THE SOVEREIGN RECORD — SPECIAL INVESTIGATIVE RELEASE: Evidence of Systemic CPRA Obstruction, Coordinated Withholding, and Procedural Manipulation Across Los Angeles City Agencies

The Sovereign Record
Dec 5
6 min read

Published by: The Sovereign Record Press Division

Date: December 5, 2025

Subject: Evidence of systematic CPRA violations, suppression of critical records, and procedural manipulation impacting a single resident’s interconnected legal cases.

I. INTRODUCTION: A SINGLE CPRA CASE UNCOVERS A MUCH BROADER FAILURE OF GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY

A routine public-records request case—Taylor v. City of Los Angeles, Case No. 25STCP04097—has evolved into a profound illustration of what appears to be coordinated obstruction, systemic nondisclosure, and procedural manipulation within several Los Angeles city agencies.

What began as a California Public Records Act (CPRA) enforcement petition filed by Minister Daevon J. Taylor, a Los Angeles resident, now reveals something much larger:

A network of public agencies refusing to release records tied to ongoing criminal, civil, and environmental matters.
A repeated pattern of missed statutory deadlines.
Lost, incomplete, or “closed without action” records requests.
Court errors that disproportionately disadvantage Taylor while shielding agency misconduct.

This report summarizes the revelations contained in:

His Verified CPRA Petition and Exhibits (96 pages)

The City’s Response denying wrongdoing while acknowledging procedural failures

His Reply to Respondents’ Answer documenting ongoing violations

His Motion to Correct the Court’s Minute Order showing inaccuracies that delay the case and protect withholding agencies

Together, these filings expose a systemic pattern of concealment cutting across the LAPD, LADOT, LADWP, and the City Administrative Officer (CAO).

II. WHAT THE VERIFIED PETITION REVEALS: PATTERNS OF CONCEALMENT ACROSS MULTIPLE AGENCIES

1. Agencies Repeatedly Violated Mandatory CPRA Deadlines

The CPRA requires agencies to:

Make a determination within 10 days,
Provide reasons for delay, and
Supply records “promptly.”

But the petition documents that:

LAPD,
LADOT,
LADWP, and
CAO/Risk Management

all missed or ignored statutory deadlines.

Some requests remained unacknowledged for months, while others were “closed” without a search or legal justification. Notably, the City’s own Answer acknowledges the missed deadlines while simultaneously denying legal responsibility. This admission highlights a structural disregard for transparency obligations.

2. No Agency Provided the Required Sworn Search Descriptions

Taylor’s petition details that none of the involved agencies provided:

Custodian declarations
Search descriptions
Privilege logs
Evidence of actual searches
Segregation logs
Explanations of what records were withheld and why

California law requires sworn, detailed justifications for nondisclosure—yet in every one of these requests, the City provided none. Taylor’s reply emphasizes that the City’s position relies entirely on non-evidentiary denials, not factual support.

3. Records Connected to His Criminal Case Are Being Withheld

Taylor is currently fighting criminal charges in a case where police conduct, warrant validity, and evidentiary chain-of-custody are in dispute.

He requested:

Body-worn camera (BWC) footage
Warrant materials
Dispatch logs
Internal LAPD communications
Case-handling documents
Supervisory notations

Despite the centrality of these materials to his defense, LAPD has produced none of these records.

Notably, this absence coincides with allegations of:

An invalid or defective warrant
Improper service
Procedural misconduct
Conflicting officer testimony

Their refusal to disclose exculpatory material raises possible Brady v. Maryland concerns.

4. Records Concerning Environmental Hazards and Electrical Dangers Are Withheld

Taylor has repeatedly documented alarming conditions inside his home, including:

Electrically energized water lines
Stray neutral currents
Chemical surges and unexplained odors
Severe air-quality fluctuations
Repeated power anomalies

These events correlate with involvement by LADWP and LAPD and occur alongside ongoing property disputes and alleged retaliatory conduct.

His LADWP CPRA request sought:

Power-quality data
Hazard assessments
Electrical field measurements
Internal communications
Smart-grid or PLC activity logs

Although LADWP acknowledged the existence of some of these records, they produced none, and unilaterally extended deadlines without legal basis.

Given the potential health and safety implications, this withholding appears more than bureaucratic—it suggests a conscious effort to conceal operational failures or improper activity affecting the property.

5. Transportation and Towing Records Display Serious Procedural Irregularities

Taylor’s filings outline irregularities in LADOT and LAPD towing records, including:

Missing CHP-180 forms
Critical fields left blank
No supervising signatures
No dispatch logs
No chain-of-custody documentation
No internal communications
No justification for seizure
Absence of post-storage notices required by law

This pattern mirrors LAPD’s withholding strategies in his criminal case and LADWP's withholding of environmental hazard data. All of these agencies share a common structural position: each faces potential liability if the withheld records were disclosed.

III. WHAT THE CITY’S RESPONSE SHOWS: A STRATEGY OF NON-ENGAGEMENT AND EMPTY DENIALS

Rather than provide evidence or lawful justifications, the City's Answer relies on:

Repeated generic denials (“Respondent denies the allegation”)
Refusal to address missed statutory deadlines
Assertions that agencies are “not required” to produce logs or declarations
No custodian statements
No factual explanations
No evidence of searches conducted

Taylor’s reply exposes that the City has failed to meet the most basic CPRA obligations.

When an agency withholds records, it must justify its position with competent evidence, not bare responses.The City provided none. This defensive posture is itself evidence of a broader systemic problem.

IV. COURT PROCEDURES NOW REFLECT THE SAME PATTERN: THE MINUTE ORDER ERROR

During the December 3, 2025 hearing, the official minute order recorded:

“Petitioner requested that the court set trial.”

The audio recording—now subject to Taylor’s request for preservation—will show that:

He did not request a trial,
He requested an expedited hearing consistent with CPRA timelines, and
He stressed the urgency due to overlapping litigations and withheld records.

But based on this incorrect note, the Court set a trial date of May 8, 2026—which is:

155 days away,
Statutorily improper under CPRA, and
Strategically advantageous to the agencies withholding records.

This delay obstructs Taylor’s ability to:

Use the requested records in his criminal case
Support his environmental hazard claims
Advance his civil lawsuits
Prosecute his federal civil rights action

Taylor’s Motion to Correct the Minute Order argues that the error is not harmless—it reinforces a long-standing pattern that consistently disadvantages him while benefiting the government entities withholding key records.

V. EMERGING PATTERN OF SYSTEMIC AND TARGETED OBSTRUCTION

Across all agencies and proceedings, several themes emerge:

1. Every agency involved has an active legal dispute with Taylor

This includes:

LAPD
LADOT
LADWP
CAO

Each has independent reasons to avoid releasing documentation that could expose liability.

2. The same categories of records are withheld in each agency

The withheld materials consistently include:

Internal communications
Logs and audit trails
Safety data
Body-worn camera footage
Dispatch records
Approval chains
Warrant materials
Use-of-force and supervisory documentation
Technical or environmental reports

The consistency of these omissions suggests a common pattern, not isolated oversights.

3. Delays consistently benefit the City and prejudice the Petitioner

Every delay:

Weakens his criminal defense
Delays his civil filings
Obstructs his CPRA rights
Slows discovery
Allows evidence to degrade or disappear
Protects the agencies involved

Delay appears to function as a strategic tool.

4. Evidence in one case could expose misconduct in the others

This interconnectedness appears to incentivize nondisclosure across all agencies simultaneously.

Several categories of withheld records would directly call into question:

Lawfulness of LAPD’s search and seizure
Cause of hazardous electrical exposure
Improper towing and property deprivation
Supervisory authorization
Compliance with statutory duties
Internal safety failures
Municipal liability under § 1983

Releasing these records could expose far-reaching institutional vulnerabilities.

VI. PUBLIC NOTICE: THE SOVEREIGN RECORD WILL CONTINUE TO REPORT AND RELEASE DOCUMENTATION

This Notice serves to inform the public of:

The systemic CPRA violations occurring across Los Angeles governmental bodies
Procedural irregularities within court filings
Potential targeting and retaliation
The legal implications for ongoing criminal, civil, and federal cases
The broader lack of transparency affecting public trust

Future investigative releases will cover:

A breakdown of each withheld record category
How each agency’s behavior ties into the others
The environmental hazard evidence tied to LADWP
The criminal-case evidence withheld by LAPD
Potential constitutional violations
Evidence of municipal coordination or retaliation
Detailed timelines connecting the CPRA failures to other litigations

VII. CONCLUSION: A SYSTEM DESIGNED TO PROTECT ITSELF—NOT THE PUBLIC

The evidence emerging from Taylor’s filings reflects more than bureaucratic dysfunction. It reveals a systemic failure of transparency, marked by:

Repeated nondisclosure
Denial-based litigation strategies
Procedural irregularities
Dangerous environmental events
Abnormal court-record errors
And multi-agency alignment against a single resident seeking accountability

This is not an isolated issue.It is a revealing window into how power structures operate within the City of Los Angeles when faced with scrutiny.

The Sovereign Record will continue its investigation, publication, and analysis until full transparency is achieved.

Get Access To All filings Below