California politics reached a new low Wednesday night when independent journalist Nick Shirley shared video from Sacramento revealing a senior California Assembly staffer transforming a legitimate inquiry about pending legislation into a torrent of crude sexual insults and distributing flyers.
The man in the footage is Terry Schanz, whose official state payroll records identify him as chief of staff to Democratic Assemblywoman Tina McKinnor. Schanz repeatedly made obscene remarks toward Shirley while handing out printed materials to pedestrians during Shirley’s challenge over AB 2624.
Shirley clarified that Schanz does not serve as the entire California State Assembly’s chief of staff, but rather as McKinnor’s individual Capitol office chief of staff—a distinction that fails to diminish the incident’s embarrassment. State payroll records dated May 31 list Schanz as a full-time employee in McKinnor’s office with a monthly salary of $17,319, confirming his status as a senior taxpayer-funded government official rather than an anonymous street agitator.
Shirley alleged Schanz used public resources to print the flyers, though the video shows him carrying and distributing stacks of them without independently proving their printing location or equipment. The confrontation occurred during Shirley’s reporting on AB 2624, a bill critics have dubbed the “Stop Nick Shirley Act.” Shirley contends the measure could deter investigations into taxpayer-funded immigration service providers.
The official record indicates AB 2624 is now at a critical juncture: After passing Assembly committees by a 57-19 vote on May 26, it was amended by the Senate and passed with a 30-10 margin on August 18 before returning to the Assembly for concurrence. The bill would establish an address-confidentiality program effective October 1, 2027, allowing qualifying immigration service employees and volunteers who document threats or violence to use a state-designated substitute address in public records while receiving mail through the secretary of state’s office.
Additional provisions permit civil remedies for protected information posted with intent to incite imminent harm or create objectively reasonable fear for safety, while explicitly stating program protections cannot be used to evade law enforcement detection. The amended text mandates minimum damages of $4,000 when a violation is found—a threshold narrower than the automatic $4,000 fine Shirley described for investigating suspected fraud.
Supporters claim the bill shields workers from doxxing and threats, while opponents warn its broad definitions could chill citizen journalists tracking public funds. Californians can evaluate the policy debate directly through the legislation itself.
Shanz and McKinnor’s office have not publicly addressed Shirley’s flyer allegations as of publication. Sacramento’s ruling class has thus exposed a stark reality: when government officials dismiss questions with sexual taunts and flyers, accountability remains elusive.
