• Embed Doc
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download

From: PRO-SF [mailto:home@prosf.org]
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 10:31 AM
To:home @prosf. org
Subject: Protect Your Executive or Legislative "Prerogative": Deputy City Attorney

Instructional Letter: #06019_SFSM vs Mayors Office

From: Christian Holmer [mailto:mail@csrsf.com]
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 9:51 AM
To: Gavin.Newsom@sfgov.org ; 'Darlene Chiu'; 'David Miree'; 'Jennifer Petrucione'; 'Joe Arellano'; 'Matthew

Goudeau'; 'Peter Ragone'; 'Steve Kawa'; Ernest.Llorente@sfgov.org ; Linda.Ross@sfgov.org ;
Buck.Delventhal@sfgov.org ; 'Dorji Roberts'; 'Matt Dorsey'; Mariam.Morley@sfgov.org ; 'Wayne Lanier';
Frank.Darby@sfgov.org

Cc: 'San Francisco Board of Supervisors'; 'Jake McGoldrick'; 'Michela Alioto-Pier'; 'Aaron Peskin'; 'Fiona Ma';

Ross.Mirkarimi@sfgov.org ; 'Marc Salomon'; Chris.Daly@sfgov.org ; 'Marc Salomon'; 'Sean Elsbernd'; 'Bevan
Dufty'; tom.ammiano@sfgov.org ; 'Sophie Maxwell'; 'Gerardo Sandoval'; Dougcoms@aol.com ; elc@lrolaw.com ;
'Richard A. Knee'; bruce@brucewolfe.net ; 'Regional and Local SFSM Press List'; home@prosf.org ; 'Gloria Young'

Subject: Protect Your Executive and Legislative Prerogative: Deputy City Attorney Instructional Letter:
#06019_SFSM vs Mayors Office
SFSM Comments on CAO DCA Memorandum in Red Below.
Christian Holmer,
SFSM Editor

SFSM 2005 Sunshine Data Request Related Correspondence
Pursuant to BOS Resolution #040684
P: 415-387-7405
F: 415-387-5904
E:mail@csrsf.com
W:http://www.csrsf.com

From: SOTF [mailto:sotf@sfgov.org]
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 8:47 AM
To: Christian Holmer mail@csrsf.com ; Darlene Chiu; David Miree; gavin_newsom@sfgov.org ; Jennifer
Petrucione; Joe Arellano; Matthew Goudeau; Peter Ragone; Steve Kawa
Subject: Deputy City Attorney Instructional Letter: #06019_SFSM vs Mayors Office

Attached is a copy of the Deputy City Attorney Instructional Letter to the

Task Force regarding the above titled complaint. (See attached file: 06019_CA Instructional.pdf) Frank Darby, Jr.

Administrator
Sunshine Ordinance Task Force
SOTF@SFGov.org
(415) 554-7724

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
DENNIS J. HERRERA
City Attorney
November 15, 2006
MEMORANDUM
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
ERNEST H. LLORENTE

Deputy City Attomey
(4151 554 -4236
E-Mail Erenest.Llorente@sfgov.org

SAN FRANCISCO SURVIVAL MANUAL ON BEHALF OF DR. WAYNE LANIER V THE MAYOR'S
OFFICE COMPLAINT THE COMPLAINANT ALLEGES THE FOLLOWING FACTS:

On March 3, 2006, Dr. Wayne Lanier ("Lanicr") made a public records request for infornation from the
Mayor's calendar and any and all information relating to the drafting and passage of Ordinance Section 179-05.
1,anier made numerous follow up requests, by e-mail for the same information. On October 20, 2006, Christian
Holmer, Editor of the San Francisco Survival Manual ("SFSM") on behalf of Lanier filed a complaint against
the Mayors office alleging that the Mayor's Office failed to release the documents that Lanier requested.
THE RESPONDENT AGENCY STATES THE FOLI.OWING:

On November 14. 2006, Joseph Arrellano ("Arrellano"), representative from the Mayor's Office. appeared
before the Complaint Committee. Arrellano stated that the Mayor's Office did not respond to the March request
in a timely fashion due to a staff member assigned to handle public records requests leaving the office and that
no one handled the requests for several months.

(SFSM Response in the Text of E-Mail Posting in Which this Searchable PDF Resides)
This complaint has been handled by every member of the MOC. The Chief of Staffs Office etc.

Francisco Castillo (Arrellanos predecessor) was only one of them. Before that it had also been handled by
Darlene Chiu (who also lost all of her records shortly before going to work for PG & E). This Departmental (In
this case the MOC) Shell Game with current, future and past employees.

Most of the last 4 months Mr. Arrellano has been \u201cgetting up to speed\u201d on this simple two part request
(four sentences in all).

Elective Organizational Restructuring (say in advance of an operations or management audit or subsequent public records request for example) is another common tactics used to thwart obfuscate and deny legitimate and wholly non-burdensome requests for Existing Electronic Records Which Take No Staff Time To Create. Find, Point, Click, Send.

Arrellano stated that the Office is now responding to the Lanier request, "Me Office has provided calendars for
the period of March 3, 2006 through July 13, 2006 and is in the process of compiling and reviewing the calendars
from July 14, 2006 to November 6, 2006.

(SFSM Response in the Text of E-Mail Posting in Which this Searchable PDF Resides)

This Supplemental Calendar submission was promised to us by Frank Darby (SOTF Admin) on behalf of Joe
Arrellano (MOC) for Gavin Newsom (Mayor) by Close of Business Thursday November 9th . Never Arrived Say
they\u2019re working on it. Can we say Incremental Delivery COB (Close of Business \u2013 Not Clerk of the Board ;-)).

Arrellano stated that the Mayor's calendar is electronically maintained that self deletes after a certain period of

time.
(SFSM Response in the Text of E-Mail Posting in Which this Searchable PDF Resides)
But Mr Arrellano could not specify the period of the \u201cdeletion interval\u201d and could (or would) not confirm the

Mayors Calendaring software as other Department Heads willingly have.
The Mayor's Office is looking into how it can better retrieve materials that are public records. Arrcllano also
spoke of the privacy issues involving parties that arc not involved with the business of the City and County of
San Francisco but have their private information on the calendar. The Mayor's Office will report on how they are
handling that information at the full task force meeting.

COMPLAINT COMMITTEE ACTION:
Based on the testimony received at the Complaint Committee hearing, the Committee added the alleged violation
of failure to respond to a public records request in a timely fashion.
Memorandum
Sunshine Ordinance \u00a7 67.21 addresses general requests for public documents.
Sunshine Ordinance \u00a7 67.25 addresses Immediate Disclosure Requests.
Sunshine Ordinance \u00a7 67.26 deals with redaction of records.
Sunshine Ordinance \u00a7 67.27 addresses legal justification for withholding of records.
Sunshine Ordinance \u00a7 67.29.5 requires Mayor to maintain a daily calendar that is a public record.
Sunshine Ordinance \u00a7 67.29-7 requires the Mayor to maintain and preserve documents and correspondence.
State Government Code \u00a7 6253 addresses requests for public records.
State Goveniment Code \u00a7 6255 addresses legal justification for withholding of records.
APPLICABLE CASE LAW:
none

ISSUES TO BE DETERMINED
1. FACTUAL ISSUES
A. Uncontested Facts:
The parties agree to the following facts:
- Lanier requested records from the Mayor's Office

- The Mayor's Office did not respond in a timely mkanner but are now working on providing the materials.
(SFSM Response in the Text of E-Mail Posting in Which this Searchable PDF Resides)
They\u2019ve Been \u201cworking\u201d for 245 Days. What is this a DPW Implemented RPD Capital Project? (Ha Ha)
First Point of \u201cIncremental Delivery\u201d for MOC November 7th 2006 (235 Days).
- The Mayor's Office will be withholding or redacting information that is private and not subject to disclosure.
(SFSM Response in the Text of E-Mail Posting in Which this Searchable PDF Resides)
Perhaps the Mayor should Keep a separate Calendar for \u201cPersonal\u201d Meetings in or outside City Hall

Regularly Release Calendar for \u201cPublic\u201d Meetings to us As Requested (Including those meetings held in private
or public settings) with care taken to identify both the \u201cPrivate\u201d and \u201cPublic\u201d Participants at those \u201cPublic
Meetings\u201d Whose Substantial Purpose is to Advance Mayor Newsoms Political and Administrative Agenda for
Our City and County of San Francisco

Then the CAO will only have to spend time ($$$) selectively \u201cunredacting\u201d from among fewer items in
Newsoms Now Wholly Separate \u201cPersonal\u201d Calendar (now distinct from Newsoms Now Wholly Separate, and
now instantly releasable \u201cPublic\u201d Calendar - as with any and all meeting conducted in City Hall or City Offices).

B. Contested facts/ Facts in dispute:
The Task Force must detennine what facts are true.
i. Relevant facts in dispute: Whether there are notations and/or entries on the Mayor's Calendar that are exempt

from disclosure.
(SFSM Response in the Text of E-Mail Posting in Which this Searchable PDF Resides)
As in Meetings Conducted in City Hall or City Offices?
QUESTIONS THAT MIGHT ASSIST IN DETERMINING FACTS:

of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...