Complaints about Black Coffee Co-op and sharing thereof

To Whom It May Concern:

Pursuant to RCW Ch. 42.56 (Public Records Act), I hereby request the following records:

* Complaints received about Black Coffee Co-op, a worker’s cooperative, café, community space, and infoshop located at 501 East Pine Street in the Capitol Hill neighborhood of Seattle, which opened for business in November, 2012. This should include but not be limited to those complaints described in an [interview by Justin Carder of CHS published May 21, 2013][1], in which Ronald J. "Ron" Wilson #4069 of Seattle Police Department is quoted as having said, "All I can share with you at this time is that over the past several weeks we have received several complaints about activity at Black Coffee. Some of the complaints deal with City and State code and/or regulation compliance issues, while some deal with public safety issues. We are sharing the complaints we receive with other city and state departments that may have responsibility/jurisdiction for non-police issues."
* Communications of complaints with "other city and state departments" including but not limited to the sharing described by Mr. Wilson
* All associated metadata

[1]: <http://www.capitolhillseattle.com/2013/05/coffee-co-op-hopes-balance-of-rules-responsibility-will-help-it-keep-place-on-hill/>
("Coffee co-op hopes balance of rules, responsibility will help it keep place on Hill")

I also request that, if appropriate, fees be waived as I believe this request is in the public interest. The requested documents will be made available to the general public free of charge as part of the public information service at MuckRock.com, processed by a representative of the news media/press and is made in the process of news gathering and not for commercial usage.

In the event that fees cannot be waived, I would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges in advance of fulfilling my request. I would prefer the request filled electronically, by e-mail attachment if available or CD-ROM if not.

Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. I look forward to receiving your response to this request within 5 business days, as the statute requires.

Sincerely,

Phil Mocek

RE: my public records request of May 21, 2013 (your identifier: P2013-1642)

Dear Sir or Madam:

I am in receipt of installment #1 of records responsive to this request. I notice that instead of providing me with electronic records, you have created new records by printing the electronic records, then digitizing the printouts to create a set of images which you then grouped into a PDF file. Please do not create records for me. I request the original records, which would be far more useful to me and to the rest of the public. Among other problems, your print-and-scan procedure results in missing metadata (e.g., e-mail message ID's, headers that indicate to which message a particular message was sent in reply, etc.), and in documents that are not easily searched for keywords of interest.

Cordially,
Phil Mocek

RE: my public records request of May 21, 2013 (your identifier: P2013-1642)

Dear Sir or Madam:

On July 11, 2013, via e-mail, Chief of Police wrote, "Members of the East Precinct Community Police Team searched their emails and hard drives for responsive documents." On August 12, 2013, via unsigned e-mail, someone from SPD wrote that "emails were provided to the Public Disclosure Unit in paper format." Allowing staff to perform their own searches is rather concerning, as is the apparent fact that these records are not archived in a central location. And that staff are printing electronic records and providing them on paper seems to be an indication of misunderstanding of the software they use.

Performing OCR on PDFs created by scanning printouts of electronic records makes the new records more useful than they would otherwise be, but they are still missing much of the information stored in the original records, and they still cannot be viewed using standard e-mail software.

The format of Internet e-mail is described in [RFC 822][1]. Standard storage formats for a group of such messages include [Maildir][2] (a hierarchy of files and directories which could be easily combined into a ZIP file for compression and simple transfer) and [mbox][3] (which includes multiple messages in a single file, so no need to ZIP, though ZIP would compress the data significantly). These formats have remained unchanged for several decades.

[1]: <http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc822.html>
[2]: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maildir>
[3]: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mbox>

Cordially,
Phil Mocek

To Whom It May Concern:

I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on May 21, 2013. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed. You had assigned it reference number #P2013-1642.

Thank you for your help.

To Whom It May Concern:

I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on May 21, 2013. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed. You had assigned it reference number #P2013-1642.

Thank you for your help.