April 28-May 4, 2019 Calendar - Immediate Disclosure Request

Anonymous Person filed this request with the San Francisco County Board of Supervisors of San Francisco, CA.
Est. Completion None
Status
Partially Completed
Tags

Communications

From: Anonymous Person

This is an Immediate Disclosure Request under the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance, made before close of business May 8, 2019.

** Note that all of your responses (including disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). **

We request under the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance (Ordinance) and the California Public Records Act (CPRA):

"1. an electronic copy, in the original electronic format, with all calendar item headers, email addresses, metadata, timestamps, attachments, appendices, exhibits, and inline images, except those explicitly exempted by the Ordinance, of the calendars, with all items, from April 28 to May 4, 2019 (inclusive) for each Supervisor and the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of San Francisco."

We remind you of your obligation under City of San Jose v Superior Court (2017) to search personal accounts/devices for calendar items regarding the public's business, as appropriate.

We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in the original format you hold them in. Therefore, calendars exported in the .ics, iCalendar, or vCard formats with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. Such formats are easily exportable from Google Calendar, Microsoft Outlook, Microsoft Exchange or other common calendaring/email systems.

However, if you choose to convert calendar items, for example, to PDF or printed format, to easily redact them, you must ensure that you have preserved the full content of the original calendar item record (as specified in request "1"), which contains many detailed headers beyond the ones commonly printed out. If you instead provide PDFs or printed items with only a few of the headers or lacking attachments/images, and therefore withhold the other headers/attachments without justification, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision.

Please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.

I look forward to your immediate disclosure.

Sincerely,
Anonymous

From: Anonymous Person

This is an Immediate Disclosure Request, so we expected a response today.

** Note this is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). **

From: San Francisco County Board of Supervisors

To Whom it May Concern,

On behalf of the Office of the Clerk of the Board, I am confirming receipt of your request, which was just brought to my attention. Please note that the purpose of an immediate disclosure request is to expedite the City's response to a simple, routine, or otherwise readily answerable request. For more extensive or demanding requests, the maximum deadlines for responding to a request may apply (Admin. Code §67.25(a)).

Please also note that our office does not have indiscriminate access to individual Supervisors calendars, but we will be glad to inquire accordingly.

Sincerely,
__
Wilson L. Ng
Records and Project Manager
San Francisco Board of Supervisors
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 244
San Francisco, CA 94102

Disclosures: Personal information that is provided in communications to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors is subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act and the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance. Personal information provided will not be redacted. Members of the public are not required to provide personal identifying information when they communicate with the Board of Supervisors and its committees. All written or oral communications that members of the public submit to the Clerk's Office regarding pending legislation or hearings will be made available to all members of the public for inspection and copying. The Clerk's Office does not redact any information from these submissions. This means that personal information-including names, phone numbers, addresses and similar information that a member of the public elects to submit to the Board and its committees-may appear on the Board of Supervisors website or in other public documents that members of the public may inspect or copy.

From: Anonymous Person

The 10 day limit under the CPRA/Sunshine Ordinance has passed. Please provide the required determination of which records exist, which will be disclosed and approximately when, and any required justifications for withholding.

** Note this is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). **

From: San Francisco County Board of Supervisors

To Whom it May Concern,

Thank you for your patience. Please note that the information you requested requires that our office, the Office of the Clerk of the Board, inquire and collect responsive records from the respective individuals/custodians of record identified in your request - as we do not have indiscriminate access to their calendars - and review the records for applicable redaction/withholdings.

Provided to you attached are all records responsive to your request, as per our inquiry with the Clerk of the Board and individual district Supervisors' offices. Records containing personal information, privileged information, or personnel matters may be redacted or withheld pursuant to CA Government Code 6254 ; Evidence Code sec. 952; Evidence Code sec. 954; Code of Civil Procedure 2018.030; Government Code 6254(c), Art. I, sec. 1; CA Const., Evidence Code sec. 1041; Evidence Code sec. 1040; Government Code sec. 6254(k); and/or Government Code sec. 6276.32.

If you have follow up questions regarding specific calendar entries, please contact the respective office<https://sfbos.org/roster-members>.

Sincerely,
__
Wilson L. Ng
Records and Project Manager
San Francisco Board of Supervisors
Disclosures: Personal information that is provided in communications to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors is subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act and the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance. Personal information provided will not be redacted. Members of the public are not required to provide personal identifying information when they communicate with the Board of Supervisors and its committees. All written or oral communications that members of the public submit to the Clerk's Office regarding pending legislation or hearings will be made available to all members of the public for inspection and copying. The Clerk's Office does not redact any information from these submissions. This means that personal information-including names, phone numbers, addresses and similar information that a member of the public elects to submit to the Board and its committees-may appear on the Board of Supervisors website or in other public documents that members of the public may inspect or copy.

Warning An exclamation point.

There are too many files to display on this communication. See all files

From: Anonymous Person

Wilson Ng,

** Note this is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). **

Thank you very much. Do you represent the Clerk specifically? I have a follow-up regarding the Clerk's responsive records:

Will the Clerk be providing their full calendar in its original electronic format, with all metadata, headers, etc. as we requested?
Often Outlook/Exchange calendars contain additional information like when the item was created, by whom, exactly who was invited, who accepted/denied the invite, etc., and we want all this information.
Furthermore, if this is a special "Prop G format" calendar, I will note that if the Clerk has any other calendar records that are public records, they too must be turned over.
Prop G does not limit which calendars are public records but instead mandates a minimum requirement for what calendar info must be kept; if the Clerk keeps more information it too should be disclosed, unless specifically exempt.

For your information - I have a similar request outstanding to the Mayor, where we appear to have received a "Prop G"-specific calendar and only in PDF format (similar it seems to what the Clerk has provided here). I have filed a Sunshine Ordinance Task Force complaint and a Supervisor of Records petition re: the Mayor's lack of disclosure. See below:
My SOTF Complaint - https://cdn.muckrock.com/outbound_request_attachments/Anonymous_2859385/72902/SF-Mayor-Calendar-SOTF-Appeal-72902.pdf
Mayor's SOTF Response - https://cdn.muckrock.com/foia_files/2019/05/21/5.21.19_Response_to_SOTF_Complaint_File_19047_Re_Request_of_Anonymous.pdf
My Rebuttal to Mayor's SOTF Response - https://cdn.muckrock.com/outbound_request_attachments/Anonymous_2859385/72902/SF-Mayor-Calendar-Appeal-SOTF-19047-followup.pdf
My Supervisor of Records Petition - https://cdn.muckrock.com/outbound_request_attachments/Anonymous_2859385/72902/SF-Supervisor-Appeal-For-Mayor-72902-ar.pdf

As of this email, those proceedings remain pending.

I hope the Clerk considers disclosing any other calendar information the office has, in the original electronic format. Note that we believe these 2 issues are orthogonal. Even if you believe the electronic format cannot be disclosed, you may still need to disclose the additional metadata we requested (in PDF format), and/or vice-versa.
Alternatively, or additionally, we would also accept a "determination" under the CPRA that the Clerk possesses no further calendar records than the PDF provided to us and/or does not have an electronic format other than PDF in which the calendar is kept (which seems unlikely as a practical matter).

Thanks,
Anonymous

From: Anonymous Person

I'd appreciate a response to this, from June 14:

Wilson Ng,

** Note this is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). **

Thank you very much. Do you represent the Clerk specifically? I have a follow-up regarding the Clerk's responsive records:

Will the Clerk be providing their full calendar in its original electronic format, with all metadata, headers, etc. as we requested?
Often Outlook/Exchange calendars contain additional information like when the item was created, by whom, exactly who was invited, who accepted/denied the invite, etc., and we want all this information.
Furthermore, if this is a special "Prop G format" calendar, I will note that if the Clerk has any other calendar records that are public records, they too must be turned over.
Prop G does not limit which calendars are public records but instead mandates a minimum requirement for what calendar info must be kept; if the Clerk keeps more information it too should be disclosed, unless specifically exempt.

For your information - I have a similar request outstanding to the Mayor, where we appear to have received a "Prop G"-specific calendar and only in PDF format (similar it seems to what the Clerk has provided here). I have filed a Sunshine Ordinance Task Force complaint and a Supervisor of Records petition re: the Mayor's lack of disclosure. See below:
My SOTF Complaint - https://cdn.muckrock.com/outbound_request_attachments/Anonymous_2859385/72902/SF-Mayor-Calendar-SOTF-Appeal-72902.pdf
Mayor's SOTF Response - https://cdn.muckrock.com/foia_files/2019/05/21/5.21.19_Response_to_SOTF_Complaint_File_19047_Re_Request_of_Anonymous.pdf
My Rebuttal to Mayor's SOTF Response - https://cdn.muckrock.com/outbound_request_attachments/Anonymous_2859385/72902/SF-Mayor-Calendar-Appeal-SOTF-19047-followup.pdf
My Supervisor of Records Petition - https://cdn.muckrock.com/outbound_request_attachments/Anonymous_2859385/72902/SF-Supervisor-Appeal-For-Mayor-72902-ar.pdf

As of this email, those proceedings remain pending.

I hope the Clerk considers disclosing any other calendar information the office has, in the original electronic format. Note that we believe these 2 issues are orthogonal. Even if you believe the electronic format cannot be disclosed, you may still need to disclose the additional metadata we requested (in PDF format), and/or vice-versa.
Alternatively, or additionally, we would also accept a "determination" under the CPRA that the Clerk possesses no further calendar records than the PDF provided to us and/or does not have an electronic format other than PDF in which the calendar is kept (which seems unlikely as a practical matter).

Thanks,
Anonymous

From: San Francisco County Board of Supervisors

To Whom It May Concern,

Thank you again for your patience.

This is to confirm that I represent the Office of the Clerk of the Board, and as per my follow up inquiry with the Clerk of the Board, we did not identify any additional calendar records, entries, or details responsive to your request beyond what had been provided to you on June 14, 2019.

With regard to providing calendar information in a native electronic format (i.e. .vcs, .ics), as per my consultation with the Office of the City Attorney, records containing personal information, privileged information, or personnel matters may be redacted or withheld pursuant to CA Government Code, Evidence Code, and/or Code of Civil Procedure. Reproducing calendar files in a native format would effectively remove a department's ability to apply potential redactions or withholdings to personal, privileged, and/or personnel information. It also subjects the City to cybersecurity risk (i.e. viruses, malware), as native file formats may contain unique identifiers, security encryption, and code which are not redactable and not relevant nor responsive to the subject of the request. In accordance with Cal. Govt. Code § 6253.9(f), a public agency is not required to release an electronic record in an electronic format that would jeopardize or compromise the security or integrity of the original record.

Sincerely,
__
Wilson L. Ng
Records and Project Manager
San Francisco Board of Supervisors
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 244
San Francisco, CA 94102

Phone: (415) 554-7725
Web: www.sfbos.org<http://www.sfbos.org/>

[CustomerSatisfactionIcon]<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=104> Click here<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=104> to complete a Board of Supervisors Customer Service Satisfaction form
Disclosures: Personal information that is provided in communications to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors is subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act and the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance. Personal information provided will not be redacted. Members of the public are not required to provide personal identifying information when they communicate with the Board of Supervisors and its committees. All written or oral communications that members of the public submit to the Clerk's Office regarding pending legislation or hearings will be made available to all members of the public for inspection and copying. The Clerk's Office does not redact any information from these submissions. This means that personal information-including names, phone numbers, addresses and similar information that a member of the public elects to submit to the Board and its committees-may appear on the Board of Supervisors website or in other public documents that members of the public may inspect or copy.

[...]

---

On June 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: April 28-May 4, 2019 Calendar - Immediate Disclosure Request
I'd appreciate a response to this, from June 14:

Wilson Ng,

** Note this is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). **

Thank you very much. Do you represent the Clerk specifically? I have a follow-up regarding the Clerk's responsive records:

Will the Clerk be providing their full calendar in its original electronic format, with all metadata, headers, etc. as we requested?
Often Outlook/Exchange calendars contain additional information like when the item was created, by whom, exactly who was invited, who accepted/denied the invite, etc., and we want all this information.
Furthermore, if this is a special "Prop G format" calendar, I will note that if the Clerk has any other calendar records that are public records, they too must be turned over.
Prop G does not limit which calendars are public records but instead mandates a minimum requirement for what calendar info must be kept; if the Clerk keeps more information it too should be disclosed, unless specifically exempt.

For your information - I have a similar request outstanding to the Mayor, where we appear to have received a "Prop G"-specific calendar and only in PDF format (similar it seems to what the Clerk has provided here). I have filed a Sunshine Ordinance Task Force complaint and a Supervisor of Records petition re: the Mayor's lack of disclosure. See below:
My SOTF Complaint - https://cdn.muckrock.com/outbound_request_attachments/Anonymous_2859385/72902/SF-Mayor-Calendar-SOTF-Appeal-72902.pdf
Mayor's SOTF Response - https://cdn.muckrock.com/foia_files/2019/05/21/5.21.19_Response_to_SOTF_Complaint_File_19047_Re_Request_of_Anonymous.pdf
My Rebuttal to Mayor's SOTF Response - https://cdn.muckrock.com/outbound_request_attachments/Anonymous_2859385/72902/SF-Mayor-Calendar-Appeal-SOTF-19047-followup.pdf
My Supervisor of Records Petition - https://cdn.muckrock.com/outbound_request_attachments/Anonymous_2859385/72902/SF-Supervisor-Appeal-For-Mayor-72902-ar.pdf

As of this email, those proceedings remain pending.

I hope the Clerk considers disclosing any other calendar information the office has, in the original electronic format. Note that we believe these 2 issues are orthogonal. Even if you believe the electronic format cannot be disclosed, you may still need to disclose the additional metadata we requested (in PDF format), and/or vice-versa.
Alternatively, or additionally, we would also accept a "determination" under the CPRA that the Clerk possesses no further calendar records than the PDF provided to us and/or does not have an electronic format other than PDF in which the calendar is kept (which seems unlikely as a practical matter).

Thanks,
Anonymous
---

On June 14, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: April 28-May 4, 2019 Calendar - Immediate Disclosure Request
Wilson Ng,

** Note this is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). **

Thank you very much. Do you represent the Clerk specifically? I have a follow-up regarding the Clerk's responsive records:

Will the Clerk be providing their full calendar in its original electronic format, with all metadata, headers, etc. as we requested?
Often Outlook/Exchange calendars contain additional information like when the item was created, by whom, exactly who was invited, who accepted/denied the invite, etc., and we want all this information.
Furthermore, if this is a special "Prop G format" calendar, I will note that if the Clerk has any other calendar records that are public records, they too must be turned over.
Prop G does not limit which calendars are public records but instead mandates a minimum requirement for what calendar info must be kept; if the Clerk keeps more information it too should be disclosed, unless specifically exempt.

For your information - I have a similar request outstanding to the Mayor, where we appear to have received a "Prop G"-specific calendar and only in PDF format (similar it seems to what the Clerk has provided here). I have filed a Sunshine Ordinance Task Force complaint and a Supervisor of Records petition re: the Mayor's lack of disclosure. See below:
My SOTF Complaint - https://cdn.muckrock.com/outbound_request_attachments/Anonymous_2859385/72902/SF-Mayor-Calendar-SOTF-Appeal-72902.pdf
Mayor's SOTF Response - https://cdn.muckrock.com/foia_files/2019/05/21/5.21.19_Response_to_SOTF_Complaint_File_19047_Re_Request_of_Anonymous.pdf
My Rebuttal to Mayor's SOTF Response - https://cdn.muckrock.com/outbound_request_attachments/Anonymous_2859385/72902/SF-Mayor-Calendar-Appeal-SOTF-19047-followup.pdf
My Supervisor of Records Petition - https://cdn.muckrock.com/outbound_request_attachments/Anonymous_2859385/72902/SF-Supervisor-Appeal-For-Mayor-72902-ar.pdf

As of this email, those proceedings remain pending.

I hope the Clerk considers disclosing any other calendar information the office has, in the original electronic format. Note that we believe these 2 issues are orthogonal. Even if you believe the electronic format cannot be disclosed, you may still need to disclose the additional metadata we requested (in PDF format), and/or vice-versa.
Alternatively, or additionally, we would also accept a "determination" under the CPRA that the Clerk possesses no further calendar records than the PDF provided to us and/or does not have an electronic format other than PDF in which the calendar is kept (which seems unlikely as a practical matter).

Thanks,
Anonymous
---

On June 14, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: April 28-May 4, 2019 Calendar - Immediate Disclosure Request
To Whom it May Concern,

Thank you for your patience. Please note that the information you requested requires that our office, the Office of the Clerk of the Board, inquire and collect responsive records from the respective individuals/custodians of record identified in your request - as we do not have indiscriminate access to their calendars - and review the records for applicable redaction/withholdings.

Provided to you attached are all records responsive to your request, as per our inquiry with the Clerk of the Board and individual district Supervisors' offices. Records containing personal information, privileged information, or personnel matters may be redacted or withheld pursuant to CA Government Code 6254 ; Evidence Code sec. 952; Evidence Code sec. 954; Code of Civil Procedure 2018.030; Government Code 6254(c), Art. I, sec. 1; CA Const., Evidence Code sec. 1041; Evidence Code sec. 1040; Government Code sec. 6254(k); and/or Government Code sec. 6276.32.

If you have follow up questions regarding specific calendar entries, please contact the respective office<https://sfbos.org/roster-members>.

Sincerely,
__
Wilson L. Ng
Records and Project Manager
San Francisco Board of Supervisors
Disclosures: Personal information that is provided in communications to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors is subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act and the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance. Personal information provided will not be redacted. Members of the public are not required to provide personal identifying information when they communicate with the Board of Supervisors and its committees. All written or oral communications that members of the public submit to the Clerk's Office regarding pending legislation or hearings will be made available to all members of the public for inspection and copying. The Clerk's Office does not redact any information from these submissions. This means that personal information-including names, phone numbers, addresses and similar information that a member of the public elects to submit to the Board and its committees-may appear on the Board of Supervisors website or in other public documents that members of the public may inspect or copy.

---

On June 4, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: April 28-May 4, 2019 Calendar - Immediate Disclosure Request
The 10 day limit under the CPRA/Sunshine Ordinance has passed. Please provide the required determination of which records exist, which will be disclosed and approximately when, and any required justifications for withholding.

** Note this is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). **
---

On May 22, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: April 28-May 4, 2019 Calendar - Immediate Disclosure Request
To Whom it May Concern,

On behalf of the Office of the Clerk of the Board, I am confirming receipt of your request, which was just brought to my attention. Please note that the purpose of an immediate disclosure request is to expedite the City's response to a simple, routine, or otherwise readily answerable request. For more extensive or demanding requests, the maximum deadlines for responding to a request may apply (Admin. Code §67.25(a)).

Please also note that our office does not have indiscriminate access to individual Supervisors calendars, but we will be glad to inquire accordingly.

Sincerely,
__
Wilson L. Ng
Records and Project Manager
San Francisco Board of Supervisors
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 244
San Francisco, CA 94102

Disclosures: Personal information that is provided in communications to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors is subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act and the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance. Personal information provided will not be redacted. Members of the public are not required to provide personal identifying information when they communicate with the Board of Supervisors and its committees. All written or oral communications that members of the public submit to the Clerk's Office regarding pending legislation or hearings will be made available to all members of the public for inspection and copying. The Clerk's Office does not redact any information from these submissions. This means that personal information-including names, phone numbers, addresses and similar information that a member of the public elects to submit to the Board and its committees-may appear on the Board of Supervisors website or in other public documents that members of the public may inspect or copy.

---

On May 8, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: April 28-May 4, 2019 Calendar - Immediate Disclosure Request
This is an Immediate Disclosure Request under the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance, made before close of business May 8, 2019.

** Note that all of your responses (including disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). **

We request under the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance (Ordinance) and the California Public Records Act (CPRA):

"1. an electronic copy, in the original electronic format, with all calendar item headers, email addresses, metadata, timestamps, attachments, appendices, exhibits, and inline images, except those explicitly exempted by the Ordinance, of the calendars, with all items, from April 28 to May 4, 2019 (inclusive) for each Supervisor and the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of San Francisco."

We remind you of your obligation under City of San Jose v Superior Court (2017) to search personal accounts/devices for calendar items regarding the public's business, as appropriate.

We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in the original format you hold them in. Therefore, calendars exported in the .ics, iCalendar, or vCard formats with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. Such formats are easily exportable from Google Calendar, Microsoft Outlook, Microsoft Exchange or other common calendaring/email systems.

However, if you choose to convert calendar items, for example, to PDF or printed format, to easily redact them, you must ensure that you have preserved the full content of the original calendar item record (as specified in request "1"), which contains many detailed headers beyond the ones commonly printed out. If you instead provide PDFs or printed items with only a few of the headers or lacking attachments/images, and therefore withhold the other headers/attachments without justification, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision.

Please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.

I look forward to your immediate disclosure.

Sincerely,
Anonymous

Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-county-clerk-6701%252Fapril-28-may-4-2019-calendar-immediate-disclosure-request-72912%252F%253Femail%253Dwilson.l.ng%252540sfgov.org&url_auth_token=AAA7tP8nvUjT9U4taJ8JjvW4kW4%3A1hlrPd%3A-CXbYyREfRgf6v9fi8NUwLNvF7g
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.

For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 72912
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516

PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.

From: Anonymous Person

Thank you. Pending the outcome of our various cases before the Sunshine Ordinance task force re: electronic formats for records, we may appeal your refusal to provide those specific formats in the future.

** Note that all of your responses (including disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). **

From: Anonymous Person

Sorry you can ignore the automated reminder for now. We have our hearing re: electronic records at the Sunshine Task Force tomorrow, so we'll find out whether we can successfully get more records soon. ** Note that all of your responses (including disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). **

From: Anonymous Person

Mr. Ng, the Clerk of the Board, and Supervisors,

** Note that all of your responses (including disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). **

As you may know, the SOTF Complaint Committee unanimously found on Aug 20 that the SOTF has jurisdiction, that the requested records are public, and to refer the matter to the SOTF for hearing, in both 19044 Anonymous v. City Attorney and 19047 Anonymous v. Mayor, regarding the refusal of the City Attorney and Mayor, respectively, to provide to me non-PDF electronic formats and metadata/headers for email and calendar information, among other things.

As a courtesy, I am asking that you reconsider your past refusal in this request, in light of the progress in case 19047. I intend to file SOTF complaints against any SF public agency refusing to provide email and calendar information in their (non-PDF) electronic format and without headers and metadata.

Furthermore, what follows below is a *new Immediate Disclosure Request* under the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance, made before start of business August 21, 2019. It in no way replaces our existing request which we will continue to pursue.

I request from the Clerk's office under the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance (Ordinance) and the California Public Records Act (CPRA):

"1. an electronic copy, (in the original electronic format, or alternatively in a format specified as "A" below, for all items held electronically, and a scanned copy for any physical papers), with all calendar item headers, email addresses, invitations (including but not limited to indications of who sent the invite and when), acceptances/declinations by guests, metadata, timestamps, attachments, appendices, exhibits, and inline images, except those explicitly exempted by the Ordinance, of the Clerk's *prospective/expected* calendar or schedule, with all expected events/items, from August 26 to Sept 3, 2019 (inclusive). We are specifically requesting ALL calendar/scheduling items for the Clerk, whether the Clerk herself possesses them or her staff, whether they are labeled "Prop G" or not, and whether they are on a computer or in physical form (such as a diary, a physical calendar on a wall, etc.). If any of the Clerk's staff uses any invitation/guestlist tracking systems on behalf of the Clerk (such as Outlook's invite mechanism), those calendars are also included within the scope of this request. Furthermore, we request that a City of San Jose v Superior Court (2017) search be performed of the Clerk, her chief of staff (and deputy chiefs), and all personal/secretarial/administrative/executive assistants, such that each such official either provide all records responsive to this request present on their personal accounts/devices/property (solely to the extent the record or portion thereof relates to the public's business), or provide a declaration/affidavit that no such records exist. All such affidavits are also requested.

2. an electronic copy, (in the original electronic format, or alternatively in a format specified as "A" below, for all items held electronically, and a scanned copy for any physical papers), with all calendar item headers, email addresses, invitations (including but not limited to indications of who sent the invite and when), acceptances/declinations by guests, metadata, timestamps, attachments, appendices, exhibits, and inline images, except those explicitly exempted by the Ordinance, of the Clerk's *past* calendar or schedule, with all events/items, from August 5 to August 16, 2019 (inclusive). We are specifically requesting ALL calendar/scheduling items for the Clerk, whether the Clerk herself possesses them or her staff, whether they are labeled "Prop G" or not, and whether they are on a computer or in physical form (such as a diary, a physical calendar on a wall, etc.). If any of the Clerk's staff uses any invitation/guestlist tracking systems on behalf of the Clerk (such as Outlook's invite mechanism), those calendars are also included within the scope of this request. Furthermore, we request that a City of San Jose v Superior Court (2017) search be performed of the Clerk, her chief of staff (and deputy chiefs), and all personal/secretarial/administrative/executive assistants, such that each such official either provide all records responsive to this request present on their personal accounts/devices/property (solely to the extent the record or portion thereof relates to the public's business), or provide a declaration/affidavit that no such records exist. All such affidavits are also requested.
"

We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in as long as either you hold them in that format, the format is available to you, or the format is easy to generate (Admin Code 67.21(l)). Therefore, calendars exported in the .ics, iCalendar, or vCard formats ("A") with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are our desired formats. Such formats are easily exportable from Google Calendar, Microsoft Outlook, Microsoft Exchange or other common calendaring/email systems. However, if you choose to convert electronic calendar items, for example, to PDF or printed format, to easily redact them, you must ensure that you have preserved the full content of the original calendar item record (as specified in requests 1 and 2), which contains many detailed headers beyond the ones generally printed out. If you provide PDFs or printed items with only a few of the headers or lacking attachments/images, and therefore withhold the other headers/attachments without justification, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision. We *do not* waive the requirement of 67.21(l) discussed above, and are merely instructing you to preserve information even if you provide to us the undesirable PDF format.

For physical calendar items, scanning to PDF format is acceptable.

Please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.

I look forward to your immediate disclosure.

Sincerely,
Anonymous

From: San Francisco County Board of Supervisors

To Whom It May Concern,

On behalf of the Office of the Clerk of the Board, I am confirming receipt of your latest request for the Clerk of the Board’s calendar entries from August 5 to August 16, 2019, and August 26 to September 3, 2019.

Please note that the San Francisco Board of Supervisors is currently on legislative recess from July 31, 2019 through September 2, 2019, as there are no Board meetings scheduled during this time, and our office has minimal staffing. The Clerk of the Board is also currently out of the office. Due to the need to inquire with the Clerk of the Board’s Executive Assistant to identify any calendar entries responsive to your request, I anticipate providing you with an update or response within 10 days. I will keep you apprised if a response can be provided sooner or if additional time is required.
Sincerely,
__
Wilson L. Ng
Records and Project Manager
San Francisco Board of Supervisors
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 244
San Francisco, CA 94102

From: Anonymous Person

Thank you. Note that the new IDR is solely directed to the Clerk (and her staff/office). The request that you reconsider your previous denials is directed the Clerk and each Supervisor.

** Note that all of your responses (including disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). **

From: San Francisco County Board of Supervisors

To Whom It May Concern,
On behalf of the Office of the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, provided attached are records responsive to your request for the Clerk of the Board’s calendar entries from August 5 to August 16, 2019, and August 26 to September 3, 2019. As a disclaimer, personnel information has been redacted pursuant to Government Code 6254(c).

With regard to your matter(s) before the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force (SOTF), it appears that SOTF Complaint Nos. 19044 and 19047 are still pending and were referred to the full SOTF for hearing according to the August 20, 2019 SOTF Complaint Committee minutes. Please note that SOTF is neither a judicial nor enforcement body, and in our opinion, does not have authority to supersede State provisions of California Government Code §6253.9(f). However, upon SOTF’s issuance of an Order of Determination, SOTF may refer the matter to the Ethics Commission for further hearing and applicable enforcement. To avoid having duplicative complaints with individual City departments over the same pending matter, we kindly advise that you address the matter with the Office of the City Attorney, who serves as the Supervisor of Records for the entire City and County of San Francisco in accordance with Sunshine Ordinance/Administrative Code Sec. 67.21(d).

Sincerely,
__
Wilson L. Ng
Records and Project Manager
San Francisco Board of Supervisors
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 244
San Francisco, CA 94102

From: Anonymous Person

Thank you for the records!

Regarding your arguments:

The City Attorney is not independent and has an obvious conflict of interest in the matter since they too are a public agency that, for example, can use their own legal opinions and Good Government Guide (which has no force of law) to ensure their own records remain hidden from the public, contrary to the decision of the SF citizenry in creating the Sunshine Ordinance and creating the SOTF as a body of independent members of the public and not of city employees/officials.

You are correct that the full SOTF has not made a determination. And yes, the SOTF can refer matters to the Ethics Commission, BUT it also "shall" refer the matter to the District Attorney and Attorney General (SFAC 67.21(e)) if the custodian refuses to conform to the SOTF's order within 5 days.
I can also directly enforce an order of the SOTF via the state superior court (SFAC 67.21(f)).

Have a good weekend,
Anonymous

Files

pages

Close