Boudin-Judge communications - Immediate disclosure request
| Submitted | June 18, 2021 |
MuckRock users can file, duplicate, track, and share public records requests like this one. Learn more.
Communications
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
Provide any communications (including any group conversations) of any form on personal or govt property between DA Boudin or any DA employee and any person who is a local, state, or federal judge at the time of the communication, Chief Scott, Mayor London Breed, Andy Lynch, Jeff Cretan, Sean Elsbernd, or Andrea Bruss. You may exclude any communication that is formally served on an adversarial party, publicly posted by a Court, or publicly posted on the Internet.
Search at least the following: email, chat, letters, text message, instant message, direct message, private message in all apps or social networks. Preserve all original records pending the final adjudication of all appeals - we may appeal all withholdings.
From: San Francisco District Attorney's office
Thank you for your request. As a preliminary matter, the purpose of the immediate disclosure request is to expedite the City's response to a "simple, routine, or otherwise readily answerable request." Admin. Code 67.25(a). The Sunshine Ordinance specifies that for more extensive or demanding requests, the maximum deadlines for responding to a request apply. Id. Accordingly, a requester's mere designation of a request as an immediate disclosure request does not automatically make it so. Rather, Admin. Code 67.25(b) makes clear that the City can invoke an extension of 10 days provided the reasons for the extension are set forth and as long as the requester is notified by the close of business the day following the request.
Processing your request requires searching for, collecting, and examining a voluminous amount of possibly responsive and non-privileged records. We are invoking our extension and will respond within 10 days.
Best,
SFDA Public Records
-
~WRD0004
From: San Francisco District Attorney's office
Thank you for your request. As a preliminary matter, the purpose of the immediate disclosure request is to expedite the City's response to a "simple, routine, or otherwise readily answerable request." Admin. Code 67.25(a). The Sunshine Ordinance specifies that for more extensive or demanding requests, the maximum deadlines for responding to a request apply. Id. Accordingly, a requester's mere designation of a request as an immediate disclosure request does not automatically make it so. Rather, Admin. Code 67.25(b) makes clear that the City can invoke an extension of 10 days provided the reasons for the extension are set forth and as long as the requester is notified by the close of business the day following the request.
Processing your request requires searching for, collecting, and examining a voluminous amount of possibly responsive and non-privileged records. We are invoking our extension and will respond within 10 days.
Best,
SFDA Public Records
-
image001
From: Muckrock Staff
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following California Public Records Act request, copied below, and originally submitted on June 18, 2021. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: San Francisco District Attorney's office
Dear Anonymous,
Responding to your request as currently framed would impose an excessive burden on the DA's office. Members of our office send and receive a huge volume of communications with judges and others, and there is no way for us to identify all communications with "judges" other than individually reviewing emails to determine whether one or more recipient was a judge, and then reviewing each responsive email to determine whether any privilege would apply.
You have furthermore not identified a time frame for your request, so responding your request as framed would require us to individually review hundreds of thousands of emails. We therefore request that you respond and narrow your request for communications between any member of the DA's office and any judge or certain other named individuals to a more limited set of documents.
As your request is currently framed, in light of the burden imposed on our agency, we find that the public interest in non-disclosure outweighs the public interest served by disclosure of the records request under Government Code Section 6255(a) and American Civil Liberties Foundation v. Deukmejian, 32 Cal. 3d 440 (1982) (finding burden on law enforcement agency in separating exempt from non-exempt investigative materials sought through public record request justified withholding all requested records).
Best,
SFDA Public Records
-
~WRD2281
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
DA's office:
Agencies retaliating against me is always very easy to spot. I wonder what happened between last week and today, given that it took you a month to simply reject in entirety my entire request?
I have already appealed your violation in this request on Friday. Don't forget that you cannot destroy records responsive to a request pending final adjudication of all appeals of those requests. Unlike some other agencies, the total number of records you have provided me is so extraordinarily small, you can't even throw around the rule of reason. Furthermore, you have violated the law by failing to state the name and title of every person responsible for withholding all of the information from me (Gov Code 6253(d)), and by failing to provide this notice of disclosable public records within 10 days of my request. A complete refusal to respond - i.e. no disclosable public records - or a request to narrow could easily, and must by law, be provided within those 10 days. Also know that I will appeal your asserted balancing test - the communications between your office and judges is critical to determine whether or not you engage in misconduct, and is certainly within the public interest to disclose.
You can't hide these communications to protect your own reputation or delay them for political benefit.
Finally, the supposed burden of separating exempt from non-exempt information cannot be used in San Francisco, per prior SOTF discussion which I will argue applies here as well. Admin Code 67.26 requires that such burden be accepted as part of a public employee's job and minimal withholding must be performed.
Nevertheless:
The request is narrowed to Jan 8, 2020 to present.
The request is further narrowed to limit the phrase "local, state, or federal judge at the time of the communication" to mean any of the attached judges (but the non-judge other parties remain as originally listed). You likely don't have any records for the vast majority, but I'll cover my bases.
-
judges.txt
From: Muckrock Staff
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following California Public Records Act request, copied below, and originally submitted on June 18, 2021. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: Muckrock Staff
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following California Public Records Act request, copied below, and originally submitted on June 18, 2021. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: Muckrock Staff
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following California Public Records Act request, copied below, and originally submitted on June 18, 2021. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: San Francisco District Attorney's office
Dear Anonymous,
Thank you for your patience and follow-up. We are continuing to cite the Mayor's temporary modification of public records laws due to the local state of emergency brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic and at this time. This request required a complicated process to pull the potentially responsive records. The records pulled are voluminous and we estimate the time to produce is 3-4 months, but will release the records on a rolling basis. Thank you.
Best,
Robyn Burke
SFDA Public Records
From: Muckrock Staff
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following California Public Records Act request, copied below, and originally submitted on June 18, 2021. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: Muckrock Staff
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following California Public Records Act request, copied below, and originally submitted on June 18, 2021. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: Muckrock Staff
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following California Public Records Act request, copied below, and originally submitted on June 18, 2021. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: Muckrock Staff
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following California Public Records Act request, copied below, and originally submitted on June 18, 2021. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: Muckrock Staff
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following California Public Records Act request, copied below, and originally submitted on June 18, 2021. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: Muckrock Staff
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following California Public Records Act request, copied below, and originally submitted on June 18, 2021. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: Muckrock Staff
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following California Public Records Act request, copied below, and originally submitted on June 18, 2021. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: Muckrock Staff
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following California Public Records Act request, copied below, and originally submitted on June 18, 2021. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: Muckrock Staff
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following California Public Records Act request, copied below, and originally submitted on June 18, 2021. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: Muckrock Staff
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following California Public Records Act request, copied below, and originally submitted on June 18, 2021. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: Muckrock Staff
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following California Public Records Act request, copied below, and originally submitted on June 18, 2021. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: Muckrock Staff
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following California Public Records Act request, copied below, and originally submitted on June 18, 2021. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: Muckrock Staff
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following California Public Records Act request, copied below, and originally submitted on June 18, 2021. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: Muckrock Staff
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following California Public Records Act request, copied below, and originally submitted on June 18, 2021. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: Muckrock Staff
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following California Public Records Act request, copied below, and originally submitted on June 18, 2021. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: San Francisco District Attorney's office
Attached please find our letter responding to your 6/18/21 PRA Requests
Nikki Moore
Public Records / Communications / Assistant District Attorney
She/her/hers
Office of San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin
Nikki.Moore@sfgov.org<mailto:Nikki.Moore@sfgov.org>
San Francisco District Attorney
350 Rhode Island Street, North Building, Suite 400N
San Francisco, CA 94103
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
DA Boudin,
The DA's office has apparently been lying about this request for months. You already asked me to narrow this almost year old request. I did narrow the request on July 18, 2021 by both date and scope. You then replied on September 9, 2021 saying you would roll response in 3-4 months as you had already pulled the records.
You do not get to balance interest in disclosure due to your perception misconduct has occurred. No balancing of the kind you describe is allowed in San Francisco which you would know if you read the law. Now you try to hide the records until your election is almost complete...
A further Ethics complaint will be filed against you as it has been more than 40 days with no records.
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
I guess you'll claim you lost the text messages between yourself and judges discussing media attention to your cases right? Cause you didn't actually search and preserve records at the time of my request as you are legally obligated to do. Just keep breaking the law.
From: Muckrock Staff
To Whom It May Concern:
I'm following up on the following California Public Records Act request, copied below, and originally submitted on June 18, 2021. You had previously indicated that it would be completed on May 30, 2022. I wanted to check on the status of my request, and to see if there was a new estimated completion date.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: San Francisco District Attorney's office
Attached please find our letter responding to your 6/18/21 PRA Request.
Nikki Moore
Public Records / Communications / Assistant District Attorney
She/her/hers
Office of San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin
Nikki.Moore@sfgov.org<mailto:Nikki.Moore@sfgov.org>
San Francisco District Attorney
350 Rhode Island Street, North Building, Suite 400N
San Francisco, CA 94103
Phone: 628-652-4013
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
I did not make any limitation to misconduct. Produce the responsive records as I requested them.
From: Muckrock Staff
To Whom It May Concern:
I'm following up on the following California Public Records Act request, copied below, and originally submitted on June 18, 2021. You had previously indicated that it would be completed on June 15, 2022. I wanted to check on the status of my request, and to see if there was a new estimated completion date.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: San Francisco District Attorney's office
There are no responsive records to produce at this time. The rolling request will continue, we estimate the next updated date for disclosure will be July 1, 2022.
Sincerely,
Nikki
Sent from my iPhone
From: Muckrock Staff
To Whom It May Concern:
I'm following up on the following California Public Records Act request, copied below, and originally submitted on June 18, 2021. You had previously indicated that it would be completed on June 15, 2022. I wanted to check on the status of my request, and to see if there was a new estimated completion date.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: San Francisco District Attorney's office
Dear Anonymoose: This response continues our rolling production of records in response to this PRA. There are no responsive records to produce at this time. Our next update will be on July 15, 2022.
Sincerely,
Nikki Moore
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
This is not a rolling response.. You have produced zero records in one year. At this point I'll be filing willful violation complaints against SFAC 67.34 to the Ethics Commission against Boudin.
From: San Francisco District Attorney's office
Dear Anonymoose: This response continues our rolling production of records in response to this PRA. There are no responsive records to produce at this time. Our next update will be on July 22, 2022.
Sincerely,
Nikki Moore
From: San Francisco District Attorney's office
Dear Anonymoose: This continues our rolling response to your records request. We have reviewed approximately 600 pages of communications dated from June 10 to June 20, 2021 and are finalizing redactions and our further response to your request. I estimate that we will produce records to you on August 8, 2022 or sooner.
Sincerely,
Nikki Moore
From: San Francisco District Attorney's office
It looks like this agency uploaded responsive documents to a portal or link sharing site. Our team is working on moving them over, so please check back soon.
Dear Anonymoose: Please see our response letter. Records should be attached here: [?pdf icon] 0188_001_Redacted.pdf<https://sfgov1.sharepoint.com/:b:/r/sites/DAT-External/SFDA%20File%20Sharing/Shared%20Documents/0188_001_Redacted.pdf?csf=1&web=1&e=sq0NcS> and additionally you should have received an email granting access to the records.
Please let me know if you are unable to access the records.
Sincerely,
Nikki Moore
Public Records/Assistant District Attorney
She/her/hers
Office of San Francisco District Attorney Brooke Jenkins
Nikki.Moore@sfgov.org<mailto:Nikki.Moore@sfgov.org>
San Francisco District Attorney
350 Rhode Island Street, North Building, Suite 400N
San Francisco, CA 94103
Phone: 628-652-4013
-
image001
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
Your link requires me to create an account and sign in. Please make the link publicly available.
From: San Francisco District Attorney's office
Can you remain anonymous and create an account? This is our method of sharing large files.
Sincerely,
Nikki
-
~WRD2880
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
No. I have to agree to certain terms and conditions in order to create such an account. You cannot require my agreement to such terms for records access. Please either email them to me or make the link publicly accessible in OneDrive or similar.
You can also just upload the documents to MuckRock using the autogenerated link in the footer of this email.
From: San Francisco District Attorney's office
I will try uploading to Muckrock tomorrow.
You’re welcome.
Sent from my iPhone
From: San Francisco District Attorney's office
Dear Anonymoose: See production 1. I estimate that I will produce Production 2 on Aug. 29. Please note that the production of these records is being made in accordance with our Aug. 8 letter which explained that we were producing records based on a narrow timeframe for review, and that your request must be narrowed in order for us to continue further review of records.
Sincerely,
Nikki
-
image001
Files
pages