Calendars and Emails - Immediate Disclosure Request (SF DHR)

Anonymous Person filed this request with the Human Resources of San Francisco, CA.
Status
Completed
Tags

Communications

From: Anonymous Person

Department Head,

Attached is an Immediate Disclosure Request (SF Admin Code 67.25(a)).
Your response is required by Dec. 17, 2019. Rolling records responses are requested (67.25(d)).

NOTE: Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. The email address sending this request is a publicly- viewable mailbox. All of your responses (including all responsive records) may be instantly and automatically available to the public online via the MuckRock.com FOIA service used to issue this request (though the requester is an anonymous user, not a representative of MuckRock). Nothing herein is legal, IT, or professional advice of any kind. The author disclaims all warranties, express or implied, including but not limited to all warranties of merchantability or fitness. In no event shall the author be liable for any special, direct, indirect, consequential, or any other damages whatsoever. The digital signature, if any, in this email is not an indication of a binding agreement or offer; it merely authenticates the sender. Please do not include any confidential information, as I intend that these communications with the City all be public records.

Sincerely,

Anonymous

From: Human Resources

Good afternoon,

I write in response to your letter received by The Department of Human Resources (DHR) on Monday, December 16, 2019 at 4:35am making an immediate disclosure request for public records. After conducting a reasonable and diligent search, DHR has found records responsive to your request. These records are being produced in a PDF format and requested metadata is being withheld to protect the integrity and security of the original record and to avoid the unwarranted disclosure of data that could pose a risk to the city's systems and network and/or the inadvertent disclosure of exempt confidential or privileged information. See Cal. Gov. Code Secs. 6253.9 (a)(1), (f); 6254.19. Please see below for responses to your inquiry:

Request #1. the specific calendar required to be kept by SF Admin Code 67.29-5 (aka "Prop G calendar") for your Department Head (whether an employee or elected official, defined pursuant to SF Charter 2A.30 para 1), with each and every meeting/item for Nov 10 - Nov 17, 2019 (inclusive). Since these dates are more than 3 business days prior to this request, you must immediately provide them. You may use any format to provide this calendar as long as it provides at least the location, exact start and end times, general description of topics, and (as required by 67.29-5) identity of meeting participants for every meeting. If all 67.29-5 information is not visible in a summary view, you must print out the individual meeting entries.

Response #1. Please note that the Human Resources Director maintains a single calendar that contains both business and personal entries.

1. 11/10 - No responsive records exist as there are no entries on this date
2. 11/11 - Attached as "Calendar 11.11"
3. 11/12 - Attached as "Calendar 11.12A", "Calendar 11.12B", "Calendar 11.12C", "Calendar 11.12D", "Calendar 11.12E", "Calendar 11.12F". DHR bases the redaction for "Calendar 11.12F" under attorney client privilege and attorney work product. Cal. Govt. Code §§ 6254(k), 6276.04; Cal. Evid. Code §§ 950 et seq., Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 2018.030
4. 11/13 - Attached as "Calendar 11.13A", "Calendar 11.13B", "Calendar 11.13C" (Two attachments were in the original calendar entry for "Calendar 11.13C". Attached here as "Agenda 11-13-19" and "Bylaws Executed March 3 2017"), "Calendar 11.13D", "Calendar 11.13E". We have redacted recurrence information concerning the department head meeting with the Mayor dated November 13, 2019 (Attachment "Calendar 11.13A"), to protect the Mayor's security. Gov't Code § 6254(f); Gov't Code § 6254(k); Evid. Code. § 1040; Times Mirror Company v. Superior Court, 53 Cal.3d 1325 (1991). We have also withheld two calendar entries/records from November 13, 2019. These entries are for the Department Head's personal events and therefore do not involve the "conduct of the public's business" or constitute public records. If deemed public records, they are exempt because the disclosure of these entries would constitute an "unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(c); Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(k); see also Cal. Const. Art. I, Sec. 1.)
5. 11/14 - Attached as "Calendar 11.14A", "Calendar 11.14B"
6. 11/15 - Attached as "Calendar 11.15A", "Calendar 11.15B", "Calendar 11.15C", "Calendar 11.15D", "Calendar 11.15E", "Calendar 11.15F", "Calendar 11.15G", "Calendar 11.15H", "Calendar 11.15I". "Calendar 11.15E" has been redacted because of confidential employee personnel matter, the disclosure of these entries would constitute an "unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(c); Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(k); see also Cal. Const. Art. I, Sec. 1.)
7. 11/16 - We have withheld two calendar entries/records from November 16, 2019. These entries are for the Department Head's personal events and therefore do not involve the "conduct of the public's business" or constitute public records. If deemed public records, they are exempt because the disclosure of these entries would constitute an "unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(c); Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(k); see also Cal. Const. Art. I, Sec. 1.)
8. 11/17 - We have withheld two calendar entries/records from November 17, 2019. These entries are for the Department Head's personal events and therefore do not involve the "conduct of the public's business" or constitute public records. If deemed public records, they are exempt because the disclosure of these entries would constitute an "unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(c); Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(k); see also Cal. Const. Art. I, Sec. 1.)

Request #2. every meeting/entry on every calendar for your Department Head for Nov 10-17, 2019 (inclusive). This specifically includes both the SFAC 67.29-5/Prop G calendar, and all other calendar records (aka "non-Prop G" calendars) prepared, owned, retained, or used by your Department Head or agency staff (see SOTF Order 19047). Calendars and meeting entries are requested in their original electronic format or in .ICS format, with all non-exempt headers and metadata, and you must preserve all attachments, exhibits, formatting, hyperlinks, images, colors, email addresses, invitees and their attendance status, recurrences, exact start/end times, locations, titles, and descriptions. Daily, weekly, or monthly summary views are non-responsive - each individual meeting entry is requested.

Response #2. Please see above response in request #1 for Prop G calendar entries. No additional responsive records exist in any other calendars prepared, owned, retained, or used by the Department Head.

Request #3. every meeting/entry on every calendar for your Department Head for future dates Jan 6-15 (inclusive). This specifically includes both the SFAC 67.29-5/Prop G calendar, and all other calendar records (aka "non-Prop G" calendars) prepared, owned, retained, or used by your Department Head or agency staff (see SOTF Order 19047). Calendars and meeting entries are requested in their original electronic format or in .ICS format, with all non-exempt headers and metadata, and you must preserve all attachments, exhibits, formatting, hyperlinks, images, colors, email addresses, invitees and their attendance status, recurrences, exact start/end times, locations, titles, and descriptions. Daily, weekly, or monthly summary views are non-responsive - each individual meeting entry is requested.

Response #3. With regard to Item 3, we have withheld two records of meetings with the Mayor to protect the Mayor's security. Gov't Code § 6254(f); Gov't Code § 6254(k); Evid. Code. § 1040; Times Mirror Company v. Superior Court, 53 Cal.3d 1325 (1991).

Please note that the Human Resources Director maintains a single calendar that contains both business and personal entries.

1. 1/6 - Attached as "Calendar 1.6A", "Calendar 1.6B"
2. 1/7 - Attached as "Calendar 1.7A". We have withheld one calendar entry/record from January 7, 2020. This entry is for the Department Head's personal events and therefore do not involve the "conduct of the public's business" or constitute public records. If deemed public records, they are exempt because the disclosure of these entries would constitute an "unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(c); Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(k); see also Cal. Const. Art. I, Sec. 1.)
3. 1/8 - Attached as "Calendar 1.8"
4. 1/9 - Attached as "Calendar 1.9"
5. 1/10 - Attached as "Calendar 1.10A", "Calendar 1.10B", "Calendar 1.10C", "Calendar 1.10D", "Calendar 1.10E",
6. 1/11 - We have withheld one calendar entry/record from January 11, 2020. This entry is for the Department Head's personal events and therefore do not involve the "conduct of the public's business" or constitute public records. If deemed public records, they are exempt because the disclosure of these entries would constitute an "unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(c); Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(k); see also Cal. Const. Art. I, Sec. 1.)
7. 1/12 - Attached as "Calendar 1.12"
8. 1/13 - Attached as "Calendar 1.13"
9. 1/14 - Attached as "Calendar 1.14A", "Calendar 1.14B". We have withheld one calendar entry/record from January 14, 2020. This entry is for the Department Head's personal events and therefore do not involve the "conduct of the public's business" or constitute public records. If deemed public records, they are exempt because the disclosure of these entries would constitute an "unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(c); Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(k); see also Cal. Const. Art. I, Sec. 1.)
10. 1/15 - Attached as "Calendar 1.15". We have withheld one calendar entry/record from January 15, 2020. This entry is for the Department Head's personal events and therefore do not involve the "conduct of the public's business" or constitute public records. If deemed public records, they are exempt because the disclosure of these entries would constitute an "unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(c); Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(k); see also Cal. Const. Art. I, Sec. 1.)

Request #4. the most recent 5 emails sent by your Department Head via their government email account. Emails are requested in their original electronic format, or in .EML or .MSG format, with all non-exempt headers and metadata, and you must preserve all attachments, exhibits, formatting, hyperlinks, images, colors, and From/To/Cc/Bcc email addresses.

Response #4.

Email #1 sent on December 14, 2019 at 10:22am - We have withheld the email sent on December 14, 2019 at 10:22am. This record consists entirely of the Department Head's personal matter and therefore do not involve the "conduct of the public's business" or constitute public records. If deemed public records, they are exempt because the disclosure of which would constitute an "unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(c); Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(k); see also Cal. Const. Art. I, Sec. 1.)
Email #2 sent on December 14, 2019 at 9:37am - We have withheld the email sent on December 14, 2019 at 9:37am. This record consists entirely of confidential employee personnel information, the disclosure of these records would constitute an "unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(c); Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(k); see also Cal. Const. Art. I, Sec. 1.)
Email #3 sent on December 14, 2019 at 9:36am - We have withheld the email sent on December 14, 2019 at 9:36am. This record consists entirely of confidential employee personnel information, the disclosure of these records would constitute an "unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(c); Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(k); see also Cal. Const. Art. I, Sec. 1.)
Email #4 sent on December 13, 2019 at 6:10pm - We have withheld the email sent on December 13, 2019 at 6:10pm. This record consists entirely of labor relations information, the disclosure of which would "reveal a local agency's deliberative processes, impressions, evaluations, opinions, recommendations, meeting minutes, research, work products, theories, or strategy, or that provide instruction, advice, or training to employees who do not have full collective bargaining and representation rights under that chapter." Cal. Govt. Code 6254(p)(2)
Email #5 sent on December 13, 2019 at 5:43pm - Attached as "Email 12.13"

Request #5. the most recent 5 emails received by your Department Head via their government email account. Emails are requested in their original electronic format, or in .EML or .MSG format, with all non-exempt headers and metadata, and you must preserve all attachments, exhibits, formatting, hyperlinks, images, colors, and From/To/Cc/Bcc email addresses.

Response #5.

Email #1 received on December 16, 2019 at 2:04am - Attached as "Email 12.16"
Email #2 received on December 15, 2019 at 7:44pm - We have withheld the email received on December 15, 2019 at 7:44pm. This record consists entirely of confidential employee personnel information, the disclosure of these records would constitute an "unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(c); Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(k); see also Cal. Const. Art. I, Sec. 1.)
Email #3 received on December 15, 2019 at 6:52pm - We have withheld the email received on December 15, 2019 at 6:52pm. This record consists of attorney client privilege and attorney work product. Cal. Govt. Code §§ 6254(k), 6276.04; Cal. Evid. Code §§ 950 et seq., Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 2018.030
Email #4 received on December 15, 2019 at 1:28pm - Attached as "Email 12.15A". The City has disabled the link to the Dropbox account because the information and records are exempt from production as confidential employee records, the disclosure of these records would constitute an "unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(c); Cal. Govt. Code § 6254(k); see also Cal. Const. Art. I, Sec. 1.)
Email #5 received on December 15, 2019 at 1:03pm - Attached as "Email 12.15B".

Request #6. the most recent 5 emails relating to the conduct of public business, subject to City of San Jose v Superior Court (Smith, 2017) , sent by your Department Head via their personal email account. Emails are requested in their original electronic format, or in .EML or .MSG format, with all non-exempt headers and metadata, and you must preserve all attachments, exhibits, formatting, hyperlinks, images, colors, and From/To/Cc/Bcc email addresses.

Response #6. No responsive records exist in any of the Department Head's personal email accounts.

Request #7. the most recent 5 emails relating to the conduct of public business, subject to City of San Jose v Superior Court (Smith, 2017) , received by your Department Head via their personal email account. Emails are requested in their original electronic format, or in .EML or .MSG format, with all non-exempt headers and metadata, and you must preserve all attachments, exhibits, formatting, hyperlinks, images, colors, and From/To/Cc/Bcc email addresses.

Response #7. No responsive records exist in any of the Department Head's personal email accounts.

Thanks,

[DHR-6@1]
Henry Voong, Classification and Compensation Department of Human Resources
One South Van Ness Ave., 4th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94103
Phone: (415) 557-4802
Website: www.sfdhr.org<http://www.sfdhr.org>
Connecting People with Purpose

Warning An exclamation point.

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

From: Anonymous Person

Thank you for your thorough response - see attached letter.

NOTE: Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. The email address sending this request is a publicly- viewable mailbox. All of your responses (including all responsive records) may be instantly and automatically available to the public online via the MuckRock.com FOIA service used to issue this request (though the requester is an anonymous user, not a representative of MuckRock). Nothing herein is legal, IT, or professional advice of any kind. The author disclaims all warranties, express or implied, including but not limited to all warranties of merchantability or fitness. In no event shall the author be liable for any special, direct, indirect, consequential, or any other damages whatsoever. The digital signature, if any, in this email is not an indication of a binding agreement or offer; it merely authenticates the sender. Please do not include any confidential information, as I intend that these communications with the City all be public records.

From: Anonymous Person

RE: New SFAC 67.21(d) Petition

On Dec. 16 I requested among other things the 5 most recently sent or received emails by the HR director. On Dec 17, HR provided many of the requested records, and also withheld many, including one with this basis:
"Email #4 sent on December 13, 2019 at 6:10pm - We have withheld the email sent on December 13, 2019 at 6:10pm. This record consists entirely of labor relations information, the disclosure of which would "reveal a local agency's deliberative processes, impressions, evaluations, opinions, recommendations, meeting minutes, research, work products, theories, or strategy, or that provide instruction, advice, or training to employees who do not have full collective bargaining and representation rights under that chapter." Cal. Govt. Code 6254(p)(2)"

We believe this is a prohibited exemption by SFAC 67.24(h): "Neither the City nor any office, employee, or agent thereof may assert an exemption for withholding for any document or information based on a "deliberative process" exemption, either as provided by California Public Records Act Section 6255 or any other provision of law that does not prohibit disclosure."

Please determine in writing Email #4 to be a public record and order it disclosed.

NOTE: Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. The email address sending this request is a publicly- viewable mailbox. All of your responses (including all responsive records) may be instantly and automatically available to the public online via the MuckRock.com FOIA service used to issue this request (though the requester is an anonymous user, not a representative of MuckRock). Nothing herein is legal, IT, or professional advice of any kind. The author disclaims all warranties, express or implied, including but not limited to all warranties of merchantability or fitness. In no event shall the author be liable for any special, direct, indirect, consequential, or any other damages whatsoever. The digital signature, if any, in this email is not an indication of a binding agreement or offer; it merely authenticates the sender. Please do not include any confidential information, as I intend that these communications with the City all be public records.

Thanks,
Anonymous

Warning An exclamation point.

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

From: Anonymous Person

SOTF,

Please file a new SOTF complaint (will fill out your form too) and provide a file number and CC me on response.

Respondents: Department of Human Resources, Jeanne Buick, Henry Voong
Complainant: Anonymous (requests@muckrock.com)
Allegations: citing a prohibited deliberative process exemption (SFAC 67.24(h)), withholding on the basis of an exemption prohibited by local law (67.27), withholding more than the minimal portion of a document (67.26)

On Dec. 16 I requested among other things the 5 most recently sent and received emails by the HR director. On Dec 17, HR provided many of the requested records, and also withheld many, including one with this basis:
"Email #4 sent on December 13, 2019 at 6:10pm - We have withheld the email sent on December 13, 2019 at 6:10pm. This record consists entirely of labor relations information, the disclosure of which would "reveal a local agency's deliberative processes, impressions, evaluations, opinions, recommendations, meeting minutes, research, work products, theories, or strategy, or that provide instruction, advice, or training to employees who do not have full collective bargaining and representation rights under that chapter." Cal. Govt. Code 6254(p)(2)"

We believe this is a prohibited exemption by SFAC 67.24(h): "Neither the City nor any office, employee, or agent thereof may assert an exemption for withholding for any document or information based on a "deliberative process" exemption, either as provided by California Public Records Act Section 6255 or any other provision of law that does not prohibit disclosure."

Please determine in writing Email #4 to be a public record and order it disclosed.

We do not waive our rights to the remaining records, and may file separate complaints for them, but we want this complaint focused on a specific legal issue.

Allegations:
SFAC 67.24 - Gov Code 6254(p)(2) is a prohibited deliberative process exemption under 67.24(h)
SFAC 67.27(a) - Withholding on the basis of an exemption prohibited by SFAC 67.24 is also prohibited.
SFAC 67.26 - nonminimal withholding - at least some part of this record must be disclosed.

Sincerely,
Anonymous

From: Human Resources

Dear Anonymous:

First, thank you for your participation in last night’s hearing. It is always good to get another opinion/commentary on Sunshine matters.

Second, thank you for your positive review of my work. I should have said something yesterday, but frankly was focused on the hearing. I appreciate your feedback and again, thank you.

Third, I spoke with City Hall Media Services about hearing the public at the podium and they said they will look into it.

If we do not speak before 12/25/19, have a great and safe Holiday Season.

Best, Cheryl Leger

From: Anonymous Person

You're welcome Ms. Leger. I understand you and the other City employees involved in this process are pulled in many different directions, and I wanted to thank you for your unbiased professionalism.

Happy holidays as well!

Cheers,
Anonymous

From: Human Resources

Good morning,

DHR's reliance on the exemption in Government Code section 6254(p)(2) is appropriate. DHR recognizes that Administrative Code section 67.24(h) prohibits the City from withholding a record "based on a 'deliberative process' exemption..." However, section 6254(p)(2) is a labor relations exemption, not a deliberative process exemption. The Legislature established the labor relations exemption to allow public employers such as the City to exempt specified labor relations records from disclosure. This exemption reflects the Legislature's recognition of the importance for some degree of confidentiality to allow public sector employers to meaningfully prepare for and engage in labor relations activities and otherwise meet their obligations under the Meyer-Milias-Brown Act, Government Code section 3500, et seq., to promote harmonious public sector labor relations. The Sunshine Ordinance does not prohibit the City from relying on this labor relations exemption.

In addition, although section 6254(p)(2) mentions the phrase "deliberative processes," that is simply one term among many mentioned in the exemption, which allows a public employer to withhold records that reflect its labor relations "deliberative processes, impressions, evaluations, opinions, recommendations, meeting minutes, research, work products, theories, or strategy...." In this case, while DHR relies on the exemption as a whole, and is not required to specify application of the exemption in greater detail, largely DHR withheld the record in question because it reflects evaluation and strategy related to City labor relations.

Thanks,

[DHR-6@1]
Henry Voong, Classification and Compensation Department of Human Resources
One South Van Ness Ave., 4th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94103
Phone: (415) 557-4802
Website: www.sfdhr.org<http://www.sfdhr.org>
Connecting People with Purpose

Human Resources
PRA Office
One South Van Ness Avenue, 4th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94103

December 18, 2019

This is a follow up to a previous request:

Thank you for your thorough response - see attached letter.

NOTE: Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. The email address sending this request is a publicly- viewable mailbox. All of your responses (including all responsive records) may be instantly and automatically available to the public online via the MuckRock.com FOIA service used to issue this request (though the requester is an anonymous user, not a representative of MuckRock). Nothing herein is legal, IT, or professional advice of any kind. The author disclaims all warranties, express or implied, including but not limited to all warranties of merchantability or fitness. In no event shall the author be liable for any special, direct, indirect, consequential, or any other damages whatsoever. The digital signature, if any, in this email is not an indication of a binding agreement or offer; it merely authenticates the sender. Please do not include any confidential information, as I intend that these communications with the City all be public records.

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%252Fhuman-resources-19337%252Fcalendars-and-emails-immediate-disclosure-request-sf-dhr-84500%252F%253Femail%253Dhenry.voong%252540sfgov.org&url_auth_token=AABqPo4sS4ZoX2c-4L8j7nxROFM%3A1ihUWO%3AxTXuciGLZxF0SPhY0YraRUw9MZg
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 84500
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:

Please see the attached response to your petition.

Bradley Russi
Deputy City Attorney
Office of City Attorney Dennis Herrera
City Hall, Room 234
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Pl., San Francisco, CA 94102
www.sfcityattorney.org

From: Anonymous Person

Thank you for your prompt response.

From: Human Resources

To Whom It May Concern:

We are unaware of anything outstanding regarding this request.
Best,

Bradley Russi
Deputy City Attorney
Office of City Attorney Dennis Herrera
City Hall, Room 234
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Pl., San Francisco, CA 94102
www.sfcityattorney.org

From: Anonymous Person

There isn't. Sorry- That was intended for DHR itself.

From: Human Resources

Good Afternoon:

Notice is hereby given that the Compliance and Amendments Committee of the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force shall hold hearings on complaints listed below to determine if the Task Force has jurisdiction pursuant to Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.21(e). A hearing to review the merits of the complaint will be scheduled on a future date.

The Complainant and Respondent are NOT REQUIRED to attend the January 28, 2020, Committee meeting but may attend to provide testimony related to the above listed determinations only.

Date: January 28, 2020

Location: City Hall, Room 408

Time: 4:30 p.m.

Complaints:

File No. 19091: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Mayor London Breed, the Office of the Mayor, Hank Heckel, Sean Elsbernd, Andres Power, Andrea Bruss, Marjon Philhour, Jeff Cretan, Sophia Kittler for allegedly violating Administrative Code, (Sunshine Ordinance) Sections 67.21, 67.26, 67.27 and 67.29-7, by failing to respond to a request for public records in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19094: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Linda Gerull and the Department of Technology for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, 67.25, 67.26 and 67.27 by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19097: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Public Works for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, 67.26 and 67.27, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19109: Complaint filed by Stephen Malloy against Dept. of Public Health for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.24, 67.25, 67.26 and 67.27 by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19110: Complaint filed by Stephen Malloy against the Fire Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.24, 67.25, 67.26 and 67.27 by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19117: Complaint filed by Conrad Wu against the Public Utilities Commission for allegedly violating Administrative Code, (Sunshine Ordinance) Sections 67.25 by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19118: Complaint filed by Paul Ondik against the Police Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b), by failing to respond to a records request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19119: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Department of Technology for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b), 67.26 and 67.27 by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19120: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Office of the City Attorney for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b)(c), 67.26, 67.27, by failing to respond to a request for public records in a timely and/or complete manner; failing to justify withholding of records and failing to provide assistance.

File No. 19121: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Police Commission for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b)(k), 67.26 and 67.27, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner; withholding more than the minimum and failing to justify withholding.

File No. 19122: Complaint filed by Anonymous against City Librarian Michael Lambert and the Public Library for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.25, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19123: Complaint filed by Paul Kniha against the San Francisco Municipal Executive Association for allegedly violating Administrative Code, (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.21, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19125: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Controller's Office for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b)(c)(k), 67.26, 67.27, by failing to respond to a request for records in a timely and/or complete manner, failing to assist, withheld more than the minimally exempt portion of a public record, failing to justify withholdings with clear reference to exemption statute or case law and failing to provide an exact copy of records.

File No. 19126: Complaint filed by Ann Treboux against the San Francisco Arts Commission for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.25, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19128: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Chief William Scott, Sgt. Brian Rodriguez, Michael Andraychak and the Police Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, 67.25, 67.26, 67.27 and 67.29-7(a), by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19130: Complaint filed by Stephen Malloy against Chesa Boudin and the District Attorney's Office for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.21, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19131: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Jose Cisneros, Theresa Buckley and the Treasurer's Office for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, 67.24, 67.26, 67.27, by failing to respond to a request for records in a timely and/or complete manner, failing to assist, withheld more than the minimally exempt portion of a public record.

File No. 19132: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Mary Ellen Carroll and the Department of Emergency Management for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21 and 67.25, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19133: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Tom Maguire and the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21 and 67.25, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19134: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Rob Reiter and City Hall Building Management for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21 and 67.25 by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19135: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Vicki Hennessy and the Sheriff's Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21 and 67.25 by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19136: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Naomi Kelly and the Office of the City Administrator for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21 and 67.25 by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19137: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Thomas P. Campbell and the Fine Arts Museum for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, 67.25 and 67.34 by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19138: Complaint filed by Stephen Malloy against the University of California, Regents of the University of California, for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19139: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Jeanne Buick, Henry Voong and the Department of Human Resources for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.24, 67.26 and 67.27(a), by withholding public records.

File No. 19140: Complaint filed by Stephen Malloy against the Department of Human Resources for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21and 67.25, by failing to respond to a request for public records in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19141: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Chief William Scott and the Police Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21 and 67.25, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19143: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Sheriff Vicki Hennessy, James Wilson and the Sheriff's Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.24, 67.25 and 67.27, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19144: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Department of Police Accountability for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections, 67.21, 67.24, 67.26 and 67.27, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19145: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Police Commission for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.5 and 67.21, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19146: Complaint filed by Anonymous against City Librarian Michael Lambert and the Public Library for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.21, by failing to request for public records in a timely and/or complete manner.

The agenda and packet material for the meeting is available online at the following link:

Cheryl Leger

Assistant Clerk, Board of Supervisors

Tel: 415-554-7724

<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.

The Legislative Research Center<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=9681> provides 24-hour access to Board of Supervisors legislation, and archived matters since August 1998.

Disclosures: Personal information that is provided in communications to 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: Human Resources

Good Afternoon:

Notice is hereby given that the Compliance and Amendments Committee of the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force shall hold hearings on complaints listed below to determine if the Task Force has jurisdiction pursuant to Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.21(e). A hearing to review the merits of the complaint will be scheduled on a future date.

The Complainant and Respondent are NOT REQUIRED to attend the January 28, 2020, Committee meeting but may attend to provide testimony related to the above listed determinations only.

Date: January 28, 2020

Location: City Hall, Room 408

Time: 4:30 p.m.

Complaints:

File No. 19091: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Mayor London Breed, the Office of the Mayor, Hank Heckel, Sean Elsbernd, Andres Power, Andrea Bruss, Marjon Philhour, Jeff Cretan, Sophia Kittler for allegedly violating Administrative Code, (Sunshine Ordinance) Sections 67.21, 67.26, 67.27 and 67.29-7, by failing to respond to a request for public records in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19094: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Linda Gerull and the Department of Technology for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, 67.25, 67.26 and 67.27 by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19097: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Public Works for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, 67.26 and 67.27, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19109: Complaint filed by Stephen Malloy against Dept. of Public Health for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.24, 67.25, 67.26 and 67.27 by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19110: Complaint filed by Stephen Malloy against the Fire Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.24, 67.25, 67.26 and 67.27 by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19117: Complaint filed by Conrad Wu against the Public Utilities Commission for allegedly violating Administrative Code, (Sunshine Ordinance) Sections 67.25 by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19118: Complaint filed by Paul Ondik against the Police Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b), by failing to respond to a records request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19119: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Department of Technology for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b), 67.26 and 67.27 by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19120: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Office of the City Attorney for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b)(c), 67.26, 67.27, by failing to respond to a request for public records in a timely and/or complete manner; failing to justify withholding of records and failing to provide assistance.

File No. 19121: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Police Commission for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b)(k), 67.26 and 67.27, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner; withholding more than the minimum and failing to justify withholding.

File No. 19122: Complaint filed by Anonymous against City Librarian Michael Lambert and the Public Library for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.25, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19123: Complaint filed by Paul Kniha against the San Francisco Municipal Executive Association for allegedly violating Administrative Code, (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.21, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19125: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Controller's Office for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b)(c)(k), 67.26, 67.27, by failing to respond to a request for records in a timely and/or complete manner, failing to assist, withheld more than the minimally exempt portion of a public record, failing to justify withholdings with clear reference to exemption statute or case law and failing to provide an exact copy of records.

File No. 19126: Complaint filed by Ann Treboux against the San Francisco Arts Commission for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.25, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19128: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Chief William Scott, Sgt. Brian Rodriguez, Michael Andraychak and the Police Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, 67.25, 67.26, 67.27 and 67.29-7(a), by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19130: Complaint filed by Stephen Malloy against Chesa Boudin and the District Attorney's Office for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.21, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19131: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Jose Cisneros, Theresa Buckley and the Treasurer's Office for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, 67.24, 67.26, 67.27, by failing to respond to a request for records in a timely and/or complete manner, failing to assist, withheld more than the minimally exempt portion of a public record.

File No. 19132: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Mary Ellen Carroll and the Department of Emergency Management for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21 and 67.25, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19133: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Tom Maguire and the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21 and 67.25, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19134: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Rob Reiter and City Hall Building Management for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21 and 67.25 by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19135: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Vicki Hennessy and the Sheriff's Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21 and 67.25 by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19136: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Naomi Kelly and the Office of the City Administrator for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21 and 67.25 by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19137: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Thomas P. Campbell and the Fine Arts Museum for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, 67.25 and 67.34 by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19138: Complaint filed by Stephen Malloy against the University of California, Regents of the University of California, for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19139: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Jeanne Buick, Henry Voong and the Department of Human Resources for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.24, 67.26 and 67.27(a), by withholding public records.

File No. 19140: Complaint filed by Stephen Malloy against the Department of Human Resources for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21and 67.25, by failing to respond to a request for public records in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19141: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Chief William Scott and the Police Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21 and 67.25, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19143: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Sheriff Vicki Hennessy, James Wilson and the Sheriff's Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.24, 67.25 and 67.27, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19144: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Department of Police Accountability for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections, 67.21, 67.24, 67.26 and 67.27, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19145: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Police Commission for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.5 and 67.21, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.

File No. 19146: Complaint filed by Anonymous against City Librarian Michael Lambert and the Public Library for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.21, by failing to request for public records in a timely and/or complete manner.

The agenda and packet material for the meeting is available online at the following link:

Cheryl Leger

Assistant Clerk, Board of Supervisors

Tel: 415-554-7724

<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.

The Legislative Research Center<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=9681> provides 24-hour access to Board of Supervisors legislation, and archived matters since August 1998.

Disclosures: Personal information that is provided in communications to 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

RE: BCC Emails - Immediate Disclosure Request

Department Head:

Below are new Immediate Disclosure Requests (SF Admin Code 67.25(a)) directed to your agency and the department head. Your response is required by Feb 11, 2020. Rolling records responses are requested (SFAC 67.25(d)) if you are unable to immediately produce records. Exact copies of every responsive record are requested (Gov Code 6253(b)) - do not: provide mere URLs, print and scan electronic records, convert native files to PDFs, or provide black and white versions of any color record. Provide only copies of records not requiring fees and in-person inspection of all other records (GC 6253). Emails are requested in the easily-generated EML or MSG formats (SFAC 67.21(l)).

I am now auditing how the City appears to unlawfully withhold the BCC recipients of emails when they print out emails in certain formats. The identity of BCC recipients is not exempt. BCC is not an information security record that reveals vulnerabilities or increases chance of an attack. The BCC names was typed in by a human being and are not metadata. You must provide BCC just like you provide To or CC recipients. There is no legal authority to keep secret the identities of persons communicating with government officials, unless they are specifically confidential informants and such. If you withhold the BCC names, I will file complaints, separate and apart from email metadata complaints (which I have now already won, see ruling in SOTF 19044).

Your non-exhaustive obligations: All withholding of any information must be justified in writing (SFAC 67.27). All withholdings by masking or deletion (aka redactions) must be keyed by footnote or other clear reference to the specific justification for that redaction, and only the minimal exempt portion of any record may be withheld (SFAC 67.26). You must respond to emailed requests (SFAC 67.21(b)). You must notify us of whether or not responsive records exist and/or were withheld for each below request (Gov Code 6253(c), 6255(b)). You must state the name and title of each person responsible for withholding any information (Gov Code 6253(d)). Do not impose any end-user restrictions upon me (Santa Clara Co. vs Superior Ct, 170 Cal.App 4th 1301); so if you use a third-party website to publish records, please make them completely public without any login or sign-in.

Your agency must do all of the above things in your response, and you cannot wait until we file complaints.

****** We have no duty to, and we will not again, remind the City of its obligations. Instead, we will file complaints for every Sunshine Ordinance or CPRA violation. We will continue to file complaints until the City's procedures are modified to fully comply with the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, without caveat or exception. ******

1. An exact copy with all email headers (incl. but not limited to the BCC identities), attachments, color, formatting, hyperlinks, images, and all other parts of the record of the most recent 5 emails which have any BCC recipients which were sent by your Dept Head on any government account . Note that you will have to search directly from the person's computer or account in their Sent folder specifically (In many email systems, no other method will allow you to see the BCC recipients). In modern Outlook systems, the search query is as follows: (bcc:*)

Do not destroy or discard any responsive records - we will appeal all withholdings or Sunshine violations.

NOTE: Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. The email address sending this request is a publicly- viewable mailbox. All of your responses (including all responsive records) may be instantly and automatically available to the public online via the MuckRock.com FOIA service used to issue this request (though the requester is an anonymous user, not a representative of MuckRock). Nothing herein is legal, IT, or professional advice of any kind. The author disclaims all warranties, express or implied, including but not limited to all warranties of merchantability or fitness. In no event shall the author be liable for any special, direct, indirect, consequential, or any other damages whatsoever. The digital signature, if any, in this email is not an indication of a binding agreement or offer; it merely authenticates the sender. Please do not include any confidential information, as I intend that these communications with the City all be disclosable public records.

Sincerely,

Anonymous

From: Human Resources

Good afternoon,

I write in response to your email received by the Department of Human Resources (DHR) on February 10, 2020 requesting:

1. An exact copy with all email headers (incl. but not limited to the BCC identities), attachments, color, formatting, hyperlinks, images, and all other parts of the record of the most recent 5 emails which have any BCC recipients which were sent by your Dept Head on any government account . Note that you will have to search directly from the person's computer or account in their Sent folder specifically (In many email systems, no other method will allow you to see the BCC recipients). In modern Outlook systems, the search query is as follows: (bcc:*)

After a reasonable and diligent search, including but not limited to conducting a search according to the instructions provided in your email, DHR found no responsive records. Please note that as a standard practice, the Human Resources Director does not utilize the blind carbon copy (bcc) function when sending emails.

Thanks,

[DHR-6@1]
Henry Voong, Classification and Compensation Department of Human Resources
One South Van Ness Ave., 4th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94103
Phone: (415) 557-4802
Website: www.sfdhr.org<http://www.sfdhr.org>
Connecting People with Purpose

From: Human Resources

Dear SOTF Petitioners, Respondents and other Stakeholders:
As you most likely know SOTF operations have been delayed over the last few months due to the Covid-19 emergency. The SOTF have started to conduct remote meetings via videoconference and are working to establish procedures to resume all operations including the processing of complaints.
While the Sunshine Ordinance requires that certain actions be taken within 45 days, the Covid-19 emergency has forced delays and immense new backlogs for complaint hearings. We write today to ask if you are willing to waive the 45 day rule for your complaint.
The SOTF intends to resume hearing complaints on a limited basis and complaints will be queued to be heard in the near future. We continue to work to address technical issues posed by remote meetings. We are aware of the time sensitivity of your records requests. Please be assured that the SOTF appreciates the urgency of your matters and the importance of handling them in a timely manner.
If you have further questions about your files or have other issues, please feel free to email the SOTF Administrator at the email below.
Cheryl Leger
Assistant Clerk, Board of Supervisors
Cheryl.Leger@sfgov.org<mailto:Cheryl.Leger@sfgov.org>
Tel: 415-554-7724
Fax: 415-554-5163
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.

The Legislative Research Center<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=9681> provides 24-hour access to Board of Supervisors legislation, and archived matters since August 1998.

Disclosures: Personal information that is provided in communications to 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

SOTF - you may waive the 45 day rule SOLELY for the complaint from this email address (but not any other files). Please confirm with the file number.

From: Human Resources

Thank you, Anonymous. This request to waive the 45 day rule refers only to matter no. File No. 19139 (Anonymous v. Dept. of Human Resources). Please correct me if I am wrong as you have several files where I am making this same request. Thank you.

Cheryl Leger
Assistant Clerk, Board of Supervisors
Cheryl.Leger@sfgov.org<mailto:Cheryl.Leger@sfgov.org>
Tel: 415-554-7724
Fax: 415-554-5163
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.

The Legislative Research Center<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=9681> provides 24-hour access to Board of Supervisors legislation, and archived matters since August 1998.

Disclosures: Personal information that is provided in communications to 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

DHR and Micki Callahan:

Below are Immediate Disclosure Requests (SF Admin Code 67.25(a)). Your initial response is required by Sept 3, 2020. Rolling records responses are requested (SFAC 67.25(d)) if you are unable to immediately produce all records. Exact copies of every responsive record are requested (Gov Code 6253(b)) - do not or print and scan electronic records or provide black and white versions of any color record. Provide only copies of records not requiring fees and in-person inspection of all other records (GC 6253).

Your non-exhaustive obligations: All withholding of any information must be justified (SFAC 67.27). All withholdings by masking or deletion (aka redactions) must be keyed by footnote or other clear reference to justification and only the minimal exempt portion of a record may be withheld (SFAC 67.26). Respond to emailed requests (SFAC 67.21(b)). You must notify us of whether or not responsive records exist and/or were withheld for each below request (Gov Code 6253(c), 6255(b)). You must state the name and title of each person responsible for withholding any information (Gov Code 6253(d)). You must do all of this in your response, and you cannot wait until we file complaints. If you wait to comply with the Sunshine Ordinance until after we file complaints, we will not withdraw any complaints and request SOTF find you in violation, regardless of what you do after filing.

****** We have no duty to, and we will not again, remind the City of its obligations. Instead, we will file complaints for every Sunshine Ordinance or CPRA violation. We will continue to file complaints until your procedures are modified to fully comply with the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, without caveat or exception. ******

Provide rolling responses - every record must be provided no later than the end of the business day that it is reviewed - see SFAC 67.25(d).

1. The original email "Corruption at DHR..." sent by Micki Callahan including all recipients in the To/Cc/Bcc fields, with all metadata and email headers and attachments.
2. All responses to that email and all forwards and other messages in that thread received by Micki Callahan, with all metadata and email headers and attachments.
3. Rebecca Sherman's alleged written admission "that she had forged documents and lied to a city employee about that employee’s EEO case"
4. Copies of Sherman's allegedly deleted records from reports printed from the EEO Division’s database (if those deleted records are backed up on a server or a deleted items or trash folder, you must recover them and provide them: ). Note that the City Attorney has opined that these kinds of "deleted" records are public, from the Good Govt Guide: "Emails that are easily retrievable by the user must be searched in response to a public records request. This includes emails that have not been deleted; emails that have been put in the “Deleted Items” folder but have not been emptied from that folder (and hence are immediately retrievable); and emails that have been deleted and emptied from that folder but remain immediately retrievable by accessing the computer’s “Recover Deleted Items From Server” function."
5. Sherman's allegedly forged and unauthorized settlement agreement with allegedly forged department head’s and two Deputy City Attorneys’ names on the document.
6. All contents of Rebecca Sherman's Deleted Items, Recycle Bin, or similar folders in both her sfgov Outlook (for email) and her computer drives (for files)
7. Every email, text, or chat message sent or received by Micki Callahan to any other city employee or officer between Jan 1 2020 and present (inclusive) containing the case insensitive phrase "Rebecca Sherman"

PLEASE BE SURE YOU PRESERVE ALL RESPONSIVE RECORDS IMMEDIATELY. You may not destroy records during the pendency of this request and all of its appeals - we will appeal any withholding/redaction of any information.

Please indicate "no responsive records" for each request if that is true.

NOTE: Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. The email address sending this request is a publicly- viewable mailbox. All of your responses (including all responsive records) may be instantly and automatically available to the public online via the MuckRock.com FOIA service used to issue this request (though the requester is an anonymous user, not a representative of MuckRock). Nothing herein is legal, IT, or professional advice of any kind. The author disclaims all warranties, express or implied, including but not limited to all warranties of merchantability or fitness. In no event shall the author be liable for any special, direct, indirect, consequential, or any other damages whatsoever. The digital signature, if any, in this email is not an indication of a binding agreement or offer; it merely authenticates the sender. Please do not include any confidential information, as I intend that these communications with the City all be disclosable public records.

--Anonymous

From: Anonymous Person

Micki Callahan:

**PLEASE BE SURE YOU PRESERVE ALL RESPONSIVE RECORDS IMMEDIATELY. You may not destroy records during the pendency of this request and all of its appeals - we will appeal any withholding/redaction of any information.**

Below are Immediate Disclosure Requests (SF Admin Code 67.25(a)). Rolling records responses are requested (SFAC 67.25(d)) if you are unable to immediately produce all records. Exact copies of every responsive record are requested (Gov Code 6253(b)) - do not or print and scan electronic records or provide black and white versions of any color record. Provide only copies of records not requiring fees and in-person inspection of all other records (GC 6253).

Your non-exhaustive obligations: All withholding of any information must be justified (SFAC 67.27). All withholdings by masking or deletion (aka redactions) must be keyed by footnote or other clear reference to justification and only the minimal exempt portion of a record may be withheld (SFAC 67.26). Respond to emailed requests (SFAC 67.21(b)). You must notify us of whether or not responsive records exist and/or were withheld for each below request (Gov Code 6253(c), 6255(b)). You must state the name and title of each person responsible for withholding any information (Gov Code 6253(d)). You must do all of this in your response, and you cannot wait until we file complaints. If you wait to comply with the Sunshine Ordinance until after we file complaints, we will not withdraw any complaints and request SOTF find you in violation, regardless of what you do after filing.

****** We have no duty to, and we will not again, remind the City of its obligations. Instead, we will file complaints for every Sunshine Ordinance or CPRA violation. We will continue to file complaints until your procedures are modified to fully comply with the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, without caveat or exception. ******

Provide rolling responses - every record must be provided no later than the end of the business day that it is reviewed - see SFAC 67.25(d).

1. The original email "Corruption at DHR..." sent by Micki Callahan including all recipients in the To/Cc/Bcc fields, with all metadata and email headers and attachments.
2. All responses to that email and all forwards and other messages in that thread received by Micki Callahan, with all metadata and email headers and attachments.
3. Rebecca Sherman's alleged written admission "that she had forged documents and lied to a city employee about that employee’s EEO case"
4. Copies of Sherman's allegedly deleted records from reports printed from the EEO Division’s database (if those deleted records are backed up on a server or a deleted items or trash folder, you must recover them and provide them: ). Note that the City Attorney has opined that these kinds of "deleted" records are public, from the Good Govt Guide: "Emails that are easily retrievable by the user must be searched in response to a public records request. This includes emails that have not been deleted; emails that have been put in the “Deleted Items” folder but have not been emptied from that folder (and hence are immediately retrievable); and emails that have been deleted and emptied from that folder but remain immediately retrievable by accessing the computer’s “Recover Deleted Items From Server” function."
5. Sherman's allegedly forged and unauthorized settlement agreement with allegedly forged department head’s and two Deputy City Attorneys’ names on the document.
6. All contents of Rebecca Sherman's Deleted Items, Recycle Bin, or similar folders in both her sfgov Outlook (for email) and her computer drives (for files)
7. Every email, text, or chat message sent or received by Micki Callahan to any other city employee or officer between Jan 1 2020 and present (inclusive) containing the case insensitive phrase "Rebecca Sherman"

Please indicate "no responsive records" for each request if that is true.

NOTE: Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. The email address sending this request is a publicly- viewable mailbox. All of your responses (including all responsive records) may be instantly and automatically available to the public online via the MuckRock.com FOIA service used to issue this request (though the requester is an anonymous user, not a representative of MuckRock). Nothing herein is legal, IT, or professional advice of any kind. The author disclaims all warranties, express or implied, including but not limited to all warranties of merchantability or fitness. In no event shall the author be liable for any special, direct, indirect, consequential, or any other damages whatsoever. The digital signature, if any, in this email is not an indication of a binding agreement or offer; it merely authenticates the sender. Please do not include any confidential information, as I intend that these communications with the City all be disclosable public records.

--Anonymous

From: Anonymous Person

LINDA SIMON:

**PLEASE BE SURE YOU PRESERVE ALL RESPONSIVE RECORDS IMMEDIATELY. You may not destroy records during the pendency of this request and all of its appeals - we will appeal any withholding/redaction of any information.**

Below are Immediate Disclosure Requests (SF Admin Code 67.25(a)). Rolling records responses are requested (SFAC 67.25(d)) if you are unable to immediately produce all records. Exact copies of every responsive record are requested (Gov Code 6253(b)) - do not or print and scan electronic records or provide black and white versions of any color record. Provide only copies of records not requiring fees and in-person inspection of all other records (GC 6253).

Your non-exhaustive obligations: All withholding of any information must be justified (SFAC 67.27). All withholdings by masking or deletion (aka redactions) must be keyed by footnote or other clear reference to justification and only the minimal exempt portion of a record may be withheld (SFAC 67.26). Respond to emailed requests (SFAC 67.21(b)). You must notify us of whether or not responsive records exist and/or were withheld for each below request (Gov Code 6253(c), 6255(b)). You must state the name and title of each person responsible for withholding any information (Gov Code 6253(d)). You must do all of this in your response, and you cannot wait until we file complaints. If you wait to comply with the Sunshine Ordinance until after we file complaints, we will not withdraw any complaints and request SOTF find you in violation, regardless of what you do after filing.

****** We have no duty to, and we will not again, remind the City of its obligations. Instead, we will file complaints for every Sunshine Ordinance or CPRA violation. We will continue to file complaints until your procedures are modified to fully comply with the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, without caveat or exception. ******

Provide rolling responses - every record must be provided no later than the end of the business day that it is reviewed - see SFAC 67.25(d).

8. Rebecca Sherman's alleged written admission "that she had forged documents and lied to a city employee about that employee’s EEO case"
9. Copies of Sherman's allegedly deleted records from reports printed from the EEO Division’s database (if those deleted records are backed up on a server or a deleted items or trash folder, you must recover them and provide them: ). Note that the City Attorney has opined that these kinds of "deleted" records are public, from the Good Govt Guide: "Emails that are easily retrievable by the user must be searched in response to a public records request. This includes emails that have not been deleted; emails that have been put in the “Deleted Items” folder but have not been emptied from that folder (and hence are immediately retrievable); and emails that have been deleted and emptied from that folder but remain immediately retrievable by accessing the computer’s “Recover Deleted Items From Server” function."
10. Sherman's allegedly forged and unauthorized settlement agreement with allegedly forged department head’s and two Deputy City Attorneys’ names on the document.
11. All contents of Rebecca Sherman's Deleted Items, Recycle Bin, or similar folders in both her sfgov Outlook (for email) and her computer drives (for files)
12. Every email, text, or chat message sent or received by LINDA SIMON to any other city employee or officer between Jan 1 2020 and present (inclusive) containing the case insensitive phrase "Rebecca Sherman"

Please indicate "no responsive records" for each request if that is true.

NOTE: Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. The email address sending this request is a publicly- viewable mailbox. All of your responses (including all responsive records) may be instantly and automatically available to the public online via the MuckRock.com FOIA service used to issue this request (though the requester is an anonymous user, not a representative of MuckRock). Nothing herein is legal, IT, or professional advice of any kind. The author disclaims all warranties, express or implied, including but not limited to all warranties of merchantability or fitness. In no event shall the author be liable for any special, direct, indirect, consequential, or any other damages whatsoever. The digital signature, if any, in this email is not an indication of a binding agreement or offer; it merely authenticates the sender. Please do not include any confidential information, as I intend that these communications with the City all be disclosable public records.

--Anonymous

From: Anonymous Person

KATE HOWARD:

**PLEASE BE SURE YOU PRESERVE ALL RESPONSIVE RECORDS IMMEDIATELY. You may not destroy records during the pendency of this request and all of its appeals - we will appeal any withholding/redaction of any information.**

Below are Immediate Disclosure Requests (SF Admin Code 67.25(a)). Rolling records responses are requested (SFAC 67.25(d)) if you are unable to immediately produce all records. Exact copies of every responsive record are requested (Gov Code 6253(b)) - do not or print and scan electronic records or provide black and white versions of any color record. Provide only copies of records not requiring fees and in-person inspection of all other records (GC 6253).

Your non-exhaustive obligations: All withholding of any information must be justified (SFAC 67.27). All withholdings by masking or deletion (aka redactions) must be keyed by footnote or other clear reference to justification and only the minimal exempt portion of a record may be withheld (SFAC 67.26). Respond to emailed requests (SFAC 67.21(b)). You must notify us of whether or not responsive records exist and/or were withheld for each below request (Gov Code 6253(c), 6255(b)). You must state the name and title of each person responsible for withholding any information (Gov Code 6253(d)). You must do all of this in your response, and you cannot wait until we file complaints. If you wait to comply with the Sunshine Ordinance until after we file complaints, we will not withdraw any complaints and request SOTF find you in violation, regardless of what you do after filing.

****** We have no duty to, and we will not again, remind the City of its obligations. Instead, we will file complaints for every Sunshine Ordinance or CPRA violation. We will continue to file complaints until your procedures are modified to fully comply with the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, without caveat or exception. ******

Provide rolling responses - every record must be provided no later than the end of the business day that it is reviewed - see SFAC 67.25(d).

13. Every email, text, or chat message sent or received by KATE HOWARD to any other city employee or officer between Jan 1 2020 and present (inclusive) containing the case insensitive phrase "Rebecca Sherman"

Please indicate "no responsive records" for each request if that is true.

NOTE: Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. The email address sending this request is a publicly- viewable mailbox. All of your responses (including all responsive records) may be instantly and automatically available to the public online via the MuckRock.com FOIA service used to issue this request (though the requester is an anonymous user, not a representative of MuckRock). Nothing herein is legal, IT, or professional advice of any kind. The author disclaims all warranties, express or implied, including but not limited to all warranties of merchantability or fitness. In no event shall the author be liable for any special, direct, indirect, consequential, or any other damages whatsoever. The digital signature, if any, in this email is not an indication of a binding agreement or offer; it merely authenticates the sender. Please do not include any confidential information, as I intend that these communications with the City all be disclosable public records.

--Anonymous

From: Human Resources

Good afternoon,

I write in response to your email received by The Department of Human Resources (DHR) on September 19, 2020, making an immediate disclosure request for public records. The purpose of the immediate disclosure request is to expedite the City’s response to a "simple, routine, or otherwise readily answerable request." S.F. 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. S.F. Admin. Code § 67.25(a). Your request seeks several categories of records, records from multiple people, and emails that need to be electronically searched for and retrieved. Accordingly, your request is not "simple, routine, or otherwise readily answerable" and DHR will apply the standard timelines for responding to a request. Under the standard timeline, the response will be due in 10 calendar days, or not later than September 29, 2020.
Best,
Dave

From: Human Resources

Good afternoon,

I write in response to your email received by The Department of Human Resources (DHR) on September 19, 2020, making an immediate disclosure request for public records. The purpose of the immediate disclosure request is to expedite the City’s response to a "simple, routine, or otherwise readily answerable request." S.F. 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. S.F. Admin. Code § 67.25(a). Your request seeks several categories of records, records from multiple people, and emails that need to be electronically searched for and retrieved. Accordingly, your request is not "simple, routine, or otherwise readily answerable" and DHR will apply the standard timelines for responding to a request. Under the standard timeline, the response will be due in 10 calendar days, or not later than September 29, 2020.
Best,
Dave

From: Human Resources

I write in response to your record requests received by the Department of Human Resources. Due to the voluminous nature of your request, DHR will be providing responsive records on a rolling basis. Attached are the responsive records that have been identified so far.

Additionally, the Department of Human Resources is hereby invoking an extension of time to respond to your request for records pursuant to Government Code Section 6253(c) and San Francisco Administrative Code Section 67.25(b), in order to search for, collect, and appropriately examine a voluminous amount of separate and distinct records included in your request, and to consult with another department or agency that has a substantial interest in the response to the request.

We will respond as promptly as possible to your request, and without unreasonable delay, and in no event than fourteen calendar days from the date of this e-mail.

Thank you

[DHR-6@1.5x]

Paul Greene, Supervising Human Resources Consultant

Department of Human Resources

One South Van Ness Ave., 4th Floor

San Francisco, CA 94103

Phone: (415) 551-8939

Website: www.sfdhr.org<http://www.sfdhr.org/>

From: Human Resources

I write to follow up on my previous response to your record request. Attached is the resignation email you have requested. To protect employee privacy, names of individual City employees have been redacted. See CA Govt Code section 6254(c), section 6254(k), California Constitution, Art I, Sec 1, and SF Admin Code section 67.1(g).

DHR will continue to provide responsive documents on a rolling basis as they become available.

Thank you

[DHR-6@1.5x]

Paul Greene, Supervising Human Resources Consultant

Department of Human Resources

One South Van Ness Ave., 4th Floor

San Francisco, CA 94103

Phone: (415) 551-8939

Website: www.sfdhr.org<http://www.sfdhr.org/>

From: Anonymous Person

Supervisor of Records,

This is a 67.21(d) petition against DHR specifically for the record attached.

The sole justification provided is:
" To protect employee privacy, names of individual City employees have been redacted. See CA Govt Code section 6254(c), section 6254(k), California Constitution, Art I, Sec 1, and SF Admin Code section 67.1(g)."

I challenge all redactions because (1) many are clearly not the names of city employees and thus not justified in any way and (2) the existence of a named person as a city employee is not a valid privacy interest. Public employee contracts - including all of their details including the parties' names - are public, Gov. Code, § 6254.8.

--Anonymous

From: Anonymous Person

To clarify:

Supervisor of Records,

This is a 67.21(d) petition against DHR specifically for the record attached.

The sole justification provided is:
" To protect employee privacy, names of individual City employees have been redacted. See CA Govt Code section 6254(c), section 6254(k), California Constitution, Art I, Sec 1, and SF Admin Code section 67.1(g)."

I challenge all redactions because (1) many are clearly not the names of city employees and thus not justified in any way and (2) the existence of a named person as a city employee is not a valid privacy interest. Public employee contracts - including all of their details including the parties' names - are public, Gov. Code, § 6254.8.

NEW: Please determine in writing that the record or parts thereof are public and order them disclosed.

--Anonymous

From: Human Resources

Please see attached.

Bradley Russi
Deputy City Attorney
Office of City Attorney Dennis Herrera
www.sfcityattorney.org

From: Anonymous Person

Supervisor of Records,

This is a new 67.21(d) petition for the specific record attached and also available at:
https://cdn.muckrock.com/foia_files/2020/09/29/RS_Settlement_Agrement_Redacted.pdf

No justifications whatsoever for any redactions were provide; thus by law all redactions are unlawful as they do not comply with SFAC 67.26 (no footnote or other clear reference) and SFAC 67.27 (failure to justify in writing withholding of any information).

Furthermore, we challenge the 3 redactions on the 4th paragraph of the first page for the following additional reasons:
These are case captions and numbers. Legal case captions are completely public.
See for example the SF Superior Court's own website, which discloses (as can be searched for by MTA as party), for example case CGC-19-574719 which is Hale Guerra vs CCSF, SFMTA, et al. for alleged harassment and sexual discrimination.
The fact that the court case is about a personnel matter does not make information about the court case exempt from disclosure. Court filings, unless under seal, are public.

Please determine in writing that one or more of these redactions are actually public and order them disclosed.

Sincerely,
Anonymous

From: Human Resources

I write to follow up on my previous response to your record request. Attached are additional records responsive to your request. Personal email addresses have been redacted in order to protect their privacy. DHR will continue to provide responsive documents on a rolling basis as they become available.

Due to the length of time required to identify possible responsive records, redact when necessary and produce said records, I would like to inquire if you are able to narrow your request so DHR can focus on providing only the records you are interested in receiving. Alternatively, DHR would like to request if you can prioritize the records you would like to receive first. Please let me know if you would like to discuss further.

Thank you

[DHR-6@1.5x]

Paul Greene, Supervising Human Resources Consultant

Department of Human Resources

One South Van Ness Ave., 4th Floor

San Francisco, CA 94103

Phone: (415) 551-8939

Website: www.sfdhr.org<http://www.sfdhr.org/>

Files

pages

Close
Warning An exclamation point.

There are too many files to display on the request page. See all files.