Resources Allocated to Public Records - Immediate Disclosure Request
It is a clone of this request.
| Submitted | Jan. 22, 2020 |
| Due | Aug. 27, 2020 |
| Est. Completion | Feb. 10, 2020 |
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
RE: A Word Document and an Excel File - Immediate Disclosure Request (SF City Atty)
Manu Pradhan, Dennis Herrera, and Office of City Attorney:
Below are Immediate Disclosure Requests (SF Admin Code 67.25(a)) directed to Manu Pradhan, Dennis Herrera, and Office of City Attorney. Your response is required by Jan 23, 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, or print and scan electronic records, convert 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).
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.
****** 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. ******
1. All org charts showing Manu Pradhan's organization including all superiors and subordinates (direct or indirect)
2. All records showing the staff resource allocation used for fulfilling City Attorney's office CPRA/Sunshine duties (for example: which staff do CPRA duties, what their job descriptions and titles are, what percentage of their time they are allocated to public records issues)
Because I do not know what kind of records you possess, I ask for SFAC 67.21(c) assistance in identifying the records related to the following topic: The resources (quantity, hours, job descriptions, titles, employee name) that your office dedicates to public records disclosure for your own office (i.e. not including attorneys advising other departments nor Supervisor of Records work).
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: San Francisco City Attorney
Dear Requester,
We are not aware of any org charts responsive to request #1, but we can disclose that Manu Pradhan reports to Jon Givner and works with a paralegal, Elizabeth Coolbrith. The staff involved in PRA disclosures on behalf of the office include Manu Pradhan, Elizabeth Coolbrith, Odaya Buta, Paul Zarefsky, and John Cote. As to the remaining information in your request #2, we invoke a 14-day extension based on volume, and will get back to you regarding the requested section 67.21(c) statement.
Please send replies to cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>
Sincerely,
[cid:image002.jpg@01D5D20B.73D79880]Elizabeth A. Coolbrith
Paralegal
Office of City Attorney Dennis Herrera
(415) 554-4685 Direct
www.sfcityattorney.org
Find us on: Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/sfcityattorney/> Twitter<https://twitter.com/SFCityAttorney> Instagram<https://www.instagram.com/sfcityattorney/>
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
Thanks you.
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
This is a further immediate disclosure request for:
3. all written determinations ever issued by the supervisor of records determining that a record or part is public, pursuant to SFAC 67.21(d)
4. all orders to disclose ever issued by the supervisor of records, pursuant to SFAC 67.21(d)
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
This is a yet further immediate disclosure request for:
5. all communications between the supervisor of records and FAMSF, its Trustees, officers, or employees between Oct 1, 2019 and present
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
This is a 67.21(c) 7-day statement request for:
6. all written determinations ever issued by the supervisor of records determining that a record or part is public, pursuant to SFAC 67.21(d)
7. all orders to disclose ever issued by the supervisor of records, pursuant to SFAC 67.21(d)
If there are 0 you must say so.
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
This is a 67.21(c) 7-day statement request for quantity of:
8. all written determinations ever issued by the supervisor of records determining that a record or part is NOT public, pursuant to SFAC 67.21(d)
From: San Francisco City Attorney
Dear Requester,
Thanks for your email. Please find attached to this email the only document responsive to request # 5. You were already cc'ed on this document but we are sending it to you anyway. Kindly note that we hereby invoke a 14-day extension of time as to request #s 3-4 based on volume.
Best,
Odaya
[cid:image002.jpg@01D5D503.B80A7950]Odaya Buta
Legal Assistant
Office of City Attorney Dennis Herrera
(415) 554-4700 Reception
odaya.buta@sfcityatty.org<mailto:odaya.buta@sfcityatty.org>
www.sfcityattorney.org
Find us on: Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/sfcityattorney/> Twitter<https://twitter.com/SFCityAttorney> Instagram<https://www.instagram.com/sfcityattorney/>
This message and any attachments are solely for the intended recipient and may include privileged or confidential information.
If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately, and permanently delete this message and any attachments.
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
Thank you Ms. Buta. I look forward to the remaining disclosures. If you are able to complete 3 or 4 within 7-days, I obviously do not need 6 and 7.
From: San Francisco City Attorney
Dear requester,
We are responding to your 67.21(c) request for a statement regarding your second request concerning staff resources allocated to fulfilling our office's PRA disclosure obligations. We previously gave you the names of the staff who deal with these issues primarily. We have the official job descriptions for each of these staff persons if that would be helpful for you. The office does not allocate a set percentage of staff time to public record issues, and we do not disclose billing information that is covered under attorney work product. We could produce a list of all the staff who have spent time on PRA disclosures on behalf of the office, without giving a specific hourly breakdown, if you can define a specific time period for the request.
Please send replies to cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>
Sincerely,
[cid:image002.jpg@01D5D698.58D67380]Elizabeth A. Coolbrith
Paralegal
Office of City Attorney Dennis Herrera
(415) 554-4685 Direct
www.sfcityattorney.org
Find us on: Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/sfcityattorney/> Twitter<https://twitter.com/SFCityAttorney> Instagram<https://www.instagram.com/sfcityattorney/>
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
Official job descriptions are fine for now. I may appeal the part you call work product - I don't think it is.
From: San Francisco City Attorney
Dear requester,
We are responding to your requests for 67.21(c) statements regarding various orders and determinations by the Supervisor of Records (numbers 6-8, below). The requests would require us to categorize and analyze the records in a manner that goes beyond what the Sunshine Ordinance requires. If you wish to perform an analysis, we suggest you could review the Supervisor of Record Annual Reports, which should have all of the orders and determinations attached to them. The reports from 2007 to 2018 are available on our website. We have all the other years (2002-2007) in our office, with the exception of 2000 and 2001, which we have not been able to find copies of. The hard copies we have for years that are not online number approximately 400 pages.
Your emails below also request copies of certain written determination and orders (numbers 3-4, below). We decline to perform the analysis that would be needed to respond to the request in the manner you have framed it, for reasons mentioned above, but we can produce all of the determinations and orders to you. The online reports are here: https://www.sfcityattorney.org/good-government/sunshine-appeals/
Please confirm that you would like the hard copies for the other years, and we will get those to you. It is possible that the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force would have copies of the reports from the years that we could not find.
Please send replies to cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>
Sincerely,
[cid:image002.jpg@01D5D81E.C5391A50]Elizabeth A. Coolbrith
Paralegal
Office of City Attorney Dennis Herrera
(415) 554-4685 Direct
www.sfcityattorney.org
Find us on: Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/sfcityattorney/> Twitter<https://twitter.com/SFCityAttorney> Instagram<https://www.instagram.com/sfcityattorney/>
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
Your argument (which of course I do not concede is valid for any of my requests) has no applicability to:
4. all orders to disclose ever issued by the supervisor of records, pursuant to SFAC 67.21(d)
Do you refuse to search and provide records?
Either you have orders to disclose or not.
I will not be waiting another 10 days for your response. Appeals will be filed close of business today.
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: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
This is an immediate disclosure request for:
9. City Attorney's office's retention policy
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: San Francisco City Attorney
Dear requester,
As stated, any written orders would be attached to the supervisor of record annual reports. If you also want copies of the old reports which aren't online, please let us know. Based on a 14-day extension we are tracking the deadline for producing the old reports, if you want them, as Feb 10.
Please send replies to cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>
Sincerely,
[cid:image002.jpg@01D5D827.DE1BDDB0]Elizabeth A. Coolbrith
Paralegal
Office of City Attorney Dennis Herrera
(415) 554-4685 Direct
www.sfcityattorney.org
Find us on: Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/sfcityattorney/> Twitter<https://twitter.com/SFCityAttorney> Instagram<https://www.instagram.com/sfcityattorney/>
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
Let's make this easier. I am withdrawing request 3.
- I have asked for a quantity/existence of orders to disclose (request 7); you have refused to provide me that under 67.21(c).
- I have asked for the actual orders to disclose (request 4); if you provide me larger set of records and tell me to find them myself, I will allege a violation of CPRA. If I ask for 3 emails you cannot give me 100 emails and tell me to figure it out.
You either have orders to disclose or you do not. I suspect you do not, or you haven't issued one in many many years, and that your office refuses to comply with your Supervisor of Records obligations, which is why you wish to obscure the evidence of that.
I will prove this through records requests, and if you are refusing to correctly respond to those requests my only recourse is to continue to file complaints until your office completely and absolutely complies with the Sunshine Ordinance and the CPRA.
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: San Francisco City Attorney
Dear requester,
Please see attached job descriptions for John Cote, Director of Community and Media Relations; Elizabeth Coolbrith, Paralegal; and Odaya Buta, Legal Assistant. Unfortunately we do not have a similar job description for Paul Zarefsky nor for Manu Pradhan, but please see below job classification link for those two:
https://www.jobapscloud.com/SF/specs/classspecdisplay.asp?ClassNumber=8177
Please send replies to cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>
Sincerely,
[cid:image003.jpg@01D5D83E.F4911B20]Elizabeth A. Coolbrith
Paralegal
Office of City Attorney Dennis Herrera
(415) 554-4685 Direct
www.sfcityattorney.org
Find us on: Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/sfcityattorney/> Twitter<https://twitter.com/SFCityAttorney> Instagram<https://www.instagram.com/sfcityattorney/>
From: San Francisco City Attorney
Dear requester,
The City Attorney's Office's record retention policy is available online, here: https://www.sfcityattorney.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Records-Retention-Policy.pdf
Please send replies to cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>
Sincerely,
[cid:image002.jpg@01D5DA85.36B9CEF0]Elizabeth A. Coolbrith
Paralegal
Office of City Attorney Dennis Herrera
(415) 554-4685 Direct
www.sfcityattorney.org
Find us on: Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/sfcityattorney/> Twitter<https://twitter.com/SFCityAttorney> Instagram<https://www.instagram.com/sfcityattorney/>
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
Immediate Disclosure Request: Please provide the Schedule for the retention policy. Not sure why it is missing from that link.
From: San Francisco City Attorney
Dear requester,
Please see the following link: https://index.sfgov.org/taxonomy/term/33
Please send replies to cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>
Sincerely,
[cid:image002.jpg@01D5DB5E.022278C0]Elizabeth A. Coolbrith
Paralegal
Office of City Attorney Dennis Herrera
(415) 554-4685 Direct
www.sfcityattorney.org
Find us on: Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/sfcityattorney/> Twitter<https://twitter.com/SFCityAttorney> Instagram<https://www.instagram.com/sfcityattorney/>
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
Thank you. This is an immediate disclosure request for all response letters/cover letters/emails given to CPRA/Sunshine requests by your office to any requestor (but excluding to/from muckrock.com or protonmail.com email addresses) between Jan 14, 2020 and Feb 7, 2020 (inclusive). I want all kinds of records request responses: acknowledgements, clarification requests, extensions, justifications, transmittals of responsive documents, etc. If you are releasing them to others, in most cases, I have a right to see them as well without further redaction, so this should be a very simple request.
The easily-generated PDFMaker-generated PDF is requested. Headers not present in such PDFs are not needed in this request.
My purpose it to determine whether you are complying with the Sunshine/CPRA requirements (extensions, timeliness, keys by clear reference or footnotes for all redactions, withholding justifications, etc.), including whether your compliance has improved in the last few months.
--Anonymous
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.
From: San Francisco City Attorney
Dear requester,
I am responding on behalf of the City Attorney's Office to your request below. Please note that we are invoking an extension of time under Government Code section 6253(c) due to the need to search for, collect, and appropriately examine a voluminous amount of separate and distinct records. We will endeavor to process your request as quickly as possible. If you have any questions in the meantime, please contact us at the information below.
Please send replies to cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>
Sincerely,
[cid:image003.jpg@01D5E013.DE0E0980]Elizabeth A. Coolbrith
Paralegal
Office of City Attorney Dennis Herrera
(415) 554-4685 Direct
www.sfcityattorney.org
Find us on: Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/sfcityattorney/> Twitter<https://twitter.com/SFCityAttorney> Instagram<https://www.instagram.com/sfcityattorney/>
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
Thank you.
From: San Francisco City Attorney
Dear requester,
I am responding on behalf of the City Attorney's Office to your below request. Below please find FTP login credentials and a download link which contains the responsive records. Please note that we have redacted the personal contact information of the various requesters, for privacy reasons.
[cid:image001.gif@01D5E732.4661C010]
Your credentials:
Username: OKOBWJERZO
Password: 2M9fzwAD
Download URL:
https://sfftp.sfgov.org
The login above will expire on 2/26/2020 12:00:00 AM
Please send replies to cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>
Sincerely,
[cid:image004.jpg@01D5E732.D79847C0]Elizabeth A. Coolbrith
Paralegal
Office of City Attorney Dennis Herrera
(415) 554-4685 Direct
www.sfcityattorney.org
Find us on: Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/sfcityattorney/> Twitter<https://twitter.com/SFCityAttorney> Instagram<https://www.instagram.com/sfcityattorney/>
There are too many files to display on this communication. See all files
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
Dennis Herrera, Ron Flynn, Marc Price Wolf, Peder Thoreen, and Office of City Attorney,
Below are Immediate Disclosure Requests (SF Admin Code 67.25(a)). Your response is required by Mar 10, 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, or print and scan electronic records, convert 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).
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.
****** 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. ******
1. All records (including both internal and external communications) related to the decision to end the service provided by SOTF DCAs to the SOTF providing analysis memos for every complaint.
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: San Francisco City Attorney
Dear requester,
I am writing on behalf of the City Attorney's Office in response to your below request for records. Your request was sent as an "Immediate Disclosure Request" under San Francisco Administrative Code Section 67.25(a). But to qualify under that section, the request must be "simple, routine and readily answerable." The Sunshine Ordinance requires shorter response times in those situations where a department is able to quickly locate and produce the requested records. In order to respond to your request, this office will need to conduct an extensive review of our electronic files to find and review responsive records. For this reason, we are not treating your request an "immediate disclosure" request, but as one which is subject to the normally applicable 10-day response time. However, we will endeavor to fulfill your request as soon as possible.
Please send replies to cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>
Sincerely,
[cid:image002.jpg@01D5F6C7.4A232640]Elizabeth A. Coolbrith
Paralegal
Office of City Attorney Dennis Herrera
(415) 554-4685 Direct
www.sfcityattorney.org
Find us on: Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/sfcityattorney/> Twitter<https://twitter.com/SFCityAttorney> Instagram<https://www.instagram.com/sfcityattorney/>
From: San Francisco City Attorney
Dear requester,
I am responding on behalf of the City Attorney's Office to your below request. After a diligent and reasonable search, our office determined that all responsive records in our custody are covered by attorney-client privilege (Cal. Gov't Code § 6276.04; Cal. Evid. Code § 954) and attorney work product (Cal. Gov't Code § 6276.04; Cal. Code of Civil Pro. § 2018.030).
Please send replies to cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>
Sincerely,
[cid:image002.jpg@01D5FDC8.10A20DC0]Elizabeth A. Coolbrith
Paralegal
Office of City Attorney Dennis Herrera
(415) 554-4685 Direct
www.sfcityattorney.org
Find us on: Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/sfcityattorney/> Twitter<https://twitter.com/SFCityAttorney> Instagram<https://www.instagram.com/sfcityattorney/>
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
Please provide as an immediate disclosure request the 2019 and 2020 records request logs/spreadsheets showing all columns of data.
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: San Francisco City Attorney
Dear requester,
I am responding on behalf of the City Attorney’s Office to your below records request. Attached please find the responsive record. Please note we redacted personal contact information on page 11 due to privacy reasons. See Cal Const., Article I, section 1; Cal. Government Code Section 6254(c), (k); Admin. Code Section 67.1(g). Please also note we redacted information exempt from disclosure as attorney work product on pages 1, 3, 4, and 6-23 (Cal. Gov’t Code § 6276.04; Cal. Code of Civil Pro. § 2018.030). We also redacted information protected from disclosure by the official information privilege on pages 1, 12, and 19-21. California Government Code section 6254(k) provides an exemption for records "the disclosure of which is exempted or prohibited pursuant to federal or state law, including, but not limited to, provisions of the Evidence Code relating to privilege." California Evidence Code section 1040 provides an exception under state law for official information. This includes information acquired in confidence by a public employee in the course of his or her duties. A public entity may refuse to disclose official information and to prevent another from disclosing such information.
Please send replies to cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>
Sincerely,
[cid:image002.jpg@01D6640C.F9B481F0]Elizabeth A. Coolbrith
Paralegal
Office of City Attorney Dennis Herrera
(415) 554-4685 Direct
www.sfcityattorney.org
Find us on: Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/sfcityattorney/> Twitter<https://twitter.com/SFCityAttorney> Instagram<https://www.instagram.com/sfcityattorney/>
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
Thanks. Which redactions are official info privilege? As the page numbers for official info and work product overlap.
From: San Francisco City Attorney
The redaction in the “notes” column are exempt as attorney work product. The redactions in the “requestor” and “content of request” columns are exempt under the official info privilege.
-
~WRD000
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
Supervisor of Records,
I am challenging under 67.21(d) the attached single redaction under the official information privilege.
Please determine all or some part of the redaction to be actually public and order it disclosed. Coolbrith states "California Evidence Code section 1040 provides an exception under state law for official information. This includes information acquired in confidence by a public employee in the course of his or her duties. ". There is nothing to indicate that this or other public records requests were received in confidence, nor somehow that that specific part of the request is confidential. It's just a public records request like any other.
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
-
Screenshot_20200728-135633.png
From: San Francisco City Attorney
Dear requester,
Regarding the 1/02/19 request in row 2 of the spreadsheet, the redaction in the “CONTENT OF REQUEST” column is exempt from disclosure as attorney work product because it contained our internal notes regarding the request. In addition, references in row 2 to the requester’s name are exempt in this case because the requester stated that the request related to a confidential whistleblower complaint submitted by the requester.
Please send replies to cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>
Sincerely,
[cid:image002.jpg@01D66595.D1C6D690]Elizabeth A. Coolbrith
Paralegal
Office of City Attorney Dennis Herrera
(415) 554-4685 Direct
www.sfcityattorney.org
Find us on: Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/sfcityattorney/> Twitter<https://twitter.com/SFCityAttorney> Instagram<https://www.instagram.com/sfcityattorney/>
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
Ok, then this 67.21(d) petition is withdrawn. Thanks.
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 Jan. 22, 2020. You had previously indicated that it would be completed on Feb. 10, 2020. 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.
Files
pages
There are too many files to display on the request page. See all files .