Texts or Chats from Feb 22 and 23, 2019 - Immediate Disclosure Request (SF Mayor)

Anonymous Person filed this request with the Office of the Mayor of San Francisco, CA.
Est. Completion None
Status
Fix Required

Communications

From: Anonymous Person

RE: Texts or Chats from Feb 22 and 23, 2019 - Immediate Disclosure Request (SF Mayor)

Mayor London Breed and Sean Elsbernd, Office of Mayor:

I am cross-checking certain records received from other departments. You have a responsibility to maintain correspondence in a professional manner.

Below are Immediate Disclosure Requests (SF Admin Code 67.25(a)). Your initial response is required by Feb 5, 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 EMLs/MSGs of emails (if any). If you refuse to provide non-PDF formats (which I do not concede to unless PDF is the sole format retained by you), use full-fidelity "PDFMaker" PDFs. 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. ******

1. London Breed's text messages, chats, SMS, MMS, WhatsApp, Instagram, WeChat, AIM, Signal, Telegram, Twitter DM, Facebook Messenger, Google Hangouts/Talk, Microsoft Teams, iMessage, FaceTime, and all other chat or instant messages of any kind or app, sent or received on Feb 22-23, 2019 on government accounts/devices. All timestamps, names of senders or recipients, attachments, inline images, must be preserved and provided.

2. London Breed's text messages, chats, SMS, MMS, WhatsApp, Instagram, WeChat, AIM, Signal, Telegram, Twitter DM, Facebook Messenger, Google Hangouts/Talk, Microsoft Teams, iMessage, FaceTime, and all other chat or instant messages of any kind or app, sent or received on Feb 22-23, 2019 on personal accounts/devices about public business. All timestamps, names of senders or recipients, attachments, inline images, must be preserved and provided.

3. Sean Elsbernd's text messages, chats, SMS, MMS, WhatsApp, Instagram, WeChat, AIM, Signal, Telegram, Twitter DM, Facebook Messenger, Google Hangouts/Talk, Microsoft Teams, iMessage, FaceTime, and all other chat or instant messages of any kind or app, sent or received on Feb 22-23, 2019 on government accounts/devices. All timestamps, names of senders or recipients, attachments, inline images, must be preserved and provided.

4. Sean Elsbernd's text messages, chats, SMS, MMS, WhatsApp, Instagram, WeChat, AIM, Signal, Telegram, Twitter DM, Facebook Messenger, Google Hangouts/Talk, Microsoft Teams , iMessage, FaceTime, and all other chat or instant messages of any kind or app, sent or received on Feb 22-23, 2019 on personal accounts/devices about public business. All timestamps, names of senders or recipients, attachments, inline images, must be preserved and provided.

Please indicate "no responsive records" for each request if that is true.
Personal property pursuant to City of San Jose v Superior Court (2017) must be searched.

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: Anonymous Person

This is a further immediate disclosure request for:

5. Any auto-deletion policies on London Breed's government accounts for email, calendar, text message, chats, SMS, MMS, WhatsApp, Instagram, WeChat, AIM, Signal, Telegram, Twitter DM, Facebook Messenger, Google Hangouts/Talk, Microsoft Teams , iMessage, FaceTime, and all other chat or instant messages of any kind or app. This includes any form of auto-vanishing or disappearing messages.

6. Any auto-deletion policies on London Breed's personal accounts for email, calendar, text message, chats, SMS, MMS, WhatsApp, Instagram, WeChat, AIM, Signal, Telegram, Twitter DM, Facebook Messenger, Google Hangouts/Talk, Microsoft Teams , iMessage, FaceTime, and all other chat or instant messages of any kind or app that have ever been used to communicate about the public business. This includes any form of auto-vanishing or disappearing messages.

7. Any auto-deletion policies on Sean Elsbernd's government accounts for email, calendar, text message, chats, SMS, MMS, WhatsApp, Instagram, WeChat, AIM, Signal, Telegram, Twitter DM, Facebook Messenger, Google Hangouts/Talk, Microsoft Teams , iMessage, FaceTime, and all other chat or instant messages of any kind or app. This includes any form of auto-vanishing or disappearing messages.

8. Any auto-deletion policies on Sean Elsbernd's personal accounts for email, calendar, text message, chats, SMS, MMS, WhatsApp, Instagram, WeChat, AIM, Signal, Telegram, Twitter DM, Facebook Messenger, Google Hangouts/Talk, Microsoft Teams , iMessage, FaceTime, and all other chat or instant messages of any kind or app that have ever been used to communicate about the public business. This includes any form of auto-vanishing or disappearing messages.

Please indicate "no responsive records" for each request if that is true.
Personal property pursuant to City of San Jose v Superior Court (2017) must be searched.

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. ******

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: Office of the Mayor

Anonymous,

Your request is neither simple nor routine nor readily answerable and requires consultation with other departments. Accordingly, we will respond within the full 10 day period for a regular request, barring the need for a further extension. See Cal. Gov. Code 6253 and Admin. Code 67.25(b).

Hank Heckel
Compliance Officer
Office of the Mayor
City and County of San Francisco

From: Office of the Mayor

Anonymous,

Your request is neither simple nor routine nor readily answerable and requires consultation with other departments. Accordingly, we will respond within the full 10 day period for a regular request, barring the need for a further extension. See Cal. Gov. Code 6253 and Admin. Code 67.25(b).

Hank Heckel
Compliance Officer
Office of the Mayor
City and County of San Francisco

From: Anonymous Person

Office of the Mayor:

I now have multiple texts sent to the Mayor about public business from other government officials.
However, in SOTF 19091, the Mayor did not turn any text messages over to us.

We can bring a new complaint, we can ask for reconsideration to add even more violations in 19091 directly against Mayor Breed, or we can do both.
Please provide an answer immediately - what is going on here?

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: Anonymous Person

Today is the 10-day deadline for requests 1 thru 4.
I will not accept a 14-day extension. I would like a straight-forward answer by close of business for each request, 1, 2, 3, and 4: Which have records, which do not, Which justifications if any apply to full withholding on each request, etc.

The records are merely texts/chats for only 2 days across 2 people. Surely, London Breed and Sean Elsbernd must know at least whether or not such chats exist.

I would like to understand why other city employees lawfully disclose their texts about public business to the Mayor as public records, as required, but the Mayor has not done so in SOTF 19091 or 20005.

What is the City's legal justification for not providing Mayoral texts under CPRA/Sunshine or, alternatively, destroying them?

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: Anonymous Person

Sending to the correct email address...

Today is the 10-day deadline for requests 1 thru 4.
I will not accept a 14-day extension. I would like a straight-forward answer by close of business for each request, 1, 2, 3, and 4: Which have records, which do not, Which justifications if any apply to full withholding on each request, etc.

The records are merely texts/chats for only 2 days across 2 people. Surely, London Breed and Sean Elsbernd must know at least whether or not such chats exist.

I would like to understand why other city employees lawfully disclose their texts about public business to the Mayor as public records, as required, but the Mayor has not done so in SOTF 19091 or 20005.

What is the City's legal justification for not providing Mayoral texts under CPRA/Sunshine or, alternatively, destroying them?

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: Office of the Mayor

Anonymous,

See our responses in bold to the requested items below:

From: Office of the Mayor

Anonymous,

See our responses to the requested items in bold.

From: Office of the Mayor

Anonymous,

We have responded. See my two prior emails.

Let me know if you have any questions.
Regards,

Hank Heckel
Compliance Officer
Office of the Mayor
City and County of San Francisco

From: Anonymous Person

Thank you. Complaints will be filed shortly.

From: Office of the Mayor

On what grounds?

From: Anonymous Person

On this basis: The Mayor has a responsibility to "maintain and preserve in a professional and businesslike manner all documents and correspondence, including but not limited to letters, e-mails, drafts, memorandum, invoices, reports and proposals and shall disclose all such records in accordance with this ordinance." (SFAC 67.29-7(a))

You have said she doesn't have an auto-deletion policy.
Other messages from other employees on these days, with the Mayor, were disclosed to us as a public record.
Mayor Breed has claimed she has no responsive records

Logically then, there are a few possibilities:
1. No one actually asked the Mayor.
2. The Mayor did not actually perform the required search.
3. The Mayor performed the search but has refused to provide the records without justification.
4. The Mayor performed the search and the records truly do not exist, but did so in the past and so were deleted by the Mayor.
5. The Mayor performed the search and the records truly do not exist, because they never did and the public records provided by other city employees are somehow not true.

Are you willing to indicate which of these is true or if there is some other explanation?

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: Office of the Mayor

Anonymous,

I have no frame of reference for documents you claim to have received from other departments. Please send the documents you are referring to.

Also, your purported complaint seems premised on an assumption of permanent retention for all records. This is not consistent with our obligations under the code nor our record retention policy, attached.

That said, I cannot respond further without seeing the documents you claim were improperly maintained. If you wish to pursue complaints rather than engage in a productive dialogue that is your right.
Regards,

Hank Heckel
Compliance Officer
Office of the Mayor
City and County of San Francisco

From: Anonymous Person

Attached is an excerpt of a CCSF public record. The poor quality is not my fault.

The Mayor has a responsibility to maintain correspondence in a professional and business-like manner.
Destroying texts from the Chief of Police (if that did occur) appears not to be professional or business-like.
I don't see 67.29-7 saying "professional and business-like manner unless you institute a retention policy allowing destruction of the records."

Are you able to indicate what happened to this record? Are any of the following true?
1. No one actually asked the Mayor.
2. The Mayor did not actually perform the required search.
3. The Mayor performed the search but has refused to provide the records without justification.
4. The Mayor performed the search and the records truly do not exist, but did so in the past and so were deleted by the Mayor.
5. The Mayor performed the search and the records truly do not exist, because they never did and the public records provided by other city employees are somehow not 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.

Sincerely,

Anonymous

Files

pages

Close