Mayor's Notes - Immediate Disclosure Request

Mayor Breed,

** Note that all of your responses (including disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Redact your responses correctly - once you send them to us there is no going back. **

This is a new Immediate Disclosure Request under the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance and the CPRA. This is also a 67.21(c) request for the statement of quantity, nature, and form (even if exempt!) for each of #1, 2, and 3, within 7 days without extension.

All records must be provided in rolling fashion.

Please remember to justify all redactions with specificity - there is an Adobe Acrobat menu item designed exactly for this where you can code each redaction with a statute section number and then apply all the redactions, instead of writing a typed letter describing page locations (though it is your choice, Acrobat's functionality is superior).

Although you may not retain the records below formally, if you retain, own, use, or prepared them at the time of receipt of request you must provide them.

I am asking for very few documents, which should be readily available to the Mayor, and thus immediately disclosed.

Please provide:
1. IMMEDIATE DISCLOSURE: an electronic scanned copy of the last 5 non-blank pages of the Mayor's most recently used physical business memo- or note-book written in by her individually (not her staff on her behalf). If no such notebooks exist, you must indicate there are no responsive records.

2. IMMEDIATE DISCLOSURE: an electronic copy (in PDF format, without printing physically and scanning) of the last 5 business electronic writings (whether Word documents, emails, etc.) written by the Mayor individually (not her staff on her behalf) to any City staff. If no such electronic writings exist, you must indicate there are no responsive records.

3. IMMEDIATE DISCLOSURE: personal property responsive to #1 or #2 containing public business, from the Mayor, per City of San Jose v Superior Court

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

I look forward to your immediate disclosure.

Sincerely,
Anonymous

** Note that all of your responses (including disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Redact your responses correctly - once you send them to us there is no going back. **

Mr. Heckel I will just remind you that 67.25 IDRs can be used for requests that are simple, routine OR "readily answerable." I would believe Mayor Breed can readily answer this.

Regardless, I look forward to your complete response.

--Anonymous

Thank you.
To avoid any misunderstandings upon appeal I believe the Mayor's Office is claiming it has retained 0 physical memos or notebooks written by the Mayor, and 0 electronic documents written by the Mayor.

I want to confirm because for example pg. 5 of the Oct. 22 BoS communications includes a Notice of Appointment signed by the Mayor herself, not by a deputy in her name ( https://sfgov.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=F&ID=7814525&GUID=50842693-134E-48E1-80DD-E7B102968574 ). There are many such examples.

--Anonymous

Sorry, let me clarify. You are correct that merely signed documents do not qualify. But documents where she wrote/typed a part of the document would qualify. It is also possible none of those exist either, so let me restate a new IDR for better clarity:

2. IMMEDIATE DISCLOSURE: an electronic copy (in PDF format, without printing physically and scanning) of the last 5 business electronic writings (whether Word documents, emails, text messages, chat messages, etc.) written by the Mayor individually in any part (but not solely by virtue of her signature). If no such electronic writings exist, you must indicate there are no responsive records.

3. IMMEDIATE DISCLOSURE: personal property responsive to #2 containing public business, from the Mayor, per City of San Jose v Superior Court

You may forward-date this new IDR to Oct. 30.

The request from Oct 17 is considered complete.

Thanks,
Anonymous

Immediate Disclosure Request - Oct. 30

Sorry, let me clarify. You are correct that merely signed documents do not qualify. But documents where she wrote/typed a part of the document would qualify. It is also possible none of those exist either, so let me restate a new IDR for better clarity:

2. IMMEDIATE DISCLOSURE: an electronic copy (in PDF format, without printing physically and scanning) of the last 5 business electronic writings (whether Word documents, emails, text messages, chat messages, etc.) written by the Mayor individually in any part (but not solely by virtue of her signature). If no such electronic writings exist, you must indicate there are no responsive records.

3. IMMEDIATE DISCLOSURE: personal property responsive to #2 containing public business, from the Mayor, per City of San Jose v Superior Court

You may forward-date this new IDR to Oct. 30.

The request from Oct 17 is considered complete.

Thanks,
Anonymous

** Note that all of your responses (including disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Redact your responses correctly - once you send them to us there is no going back. **

Thank you. This is a further immediate disclosure request for:

1. Immediate disclosure: All executive directives issued by the Mayor (solely in her role as Mayor, not her prior role as Acting Mayor), in whatever format you can produce the fastest. If there is some online index of such directives, you may also simply provide that URL. This request is for records anywhere in the Mayor's Office, not solely those possessed by or written by Mayor Breed herself.

2. Regular disclosure: Every version, draft and final, of (a) every executive directive issued by the Mayor and (b) the Sept 23 NRA memo, in the electronic format stored by the City. It is likely you stored these somewhere as Word documents. It will be extremely difficult to argue Word documents are information security records or contain IP addresses or passwords or similar. Remember that the Ordinance prohibits the public interest balancing test, deliberative process exemption, and all similar exemptions, and also much weakens the draft exemption. Include any tracked changes if they are stored in the record. This request is for records anywhere in the Mayor's Office, not solely those possessed by or written by Mayor Breed herself. Withholding tracked changes or author identity will also be appealed.

3. Regular disclosure: Every version of every record in #2, exported to a PDF format. Remember that the Ordinance prohibits the public interest balancing test, deliberative process exemption, and all similar exemptions, and also much weakens the draft exemption. You do not have to produce #3 if you produce #2 for any given record. However, refusing #2 while producing #3 will still lead to an appeal of #2. If the original record contains tracked changes, export those to PDF as well (this is a view in Word that you can print to PDF). Withholding tracked changes or author identity will also be appealed.

--Anonymous

Thank you. Please clarify:

> Regarding the "NRA" memo, we have not located any other versions than the one previously produced and to the extent there are draft versions, they would likely be exempt as attorney/client privileged and/or attorney work product in connection with litigation. See Gov't Code § 6254(k); Evid. Code § 954; Code of Civ. Proc. § 2018.030; Gov't Code § 6276.04; Admin. Code § 67.21(k).

Are you asserting a record(s) was withheld under those privileges, or not? A document is either privileged or not. If you have not examined a document and determined it is exempt I'm not sure what you are asserting here.

Also, as you know, I will challenge all metadata or format withholdings by the City. A City Attorney memorandum is not a legal basis for justification under SFAC 67.27, but your citation of Cal. Gov. Code 6253.9 (a)(1), (f) and 6254.19 is noted.

Sincerely,
Anonymous

Mayor Breed, Hank Heckel, Office of the Mayor:

In light of recent SOTF proceedings, I am requesting that you reconsider your refusal to provide the full, original Word document(s) of all versions of the Supporting Special Events memo, with all tracked changes (if any) and metadata. The metadata in a word document is not only a "writing" in the "record thereby created" sense, but much of it is also a writing as directly written by a human being. If you do not provide them, I will appeal this series of requests. My purpose is to get the full tracked changes and understand who did what when, and get all the timestamps, subject, authors, categories, tags, and other similar metadata.

We know that you have preserved them and did not discard them, and we know that you provided the non-final versions before and thus waived any supposed draft exemptions (which I do not concede apply at all).

The only thing left is the format and metadata like author/timestamps/keywords. You would have to prove that the Word document format is some sort of security threat, which seems difficult to prove barring the embedding of active objects. If you did prove that, you would then also have to prove that all metadata in word file is also a threat or otherwise exempt.
Finally, the SOTF has seen through the specious argument made by both you and the City Attorney that somehow a copy of a document allows the public to change the original one stored on your computers.

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). Do not produce fee-based copies of records; instead provide in person inspection of those records. 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.

Anonymous

Thank you. If you intend to continue to withhold them, I hope the City presents a much more solid computer security argument.
As the SOTF Chair stated many months ago, in questions of technology, objective, provable answers are possible; and if the City wants to make infosec claims, it should be able to bring documentation proving its case, because otherwise I will prove mine.

Also here is a Motion passed by the Board over 13 years ago: https://sfgov.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=F&ID=2584664&GUID=1626DF79-4AF7-46AF-B9DA-3CAFE76B1A55 to release documents in the format requested.

I'm not the first who has fought for metadata, and I will not be the last.

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). Do not produce fee-based copies of records; instead provide in person inspection of those records. 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.

--Anonymous

What happened here?

Mayor London Breed and Office of Mayor:

Below are new Immediate Disclosure Requests (SF Admin Code 67.25(a)). Your initial response is required by Feb 17, 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. The most recent executive directive signed by the Mayor - provide in any electronic format except printing and scanning.

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

Mayor London Breed, Hank Heckel, and Office of Mayor:

Below are new Immediate Disclosure Requests (SF Admin Code 67.25(a)). Your initial response is required by Feb 17, 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. ******

2. The most recent 5 communications sent by London Breed (NOT her generic MONS list) and received by Hank Heckel of any kind in any form.
3. The most recent 5 communications sent by Hank Heckel and received by London Breed (NOT her generic MONS list) of any kind in any form.

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

Thank you. Please provide, as an immediate disclosure request, and as described in the second para of the Memo ( https://cdn.muckrock.com/foia_files/2020/02/18/Executive_Directive_20_1_Cooperation_with_City_Attorney_and_Controller_Investigation.pdf )
every record memorializing the request made by the Mayor to the Controller or City Attorney, and any other directives issued by the Mayor to her employees including Naomi Kelly or all staff. This includes communication by London Breed herself, or her staff on her behalf in order to effectuate directive 20-01.

NOTE: THE EMAIL ADDRESS SENDING THIS REQUEST IS A PUBLICLY-VIEWABLE MAILBOX. Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. 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.

Office of Mayor:

NOTE: THE EMAIL ADDRESS SENDING THIS REQUEST IS A PUBLICLY-VIEWABLE MAILBOX. Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. 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.

Below are new Immediate Disclosure Requests (SF Admin Code 67.25(a)). Your initial response is required by Feb 20, 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. Any meeting agenda, minutes or any form of notes for the mayor's monthly department heads meetings in 2019 or 2020 that have already occurred.

2. Any meeting agenda, minutes or any form of notes for any of the 2020 "Senior Staff Check In" meetings

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.

Sincerely,

Anonymous

Just a reminder that this request exists too from Feb 14:

Mayor London Breed, Hank Heckel, and Office of Mayor:

Below are new Immediate Disclosure Requests (SF Admin Code 67.25(a)). Your initial response is required by Feb 17, 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. ******

2. The most recent 5 communications sent by London Breed (NOT her generic MONS list) and received by Hank Heckel of any kind in any form.
3. The most recent 5 communications sent by Hank Heckel and received by London Breed (NOT her generic MONS list) of any kind in any form.

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

I have no way of forwarding on MuckRock but here it is:
https://www.muckrock.com/foi/san-francisco-141/mayors-notes-immediate-disclosure-request-81856/#comm-853224

It went to mayorspressoffice@sfgov.org apparently.

I'm saying I can't forward emails using MuckRock... there is no forward email feature.
I sent the request myself. MuckRock has various contact points for different public agencies so that people who are less aware of public records issues can also make requests easily. I assume I either autocompleted or chose mayorspressoffice@sfgov.org instead of the usual one.

Regardless... I believe SOTF has previously held that agencies must respond no matter how they receive the email or which employee gets it.

Anyway here is the request again...

Mayor London Breed, Hank Heckel, and Office of Mayor:

Below are new Immediate Disclosure Requests (SF Admin Code 67.25(a)). Your initial response is required by Feb 17, 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. ******

2. The most recent 5 communications sent by London Breed (NOT her generic MONS list) and received by Hank Heckel of any kind in any form.
3. The most recent 5 communications sent by Hank Heckel and received by London Breed (NOT her generic MONS list) of any kind in any form.

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

Mayor Breed, Jeff Cretan, and Office of the Mayor:

This is an immediate disclosure request for: All inquiries made to mayorspressoffice@sfgov.org from February 15, 2020 to present (inclusive), and all of your office's replies. Read below for caveats which are all incorporated into the request.

Your initial response is required by Feb 21, 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.
You must provide exact PDF copies with From/To/Cc/Bcc/Attachments/Images/Sender using for example the PDFMaker tool. Email headers not preserved by PDFMaker are not needed.
You must retrieve emails from the Sent folder of the sender (if the account is in the Mayor's Office) in order to preserve Bcc.
PDFMaker PDFs are easily generated under SFAC 67.21(l) and must be provided.
Provide only copies of records not requiring fees and in-person inspection of all other records (GC 6253).

Your non-exhaustive mandatory 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. ******

NOTE: THE EMAIL ADDRESS SENDING THIS REQUEST IS A PUBLICLY-VIEWABLE MAILBOX. Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. 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

Please provide as an immediate disclosure request the statement provided referenced herein: https://twitter.com/FitzTheReporter/status/1230261332370309121
There is no excuse not to disclose that to me immediately.

NOTE: THE EMAIL ADDRESS SENDING THIS REQUEST IS A PUBLICLY-VIEWABLE MAILBOX. Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. 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

Jeff Cretan, Mayor Breed, and Office of Mayor,

Immediate Disclosure Request
Please immediately provide all records of communications between Jeff Cretan and Joe Fitz with the SF Examiner between Feb 14, 2020 and present.
Please immediately provide the statement referenced here: https://twitter.com/FitzTheReporter/status/1230261332370309121
Please immediately provide the email shown by the SF Examiner here: https://2zwmzkbocl625qdrf2qqqfok-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/20607505_web1_201902-sfe-ONGUARD-breedbovis_3.jpg

You must search personal accounts under City of San Jose v Superior Court.
Remember you claimed the pride float is a governmental purpose so the record is a public record.

NOTE: THE EMAIL ADDRESS SENDING THIS REQUEST IS A PUBLICLY-VIEWABLE MAILBOX. Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. 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

Jeff Cretan, Mayor Breed, and Office of Mayor,

Immediate Disclosure Request
Please immediately provide all records of communications between Jeff Cretan and Joe Fitz with the SF Examiner between Feb 14, 2020 and present.
Please immediately provide the statement referenced here: https://twitter.com/FitzTheReporter/status/1230261332370309121
Please immediately provide the email shown by the SF Examiner here: https://2zwmzkbocl625qdrf2qqqfok-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/20607505_web1_201902-sfe-ONGUARD-breedbovis_3.jpg

You must search personal accounts under City of San Jose v Superior Court.
Remember you claimed the pride float is a governmental purpose so the record is a public record.

NOTE: THE EMAIL ADDRESS SENDING THIS REQUEST IS A PUBLICLY-VIEWABLE MAILBOX. Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. 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

Jeff Cretan, Mayor Breed, and Office of Mayor,

Immediate Disclosure Request
Please immediately provide all records of communications between Jeff Cretan and Joe Fitz with the SF Examiner between Feb 14, 2020 and present.
Please immediately provide the statement referenced here: https://twitter.com/FitzTheReporter/status/1230261332370309121
Please immediately provide the email shown by the SF Examiner here: https://2zwmzkbocl625qdrf2qqqfok-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/20607505_web1_201902-sfe-ONGUARD-breedbovis_3.jpg

You must search personal accounts under City of San Jose v Superior Court.
Remember you claimed the pride float is a governmental purpose so the record is a public record.

NOTE: THE EMAIL ADDRESS SENDING THIS REQUEST IS A PUBLICLY-VIEWABLE MAILBOX. Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. 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

Jeff Cretan, Mayor Breed, and Office of Mayor,

Immediate Disclosure Request for all records ever retained by London Breed or her staff for any parade float. You must search personal accounts under City of San Jose v Superior Court.
Remember you claimed the pride float is a governmental purpose so these records are a public record.

NOTE: THE EMAIL ADDRESS SENDING THIS REQUEST IS A PUBLICLY-VIEWABLE MAILBOX. Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. 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

Immediate Disclosure Request

Thank you for the PDF emails.

For #3, your denial is carefully worded ("relevant personal accounts used for city business"), so I am going to phrase my request in a way that avoids any wiggle-room:

4. all emails in the thread "Invoice: London's Pride Float" (i.e. with that subject or its replies or forwards) from the account londonbreed at gmail dot com , as purported to exist here: https://2zwmzkbocl625qdrf2qqqfok-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/20607505_web1_201902-sfe-ONGUARD-breedbovis_3.jpg - You have stated this is a governmental purpose so if it exists, it must be provided.

5. all emails in the thread "Invoice: London's Pride Float" (i.e. with that subject or its replies or forwards) from any London Breed SFGOV email account - You have stated this is a governmental purpose so if it exists, it must be provided.

NOTE: Supervisors must retain accounting records for ~5 years. 5 years would be June 2020. https://index.sfgov.org/taxonomy/term/30

Either the answer is you have responsive records or you don't. A denial that isn't clear will be appealed. This should plainly be answerable in an IDR.

NOTE: THE EMAIL ADDRESS SENDING THIS REQUEST IS A PUBLICLY-VIEWABLE MAILBOX. Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. 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

Immediate Disclosure Request

You earlier disclosed the following request from the Examiner (below).
I am requesting the same records however I am also requesting exact PDF copies (no printing and scanning) and rolling responses. Whether or not you follow the whole Ordinance for Mr. Fitz, you must follow all of it for me (ex: justifications must be given for withholding, and also a key for redactions). I hope of course that you follow the full Ordinance for everyone, which should avoid duplicate work.

6. "Mayor London Breed's private and public calendars from the beginning of her mayorship to date, February 14, 2020."

You cannot withhold anything from me that you disclosed to Mr. Fitz nor vice-versa.

[excerpt from prior disclosure:]
Hello Jeff,
Under the sunshine ordinance I am making a request for Mayor London Breed's private and
public calendars from the beginning of her mayorship to date, February 14, 2020.
As with my previous immediate disclosure request, I am making the case that her private
calendar should be shared, albeit redacted, to show all appointments with Mr. Nuru, as it is
clear there is a public interest in her private relationship with Mr. Nuru.
Thank you.
Joe Fitz
SF Examiner
[end excerpt]

NOTE: THE EMAIL ADDRESS SENDING THIS REQUEST IS A PUBLICLY-VIEWABLE MAILBOX. Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. 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

Thanks, but are you sure your response for Heckel to Breed isn't "no records"? I asked for "The most recent 5 communications sent by Hank Heckel and received by London Breed (NOT her generic MONS list) of any kind in any form."
But it seems you are giving her MONS address.

This is an immediate disclosure request for the final signed version of the Mayor's Office's letter in SOTF 20002. I need to retain that letter specifically as a public record.

NOTE: THE EMAIL ADDRESS SENDING THIS REQUEST IS A PUBLICLY-VIEWABLE MAILBOX. Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. 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

On Feb 25 I requested:
6. "Mayor London Breed's private and public calendars from the beginning of her mayorship to date, February 14, 2020."

You provided some of the replies on March 6. You may exclude from the remainder of your response to this request: all calendars called 'PropG, Mayor (MYR)' or 'Calendar, Mayor (MYR)' for entries on or after Oct 27, 2019. You cannot exclude any other calendars (including other govt or personal/San Jose records for any time period; or 'PropG, Mayor (MYR)' or 'Calendar, Mayor (MYR)' before Oct 27, 2019).

NOTE: THE EMAIL ADDRESS SENDING THIS REQUEST IS A PUBLICLY-VIEWABLE MAILBOX. Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. 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

Mayor Breed and Office of the Mayor,

NOTE: THE EMAIL ADDRESS SENDING THIS REQUEST IS A PUBLICLY-VIEWABLE MAILBOX. Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. 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.

Below are new Immediate Disclosure Requests (SF Admin Code 67.25(a)) directed to you individually and your agency.

1. The records described by Herrera in the following memo https://sfmayor.org/sites/default/files/03.10.20%20Memo.pdf as "initial set of records Hui voluntarily provided after [the Feb 18, 2020] interview."
2. "Hui's personal emails" referred to in page 7 bottom para of the above linked document.
3. All exhibits to both memos in the above document.

If you did not prepare, retain, use, or own the documents you must indicate no responsive records. (It is possible Herrera never gave your office them - but if ANYONE in your office has retained them, then I get them.)

Your initial response is required by Mar 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).

Your non-exhaustive obligations:
- All withholding of any information must be justified in writing by specific statutory authority (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. ******

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

Thank you for your anticipated cooperation in this matter.

Sincerely,
Anonymous

Thank you for the response.

I'm unsure why you have returned to printing and scanning these documents. Even if you can't use PDFMaker for Gmail, you can surely directly "Print" them to normal PDFs that preserve all textual/image content with any modern computer/browser.

Did you withhold any of the attached files in any of those documents?

We will also dispute all of the attorney-client privilege redactions. It's unclear whether the attorneys represent the City or Mayor Breed or some other party, given your office's apparent dissemblance on whether this is government work or as one of the contract states on behalf of Mayor Breed "individually." Regardless, given that representatives of multiple counterparties are on this thread, what privilege, if any existed, appears to have been waved by prior disclosure.

NOTE: THE EMAIL ADDRESS SENDING THIS REQUEST IS A PUBLICLY-VIEWABLE MAILBOX. Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. 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.

Sup of Records Herrera,

Please see attached petition (and Exhibits A and B).

Exhibit C is here: https://www.muckrock.com/foi/san-francisco-141/custodian-of-records-working-group-immediate-disclosure-request-79193/#comm-797056

NOTE: THE EMAIL ADDRESS SENDING THIS REQUEST IS A PUBLICLY-VIEWABLE MAILBOX. Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. 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.

Mayor Breed, Hank Heckel, Sean Elsbernd, Marjan Philhour, Andrea Bruss, and all other Office of Mayor Staff:

NOTE: THE EMAIL ADDRESS SENDING THIS REQUEST IS A PUBLICLY-VIEWABLE MAILBOX. Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. 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.

Below are new Immediate Disclosure Requests (SF Admin Code 67.25(a)) directed to you individually and your agency.

1. All emails to, from, cc, or bcc any email address with domain name "jaidin.net" including but limited to consult@jaidin.net (case insensitive search); including a search of personal accounts, for Breed and all staff members
2. All emails to, from, cc, or bcc "JdnGrp@pacbell.net" (case insensitive search); including a search of personal accounts, for Breed and all staff members

We know records exist due to both your own disclosures, press reports, and disclosures by other departments.

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

Your initial response is required by June 12, 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).

Your non-exhaustive obligations:
- All withholding of any information must be justified in writing by specific statutory authority (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. ******

Thank you for your anticipated cooperation in this matter.

Sincerely,
Anonymous

SOTF,

Please file the attached complaint and exhibits, and assign a complaint number and CC me on the Notice.

Anonymous (requests@muckrock.com)
v.
Mayor London Breed, Hank Heckel, and Office of the Mayor

I allege Respondents responded incompletely to multiple records requests (SFAC 67.21(b)), non-minimally withheld records or portions thereof (SFAC 67.26), withheld information without lawful justification (SFAC 67.27), and (as to Breed only) failed to maintain and disclose her correspondence as a public record (SFAC 67.29-7(a)).

--Anonymous

NOTE: THE EMAIL ADDRESS SENDING THIS REQUEST IS A PUBLICLY-VIEWABLE MAILBOX. Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. 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.

**Please ignore the first email it had a missing attachment**

SOTF,

Please file the attached complaint and exhibits, and assign a complaint number and CC me on the Notice.

Anonymous (requests@muckrock.com)
v.
Mayor London Breed, Hank Heckel, and Office of the Mayor

I allege Respondents responded incompletely to multiple records requests (SFAC 67.21(b)), non-minimally withheld records or portions thereof (SFAC 67.26), withheld information without lawful justification (SFAC 67.27), and (as to Breed only) failed to maintain and disclose her correspondence as a public record (SFAC 67.29-7(a)).

--Anonymous

NOTE: THE EMAIL ADDRESS SENDING THIS REQUEST IS A PUBLICLY-VIEWABLE MAILBOX. Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. 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.

Yes I received "20200215-ALL_Redacted" back then and now, correct.

Cheryl,

Attached is a refiling of the amended SOTF 20075. Please use only this new complaint.

Please note, Exhibit B is too large to send, it is instead linked here: https://cdn.muckrock.com/foia_files/2020/06/05/Anonymous_Request_Response_6.5.20_Redacted.pdf (please include it in the complaint).

--Anonymous

NOTE: THE EMAIL ADDRESS SENDING THIS REQUEST IS A PUBLICLY-VIEWABLE MAILBOX. Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. 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.

Actually, just hold on sending out 20075 for now. I'll be able to consolidate the Mayoral issues into one complaint in a bit, and send you an updated complaint - Thanks!

Supervisor of Records Herrera,

This is a new 67.21(d) petition to determine in writing that the following parts of records are public and to issue an order for their disclosure:

1) Throughout the responsive records ( referring to Exhibit B of https://cdn.muckrock.com/outbound_request_attachments/94383620Anonymous/81856/20200605-Sup-Records-Petition-Mayor-Float-1-A-B.pdf ), portions of message bodies say "[quoted text hidden]." There is no way to know what text is in each of these bodies unlawfully withheld, and without any justification. Given that these are Gmail records, it is entirely possible to show all of these portions of messages merely by clicking on each such hidden marker. I am not required to try to guess what these parts of records are by piecing through the other records - which may or may not contain the quoted, hidden body. For example, I cannot be certain what Mason sent to Maggie on pg. 28, nor what Jaidin sent to Mason on pg. 23, etc. All [quoted text hidden] areas are challenged.

2) On at least the bottom of page 49 and top of page 50, it appears that the supposedly A/C privileged message withheld is in fact part of a message forwarded to Jaidin Consulting and Harlan Wong Street fair - who presumably do not work for the campaign nor the campaign's attorneys. This withholding is challenged.

Sincerely,

Anonymous

Supervisor of Records,

I am owed a *copy* of the record pursuant to law. The original record has "quoted text", hidden from view by Mayor's Office, and I want a copy of that hidden part of the record.
See the attached record that I am petitioning here. I have no idea which quoted text that is, and I don't have to piece together parts of records given to me in cut apart in a jigsaw puzzle.

There is no legal justification for this "hiding" the quoted text.

Sincerely,
Anonymous

This is an immediate disclosure request for all records requests received by the Mayor's Office from Jan 5, 2021 to present.

This is an immediate disclosure request for all records requests received by the Mayor's Office from Jan 5, 2021 to present.

This is an immediate disclosure request for all records requests received by the Mayor's Office from Jan 5, 2021 to present.

Supervisor of Records Herrera,

Sean Elsbernd, Hank Heckel, and Office of the Mayor were requested on Jan 19, 2021 to provide records requests they received from Jan 5 2021 to present. No response whatsoever having been received in the last 2+ months, they have refused to comply. Please determine in writing that the records are public and order them disclosed.

(Ignore the "Adnan" spam on the mailing list below)

Mayor's Office:

Please provide rolling (starting from most recent to oldest), exact copies of emails with the word "confidential" (case insensitive) anywhere in the subject line from Jan 1 2020 to present, performed as a centralized IT search of your official department email (which i know is possible) including all deleted/trash locations. I am also aware of an archiving system of City emails, which SOTF has directed recovery from in the past, which will be the next search target if you refuse to provide these emails.

--Anonymous

This is an immediate disclosure request for any communications in any form (don't forget Teams messages...) between Hank Heckel and any City employee/official in any other department regarding responses to either anonymous or MuckRock-based records requests from Dec 29, 2020 to present. Messages SOLELY between Heckel and a DCA that are privileged are excluded and not responsive. If any non-DCA other than Heckel is on the thread, that is a responsive record however.

Your office has previously disclosed records indicating that your office wishes to have a say in what other agencies disclose to me regarding Breed and Elsbernd records. Let's see what influence your office is wielding here.

To Amy Sawyer and Office of Mayor:

1. Please produce the email from Brad Russi to you pictured here: https://twitter.com/dizz_h/status/1383483428851519493/photo/1 / https://archive.ph/zTPzN - From the formatting of that record, I believe it was produced by DPW using NextRequest but NextRequest does a horrible job of searching full text so I haven't found it yet.

2. Please produce every reply to/forward of that email, and every email that that email is a reply to or forward of (i.e. all threads containing that email).

Either exact PDF copy via PDFMaker/Acrobat Pro, or via NextRequest's built-in email production system usually used by DPW, is acceptable. Attachments, email addresses, formatting, images must be preserved.

As far as I can tell this is not from one of my own requests... HDizz however often does a better job than me in finding great nuggets in my requests, so if it is from mine, you can just point me to the existing request.

For some reason the screenshot is super blurry, so I've transcribed the record below to help you find it:

=======

From: "Russi, Brad (CAT)" To: "Degrafinried, Alaric (DPW)" , "Sawyer, Amy (MYR)" Sent: Thu, 29 Oct
2020 02:24:40 +0000 Subject: Bag and tag policy, cont... Co: "Goldman, Jeremy (CAT)"

Alaric and Amy ??"

BALA is now pressing for another meeting to discuss their proposed changes to the bag and tag policy
(and other issues unrelated to DPW, see below). Per our discussion several months ago, I went through
their suggested edits and made revisions. I did not modify the edits that I had suggested and sent to BALA
months ago after DPW approved such changes. I understand that Public Work raised questions with
regard to some of those previous edits in our call, but we would need a compelling reason to renege on
agreements already made and communicated to BALA. Please take a look at the attached and let me
know if you would like to discuss further or have edits or concerns.

A couple of things to note:

1. The lawsuit against Los Angeles in which the court found the bulky item exception to be unlawful
has been appealed. We have not agreed to changes to the bulky item exception in the policy, and we
told them we are monitoring the appeal of the Los Angeles case. But you should prepare for the
possibility that the Court of Appeal will uphold the district court??s decision and we will need [sic]
make a change. It??s also possible that BALA could bring a legal challenge to our policy before
the appeal is resolved.
2. My understanding is that Public Works does not want the policy to require notice before bagging
and tagging in response to 311 complaints. This is legally risky as we have previously advised and
could form the basis for a successful challenge to the policy
3. They have continually asked about a reasonable accommodation policy and training. Has your ADA
coordinator been consulted and is there any update?

I would prefer to reach agreement internally on the proposed changes and send to BALA but not agree to
any further meetings on this subject. Jeremy, feel free to chime in if you have other thoughts on how to
proceed or if I??ve missed anything.

Hope you are both well. Thanks!

Bradley Russi
Deputy City Attorney
Office of City Attorney Dennis Herrera
(415) 554-4645 Direct

========

Sincerely,
An anonymous journalist