May 08, 2007

1.

Approval of minutes of April 10, 2007.

Speakers: None

Motion approving minutes of April 10, 2007. ( Cauthen / Wolfe )

Ayes: Cauthen, Wolfe, Goldman

Excused Absent: Chu

2.

07025

Determination of jurisdiction of complaint filed by John Templeton against the Historical Preservation Fund Committee for alleged failure to provide notice of its meetings.

Continued by agreement of both parties prior to the meeting.

3.

07027

Determination of jurisdiction of complaint filed by Kimo Crossman against the Small Business Commission (SBC) and Martha Yanez for alleged failure to provide e-mail addresses of the SBC Commissioners.

Speakers: Kimo Crossman, Complainant, asked for a finding of jurisdiction; Michael Farrah, Respondent, said that the Department does not contest jurisdiction. He said that three out of four Commissioners have agreed to release their personal e-mail addresses and that he should have all of them within 48 to 72 hours.

DCA Llorente noted an error on his instructional letter: the last sentence should refer to SBC and not DTIS

Member Wolfe asked Chair Cauthen if she could vote last on motions in the event that there is a tie. Chair Cauthen agreed to vote last.

Motion to recommend jurisdiction. ( Goldman / Wolfe )

Ayes: Wolfe, Goldman, Cauthen

Excused Absent: Chu

4.

07029

Determination of jurisdiction of complaint filed by Kelly Satuarno against the Recreation and Parks Department for alleged failure to post the agenda of the April 19, 2007, 72 hours prior to the meeting.

Continued by agreement of both parties prior to the meeting.

5.

07030

Determination of jurisdiction of complaint filed by Michael Petrelis against the Department of Public Health for alleged failure to provided copies of public records requested.

Continued by agreement of both parties prior to the meeting.

6.

Motion adding Sub-Section B. 8. (a) and (b) to the Task Forces Complaint Procedures: (a) A complainant may waive the 45 day rule and a continuance shall be allowed. Should the complainant again wish to continue, it shall be by a simple majority vote of the members present.

(b) A respondent may request a continuance once, and upon agreement of the complainant the matter will be continued. If the complainant does not agree to the continuance requested, such continuance must be put to a vote and be approved by a simple majority vote of the members present.

Speakers: Kimo Crossman said that Sub-Section 8 (b) should be removed because departments can't request a continuance, and they should not be given this option.

Motion adding Sub-Section B. 8. (a) and (b) to the Task Forces Complaint Procedures: (a) A complainant may waive the 45 day rule and a continuance shall be allowed. Should the complainant again wish to continue, such continuance shall be by a simple majority vote of the members present.

(b) A respondent named as an individual may request a continuance once, and upon agreement of the complainant the matter will be continued. If the complainant does not agree to the continuance requested, such continuance must be put to a vote and be approved by a simple majority vote of the members present. ( Wolfe / Goldman )

Ayes: Cauthen, Wolfe, Goldman

Excused Absent: Chu

7.

Discussion re: Whether to change the number of pages that parties to the complaint can submit as supporting documentation.

Member Wolfe said that he favors more information rather than less information, and that he can discern what is and is not important to read.

Member Goldman said that he wants to be fair to the parties and not restrict them from submitting information that proves their case. He said that parties should be asked to submit a summary of their documents.

Chair Cauthen said that the Task Force needs to remember that the parties that come before them are not experts.

Chair Cauthen, by consensus of the Committee, recommended that the page limit remain at 75 pages, and that out of interest for the environment and administrative efficiencies that parties keep their presentation as cohesive as possible.

Speakers: Kim Crossman said he agrees with the recommendation that parties should be encouraged to summarize their case.

The Committee took no formal action.

8.

Discussion re: Whether to change the time/specify a time allowed for parties to receive documents associated with a complaint.

Member Wolfe said that complainants have stated on numerous occasions that they do not received the department's responses to their complaint in enough time to allow them to submit a rebuttal for inclusion in the packet.

Member Goldman said that when complainants file a complaint they should be able to support their argument regardless of how the department responds.

DCA Llorente said that there are timing issues with regard to processing, compiling, copying and distributing the packet.

Member Chu said that she can't tell whether this is a big problem or just isolated instances; therefore she doesn't have a reason to support a change.

Speakers: Kimo Crossman said that Departments are not submitting their response in 5 days. He urged that 1) the 5-day response be enforced, 2) Departments submit their responses electronically, and/or 3) that Departments be given a shorter deadline in lieu of the 5 day response.

Peter Warfield said that he agrees with Mr. Crossman regarding the enforcement of the current complaint procedures. He said that Respondents are not arguing their reasons at the Complaint hearing, which prevents the Complainant from preparing a sufficient response for the full Task Force. He said that the late arrivals of the DCA letters are a disadvantage to Complainants.

DCA Llorente said that changing the deadline for the Department's response might be helpful to complainants, but that he is issuing his letter as soon as he can.

Administrator Darby discussed the time frame for processing complaints, including the notice and response to departments. He said that there are tight deadlines to process complaints and compile, copy and distribute the packet, which can be changed. He said that reducing the Departments response time from 5 to 3 business days might be difficult for Departments.

Chair Cauthen said that Allen Grossman, Peter Warfield, and Kimo Crossman have complained that they did not receive the Departments response or the DCA letters in time to submit a written rebuttal; she asked the Administrator if other complainants had made similar complaints. The Administrator said that he did not receive similar complaints from other complainants.

Continued by consensus of the Committee.

Chair Cauthen asked the Administrator to include a copy of the flow chart of the Complaint process in the next packet. She also asked that a few City departments be invited to discuss whether they can comply with a shorter timeframe.

9.

Discussion regarding a stylistic revision of the Complaint Procedures.

Chair Cauthen said that Member Knee introduced this matter at the last Task Force meeting and wanted to perform this task.

Speakers: Peter Warfield said that future agenda items should be clearer as to what is being proposed; that the public need to know who put items on the agenda and why.

Member Wolfe said that this matter was discussed extensively at the last full Task Force meeting and that the description is very clear.

Kimo Crossman said that Sub-section G.1 of the Complaint Procedures should require the Administrator to keep a log of all inquiries.

The Committee took no formal action.

10.

Administrator's Report.

The Administrator made the report.

Speakers: Kimo Crossman said that the SOTF office appears to be open from 7-4 and not the 8:30-5 PM normal business hours specified in the charter. He said that the public can't get in the building until 8 AM.

Peter Warfield said that he is glad that the Administrator's report shows the Library Users Association (LUA) as the complainant. He said that the report does not mention the four recent complaints filed by the LUA, and said he has not received a confirmation.

11.

Public comment for items not listed on the agenda.

Speakers: Peter Warfield said that the minutes should include activities that affect the meeting, specifically the limitation on his time that occurred at the last meeting. He urged the Committee not to rush speakers and not to limit the amount of substance being heard.

Kimo Crossman said that the DCA's letters should be tailored to the complainants. He said that the PUC adopted the Google agreement and that if he had received the discussions from DTIS as requested, the outcome would have been different.

12.

Announcements, questions, and future agenda items from Committee members.

Member Chu asked the Administrator to provide a flip chart for the next meeting.

Speakers: None