To view graphic version of this page, refresh this page (F5)

Skip to page body
City and County of San Francisco

March 27, 2001

 

 

SUNSHINE ORDINANCE TASK FORCE

REGULAR MEETING

MINUTES

Tuesday, March 27, 2001

4:00 p.m. City Hall, Room 408

Task Force Members

Seat 1 Judith Appel Seat 8 Robert Planthold

Seat 2 Bruce Brugmann Seat 9 Daniel Guillory

Seat 3 Vince Courtney Seat 10 Paul Hogan, Vice Chair

Seat 4 Vacant Seat 11 Sue Cauthen

Seat 5 Tuesday Ray Ex-officio Lillian Hare

Seat 6 Hilda Bernstein, Chair Ex-officio Hala Hajazi

Seat 7 Ted Kowalczuk

Roll Call: Appel, Ray, Hogan absent

  1. Approval of Minutes of February 27, 2001

    2. Minutes approved as amended (Item #5 roll call). (Planthold, Cauthen)

    (Appel, Ray, Hogan absent)

  2. Demonstration of records index on City web page (Jill Lerner)

Demonstration given by Jill Lerner, City Administrator's Office, and Richard Isen, Department of Telecommunications and Information.

3. Report from Chair Hilda Bernstein

(a) Attendance at various meetings

    1. Telephone call to New California Media
    2. Correspondence

      3. Catharine Barnes

      Matt Gonzalez

    3. Proposal for Sunshine Ordinance review: Existing ad hoc committee would be rolled to a Review Committee to which would be added three persons who were involved in drafting Prop G; chair of the Task Force would chair Review Committee; charge would be to determine issues that should be removed, clarified, or added, i.e., meaning of sole; sending inquiries to the State Attorney General; changing the reserved seat for the New California Media to a seat reserved for a representative of an ethnic newspaper; adding enforcement capability; direct funding for own budget; other issues which the committee determines; committee would recommend path to be taken, going to the Board of Supervisors or back to the electorate.

Member Brugmann stated he was against this proposal; problems are with implementation; proposal would weaken the ordinance.

Member Courtney stated rather than forming another committee to deal with this; request memorandum or opinion letter from City Attorney for lengthy, in-depth analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the ordinance and strengths and weaknesses of the Task Force and then some suggestions and options of what directions we might take to change that.

Member Planthold stated there are problems with implementation of the ordinance; we could provide more specific and guidance for staff training; ask City Attorney for what is unclear or inconsistent or lack of clarity in the ordinance rather than for what is right or wrong.

Public comment from Richard Knee requesting broad representation on proposed review committee; provisions in Prop G for enforcement; feel proposal would be counter-productive.

Public comment from Gilbert Criswell stating in Prop G Board of Supervisors were to provide a budget for Task Force; City Attorney has not been supportive of Task Force.

Member Cauthen stated ordinance is complicated; ordinance working okay now; not ready to make a decision today.

Motion to table this item until such time as we have more of an idea of what is involved. (Cauthen/Planthold) (Appel, Ray, Hogan absent)

 

Motion requesting City Attorney provide to the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force a legal analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the ordinance as well as the strengths and weaknesses of the Task Force's ability to enforce the ordinance; analysis to include recommendations regarding actions which can be taken to improve the ordinance specifically relating to the aggressive enforcement of the ordinance as discussed. (Courtney/Brugmann) (Appel, Ray, Hogan absent)

Member Courtney stated he wanted the City Attorney to keep in mind what is going on with the Williams complaint.

Jackie Minor stated the issue would become more specifically how we would work with you to share the results of the memo; it is a bit confusing now; concerned I not be requested to figure out the intent of the drafters; provided we have some leeway, I think I can work with you and get to you a document that outlines the significant improvements in access to information that Prop G has offered to the citizens of San Francisco, as well as areas where there is confusion because of lack of clarity in the ordinance; this is an opportunity for us to look more specifically at some of the implementation problems as well as pointing out where there have been some significant improvements on the part of the City.

Member Guillory stated he would like an aggressive interpretation of what enforcement opportunities we might have. Member Courtney stated he would agree with aggressive interpretation of current enforcement and the channels we would need to proceed to gain additional enforcement; how we might go about doing that; rather than talking about the strengths now, skip that for now.

Member Cauthen stated it would be a massive task to go to the voters now; should be mindful of the timetable if we decide to go to the voters.

Member Brugmann asked if term aggressive implementation would be accepted. Member Courtney agreed.

Public comment from Gilbert Criswell stating it would be prudent of the Task Force to ask the District Attorney for an opinion on enforcement on the Sunshine Ordinance.
  1. Report of Administrator Donna L. Hall

Report given.

Member Brugmann requested tabulation be kept of calls that are received that are taken care of before they reach the hearing point.
  1. Public Comment

Public comment from Gilbert Criswell commending Bay Guardian for their coverage of Task Force; commending Task Force for their work; suggest District Attorney do a presentation before the Task Force.
  1. Report from Counsel

    2. No report.

  2. Resolution of the SF LAFCo Establishing Open Meeting Processes

    3. LAFCo submitted a copy of a proposed LAFCo resolution establishing open meeting processes, stating they will comply with the spirit of the Sunshine Ordinance and will follow the Brown Act. Executive Officer Gloria Young requested the Task Force review the proposed legislation and inquire if the Task Force had any comments.

    Comments made that policy should be to ask them to come under the Sunshine Ordinance; maybe they cannot do this, however would request they abide by Sunshine Ordinance; also comment regarding the sentence of the resolution stating all meetings shall be open and public; concern was stated about closed sessions being needed; Chair Bernstein requested we acknowledge receipt of the resolution.

    Motion adopted as a matter of policy, from now on when the Task Force receives inquiries from groups that are not under jurisdiction of the Sunshine Ordinance, that the Task Force would like them to abide by the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance. (Brugmann/Planthold) (Appel, Ray, Hogan absent)

    Public comment from Gilbert Criswell regarding difference between the Brown Act and Sunshine Ordinance.

  3. Order of Determination dated October 26, 2000, Complaint of Davis/Reno, representing Local 21, AFL-CIO, against the Human Rights Commission.

    4. Jackie Minor excused herself and Buck Delventhal joined the meeting.

    Janene Murtha, of law firm of Davis Reno representing Kevin Williams on behalf of International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, AFL-CIO, Local 21, addressed the Task Force stating the parties have stipulated that Virginia Harmon will sign a declaration stating that the one remaining document, handwritten ledger of comp time by Arcedo Brilliantes, has disappeared and they cannot find the document. Davis Reno has agreed to do this with the condition that if they do not receive the declaration by the time of the next Task Force meeting they will have opportunity to return and have the Task Force take further action.

    Member Cauthen stated the Task Force has made a couple of determinations and Task Force has done what they can do.

    Member Courtney asked if Task Force should revise the Order of Determination since what would be acceptable is to receive the declaration from HRC. Buck Delventhal suggested the Task Force leave the prior Order of Determination on the table and continue this to the call of the Chair with the understanding if they do not receive the stipulation they are requesting, they may come to the Chair, and the Chair can place this on the calendar for the next meeting.

  4. Report from Complaint Committee

    5. No report.

  5. Report from Public Education & Information Committee

    6. No report.

  6. Report from Rules Committee Chair Bob Planthold

Report of Rules Committee meeting of March 8, 2001

      1. Amending by-laws regarding reporting members' absences

        2. Recommendation from Rules Committee to change the permissive "may" to the mandatory "shall" in Article VII–Attendance section.

        Member Courtney stated we are having quorums and we are taking care of business; do not see urgency to do this; opposed to the recommendation; deal with persons on case-by-case basis; differentiate between absences that are excused or unexcused.

        Chair Bernstein asked if we could keep the word "shall" and specify certain exemptions; or "shall, except for the following."

        Member Brugmann stated he did not see the urgency; there has only been one minor blip so far.

        Member Planthold stated some persons have legitimate reasons to be away; this should not be cast in one recent former member or another; but all prospective applicants for the future.

        Member Cauthen stated she was in favor of permissive "may," and with wording "except for good cause."

        Consensus of the Task Force to return this item to the Rules Committee and try to find some way insuring that we will have quorum and understand individual circumstances.

      2. Notification to prospective SOTF members of attendance requirements.

        3. Recommendation from Rules Committee suggesting for vacancy notices to let persons know they will be expected to not only attend regular meetings, but also to participate in committee work. Consensus of the Task Force that the recommendation of the Rules Committee be accepted.

      3. Recommendation on clarifying the duties and authority of the Chair.

Recommendation from Rules Committee that the Chair of the Task Force, subject to the control of the Task Force, has general supervision, direction and control over the Task Force activities; and has such general powers and duties of management as shall reasonably be necessary to carry out the duties of the Chair.

Member Brugmann stated concern about Chair sending letter to Attorney General regarding the HRC issue and also the conflict of interest issue.

Chair Bernstein stated the letter in question was reviewed by the Task Force; they deleted the portion regarding the AG's interpretation of sole. They let stand the matter of HRC, so the Chair did not act without authority on this issue; the Chair has a conventional role that is found in Robert's Rules of Order and that is found in virtually every body that the Chair is empowered to act within the context of previously determined policy and action; not empowered to act on something that has never come before or was a new issue or will turn policy upside-down.

Member Courtney stated his understanding was we were able to correct the problem; the letter was going out; and were able to retrieve the letter; there is a conflict issue; it warrants investigation; want to address the issue of Chair acting without us; why are we trying to expand the role rather than trying to define the role.

Chair Bernstein stated she requested the Rules Committee to address this item; not aware this is a request for expansion of the Chair role; simply a restatement of what is ordinary and usual procedure.

Member Cauthen stated she is concerned about larger issue which is can the Chair act in congruence with our policies between meetings; Chair needs to have this latitude.

Public comment from Gilbert Criswell responding to members absences.

Motion to accept the report of the Rules Committee interpretation that the Chair of the Task Force, subject to the control of the Task Force, has general supervision, direction and control over the Task Force activities; and has such general powers and duties of management as shall reasonably be necessary to carry out the duties of Chair. (Planthold/Cauthen) (Brugmann no) (Appel, Ray, Hogan absent)

11. Report from Ad Hoc Committee Regarding Conflict of Interest

Member Guillory suggested this item be moved to the next Task Force meeting; important to have all members present. Consensus of the Task Force to move this item to the next meeting.

Member Courtney agreed to sit on the Ad Hoc Advisory Committee on Conflict of Interest.
  1. Request for information from the City Attorney's Office on possible "conflicts with representation on the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force."

Chair Bernstein stated the letter was immediately referred to the City Attorney; information on response to the letter not yet available.

Member Brugmann requested in addition to the three requests "any City Attorney opinions involving the conflict of interest issue with the Sunshine Task Force and representation–something in writing on this issue."

Motion that the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force request the City Attorney assigned to the Task Force identify, with completeness and specificity, all other responsibilities that the deputy assigned to the Task Force has–or is expected to have or do–on behalf of the City and County of San Francisco, other than serve as the legal advisor to the Sunshine Task Force, as contemplated by Section 67.30 (a) of the Ordinance. (Courtney/Planthold) (Appel, Ray, Hogan absent)

Public comment from Gilbert Criswell affirming above motion.

 

Motion that the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force request written assurances that since January 1, 2000, that the deputy assigned to the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force has been "ethically walled off" from any matters within the City Attorney's Office that might in any way interfere with her ability to serve as an effective advocate for the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force, as contemplated by Section 67.30 (a) of the Ordinance. (Courtney, Planthold) (Appel, Ray, Hogan absent)

Member Guillory asked Deputy City Attorney Minor during what period she served as counsel to the HRC; Deputy City Attorney Minor answered from the "end of July 2000 until January 10, 2001."

Motion that the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force request written assurance that the deputy has not, since being assigned to the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force, provided any legal advice concerning the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance, the California Public Records Act or the Brown Act to any employees, agents, departments or officials associated with the City and County of San Francisco other than the advice and counsel they are providing to the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force. (Courtney/Brugmann) (Ayes: Brugmann, Courtney) Noes: Bernstein, Kowalczuk, Planthold, Guillory, Cauthen) (Absent: Appel, Ray, Hogan) The motion failed.

Member Guillory asked Deputy City Attorney Minor if departments have come to her during her time as serving as Task Force counsel. Deputy City Attorney Minor stated "I was assigned to the Task Force before passage of Prop G the specific provision that we are talking about that has been a concern by some members of the Task Force exists only because of Prop G; for point of clarification and to make sure the response from the City Attorney actually addresses the concerns, you may be interested in narrowing question #1 to make it clear you are talking about post Prop G.:

Member Planthold stated he was uncomfortable with this motion because it seems our counsel's duty is to give legal advice to other departments when they ask what they should do.

Member Cauthen stated she read the minutes of the ad hoc committee, and what Tom Burke said is not really what our total understanding was–I think it was appropriate for counsel to answer questions in the interim period.

Chair Bernstein asked if the motion included training that was given to departments. Member Brugmann stated yes.

The meeting adjourned at 6:20 p.m. Donna L. Hall, Administrator

*Memo from Bruce Brugmann and transcript of portion of January 23, 2001 Sunshine Ordinance Task Force Meeting attached.
Last updated: 8/18/2009 1:57:05 PM