|
|
Agenda Changes:
The Administrator informed the Task Force that item 9 was withdrawn; item 13 was continued by agreement of both parties, that Mr. Crossman asked for a continuance of item #15, and Mr. Arellano asked for a continuance of item numbers 20, 21, and 23.
Kimo Crossman asked for a continuance of item #14; he said that he still has not received the COB's Internet posting policy and that he may withdraw the complaint once he receives the policy. The Administrator objected to the continuance because he has no additional information to provide.
Motion to continue item #14 (Craven \ Knee)
Ayes: Craven, Knee, Cauthen, Chu, Comstock, Pilpel, Wolfe, Goldman, Williams:
Absent: Chan
Chair Comstock asked Kimo Crossman to state his reason for requesting a continuance for item #15. Mr. Crossman said that he did not receive the response from DCA Dorji Roberts in time to submit his comments. Mr. Roberts said that he was prepared to go forward, but deferred the decision to the Task Force.
Motion to continue item #15. (Comstock \ Wolfe)
Ayes: Comstock, Wolfe, Chan
Noes: Craven, Knee, Cauthen, Chu, Pilpel, Goldman, Williams
Chair Comstock asked Kimo Crossman to respond to the request from the Mayor's Office to continue item #20, 21 and 23. Mr. Crossman said that he did not receive Mr. Arellano's request, and does not agree to a continuance.
DCA Llorente suggested that the Task Force, out of due process consideration, allow Mr. Arellano, who has been the representative of the Mayor's Office and appears most knowledgeable about the matter, the opportunity to speak.
Member Wolfe suggested that the Task Force not continue the matter.
Motion to continue item #20, 21, and 23. ( Pilpel )
The motion failed for lack of a second.
Chair Comstock informed the public that item 9 was withdrawn, items 13, and 14 are continued.
The Administrator asked the Task Force to hear items 11 and 17 consecutively after item 7, because Linda Wong, who is assisting with clerking the meeting, must leave at 7 PM. Chair Comstock asked the Members if there was any objection to the Administrators request. There were no objections.
Chair Comstock, stated that the approved changes would be the order of the day.
Ming Lee asked that item 10 be heard last, after the other complaints. Emily Murase, DOSW, said that she is not able to stay to the very end and asked that the item be heard as posted on the agenda. Chair Comstock asked if there was a motion to continue the matter.
Member Cauthen said, that at the Complaint Committee, the parties were urged and Ms. Murase agreed to meet with Ms. Lee, but that Ms. Lee did not agree to a meeting.
There was no motion. Chair Comstock informed Ms. Lee that her matter would be heard in its current order.
Kimo Crossman, withdrew item #15.
|
| 1. |
|
Approval of minutes of March 27, 2007.
Member Goldman informed the Task Force that he was submitting technical corrections to the minutes to the Administrator.
Speakers: Peter Warfield said that he did not get an agenda packet and does not have easy access to a computer, which made preparing for today's hearing difficult. He had no comments on the minutes, because he had not had a chance to read them.
Motion to approve minutes of March 27, 2007, as amended. ( Cauthen / Goldman )
Ayes: Craven, Knee, Cauthen, Chu, Comstock, Pilpel, Wolfe, Chan, Goldman, Williams:
|
| 2. |
|
Approval of minutes of April 10, 2007.
Chair Comstock and Member Goldman informed members that they had submitted typographical corrections to the Administrator.
Speakers: Peter Warfield said that their were unflattering language usage's in the minutes regarding statements that he made, such as the use of the word "complained" and "alleged." He suggested more appropriate language. Minutes were amended to reflect Mr. Warfield's suggestions.
Motion to approve minutes of April 10, 2007, as amended. ( Comstock / Chu )
Ayes: Craven, Knee, Cauthen, Chu, Comstock, Pilpel, Wolfe, Chan, Goldman, Williams:
|
| 3. |
|
Report: Rules Committee: Meeting of April 12, 2007.
Member Wolfe made the report regarding the items 4 and 5, which are scheduled for discussion. He also reported the Committee's discussion regarding the time frame regarding when documents associated with complaints are received, and suggested that the matter be discussed in the Complaint Committee.
Member Cauthen asked the Administrator to agendize a discussion regarding Member Wolfe's suggestion at the next Complaint Committee meeting. She also suggested the following grammatical changes to the language in item #4.
- & such continuance must be put to a vote and be approved by&
- & request a continuance; however, such continuance& .
Member Wolfe indicated that the Committee also discussed whether the language in the charter regarding the 6 vote quorum applied to the Task Force.
Speakers: Peter Warfield said that he appreciated the report and the thinking that went behind it. He disagreed with the language that would allow a respondent the option to postpone, because the law requires that the complainant receives a resolution within 45 days. He urged caution regarding giving additional rights to departments because it may disadvantage complainants.
|
| 4. |
|
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 postponement shall be allowed. Should the complainant again wish to postpone, it shall be by a simple majority vote of the members present.
(b) A respondent may request a postponement but it shall be approved upon the simple majority vote of the members present.
Chair Comstock stated that Member Cauthen had already provided suggested language and asked if there were any objections to those amendments.
Member Pilpel said that the language on the agenda does not match the language on page 37 of the packet, which uses the word "continuance" rather than "postponement" and asked for clarification. Chair Comstock said that the word continuance is being used.
Member Craven suggested the following language:
(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.
Member Pilpel suggested that the last sentences in (b) read "& subject to the approved of the full Task Force by a simple majority vote of the members present."
Member Knee said that the entire procedures need editing. He said that he could inform the Task Force of the changes now, or that the matter be continued to the next meeting.
Chair Comstock asked the Administrator to agendize the discussion regarding formatting the complaint procedures for the next meeting.
Member Williams suggested that the Task Force delay discussion of this item until later in the meeting because their were individuals present to discuss the complaints.
Speakers: Kimo Crossman, urged that the matter be approved and not referred to the Complaint Committee.
Peter Warfield, said that the direction is good, but is not clear on the proposed wording; that he is concerned that the language in (b) will hinder meeting the 45 day requirement. That it's important to document how this discussion originated and what was discussed. He urged the Task Force to keep the language and the matter simple and not to assume that a person present today to discuss this matter is available to discuss it in other meetings.
Motion to refer this matter to the Complaint Committee for further review and editing. ( Pilpel / Williams )
Ayes: Craven, Knee, Cauthen, Chu, Comstock, Pilpel, Wolfe, Chan, Goldman, Williams
|
| 5. |
|
Motion amending Section 7 of the Task Force's By Laws as follows [Strikethroughs = deletions; Underlines = additions]:
Section 7. Action at a Meeting; Quorum and Required Vote
The presence of a majority of the members (six members) of the Task Force shall constitute a quorum for all purposes. The affirmative vote of a majority of the members of the Task Force (six votes) present shall be required for the approval of all substantive matters. Procedural motions require an affirmative vote of a majority of the members present. If a quorum is not present, no official action may be taken, except roll call and adjournment.
DCA Llorente informed the Task Force that section 4.104 of the Charter might implicate the Task Force on this matter. He said that the Government team of the City Attorney's Office (CA) has no opinion on this matter and that the CAO is in the beginning process of drafting an opinion on this matter. He suggested that the Task Force continue this item until a written opinion is provided.
Member Craven asked that the provisions of the code be referenced. She said that she supports a continuance
Member Pilpel asked the Administrator if a 10-day notice, as required in Article 8 of the By Laws before any changes can be made, had been made. The Administrator, through the Chair, responded that a 10-day notice had not been give.
Member Craven asked the Administrator to provide the 10-day notice prior to the next Task Force meeting.
Speakers: Allen Grossman said that he has no objection to continuing this item and that he wants to review the CAO opinion prior to the meeting.
Kimo Crossman said that another opinion, besides DCA Llorente's, is unnecessary since the CAO will say that 6 votes are required. He suggested that another opinion from an outside attorney such as Thomas Burke be sought, and that this matter be adopted and not continued.
Member Pilpel, asked the Administrator to include any public comment on this matter in the packet.
Peter Warfield said that the CAO's advice does not favor the complainant or the Task Force. The said, that this is a good measure because it is difficult for a complainant to obtain 6 favorable votes when members are absent or when there are vacancies. He said that he is disappointed that there is an absence of prior research. He suggested that the Task Force consult Thomas Burke or Terry Francke for an opinion.
Member Wolfe said that he is concerned when some members leave early because it affects the fairness of the vote.
Motion to continue to the next Task Force meeting. ( Pilpel / Goldman )
Ayes: Craven, Knee, Cauthen, Chu, Comstock, Pilpel, Wolfe, Chan, Goldman, Williams
|
| 6. |
|
Report from Complaint Committee meeting of March 13, 2007, and April 10, 2007.
Member Cauthen made the report.
Speakers: Peter Warfield said that the meeting was a great disappointment because he did not get the full time to present and rebut, he was interrupted, the DCA's letter was flawed, the Department did not explain its position and the DCA's letter was submitted to complainants after the deadline.
Member Cauthen explained, the purpose of the Complaint Committee is to determine jurisdiction and to focus the issue on the complaints. She said that Mr. Warfield had plenty of opportunities to speak and be heard, that he spoke about 16 times, and on each agenda item.
Kimo Crossman, referred to page 57 of the packet, indicating that there was a request for the Clerk of the Board to provide someone else to process complaints number 07018, 07021, and 07024, but that the Administrator continues to process them. He wanted to know what happened.
Member Cauthen responded that when the conflict of interest was raised, the Complainants were informed that the Committee could not force the City to provide an alternate, but that they could recommend it. She said that it was up to the City to decide to act, or not act on the recommendation.
|
|
07011
|
Determination of jurisdiction of complaint filed by Kimo Crossman against the Sheriff's Office for alleged failure to provide video records requested.
Member Pilpel asked Mr. Harrigan if he agrees that the records at issue in this complaint are subject to the Sunshine Ordinance and not records of a State officer. Mr. Harrigan responded that he did not agree that the records were subject to the Sunshine Ordinance, but that the subject matter falls under the Task Force's complaint jurisdiction.
Speaker: Kimo Crossman said that according to the sheriff's letter on page 108, it is a public record.
Peter Warfield asked when public comment would be allowed on the Committee report as a whole. Member Pilpel responded that it would occur after the discussion on jurisdiction of the complaints.
Member Chan asked to be recused.
Motion to recuse member Chan. ( Craven / Wolfe )
Ayes: Craven, Knee, Cauthen, Chu, Comstock, Pilpel, Wolfe, Chan, Goldman, Williams
Motion to accept jurisdiction. ( Cauthen / Goldman )
Ayes: Craven, Knee, Cauthen, Chu, Comstock, Pilpel, Wolfe, Goldman, Williams
Recused: Chan
|
|
07016
|
Determination of jurisdiction of complaint filed by Ming Lee against Mary Elizabeth Inn and the Department on the Status of Women for alleged failure to respond in a timely manner, failure to allow inspection of documents and incomplete production of documents in violation of Section 12L of the City Administrative Code.
Speakers: Emily Murase, Respondent, said she does not agree with a finding of jurisdiction, since the department did not have an opportunity to mediate the issue before it was brought to the Task Force. Ming Lee, Complainant, said that she does not see the value of meeting with Ms. Murase and that she supports jurisdiction.
Member Pilpel asked Ms. Murase if they had addressed the matter with Ms. Lee to seek a resolution. Ms. Murase said that that they had not and that she offered to mediate this matter with Ms. Lee but she declined.
Member Pilpel asked DCA Llorente, if the Task Force could hear the matter. DCA Llorente said, that a decision needs to be made on the merits, that he based his recommendation of jurisdiction on the Complainant's allegation that she sought mediation from the department but did not receive a resolution.
Mr. Wolfe asked if the complaint was against both the MEI and DOSW? Ms. Lee said that the complaint was against both. She said that she did not refuse to meet with Ms. Murase, but that she considered it an insincere jester.
Member Cauthen said that the Complaint Committee unanimously agreed to find jurisdiction and is recommending it.
Mr. Pilpel said that since the Department has not had an opportunity to resolve the dispute as required under 12L, he does not support jurisdiction.
Chair Comstock asked DCA Llorente if the Task Force must wait for a dispute resolution by the Department before hearing the matter. DCA Llorente said that 12L.5 (b) requires that the Department provide dispute resolution prior to seeking an advisory opinion of the Task Force.
Member Cauthen suggested that the Task Force move forward with jurisdiction since 12L.5 (b) says that the complainant "may" submit a complaint to the City agency, but it is not mandatory.
Member Craven agreed with Member Cauthen, and said that this complaint had been submitted to the department, and therefore the Task Force has jurisdiction.
Speakers: Allen Grossman said that 67.21 (c) applies because the Complainant made a request and was denied.
Chair Comstock asked Ms. Lee if she had requested the Department to adjudicate this matter. Ms. Lee responded that she attempted to, but never received a response.
Motion to continue to the call of the Chair to allow the Department to resolve the matter in accordance with 12L. ( Pilpel / Chan )
Ayes: Pilpel
Noes: Craven, Knee, Cauthen, Chu, Comstock, Wolfe, Chan, Goldman, Williams
Motion to accept jurisdiction. ( Cauthen / Goldman )
Ayes: Craven, Knee, Cauthen, Chu, Comstock, Wolfe, Chan, Goldman, Williams
Noes: Pilpel
|
|
07018
|
Determination of jurisdiction of complaint filed by Peter Warfield, on behalf of the Library Users Association, against the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force Administrator and the Clerk of the Board for allegedly overcharging for agenda packets.
Speakers: Peter Warfield, Complainant, said that one of the difficulties that he has is being heard. He said that the agenda cuts off half of the complaint, which is that his subscription, which is allowed under Gov. Code Section 54954.1, was stopped because of non-payment.
Member Pilpel asked the Chair if the complaint could be amended to include section 54954.1.
Peter Warfield said that the complaint does not need to be change, but that the agenda needed to be changed.
Frank Darby, Respondent, said that he supports jurisdiction.
Member Knee, asked Mr. Warfield how he wanted to proceed. Mr. Warfield said that there was nothing wrong with the compliant, but that the description in the agenda needed to be addressed.
Motion to accept jurisdiction. ( Cauthen / Knee )
Ayes: Craven, Knee, Cauthen, Chu, Comstock, Pilpel, Wolfe, Chan, Goldman, Williams
|
|
07019
|
Determination of jurisdiction of complaint filed by Andrew Sisneros against the Municipal Transportation Agency-Muni Kirkland Division for alleged failure to allow inspection of his personnel file, and untimely response.
Member Pilpel disclosed that he had served on the MTA-CAC and serves as an alternate on the MTATEP-CAC and that he spoke with Ms. Ueno yesterday on an unrelated matter, but, that he believes he can be impartial.
Speakers: None
Motion to accept jurisdiction. ( Cauthen / Wolfe )
Ayes: Craven, Knee, Cauthen, Chu, Comstock, Pilpel, Wolfe, Chan, Goldman, Williams
|
|
07020
|
Determination of jurisdiction of complaint filed by Patrick Monette-Shaw against the Department of Public Health for alleged failure to post meeting notices and minutes, and denial of request to be added to their e-mail distribution list for agenda notices.
Previously continued.
|
|
07021
|
Determination of jurisdiction of complaint filed by Kimo Crossman against the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force Administrator and the Clerk of the Board for alleged refusal to provide public records in original electronic format on the City web site.
Previously continued.
|
|
07022
|
Determination of jurisdiction of complaint filed by Kimo Crossman against the City Attorney's Office for alleged failure to provide the supplemental report for the 2006 Supervisor of Records Report.
Previously withdrawn
|
|
07023
|
Determination of jurisdiction of complaint filed by Kimo Crossman against the Department of Telecommunications and Information Services for alleged failure to provide a complaint log as directed by the Task Force and failure to provide e-mails related to position in Earthlink negotiations.
Members Craven and Wolfe asked to be recused.
Motion to recuse Members Craven and Wolfe (Cauthen/Goldman)
Ayes: Craven, Knee, Cauthen, Chu, Comstock, Pilpel, Wolfe, Chan, Goldman, Williams
Member Chu said that this complaint concerns prior Task Force findings, and that there is no new information. She suggested that the matter be referred to the Compliance and Amendments Committee.
Speakers: Kimo Crossman, Complainant, said that the Department still has not complied with the original request and would like the matter to be heard.
Member Knee asked Mr. Crossman if his complaint was about the same records or new records. Mr. Crossman responded that they were about the same records. Member Knee said that it sounds as though it is not a new complaint.
Allen Grossman said that this is a new complaint for non-compliance. The CAC can't make a referral. The CAC failed to make a proper recommendation for a referral.
Peter Warfield said that since it is a new request and new withholding it constitutes a separate occurrence. He said that he is troubled by the recusals, because they were not asked to be recused by the complainant, who is now at a disadvantage.
Motion to refer to the Compliance and Amendments Committee for consideration. (Chu / Goldman)
Ayes: Knee, Cauthen, Chu, Comstock, Pilpel, Chan, Goldman, Williams
Recused: Craven, Wolfe
|
|
07024
|
Determination of jurisdiction of complaint filed by Peter Warfield, on behalf of the Library Users Association, against the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force Administrator and the Clerk of the Board for alleged violation of Section 67.21 (c) for late, incomplete, and possibly no response to a request for assistance.
Speakers: Peter Warfield, Complainant, said he supports jurisdiction, but that the DCA's letter adds Section 67.21 (b) and (c), which are not an issue. He said that he does not agree with the DCA's letter because it is not accurate. He said that the 10-day response to records request has nothing to do with this complaint.
Motion to accept jurisdiction. ( Cauthen / Goldman )
Ayes: Craven, Knee, Cauthen, Chu, Comstock, Pilpel, Wolfe, Chan, Goldman, Williams
|
| 7. |
07015
|
Ming Lee requests that the full Task Force consider her appeal against the Complaint Committee's failure to find jurisdiction.
Speakers: Ming Lee, Complainant, urged the Task Force to find jurisdiction. Respondents, Emily Murase, Department on the Status of Women, said that she was not aware of the complaint and did not have an opportunity to provide dispute resolution as specified under 12L.5 (b). She said that she reviewed the contract and that they have no documents responsive to Ms. Lee's request.
DCA Llorente said that there isn't jurisdiction because the documents requested don't fall under the documents subject to disclosure under 12L.
Kathy Black, La Casa, said that she supports the finding of no jurisdiction, and that she was not notified of the hearing; that she did not receive a request from Ms. Lee, and that 12L procedures were not followed.
Ming Lee, in rebuttal, said that on page 83 of the packet, is a copy of her letter showing that she made an Immediate Disclosure Request.
Member Cauthen said that the problem is, that 12L only covers certain documents, but not the documents requested. She said that she felt there was a mistake in the filing and that the Task Force could hear the complaint if Ms. Lee agrees to amend it to make the DOSW the only respondent.
Member Craven asked Ms. Murase if the Department has a document regarding a formal service agreement that specifies the terms and conditions and when La Casa commenced to provide case management service to all of the Inn's participants. Ms. Murase responded that they do not have responsive documents.
Member Cauthen asked Ms. Murase if the contact specifies the services that are provided and whether a copy of the contract was provided to Ms. Lee. Ms. Murase responded that the contract specifies the services and that it was given to Ms. Lee.
Ms. Lee responded that she did receive that document and that it is not in the Task Force's packet.
Member Pilpel asked Ms. Murase to confirm whether MEI was a 12L by disclosing the amount of funds that they are provided. Ms. Murase deferred the answer to Amanda Heier. Ms. Heier responded that MEI receives approximately $78K from DOSW and $360K from the Department of Human Services.
Motion to find no jurisdiction. ( Craven / Goldman )
Ayes: Craven, Knee, Chu, Pilpel, Goldman
Noes: Cauthen, Comstock, Wolfe, Chan, Williams
Motion to accept jurisdiction. ( Knee / Wolfe )
Ayes: Comstock, Wolfe, Chan, Williams
Noes: Craven, Knee, Cauthen, Chu, Pilpel, Goldman
Member Cauthen asked that this matter be reconsidered at the next Task Force meeting.
Member Pilpel asked that, if this matter is heard again, the parties submit only new information and that they attempt to resolve the matter on their own.
Member Cauthen urged the parties to meet and talk about the issue.
|
| 8. |
07011
|
Public Hearing, complaint filed by Kimo Crossman against the Sheriff's Office for alleged failure to provide video records requested.
Member Chan recused himself
Speakers: Kimo Crossman, Complaint, said he requested routine video made in City Hall of 10 hours of activity that occurred outside the Mayors office, but that his request was denied. The Sheriff's Office alleged that it may be part of an investigation. James Harrigan, Respondent, said his written response is in the packet and that all video in City Hall has an investigatory feature. He said that he did not discuss with, and will not disclose to Mr. Crossman whether the tapes are the subject of an investigation. He said that any document that supports a security function may become evidence, and neither the building management nor the City Administrator has access to the tapes.
Kimo Cross, in rebuttal, said that the department did not allege that there is an investigation, and that there is no expectation of privacy in City Hall.
Peter Warfield said, that if records requested are specifically named in an exemption, then they can be denied, but if not they must be provided.
Emily Murase said, that at commission meetings they have made it possible for people to testify anonymously. She said that, while women know that they will be audio recorded during the meeting, but have a reasonable expectation that they can come to City Hall without fear that their image would be disclosed.
Motion finding no violation ( Pilpel / Craven )
Ayes: Craven, Pilpel, Williams
Noes: Knee, Cauthen, Chu, Comstock, Wolfe, Goldman
Recused: Chan
Motion finding a violation of Section 67.21 of the Sunshine Ordinance for failure to produce videotapes. The Department is directed to submit a response to the Task Force within 5 days of the receipt of the Order of Determination. ( Cauthen / Goldman )
Ayes: Knee, Cauthen, Chu, Comstock, Wolfe, Goldman, Williams
Noes: Craven, Pilpel
Recused: Chan
|
| 9. |
07013
|
Public Hearing, complaint filed by Adam Aufdencamp against the Mayor's Office of Communications for alleged failure to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request.
Withdrawn prior to the meeting.
|
| 10. |
07016
|
Public Hearing, complaint filed by Ming Lee against Mary Elizabeth Inn and the Department on the Status of Women for alleged failure to respond in a timely manner, failure to allow inspection of documents and incomplete production of documents in violation of Section 12L of the City Administrative Code.
Speakers: Ming Lee, Complainant, said that the department failed to respond to the IDR within 24 hours, and failed to fully disclose the records requested. Respondents: Amanda Heier (MEI), said that they are required to respond within 24 hours under the IDR, but that within 5 days of the request they had provided Ms. Lee will all responsive documents. Emily Murase (DOSW), said that the issues raised by Ms. Lee are service delivery issues, and that she would like the opportunity to meet with Ms. Lee to discuss them.
Ms. Lee, in rebuttal, said that she did not receive the documents requested and has no confidence in quality of service offered by DOSW.
Member Pilpel asked Ms. Heier if she was willing to provide Ms. Lee with another copy of the documents. Ms. Heier said that she would provide another copy.
Member Wolfe asked Ms. Lee if she had notified DOSW. Ms Lee said that she was dissatisfied with DOSW.
Member Craven urged Ms. Heier, Ms. Murase, and Ms Lee to meet to discuss any additional outstanding issues.
Motion finding a violation of 12L, for not producing documents. ( Wolfe / Williams )
Ayes: Wolfe, Williams
Noes: Craven, Knee, Cauthen, Chu, Comstock, Pilpel, Goldman
Excused Absent: Chan
The motion failed.
Task Force took no formal action.
|
| 11. |
07018
|
Public Hearing, complaint filed by Peter Warfield, on behalf of the Library Users Association, against the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force Administrator and the Clerk of the Board for allegedly overcharging for agenda packets.
Speakers: Peter Warfield, Complainant, said that he was overcharged for the agenda packets and that his subscription for the agenda and agenda packets were stopped for non-payment. He urged the Task Force to find a violation against both Mr. Darby and the Clerk of the Board.
Frank Darby, Respondent, said that the department made an error in its charge to Mr. Warfield and that they should have charged 1 cent per page rather than 10 cents per page. He asked the Task Force to find no violation since the documents were provided by the department but no payment was submitted by Mr. Warfield for the undisputed documents, and he asked that Mr. Warfield be directed to pay $29.17, which is the cost due for the material provided at 1 cent per page. He said that the department would reactivate the subscription upon request by Mr. Warfield and that documents would be mailed after receipt of payment.
Peter Warfield said that he appreciates the acknowledgment of error, but said that it has taken over a year. He said that he did not feel that it was appropriate to pay a charge while it was in dispute until it was adjudicated, because he would loose the opportunity to dispute it. He said that he does not dispute the amended charges and would be happy to pay for what he received. He said his rescinding his subscription for non-payment was not appropriate under any circumstance. He asked for a finding that he identified on page 173 of the packet, and that the 1 cent charge be expanded to apply to all agenda packets, whether there is a subscription or not. He said that the charges are optional and that other departments provide such materials without charge.
Member Craven said that it was incredibly unfortunate that it took a year to resolve, and that she was troubled that the Department did not notice the error until the eve of the meeting. With regards to an agency's right to cut off a mailing under 54954.1, she said, that the department probably had a right to terminate the subscription due to unpaid fees, because they are allowed to assess and collect a fee, however, she feels that it was unreasonably applied in this instance because there was a good faith dispute.
Member Williams cited the Section 8.37 of the Administrative code regarding the waiving of fees or the inability to pay and asked Mr. Warfield if he notified the department that he was unable to pay. Mr. Warfield responded that he did not provide such notice.
Kimo Crossman said that he supports the motion and recommends that the fees be completely waived.
Motion finding a violation of the Sunshine Ordinance Sections 67.9 (e), 67.21 (h), and California Government Code Section 54954.1 for charging 10 cents per page for agenda packet materials. The Department is directed to reassess the invoices and the amounts due within five days of receipt of the Order of Determination, and to issue a revised invoice that charges only one cent per page for the packet, and include the mailing cost incurred to date. Further, that Library Users Association shall be reinstated on the mailing list to receive agendas and agenda packets. ( Craven / Wolfe )
Ayes: Craven, Knee, Cauthen, Chu, Comstock, Pilpel, Wolfe, Chan, Goldman, Williams
|
| 12. |
07019
|
Public Hearing, complaint filed by Andrew Sisneros against the Municipal Transportation Agency-Muni, Kirkland Division for alleged failure to allow inspection of his personnel file, and untimely response.
Member Pilpel said that he knows Ms. Ayn Antonio, but feels that he can be impartial in this matter.
Member Cauthen disclosed that she is a member of the MTA-CAC, but that she feels that she can be impartial in this matter.
Speakers: Andrew Sisneros, Complainant, said that he did not receive full disclosure of his personnel file, and that the Department did not respond in a timely manner. Respondents: Rumi Ueno, said that Mr. Sisneros was provided a complete copy of his file, which consisted of over 300 pages. Ayn Antonio, said, although the Department did not respond timely, it has provided all of the records that they have at the division.
Mr. Sisneros, in rebuttal, said that, although he received over 300 pages, 60 pages were duplicated and 77 pages were missing from the file.
Member Pilpel asked Ms. Ueno, if there were other documents that were not provided. Mr. Ueno said that some documents that Mr. Sisneros alleges are missing may have been destroyed due to retention requirements. She said that there is a separate grievance file that is not part of the personnel file.
Motion finding a violation of Section 67.21 of the Sunshine Ordinance for failure to respond to the initial request and the subsequent IDR within the timeframe provided. ( Craven / Wolfe )
Ayes: Craven, Knee, Cauthen, Chu, Comstock, Pilpel, Wolfe, Goldman, Williams
Excused Absent: Chan
|
| 13. |
07020
|
Public Hearing, complaint filed by Patrick Monette-Shaw against the Department of Public Health for alleged failure to post meeting notices and minutes, and denial of request to be added to their e-mail distribution list for agenda notices.
Previously continued.
|
| 14. |
07021
|
Public Hearing, complaint filed by Kimo Crossman against the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force Administrator and the Clerk of the Board for alleged refusal to provide public records in original electronic format on the City web site.
Previously continued.
|
| 15. |
07022
|
Public Hearing, complaint filed by Kimo Crossman against the City Attorney's Office for alleged failure to provide the supplemental report for the 2006 Supervisor of Records Report.
Previously withdrawn.
|
| 16. |
07023
|
Public Hearing, complaint filed by Kimo Crossman against the Department of Telecommunications and Information Services for alleged failure to provide a complaint log as directed by the Task Force and failure to provide e-mails related to position in Earthlink negotiations.
Previously referred to the Compliance and Amendments Committee.
|
| 17. |
07024
|
Public Hearing, complaint filed by Peter Warfield, on behalf of the Library Users Association, against the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force Administrator and the Clerk of the Board for alleged violation of Section 67.21 (c) for late, incomplete, and possibly no response to a request for assistance.
Speakers: Peter Warfield, asked that his matter be continued because there was new material that came in and he was not able to prepare his presentation.
Member Pilpel asked if there were any substantive matters still outstanding. Mr. Warfield said that there were still substantive matters pending.
Frank Darby, Respondent, said that he did not agree to a continuance.
Motion to continue. ( Craven / Knee )
Ayes: Craven, Knee, Comstock, Wolfe, Chan
Noes: Chu, Pilpel, Goldman, Cauthen, Williams
Peter Warfield withdrew the complaint.
|
| 18. |
|
Report: Compliance and Amendments Committee: meeting of April 11, 2007.
Member Knee made the report. He said that the Office of Contract Administration was invited to their next meeting do discuss their polices and practices regarding the method and timing of releases of records related to request bids and proposals.
Chair Comstock said that he presented to the Members a response from the Ethics Commission with regards to records of closed investigations, and that they refused to provide the records of investigations. He said that he is seeking direction from the Task Force as to some next steps.
Chair Comstock, asked the Administrator to agendize a discussion regarding the Ethic Commission's retention of records of closed investigations, for the next meeting.
Speakers: Peter Warfield said that he "seconds" the chairs recommendation because it's something that needs to be aired. He said that he has had complaints referred to the Ethics Commission, but did not receive a satisfactory response, so it is an important matter for the Task Force to take up with public input.
|
| 19. |
07005 & 07007
|
The Compliance and Amendments Committee has referred to the Task Force the Determination of whether the Department of Telecommunications and Information Services have fully complied with the Order of Determination of February 27, 2007.
Members Craven and Wolfe recused themselves.
Member Knee said that there is continued resistance by the Department to comply with the Order of Determination, and recommended that this matter be referred to another body.
Speaker: Kimo Crossman, said that Mr. Vincent should be found in willful failure for not doing his duty, which is official misconduct. Ron Vinson said that he has responded completely with the Task Forces, Order of Determination (OD) and doesn't know what more he can do. He referred the Task Force to the packet of material that he submitted to the CAC.
Chair Comstock asked Mr. Vinson to confirm that, in his written response to Mr. Crossman's requests #1, 5, and 8 that the Department disagrees with the Task Force's orders.
DCA Llorente responded that the Department appears to have complied with the OD.
Member Knee asked if the OD could be revised? DCA Llorente said that the OD could be revised and that the Department had complied with the OD as it is written.
Member Williams said that the Task Force has been going around in circles regarding this complaint and suggested that they move on.
Member Cauthen said that the Department has made a good faith effort to comply with the OD.
At the conclusion of testimony and extensive discussions among its members, the Task Force took no formal action.
|
| 20. |
07002a
|
The Compliance and Amendments Committee has referred to the Task Force for further consideration their recommendation that the Mayor's Office be found in willful misconduct for failure to comply with the Sunshine Ordinance, and failure to respond to the Order of Determination issued by the full Task Force on March 27, 2007; that potential referral, based on that finding, to another appropriate body be considered.
Member Knee recommended that this matter be referred to District Attorney, Board of Supervisors, or California Attorney General.
Speaker: Kimo Crossman, said that the language of the motion should be willful failure. He suggested that the Department Head, Nathan Ballard, be named, and held responsible.
Member Craven suggested that items #20 and 21 be heard together and that there be a combined referral. Without objection.
Peter Warfield said that if he is not allowed six minutes for public comment that he will file a complaint next month against the Chair for not allowing three minutes per item. He said that he wanted to "second" what the previous speaker said. He said that he does not believe the Mayor's Office's claim that the Mayor's calendar is destroyed after 5 days. He urged the Task Force to investigate the Mayor's Office's allegations, and to also include a violation of Section 67.29-5,
Member Pilpel said that the Task Force can refer the matter, but only the Ethics Commission can find official misconduct, pursuant to Section 67.30.
Member Wolfe asked if it matters whether the words "official misconduct" is removed from the language of the motion? Member Craven responded that it is important because the Director of the Ethics Commission indicated that the Task Force should clearly identify its findings.
Chair Comstock asked if willful failure can be against a Department or if it must be found against a person. Member Craven responded that it must be directed to a person.
Member Pilpel said that it is not appropriate to name individuals who have not had an opportunity to directly address the Task Force. He said that making a decision without their presence denies them the right to due process, and that Task Force Member may be themselves subject to claims of official misconduct for failure to properly discharge their duties.
DCA Llorente said, that the Department Head can be held responsible, if he is aware of this matter.
The Task Force finds the Mayor's Office and the Mayor's Office of Communications, through their representatives the Mayor and Nathan Ballard, are in willful failure and official misconduct for violation of Sunshine Ordinance Sections 67.21, 67.29-7 and 67.34 for failure to provide requested records and ongoing failure to preserve public records. The Task Force referred this matter for further investigation and enforcement to the San Francisco Ethics Commission, the San Francisco District Attorney, and the California Attorney General. ( Craven / Knee )
Ayes: Craven, Knee, Cauthen, Comstock, Wolfe, Goldman, Williams
Noes: Pilpel
Excused Absent: Chu, Chan
|
| 21. |
07002b
|
The Compliance and Amendments Committee has referred to the Task Force the for further consideration their recommendation that the Mayor's Office be found in continued violation for failure to preserve records in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance, and failure to comply with the Order of Determination issued by the full Task Force on March 27, 2007; that potential referral, based on that finding, to another appropriate body be considered.
The Task Force acted on this matter with item #20.
|
| 22. |
07008
|
The Compliance and Amendments Committee has referred to the Task Force the for further consideration their recommendation that the Public Utilities Commission be found in willful misconduct for failure to comply with the Sunshine Ordinance, and failure to comply with the Order of Determination issued by the full Task Force on March 27, 2007; that potential referral, based on that finding, to another appropriate body be considered.
Previously continued.
|
| 23. |
07009
|
The Compliance and Amendments Committee has referred to the Task Force for further consideration their recommendation that the Mayor's Office be found in willful misconduct for failure to comply with the Sunshine Ordinance, and failure to respond to the Order of Determination issued by the full Task Force on March 27, 2007.
Member Craven said that this is not willful failure, since staff were following the Departments policy.
Speaker: Kimo Crossman, said that the Department deleted the e-mail records after they were requested and should not get away with it. That they could easily pull them from backup, that all servers maintain.
Peter Warfield, apologized for being harsh during his prior comment and said that he does not plan to file a complaint against the Chair. He said that the Task Force will loose credibility if they don't respond in a strong manner. He urged the Task Force to take this matter seriously, and to take the strongest possible action.
DCA Llorenta said that the OD is not as clear as others are for a referral.
Member Pilpel suggested that the Task Force take no action.
Member Knee suggested that the Chair send a letter to the Mayor's Office stating that, the matter would be referred to the Attorney General and/or District Attorney, if the requested documents are not provided by the next meeting of the Task Force.
Chair Comstock suggested, that a letter be written asking if they have corrected the problem, and if the problem is ongoing the matter will be referred.
Member Craven said that it is important to know why there is no e-mail back up from which the information can be pulled, and whether there's been a change to the Mayor's policy.
Member Wolfe suggested that a knowledgeable person from the Mayor's Office appear to address any technological matters.
Member Knee said that an invitation to attend the next full Task Force meeting or detailed written explanation would suffice.
Chair Comstock, by consensus of the Task Force, said that a letter will be written requesting that the Mayor's Office provide a written response within 14 days and that a knowledgeable representative appear at the next Task Force meeting.
Continued by consensus of the Task Force.
|
| 24. |
|
Scheduling: Special Meeting of the Task Force to consider amendments referred from the Compliance and Amendments Committee ยง67.3, 67.7 through 67.15 (action item) (no attachment)
Speaker: Kimo Crossman, asked when the draft amendments for the last meeting will be completed? He suggested that the changes be made visible on a projector during the meeting.
Peter Warfield said, that the Task Force need to show the source of the changes and how changes are being made.
By consensus, the Task Force scheduled its next special meeting for Tuesday, May 8, 2007 at 5:00 PM.
Chair Comstock, asked the Administrator to schedule items 67.7 to 67.16 for discussion at the next special meeting of the Task Force.
|
| 25. |
|
Administrator's Report.
The Administrator made the report.
Speakers: Peter Warfield said, that according to the Complaint Committee minutes he only spoke 11 times and not 16 times. He said that the Complaint Log should indicate that the complaint was filed by the Library Users Association, rather than Peter Warfield.
Kimo Crossman said, that Angela Calvillo is the new clerk, and that he asked for a commitment to Sunshine. He said that the SOTF Administrator's Office should be open during business hours (8 am – 5 pm).
|
| 26. |
|
Public comment for items not listed on the agenda. Public comment to be held at 5:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as possible.
Speakers: Allen Grossman said, that if a complainant asks for 1 additional day to respond to the Department's response to a complaint that it should be allowed. He alleged that the Administrator favors the Departments to the detriment of the complainants. He said that he received no response to his questions to item #5.
Kimo Crossman said, that Departments are not submitting a response to complaints within five days as required. He alleged that the Administrator favors the Departments, that he is non-responsive, and should be censored for his activities.
Peter Warfield said, that the complaint procedures are not clear regarding the filing time. He said that he received notices from the Administrator via e-mail, and that he doesn't want information e-mailed to him. He said that the Respondent did not provide any discussion at the Complaint hearing, and that there is confusion regarding the deadline for submitting information for inclusion in the packet.
|
| 27. |
|
Announcements, questions, and future agenda items from the Task Force
Speakers: Member Wolfe said, that he plans to address the Board during the budget process to request more money from the Board for an additional staff person to assist the Administrator.
Chair Comstock said, that Angela Cavillo will be a great addition to the Clerk of the Board's Office.
Member Pilpel said, that it's time for the Annual Report. He asked to agendize the presentation of the Supervisor of Records supplemental report for the next Full Task Force meeting. He suggested that the new Clerk of the Board be invited to the Full Task Force meeting once she comes on board. He said that the annual election of officers is scheduled for the next meeting.
Speaker: Peter Warfield urged the Task Force to agendize Member Pilpel's suggestions.
|