pages: OpenGovernmentCommission/2021-02-01.pdf, 3
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
OpenGovernmentCommission | 2021-02-01 | 3 | Commissioner LoPilato stated references to 2019 should be changed to 2020; inquired whether the PRA chart only shows requests that actually rise to the City Attorney's office, to which the Assistant City Attorney responded in the affirmative. In response to Commissioner LoPilato's inquiry, the Assistant City Attorney stated the chart encompasses requests that went to the different departments; the City Attorney's office reviews the requests to determine whether or not an exemption applies; the City Attorney's office has reviewed every request on the chart. The City Clerk clarified requests that trickle up to the City Attorney's office require review; simple PRAs handled by other departments are not included on the chart; each department responds to many other requests that do not need review by the City Attorney's office. Vice Chair Shabazz stated three out of four complaints were withdrawn; from his own experience in filing a complaint, there was encouragement to withdraw his complaint; inquired whether there was any communication with the complainants to withdraw their complaints. The City Clerk responded in the affirmative; stated the process when a complaint is filed involves staff trying to work with the complainant to resolve the issue to get them satisfaction without having to go before the OGC. Vice Chair Shabazz inquired what a voluntary suspension is, to which the City Clerk responded it was a request for records with an agreement to do some follow-up; stated the request was suspended until the follow-up was completed, rather than withdrawn. The Assistant City Attorney concurred; stated the request involved records, which the complainant decided to voluntary suspend until further notice. Vice Chair Shabazz inquired what the status of the suspended request is now and whether there was further communication from the complainant. The Assistant City Attorney responded his understanding is that the Attorney assigned to the request reached out to the complainant and has not heard back. Stated the two reports do not provide the information they purport to provide; encouraged alleged violations be listed; he thinks it is inappropriate for the City Attorney's office to encourage withdrawals of complaints; all complaints should be heard to allow the Commission to observe and respond to patterns: Jay Garfinkle, Alameda. In response to Chair Tilos' inquiry, the City Clerk responded information provided is electronically produced. Commissioner Reid inquired whether there is a reason why other PRAs are not included in the report. Meeting of the Open Government Commission February 2, 2021 3 | OpenGovernmentCommission/2021-02-01.pdf |