pages: OpenGovernmentCommission/2021-04-05.pdf, 6
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
OpenGovernmentCommission | 2021-04-05 | 6 | elucidate exactly what the judicial landscape looks like; the staff report explains that the Kusar decision in 1993 rested on a statutory interpretation argument supplemented with a purpose of the interplay of the PRA provision as it relates to other protections for exactly the same information that are found in the Penal Code and other somewhat codependent; in some cases, there will be a very clearly articulated privacy interest; in the Kusar case, the rules of civil discovery were also barring some of the accessibility of the requested records. In response to Ms. Roger's inquiry, Commissioner LoPilato stated the explanation provides a good balance with regard to the legal landscape, but she is still interested in the jurisdictional comparisons with respect to the length of the policy and look back. Ms. Rogers stated San Leandro, Pleasanton, Berkeley, Milpitas and San Diego all have 30 day look back policies; the League of California Cities provides top notch legal guidance to municipalities throughout the State. Commissioner Reid inquired what data was finally provided to Mr. Morris and if he received the full scope that he requested. Mr. Morris responded in the affirmative; stated he received the data more or less after a lot of back and forth, he did receive what he requested. Commissioner Reid inquired whether the data is identical to what is currently viewable on Police logs. Mr. Morris responded he is not sure what is currently viewable and is not exactly sure what he ended up getting off the top of his head; the statute defines a lot of things like eye color and things like that he was not even interested in; he was really looking for who was arrested, on what charges and the disposition; he does not recall the specific details of everything included in the statute. Commissioner Reid inquired whether Mr. Morris received a response on April 27th from his initial request on April 15th, to which Mr. Morris responded in the affirmative; stated the dates sound accurate, though he does not have the specific dates in front of him. Commissioner Reid stated the initial response to Mr. Morris went beyond the 10 days. The Chief Assistant City Attorney stated the 10 day period can be extended to 14 days to respond whether or not there are documents and, then, the actual disclosure comes later. The City Clerk added that potentially the period could go longer than 10 days if it falls on a Saturday or Sunday, it can bump to Monday as well; it is important to note the day of the week. Commissioner Reid reiterated the timeline for Mr. Morris PRA request; inquired why the data was given to Mr. Morris in three separate sections and what was missing. Meeting of the Open Government Commission April 5, 2021 6 | OpenGovernmentCommission/2021-04-05.pdf |