pages: OpenGovernmentCommission/2021-05-03.pdf, 14
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
OpenGovernmentCommission | 2021-05-03 | 14 | Commissioner LoPilato stated she is concerned about balancing privacy considerations and does not think specific addresses, even with regard to permit issues, is relevant enough to be included in the materials and could simply be redacted. The City Clerk explained that when there is a well-known address of interest, requestors will use the address when submitting their PRAs; gave the example of the McKay property. Commissioner LoPilato stated that she agrees it is fine for addresses for properties that are the subject of public discourse, but she sees some listed that are calls for service at specific addresses that seem to be residential. In response to Chair Tilos's inquiry, Vice Chair Shabazz stated the last issue he wants to address is the supplemental documents compiled related to individual Departments requests; shared that when he submitted a PRA, the City Attorney's office addressed him as Commissioner Shabazz; he does not want to receive special treatment because he is on the OGC; he is concerned and hopes all community members are being treated equally based on the law; described the example of two separate requests for SB 1421 information where one requestor, the District Attorney, received 18.8 gigabytes of information, whereas the other requestor's was labeled non-applicable; he would like to ensure that people have access to the same information. Commissioner LoPilato concurred with Vice Chair Shabazz; stated it seems one requestor is the District Attorney and the other requestor looks like a plaintiff-side personal injury law firm; one thing to consider is the extent to which PRAs may differ depending if there is active litigation; alternatively, it could be something less straight forward; she wants to highlight how helpful it is to see the requesting party; going forward, more clarifications should be built around the requestor so trends can be tracked. The City Clerk stated the tracking and reports that can be run in the new system will be very verbose and drilling for the details will be possible. Vice Chair Shabazz reminded the Commission that Commissioner Reid made comments about inaccuracies in the report regarding her own request and wonders what else may need to be addressed; if a subcommittee is created, is should become an annual thing; also suggested that one of the duties of the Commission could be a report evaluating compliance with PRAs. *** In response to Chair Tilos's inquiry, the City Clerk stated a motion is needed to hear items past 10:30 p.m. Commissioner Reid noted that she would pull items 4-A and 4-C. Chair Tilos stated Items 4-A and 4-C will not be heard and could be placed on another meeting. Meeting of the Open Government Commission May 3, 2021 14 | OpenGovernmentCommission/2021-05-03.pdf |