CommentsEASTSIDER-A couple of weeks ago, I wrote how the actual structure and framework of DONE is crumbling. Here’s what I wrote in my takeaway to the piece:
“As I said in the beginning, DONE is breaking down. First, the LA City Clerk’s Public Records Request system is useless, and in this case, they probably lied as the above BONC Policy, a public record, proves. Second, in doing some further inquiries, I discovered a response to an NC Grievance which points out that the BONC Policy trumps the Brown Act regarding Special Meetings.
Therefore, the City Clerk’s response was meaningless. The LA District Attorney does not address public records requests from you and me. Therefore, we may never know what genius in the City Attorney’s Office blessed the BONC policy, and good luck finding out if there was even a legal opinion by a discoverable attorney in their shop.
Just because I’m stubborn, I am going to write the City Attorney’s Office directly, and we shall see if they have done anything to comply with AB 2257, which, effective January 2019, required new and additional posting requirements by public agencies. If you are interested, here’s the link.
This is all very sad, but I’m not making it up.”
Turns out I’m stubborn. So, I tried to email the City Attorney who supervises DONE and presumably, BONC. First, by email, but it turns out the City Attorneys don’t allow us mere mortals contact them by email. So I actually mailed my concerns by snail mail, using the City Attorney’s address.
We’ll see. It may be that the only way to get an answer as to why they think DONE is exempt from the express language of the Brown Act’s special meeting requirement is to sue them. Then we’ll get to see the City Attorney. You bet.
Highland Park and Public Records
While all this has been going on, some Highland Park folks contacted me to see if I could make a public records request to obtain the audio tape of their Committee meeting’s audio recording. Seems like someone was fudging what a couple of motions actually said, to the benefit of the Chair of the Committee. Sound familiar?
Anyway, I said sure, and fired off PRA. That one is PRA Request 20-5194. On the same day, I received a really weird response. A message was sent to you regarding record request #20-5194.
Digging deeper, I dare you to try and access the request. Click on the request number and you will find that the request doesn’t exist! Here’s what I got in the email from the public records folks. . .
Under the ominous heading of “[External Message Added] we find:
Hi there
A message was sent to you regarding record request #20-5194:
July 31, 2020
Sent via NextRequest
RE: Your July 31, 2020, California Public Records Act Request to the Department of Neighborhood Empowerment
Dear Mr. Butka,
This e-mail is in response to your PRA Request of July 31, 2020, requesting certain records under the Public Records Act. The Public Records Act allows the public to inspect non-exempt and reasonably identifiable writings relating to the conduct of the public’s business and that are prepared, owned, or retained by a local agency. (Gov. Code §6252 and 6253(d).) Under the Act, the public may inspect reasonably identifiable records only if the records being requested exist and are non-exempt. (Govt. Code§§ 6252 and 6253(d).) Under Government Code section §6253 (b), a request must reasonably identify or describe the records that are being sought. (See also Rogers v. Superior Court, (1993) 19 Cal.App.4th 469, 481; holding that a request must be specific and focused.) In addition, there is no obligation to create a record for the purpose of responding to a request under the Public Records Act. (Gov. Code§ 6252 and 6253 (d).)
The Department of Neighborhood Empowerment only has custody and control of the records in its possession.
Butka Request:
"I would like to request a copy of the audio recording of the Historic Highland Park Land Use Committee meeting on Tuesday, July 28, 2020"
Department Response:
Please note that you may find a copy of the audio recording to the Highland Park Land Use Committee meeting for Tuesday, July 28, 2020 by visiting:
https://highlandparknc.com/land-use-committee/
Please direct all questions to [email protected]
Sincerely,
Administrative Services”
Holy moly, Batman! They are letting me know about a dirty little secret they don’t want anyone to figure out. Here is why their answer is one of those deliberate obfuscations that only a seasoned bureaucrat or a freaked-out lawyer would use.
They are saying that “The Department of Neighborhood Empowerment only has custody and control of the records in its possession.” The implication is that the 98 Neighborhood Councils may have a bunch of documents, videos or audios relating to their meetings, but DONE doesn’t want to know about any of them and they aren’t really records that are subject to the Public Records Act.
That is total bullshit. Do we really think that the 98 Neighborhood Councils went out and bought their own websites? Nyet. DONE is responsible for all the Neighborhood Council websites. Therefore, anything that resides on these websites, by definition, a “public record.”
And important records, I maintain. If there’s an audio or video of an NC meeting, it is relatively trivial to examine the audio, video, or document to resolve a dispute as to what action was or was not taken, and who voted how. Grievance resolved. Objectively provable answers.
Yet DONE, in effect, is saying that they are not responsible for any of this. More importantly, they are saying that “if” any such record exists, you and I have to go play ‘Mother May I?” with the individual Neighborhood Council, and the City Clerk and DONE have decided that all this information is not a public record.
So, on the one hand DONE is saying that they do not have “custody and control” of any such record. Even though the information is sitting on their servers. Now that is true chutzpah. For those old enough to remember, it’s like a really bad Marx Brothers skit.
Breaking News!
In one of those twists of fate, the issue I’ve described has just become front and center in how Neighborhood Councils transact their business. Courtesy of the President of the HHPNC, we have the following email sent out to their Land Use Committee:
“Stephanie Maynetto-Jackson <[email protected]>
To:Stephanie Maynetto-Jackson
Cc:John Darnell
Fri, Jul 31 at 11:42 AM
Good Morning Land Use Committee Members,
We received a CPRA (California Public Records Act) Request this morning and I would appreciate it if you could please start gathering all of the documents that you have in your possession in regards to the following:
"I would like to submit a CPRA (California Public Records Act) request to the HHPNC (Historic Highland Park Neighborhood Council) Land Use Committee for the period July 21, 2020-July 31, 2020 for the following information:
-All emails (including attachments) between all HHPNC Land Use Committee members that were to and from (to include CC’d and BCC’d) stakeholders, other HHPNC board members, city agencies, and interested parties regarding any official Land Use agenda items and potential future land use agenda items.
-All documents received through the USPS addressed to the Historic Highland Park Neighborhood Council regarding any official Land Use agenda items and potential future land use agenda items.”
If they are emails the best way to do this is save them as a PDF, please DO NOT forward emails to me send ONLY ONE email with all of these documents as a PDF.
Please submit these documents to me no later than Wednesday, August 5th, 2020 at 9:00am PST.
I couldn’t make this stuff up if I smoked dope and tried. First, you can’t tell who really made this request, and since it is essentially hidden, I wouldn’t be surprised if it was the President herself or a crony.
Anyhow, even the genius-types at DONE have never tried this kind of crap. Your and my private emails are NOT public records and have nothing to do with the servers or anything else under the control and direction of DONE.
Whoever sent this request is simply engaging in slimy hardball intimidation of people who have volunteered their time to help out their Neighborhood via the Neighborhood Council system. So let’s see who actually sent the email demand and out them to God and Country.
Finally, if the email I received from the LA City Clerk is, in fact, correct, none of this stuff is a public record in the first place. And now the distinction has serious implications. If the private emails of every Board member of every Neighborhood Council is subject to a Public Records Act request from whomever, they would be nuts not to quit and tell DONE and the City of Los Angeles to go to hell!
Hey DONE, where are you? Hey City Clerk, where are you? Hey LA City Attorney, where are you as well, other than in hiding?
Stay tuned. . .
(Tony Butka is an Eastside community activist, who has served on a neighborhood council, has a background in government and is a contributor to CityWatch.) Edited for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.
