Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
| Tracking # |
SOTF 19125 |
| Submitted | Sept. 13, 2019 |
| Due | Feb. 9, 2020 |
| Est. Completion | None |
This request was filed by twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester through MuckRock, a non-profit organization that helps journalists, researchers, and the public file, track, and share records requests. You may follow up directly with the requester by following the prompts below. Should this request be directed elsewhere? Have you already responded? Click Get Help above and let us know, or reach our team directly at info@muckrock.com . Frequently asked questions about MuckRock.
Upload documents and update the status of the request below, or choose an option to reach our team directly:
Communications
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
From: San Francisco Controller's Office
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
-
image002
From: San Francisco Controller's Office
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
From: San Francisco Controller's Office
To Whom it May Concern:
Thank you for your public records request. The Controller's Office has conducted a diligent search for any records responsive to your request that it possesses. Please see this link<http://sfcontroller.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Auditing/Fine%20Arts%20Museums%20Audit%20Report%20%2810.27.16%29_0.pdf> for an audit report from October 2016. The Controller's Office has previously provided the payment transaction records for both COFAM and FAMF and does not have any additional contractual/legal/MOU records re COFAM and/or FAMF. If such information exists, it would be at the departmental level or with the City Attorney. To submit a public records request with the Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco, please find the contact information here<https://www.famsf.org/about/board-of-trustees/meetings-and-agendas>; for the City Attorney, please email cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>.
This concludes your public records request.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D57AD5.71B29790]
From: requests@muckrock.com <requests@muckrock.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2019 5:33 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
September 26, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
[Image removed by sender.]
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
Thank you, however I do not believe you have completed these 2 requests:
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
Contrary to your prior concern, I do not need you to search all CCSF employees' records - I only need you to search those in your department. But remember, if your department or its employees "prepared, used, owned, or retained" a communication between some *other* City employee and COFAM or FAMF, you must still turn it over. For example if your employee has a forwarded email between a FAMSF employee and COFAM, you must disclose it.
I will also proceed against FAMSF and the City Attorney directly - however: that does not absolve your agency of its own responsibilities under the CPRA and Sunshine Ordinance.
Thanks,
Anonymous
From: San Francisco Controller's Office
Hi,
We are following up on your request for items 5 and 6. We are processing this item and we will have a response to you next week.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image001.png@01D585BC.FA816EB0]
From: requests@muckrock.com <requests@muckrock.com>
Sent: Friday, October 4, 2019 6:09 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
October 4, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you, however I do not believe you have completed these 2 requests:
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
Contrary to your prior concern, I do not need you to search all CCSF employees' records - I only need you to search those in your department. But remember, if your department or its employees "prepared, used, owned, or retained" a communication between some *other* City employee and COFAM or FAMF, you must still turn it over. For example if your employee has a forwarded email between a FAMSF employee and COFAM, you must disclose it.
I will also proceed against FAMSF and the City Attorney directly - however: that does not absolve your agency of its own responsibilities under the CPRA and Sunshine Ordinance.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Oct. 4, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
To Whom it May Concern:
Thank you for your public records request. The Controller's Office has conducted a diligent search for any records responsive to your request that it possesses. Please see this link<http://sfcontroller.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Auditing/Fine%20Arts%20Museums%20Audit%20Report%20%2810.27.16%29_0.pdf> for an audit report from October 2016. The Controller's Office has previously provided the payment transaction records for both COFAM and FAMF and does not have any additional contractual/legal/MOU records re COFAM and/or FAMF. If such information exists, it would be at the departmental level or with the City Attorney. To submit a public records request with the Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco, please find the contact information here<https://www.famsf.org/about/board-of-trustees/meetings-and-agendas>; for the City Attorney, please email cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org%3cmailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>>.
This concludes your public records request.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D57AD5.71B29790]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2019 5:33 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
September 26, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
[Image removed by sender.]
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
[http://email.requests.muckrock.com/o/eJwNyksOgyAQANDTlCWZQUbHBZtqz9Hw0xpBUtCev25fXjBEvYjZbum9BYOgBs1KfIxzXXCEjiyMo-2QA5HXaHHwC4ElsRkFOCIAAQITS5QzMahnT0PPr27m6aGhxu8V29lkvvxei9-lL1lU48tx1pJSrDccd2zLWn6y1PUPlyUrUA]
-
image001
From: San Francisco Controller's Office
Hi,
Our team is still processing your request. We appreciate your patience and we hope to complete your request shortly. We will circle back again soon to give an update / complete.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image001.png@01D58A80.23058930]
From: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2019 2:05 PM
To: requests@muckrock.com; CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hi,
We are following up on your request for items 5 and 6. We are processing this item and we will have a response to you next week.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image003.png@01D58A80.22F69510]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Sent: Friday, October 4, 2019 6:09 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
October 4, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you, however I do not believe you have completed these 2 requests:
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
Contrary to your prior concern, I do not need you to search all CCSF employees' records - I only need you to search those in your department. But remember, if your department or its employees "prepared, used, owned, or retained" a communication between some *other* City employee and COFAM or FAMF, you must still turn it over. For example if your employee has a forwarded email between a FAMSF employee and COFAM, you must disclose it.
I will also proceed against FAMSF and the City Attorney directly - however: that does not absolve your agency of its own responsibilities under the CPRA and Sunshine Ordinance.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Oct. 4, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
To Whom it May Concern:
Thank you for your public records request. The Controller's Office has conducted a diligent search for any records responsive to your request that it possesses. Please see this link<http://sfcontroller.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Auditing/Fine%20Arts%20Museums%20Audit%20Report%20%2810.27.16%29_0.pdf> for an audit report from October 2016. The Controller's Office has previously provided the payment transaction records for both COFAM and FAMF and does not have any additional contractual/legal/MOU records re COFAM and/or FAMF. If such information exists, it would be at the departmental level or with the City Attorney. To submit a public records request with the Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco, please find the contact information here<https://www.famsf.org/about/board-of-trustees/meetings-and-agendas>; for the City Attorney, please email cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org%3cmailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>>.
This concludes your public records request.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D57AD5.71B29790]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2019 5:33 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
September 26, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
[Image removed by sender.]
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
[http://email.requests.muckrock.com/o/eJwNyksOgyAQANDTlCWZQUbHBZtqz9Hw0xpBUtCev25fXjBEvYjZbum9BYOgBs1KfIxzXXCEjiyMo-2QA5HXaHHwC4ElsRkFOCIAAQITS5QzMahnT0PPr27m6aGhxu8V29lkvvxei9-lL1lU48tx1pJSrDccd2zLWn6y1PUPlyUrUA]
From: San Francisco Controller's Office
Hi,
We have completed items 5 & 6. We apologize for the delay. Please find the attachments. If you have any questions, please let us know.
This concludes your public records request. To expedite your future requests, please submit your request through our public records portal<https://sfcontroller.org/contact-us-3>.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image003.png@01D59FB5.0476A900]
From: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2019 2:05 PM
To: requests@muckrock.com; CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hi,
We are following up on your request for items 5 and 6. We are processing this item and we will have a response to you next week.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image004.png@01D59FA2.F5C0A8A0]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Sent: Friday, October 4, 2019 6:09 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
October 4, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you, however I do not believe you have completed these 2 requests:
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
Contrary to your prior concern, I do not need you to search all CCSF employees' records - I only need you to search those in your department. But remember, if your department or its employees "prepared, used, owned, or retained" a communication between some *other* City employee and COFAM or FAMF, you must still turn it over. For example if your employee has a forwarded email between a FAMSF employee and COFAM, you must disclose it.
I will also proceed against FAMSF and the City Attorney directly - however: that does not absolve your agency of its own responsibilities under the CPRA and Sunshine Ordinance.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Oct. 4, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
To Whom it May Concern:
Thank you for your public records request. The Controller's Office has conducted a diligent search for any records responsive to your request that it possesses. Please see this link<http://sfcontroller.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Auditing/Fine%20Arts%20Museums%20Audit%20Report%20%2810.27.16%29_0.pdf> for an audit report from October 2016. The Controller's Office has previously provided the payment transaction records for both COFAM and FAMF and does not have any additional contractual/legal/MOU records re COFAM and/or FAMF. If such information exists, it would be at the departmental level or with the City Attorney. To submit a public records request with the Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco, please find the contact information here<https://www.famsf.org/about/board-of-trustees/meetings-and-agendas>; for the City Attorney, please email cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org%3cmailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>>.
This concludes your public records request.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D57AD5.71B29790]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2019 5:33 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
September 26, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
[Image removed by sender.]
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
[http://email.requests.muckrock.com/o/eJwNyksOgyAQANDTlCWZQUbHBZtqz9Hw0xpBUtCev25fXjBEvYjZbum9BYOgBs1KfIxzXXCEjiyMo-2QA5HXaHHwC4ElsRkFOCIAAQITS5QzMahnT0PPr27m6aGhxu8V29lkvvxei9-lL1lU48tx1pJSrDccd2zLWn6y1PUPlyUrUA]
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
Thank you for your Nov 20 response to #5 and #6 of our Sept 13 records request.
A few issues:
- Which attachments did you provide or withhold? For example: 3 listed on pg 1, 7 on pg 2, 1 on pg 4, 1 on pg 5, 7 on pg 8, 1 on pg 10. The request specifically requested all attachments.
- There are dozens of redactions throughout your responses. You are required by law (SFAC 67.26) to provide a clear reference to a justification for each and every redaction or full document withheld, and (SFAC 67.27) you must use a statute or case law dictating exemption.
- You were requested to provide documents in specified electronic format. Why have you printed and scanned these documents, thus failing to provide an exact copy of the records? No legal justification has been provided.
I intend to appeal these issues and the timeliness of your response to SOTF, the Supervisor of Records and/or Superior Court.
Sincerely,
Anonymous
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
Supervisor of Records,
This is a new 67.21(d) petition regarding the Controller's Nov 20 response to (solely) parts #5 and #6 of our Sept 13 records request. Please determine in writing that some or all of the following records or some parts thereof are public (references are to Controller's responsive record collection "MuckRock_80368-97597279" which you may get from the Controller):
1. All attachments for the provided emails. For example: 3 listed on pg 1, 7 on pg 2, 1 on pg 4, 1 on pg 5, 7 on pg 8, 1 on pg 10. The request specifically requested all attachments.
2. Dozens of redactions throughout the responses. Since no clear reference (or any reference at all) to statutory or case law justifications were provided, I challenge all the redactions as unlawful, and all should be public parts of records.
3. Exact copies of the emails and their attachments. The Controller was requested to provide documents in specified electronic formats. They printed and scanned these documents, thus failing to provide an exact copy of the records, which are public records. No legal justification has been provided.
4. Any documents thus far fully withheld. We do not know if any documents were withheld or not, and no justifications were provided.
The original request is copied below. Parts 1-4 and 7-9 of the request are not being appealed in this petition, but we reserve the right to appeal them at another time.
Sincerely,
Anonymous
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
SOTF,
Please docket the new attached complaint and CC me on the response request to Respondents. Your intake form will be also transmitted.
Complainant: Anonymous (this email address).
Respondents: Controller Ben Rosenfield and the Office of the Controller
Violations: SFAC 67.21(b,c,k), 67.26, 67.27; CPRA Gov Code 6253(b,c)
Sincerely,
Aononn
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
SOTF,
Please docket the new attached complaint and CC me on the response request to Respondents. Your intake form will be also transmitted.
Complainant: Anonymous (this email address).
Respondents: Controller Ben Rosenfield and the Office of the Controller
Violations: SFAC 67.21(b,c,k), 67.26, 67.27; CPRA Gov Code 6253(b,c)
Sincerely,
Anonymous
From: San Francisco Controller's Office
Good Morning:
The Controller's Office has been named as a Respondent in the attached complaint filed with the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force. Please respond to the following complaint/request within five business days.
The Respondent is required to submit a written response to the allegations including any and all supporting documents, recordings, electronic media, etc., to the Task Force within five (5) business days of receipt of this notice. This is your opportunity to provide a full explanation to allow the Task Force to be fully informed in considering your response prior its meeting.
Please include the following information in your response if applicable:
1. List all relevant records with descriptions that have been provided pursuant to the Complainant request.
2. Date the relevant records were provided to the Complainant.
3. Description of the method used, along with any relevant search terms used, to search for the relevant records.
4. Statement/declaration that all relevant documents have been provided, does not exist, or has been excluded.
5. Copy of the original request for records (if applicable).
Please refer to the File Number when submitting any new information and/or supporting documents pertaining to this complaint.
The Complainant alleges:
Complaint Attached.
Cheryl Leger
Assistant Clerk, Board of Supervisors
Tel: 415-554-7724
<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=104> Click here<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=104> to complete a Board of Supervisors Customer Service Satisfaction form.
The Legislative Research Center<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=9681> provides 24-hour access to Board of Supervisors legislation, and archived matters since August 1998.
Disclosures: Personal information that is provided in communications to the Board of Supervisors is subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act and the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance. Personal information provided will not be redacted. Members of the public are not required to provide personal identifying information when they communicate with the Board of Supervisors and its committees. All written or oral communications that members of the public submit to the Clerk's Office regarding pending legislation or hearings will be made available to all members of the public for inspection and copying. The Clerk's Office does not redact any information from these submissions. This means that personal information-including names, phone numbers, addresses and similar information that a member of the public elects to submit to the Board and its committees-may appear on the Board of Supervisors website or in other public documents that members of the public may inspect or copy.
-
image001
From:
To Whom It May Concern:
We write to provide an update on the status of our consideration of your petitions. You have submitted eighteen separate petitions to the Supervisor of Records and numerous other follow up communications concerning prior petitions. We have already responded to twelve of your petitions.
Due to the volume of petitions and the complexity of the issues raised, we are continuing to invoke the rule of reason and will respond to your petitions within a reasonable time period with the goal of addressing each petition within 30 days of submission. We understand you disagree with this basis. As we recently explained in response to one of your complaints with the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force, we strive to respond to petitions within the 10-day period specified in Section 67.21(d), but we don't view it as an absolute deadline. Particularly here, where the issues raised are novel and you have submitted numerous petitions over a short time period, responding within 10 days is not feasible because doing so would unreasonably impinge on our ability to perform our other responsibilities.
Best,
Bradley Russi
Deputy City Attorney
Office of City Attorney Dennis Herrera
City Hall, Room 234
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Pl., San Francisco, CA 94102
www.sfcityattorney.org
From: requests@muckrock.com <requests@muckrock.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2019 8:58 PM
To: Supervisor Records <supervisor.records@SFCITYATTY.ORG>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
November 20, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Supervisor of Records,
This is a new 67.21(d) petition regarding the Controller's Nov 20 response to (solely) parts #5 and #6 of our Sept 13 records request. Please determine in writing that some or all of the following records or some parts thereof are public (references are to Controller's responsive record collection "MuckRock_80368-97597279" which you may get from the Controller):
1. All attachments for the provided emails. For example: 3 listed on pg 1, 7 on pg 2, 1 on pg 4, 1 on pg 5, 7 on pg 8, 1 on pg 10. The request specifically requested all attachments.
2. Dozens of redactions throughout the responses. Since no clear reference (or any reference at all) to statutory or case law justifications were provided, I challenge all the redactions as unlawful, and all should be public parts of records.
3. Exact copies of the emails and their attachments. The Controller was requested to provide documents in specified electronic formats. They printed and scanned these documents, thus failing to provide an exact copy of the records, which are public records. No legal justification has been provided.
4. Any documents thus far fully withheld. We do not know if any documents were withheld or not, and no justifications were provided.
The original request is copied below. Parts 1-4 and 7-9 of the request are not being appealed in this petition, but we reserve the right to appeal them at another time.
Sincerely,
Anonymous
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iXeXS%3AIzR9Yyak4lmZGqfzZabChb7-IM4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dsupervisor.records%252540sfcityatty.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Nov. 20, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
Thank you for your Nov 20 response to #5 and #6 of our Sept 13 records request.
A few issues:
- Which attachments did you provide or withhold? For example: 3 listed on pg 1, 7 on pg 2, 1 on pg 4, 1 on pg 5, 7 on pg 8, 1 on pg 10. The request specifically requested all attachments.
- There are dozens of redactions throughout your responses. You are required by law (SFAC 67.26) to provide a clear reference to a justification for each and every redaction or full document withheld, and (SFAC 67.27) you must use a statute or case law dictating exemption.
- You were requested to provide documents in specified electronic format. Why have you printed and scanned these documents, thus failing to provide an exact copy of the records? No legal justification has been provided.
I intend to appeal these issues and the timeliness of your response to SOTF, the Supervisor of Records and/or Superior Court.
Sincerely,
Anonymous
---
On Nov. 20, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hi,
We have completed items 5 & 6. We apologize for the delay. Please find the attachments. If you have any questions, please let us know.
This concludes your public records request. To expedite your future requests, please submit your request through our public records portal<https://sfcontroller.org/contact-us-3>.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image003.png@01D59FB5.0476A900]
From: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2019 2:05 PM
To: requests@muckrock.com; CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hi,
We are following up on your request for items 5 and 6. We are processing this item and we will have a response to you next week.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image004.png@01D59FA2.F5C0A8A0]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Sent: Friday, October 4, 2019 6:09 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
October 4, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you, however I do not believe you have completed these 2 requests:
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
Contrary to your prior concern, I do not need you to search all CCSF employees' records - I only need you to search those in your department. But remember, if your department or its employees "prepared, used, owned, or retained" a communication between some *other* City employee and COFAM or FAMF, you must still turn it over. For example if your employee has a forwarded email between a FAMSF employee and COFAM, you must disclose it.
I will also proceed against FAMSF and the City Attorney directly - however: that does not absolve your agency of its own responsibilities under the CPRA and Sunshine Ordinance.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Oct. 4, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
To Whom it May Concern:
Thank you for your public records request. The Controller's Office has conducted a diligent search for any records responsive to your request that it possesses. Please see this link<http://sfcontroller.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Auditing/Fine%20Arts%20Museums%20Audit%20Report%20%2810.27.16%29_0.pdf> for an audit report from October 2016. The Controller's Office has previously provided the payment transaction records for both COFAM and FAMF and does not have any additional contractual/legal/MOU records re COFAM and/or FAMF. If such information exists, it would be at the departmental level or with the City Attorney. To submit a public records request with the Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco, please find the contact information here<https://www.famsf.org/about/board-of-trustees/meetings-and-agendas>; for the City Attorney, please email cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org%3cmailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>>.
This concludes your public records request.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D57AD5.71B29790]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2019 5:33 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
September 26, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
[Image removed by sender.]
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
[http://email.requests.muckrock.com/o/eJwNyksOgyAQANDTlCWZQUbHBZtqz9Hw0xpBUtCev25fXjBEvYjZbum9BYOgBs1KfIxzXXCEjiyMo-2QA5HXaHHwC4ElsRkFOCIAAQITS5QzMahnT0PPr27m6aGhxu8V29lkvvxei9-lL1lU48tx1pJSrDccd2zLWn6y1PUPlyUrUA]
---
On Oct. 24, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hi,
Our team is still processing your request. We appreciate your patience and we hope to complete your request shortly. We will circle back again soon to give an update / complete.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image001.png@01D58A80.23058930]
From: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2019 2:05 PM
To: requests@muckrock.com; CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hi,
We are following up on your request for items 5 and 6. We are processing this item and we will have a response to you next week.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image003.png@01D58A80.22F69510]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Sent: Friday, October 4, 2019 6:09 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
October 4, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you, however I do not believe you have completed these 2 requests:
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
Contrary to your prior concern, I do not need you to search all CCSF employees' records - I only need you to search those in your department. But remember, if your department or its employees "prepared, used, owned, or retained" a communication between some *other* City employee and COFAM or FAMF, you must still turn it over. For example if your employee has a forwarded email between a FAMSF employee and COFAM, you must disclose it.
I will also proceed against FAMSF and the City Attorney directly - however: that does not absolve your agency of its own responsibilities under the CPRA and Sunshine Ordinance.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Oct. 4, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
To Whom it May Concern:
Thank you for your public records request. The Controller's Office has conducted a diligent search for any records responsive to your request that it possesses. Please see this link<http://sfcontroller.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Auditing/Fine%20Arts%20Museums%20Audit%20Report%20%2810.27.16%29_0.pdf> for an audit report from October 2016. The Controller's Office has previously provided the payment transaction records for both COFAM and FAMF and does not have any additional contractual/legal/MOU records re COFAM and/or FAMF. If such information exists, it would be at the departmental level or with the City Attorney. To submit a public records request with the Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco, please find the contact information here<https://www.famsf.org/about/board-of-trustees/meetings-and-agendas>; for the City Attorney, please email cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org%3cmailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>>.
This concludes your public records request.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D57AD5.71B29790]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2019 5:33 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
September 26, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
[Image removed by sender.]
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
[http://email.requests.muckrock.com/o/eJwNyksOgyAQANDTlCWZQUbHBZtqz9Hw0xpBUtCev25fXjBEvYjZbum9BYOgBs1KfIxzXXCEjiyMo-2QA5HXaHHwC4ElsRkFOCIAAQITS5QzMahnT0PPr27m6aGhxu8V29lkvvxei9-lL1lU48tx1pJSrDccd2zLWn6y1PUPlyUrUA]
---
On Oct. 18, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hi,
We are following up on your request for items 5 and 6. We are processing this item and we will have a response to you next week.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image001.png@01D585BC.FA816EB0]
From: requests@muckrock.com <requests@muckrock.com>
Sent: Friday, October 4, 2019 6:09 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
October 4, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you, however I do not believe you have completed these 2 requests:
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
Contrary to your prior concern, I do not need you to search all CCSF employees' records - I only need you to search those in your department. But remember, if your department or its employees "prepared, used, owned, or retained" a communication between some *other* City employee and COFAM or FAMF, you must still turn it over. For example if your employee has a forwarded email between a FAMSF employee and COFAM, you must disclose it.
I will also proceed against FAMSF and the City Attorney directly - however: that does not absolve your agency of its own responsibilities under the CPRA and Sunshine Ordinance.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Oct. 4, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
To Whom it May Concern:
Thank you for your public records request. The Controller's Office has conducted a diligent search for any records responsive to your request that it possesses. Please see this link<http://sfcontroller.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Auditing/Fine%20Arts%20Museums%20Audit%20Report%20%2810.27.16%29_0.pdf> for an audit report from October 2016. The Controller's Office has previously provided the payment transaction records for both COFAM and FAMF and does not have any additional contractual/legal/MOU records re COFAM and/or FAMF. If such information exists, it would be at the departmental level or with the City Attorney. To submit a public records request with the Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco, please find the contact information here<https://www.famsf.org/about/board-of-trustees/meetings-and-agendas>; for the City Attorney, please email cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org%3cmailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>>.
This concludes your public records request.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D57AD5.71B29790]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2019 5:33 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
September 26, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
-
~WRD377
From: San Francisco Controller's Office
Dear Anonymous: I received this email this morning.
Cheryl Leger
Assistant Clerk, Board of Supervisors
Tel: 415-554-7724
[CustomerSatisfactionIcon]<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=104> Click here<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=104> to complete a Board of Supervisors Customer Service Satisfaction form.
The Legislative Research Center<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=9681> provides 24-hour access to Board of Supervisors legislation, and archived matters since August 1998.
Disclosures: Personal information that is provided in communications to the Board of Supervisors is subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act and the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance. Personal information provided will not be redacted. Members of the public are not required to provide personal identifying information when they communicate with the Board of Supervisors and its committees. All written or oral communications that members of the public submit to the Clerk's Office regarding pending legislation or hearings will be made available to all members of the public for inspection and copying. The Clerk's Office does not redact any information from these submissions. This means that personal information-including names, phone numbers, addresses and similar information that a member of the public elects to submit to the Board and its committees-may appear on the Board of Supervisors website or in other public documents that members of the public may inspect or copy.
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
** File 19125 **
Thanks Ms. Leger! Sadly it appears the Controller's office has not responded to the allegations. I will follow up with them directly as well.
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
RE: SOTF 19125
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
Deputy Controller Rydstrom,
Earlier today I received your response to SOTF Complaint 19125. Thank you.
However, it appears your response does not actually deny most of my allegations. My understanding is that if you do not deny my allegations, I will win by default. While I am happy to win, I would also like to understand why the City does not follow all the Sunshine rules as written.
You do not appear to deny or even discuss allegations #1, 3, or 4 of my complaint.
It appears you dispute the 2nd paragraph of allegation #2, but there is no response to para #1 of allegation #2.
Thanks,
Anonymous
From: San Francisco Controller's Office
Anonymous: Please make certain that you keep me in the loop. I may need the information when the time comes for an appearance.
Cheryl Leger
(415) 554-7724
From: requests@muckrock.com <requests@muckrock.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 9:40 AM
To: SOTF, (BOS) <sotf@sfgov.org>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
December 3, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
** File 19125 **
Thanks Ms. Leger! Sadly it appears the Controller's office has not responded to the allegations. I will follow up with them directly as well.
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1icC9T%3ABVvEAIm65vehFcg9oE26GCAyDOw&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dsotf%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Dec. 3, 2019:
Subject: FW: SOTF - Complaint Filed with the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force - File No. 19125
Dear Anonymous: I received this email this morning.
Cheryl Leger
Assistant Clerk, Board of Supervisors
Tel: 415-554-7724
[CustomerSatisfactionIcon]<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=104> Click here<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=104> to complete a Board of Supervisors Customer Service Satisfaction form.
The Legislative Research Center<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=9681> provides 24-hour access to Board of Supervisors legislation, and archived matters since August 1998.
Disclosures: Personal information that is provided in communications to the Board of Supervisors is subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act and the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance. Personal information provided will not be redacted. Members of the public are not required to provide personal identifying information when they communicate with the Board of Supervisors and its committees. All written or oral communications that members of the public submit to the Clerk's Office regarding pending legislation or hearings will be made available to all members of the public for inspection and copying. The Clerk's Office does not redact any information from these submissions. This means that personal information-including names, phone numbers, addresses and similar information that a member of the public elects to submit to the Board and its committees-may appear on the Board of Supervisors website or in other public documents that members of the public may inspect or copy.
---
On Dec. 2, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
To Whom It May Concern:
We write to provide an update on the status of our consideration of your petitions. You have submitted eighteen separate petitions to the Supervisor of Records and numerous other follow up communications concerning prior petitions. We have already responded to twelve of your petitions.
Due to the volume of petitions and the complexity of the issues raised, we are continuing to invoke the rule of reason and will respond to your petitions within a reasonable time period with the goal of addressing each petition within 30 days of submission. We understand you disagree with this basis. As we recently explained in response to one of your complaints with the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force, we strive to respond to petitions within the 10-day period specified in Section 67.21(d), but we don't view it as an absolute deadline. Particularly here, where the issues raised are novel and you have submitted numerous petitions over a short time period, responding within 10 days is not feasible because doing so would unreasonably impinge on our ability to perform our other responsibilities.
Best,
Bradley Russi
Deputy City Attorney
Office of City Attorney Dennis Herrera
City Hall, Room 234
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Pl., San Francisco, CA 94102
www.sfcityattorney.org
From: requests@muckrock.com <requests@muckrock.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2019 8:58 PM
To: Supervisor Records <supervisor.records@SFCITYATTY.ORG>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
November 20, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Supervisor of Records,
This is a new 67.21(d) petition regarding the Controller's Nov 20 response to (solely) parts #5 and #6 of our Sept 13 records request. Please determine in writing that some or all of the following records or some parts thereof are public (references are to Controller's responsive record collection "MuckRock_80368-97597279" which you may get from the Controller):
1. All attachments for the provided emails. For example: 3 listed on pg 1, 7 on pg 2, 1 on pg 4, 1 on pg 5, 7 on pg 8, 1 on pg 10. The request specifically requested all attachments.
2. Dozens of redactions throughout the responses. Since no clear reference (or any reference at all) to statutory or case law justifications were provided, I challenge all the redactions as unlawful, and all should be public parts of records.
3. Exact copies of the emails and their attachments. The Controller was requested to provide documents in specified electronic formats. They printed and scanned these documents, thus failing to provide an exact copy of the records, which are public records. No legal justification has been provided.
4. Any documents thus far fully withheld. We do not know if any documents were withheld or not, and no justifications were provided.
The original request is copied below. Parts 1-4 and 7-9 of the request are not being appealed in this petition, but we reserve the right to appeal them at another time.
Sincerely,
Anonymous
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iXeXS%3AIzR9Yyak4lmZGqfzZabChb7-IM4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dsupervisor.records%252540sfcityatty.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Nov. 20, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
Thank you for your Nov 20 response to #5 and #6 of our Sept 13 records request.
A few issues:
- Which attachments did you provide or withhold? For example: 3 listed on pg 1, 7 on pg 2, 1 on pg 4, 1 on pg 5, 7 on pg 8, 1 on pg 10. The request specifically requested all attachments.
- There are dozens of redactions throughout your responses. You are required by law (SFAC 67.26) to provide a clear reference to a justification for each and every redaction or full document withheld, and (SFAC 67.27) you must use a statute or case law dictating exemption.
- You were requested to provide documents in specified electronic format. Why have you printed and scanned these documents, thus failing to provide an exact copy of the records? No legal justification has been provided.
I intend to appeal these issues and the timeliness of your response to SOTF, the Supervisor of Records and/or Superior Court.
Sincerely,
Anonymous
---
On Nov. 20, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hi,
We have completed items 5 & 6. We apologize for the delay. Please find the attachments. If you have any questions, please let us know.
This concludes your public records request. To expedite your future requests, please submit your request through our public records portal<https://sfcontroller.org/contact-us-3>.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image003.png@01D59FB5.0476A900]
From: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2019 2:05 PM
To: requests@muckrock.com; CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hi,
We are following up on your request for items 5 and 6. We are processing this item and we will have a response to you next week.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image004.png@01D59FA2.F5C0A8A0]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Sent: Friday, October 4, 2019 6:09 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
October 4, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you, however I do not believe you have completed these 2 requests:
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
Contrary to your prior concern, I do not need you to search all CCSF employees' records - I only need you to search those in your department. But remember, if your department or its employees "prepared, used, owned, or retained" a communication between some *other* City employee and COFAM or FAMF, you must still turn it over. For example if your employee has a forwarded email between a FAMSF employee and COFAM, you must disclose it.
I will also proceed against FAMSF and the City Attorney directly - however: that does not absolve your agency of its own responsibilities under the CPRA and Sunshine Ordinance.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Oct. 4, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
To Whom it May Concern:
Thank you for your public records request. The Controller's Office has conducted a diligent search for any records responsive to your request that it possesses. Please see this link<http://sfcontroller.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Auditing/Fine%20Arts%20Museums%20Audit%20Report%20%2810.27.16%29_0.pdf> for an audit report from October 2016. The Controller's Office has previously provided the payment transaction records for both COFAM and FAMF and does not have any additional contractual/legal/MOU records re COFAM and/or FAMF. If such information exists, it would be at the departmental level or with the City Attorney. To submit a public records request with the Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco, please find the contact information here<https://www.famsf.org/about/board-of-trustees/meetings-and-agendas>; for the City Attorney, please email cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org%3cmailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>>.
This concludes your public records request.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D57AD5.71B29790]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2019 5:33 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
September 26, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
[Image removed by sender.]
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
[http://email.requests.muckrock.com/o/eJwNyksOgyAQANDTlCWZQUbHBZtqz9Hw0xpBUtCev25fXjBEvYjZbum9BYOgBs1KfIxzXXCEjiyMo-2QA5HXaHHwC4ElsRkFOCIAAQITS5QzMahnT0PPr27m6aGhxu8V29lkvvxei9-lL1lU48tx1pJSrDccd2zLWn6y1PUPlyUrUA]
---
On Oct. 24, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hi,
Our team is still processing your request. We appreciate your patience and we hope to complete your request shortly. We will circle back again soon to give an update / complete.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image001.png@01D58A80.23058930]
From: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2019 2:05 PM
To: requests@muckrock.com; CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hi,
We are following up on your request for items 5 and 6. We are processing this item and we will have a response to you next week.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image003.png@01D58A80.22F69510]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Sent: Friday, October 4, 2019 6:09 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
October 4, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you, however I do not believe you have completed these 2 requests:
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
Contrary to your prior concern, I do not need you to search all CCSF employees' records - I only need you to search those in your department. But remember, if your department or its employees "prepared, used, owned, or retained" a communication between some *other* City employee and COFAM or FAMF, you must still turn it over. For example if your employee has a forwarded email between a FAMSF employee and COFAM, you must disclose it.
I will also proceed against FAMSF and the City Attorney directly - however: that does not absolve your agency of its own responsibilities under the CPRA and Sunshine Ordinance.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Oct. 4, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
To Whom it May Concern:
Thank you for your public records request. The Controller's Office has conducted a diligent search for any records responsive to your request that it possesses. Please see this link<http://sfcontroller.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Auditing/Fine%20Arts%20Museums%20Audit%20Report%20%2810.27.16%29_0.pdf> for an audit report from October 2016. The Controller's Office has previously provided the payment transaction records for both COFAM and FAMF and does not have any additional contractual/legal/MOU records re COFAM and/or FAMF. If such information exists, it would be at the departmental level or with the City Attorney. To submit a public records request with the Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco, please find the contact information here<https://www.famsf.org/about/board-of-trustees/meetings-and-agendas>; for the City Attorney, please email cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org%3cmailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>>.
This concludes your public records request.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D57AD5.71B29790]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2019 5:33 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
September 26, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
[Image removed by sender.]
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
[http://email.requests.muckrock.com/o/eJwNyksOgyAQANDTlCWZQUbHBZtqz9Hw0xpBUtCev25fXjBEvYjZbum9BYOgBs1KfIxzXXCEjiyMo-2QA5HXaHHwC4ElsRkFOCIAAQITS5QzMahnT0PPr27m6aGhxu8V29lkvvxei9-lL1lU48tx1pJSrDccd2zLWn6y1PUPlyUrUA]
---
On Oct. 18, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hi,
We are following up on your request for items 5 and 6. We are processing this item and we will have a response to you next week.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image001.png@01D585BC.FA816EB0]
From: requests@muckrock.com <requests@muckrock.com>
Sent: Friday, October 4, 2019 6:09 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
October 4, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you, however I do not believe you have completed these 2 requests:
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
Contrary to your prior concern, I do not need you to search all CCSF employees' records - I only need you to search those in your department. But remember, if your department or its employees "prepared, used, owned, or retained" a communication between some *other* City employee and COFAM or FAMF, you must still turn it over. For example if your employee has a forwarded email between a FAMSF employee and COFAM, you must disclose it.
I will also proceed against FAMSF and the City Attorney directly - however: that does not absolve your agency of its own responsibilities under the CPRA and Sunshine Ordinance.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Oct. 4, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
To Whom it May Concern:
Thank you for your public records request. The Controller's Office has conducted a diligent search for any records responsive to your request that it possesses. Please see this link<http://sfcontroller.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Auditing/Fine%20Arts%20Museums%20Audit%20Report%20%2810.27.16%29_0.pdf> for an audit report from October 2016. The Controller's Office has previously provided the payment transaction records for both COFAM and FAMF and does not have any additional contractual/legal/MOU records re COFAM and/or FAMF. If such information exists, it would be at the departmental level or with the City Attorney. To submit a public records request with the Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco, please find the contact information here<https://www.famsf.org/about/board-of-trustees/meetings-and-agendas>; for the City Attorney, please email cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org%3cmailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>>.
This concludes your public records request.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D57AD5.71B29790]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2019 5:33 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
September 26, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
-
~WRD000
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
*** for inclusion in FILE 19125 ***
Sure thing Ms. Leger. Attached is the follow-up I sent the Deputy Controller just now.
Since they do not deny allegations 1, 3, and 4 of my complaint at all, I expect I should win on those by default.
What I don't want is them to act surprised when this comes to a hearing, and then delay/continue the case.
Thanks,
Anonymous
From: San Francisco Controller's Office
Good Morning:
Notice is hereby given that the Complaint Committee (Committee) of the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force shall hold hearings on complaints listed below to determine if the Task Force has jurisdiction pursuant to Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.21(e). A hearing to review the merits of the complaint will be scheduled on a future date. The Complaint Committee (Committee) shall review File No(s). 19097, 19109, 19110, 19117, 19118, 19119, 19120, 19121, 19122, 19123, 19124, 19125, 19126 and 19127. The Complainant and Respondent are NOT REQUIRED to attend the December 17, 2019, Complaint Committee meeting but may attend to provide testimony related to the above listed determinations. A hearing to review the merits of the complaint will be scheduled on a future date.
Date: December 17, 2019
Location: City Hall, Room 408
Time: 5:30 p.m.
File No. 19097: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Public Works for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, 67.26 and 67.27, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19109: Complaint filed by Stephen Malloy against Dept. of Public Health for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.24, 67.25, 67.26 and 67.27 by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19110: Complaint filed by Stephen Malloy against the Fire Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.24, 67.25, 67.26 and 67.27 by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19119: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Department of Technology for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b), 67.26 and 67.27 by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19120: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Office of the City Attorney for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b)(c), 67.26, 67.27, by failing to respond to a request for public records in a timely and/or complete manner; failing to justify withholding of records and failing to provide assistance.
File No. 19121: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Police Commission for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b)(k), 67.26 and 67.27, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner; withholding more than the minimum and failing to justify withholding.
File No. 19122: Complaint filed by Anonymous against City Librarian Michael Lambert and the Public Library for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.25, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19123: Complaint filed by Paul Kniha against the San Francisco Municipal Executive Association for allegedly violating Administrative Code, (Sunshine Ordinance) Sections 67.21 by failing to respond to a public records in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19124: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Chief William Scott and Lt. R. Andrew Cox and the Police Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, 67.25, 67.26, 67.27, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner, failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner, failing to justify withholding of records and failing to maintain a Proposition G calendar.
File No. 19125: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Controller's Office for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b)(c)(k), 67.26, 67.27, by failing to respond to a request for records in a timely and/or complete manner, failing to assist, withheld more than the minimally exempt portion of a public record, failing to justify withholdings with clear reference to exemption statute or case law and failing to provide an exact copy of records.
File No. 19127: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Department of Police Accountability for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, 67.25, 67.26, 67.27, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request for records in a timely and/or complete manner, failing to assist, withheld more than the minimally exempt portion of a public record, failing to justify withholdings with clear reference to exemption statute or case law and failing to provide an exact copy of records.
Cheryl Leger
Assistant Clerk, Board of Supervisors
Tel: 415-554-7724
<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=104> Click here<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=104> to complete a Board of Supervisors Customer Service Satisfaction form.
The Legislative Research Center<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=9681> provides 24-hour access to Board of Supervisors legislation, and archived matters since August 1998.
Disclosures: Personal information that is provided in communications to the Board of Supervisors is subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act and the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance. Personal information provided will not be redacted. Members of the public are not required to provide personal identifying information when they communicate with the Board of Supervisors and its committees. All written or oral communications that members of the public submit to the Clerk's Office regarding pending legislation or hearings will be made available to all members of the public for inspection and copying. The Clerk's Office does not redact any information from these submissions. This means that personal information-including names, phone numbers, addresses and similar information that a member of the public elects to submit to the Board and its committees-may appear on the Board of Supervisors website or in other public documents that members of the public may inspect or copy.
-
image001_2tMcdME_tbTxvrA_cqgpz9z_cq4sW9f
From: San Francisco Controller's Office
Good Morning:
Notice is hereby given that the Complaint Committee (Committee) of the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force shall hold hearings on complaints listed below to determine if the Task Force has jurisdiction pursuant to Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.21(e). A hearing to review the merits of the complaint will be scheduled on a future date. The Complaint Committee (Committee) shall review File No(s). 19097, 19109, 19110, 19117, 19118, 19119, 19120, 19121, 19122, 19123, 19124, 19125, 19126 and 19127. The Complainant and Respondent are NOT REQUIRED to attend the December 17, 2019, Complaint Committee meeting but may attend to provide testimony related to the above listed determinations. A hearing to review the merits of the complaint will be scheduled on a future date.
Date: December 17, 2019
Location: City Hall, Room 408
Time: 5:30 p.m.
File No. 19097: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Public Works for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, 67.26 and 67.27, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19109: Complaint filed by Stephen Malloy against Dept. of Public Health for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.24, 67.25, 67.26 and 67.27 by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19110: Complaint filed by Stephen Malloy against the Fire Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.24, 67.25, 67.26 and 67.27 by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19119: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Department of Technology for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b), 67.26 and 67.27 by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19120: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Office of the City Attorney for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b)(c), 67.26, 67.27, by failing to respond to a request for public records in a timely and/or complete manner; failing to justify withholding of records and failing to provide assistance.
File No. 19121: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Police Commission for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b)(k), 67.26 and 67.27, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner; withholding more than the minimum and failing to justify withholding.
File No. 19122: Complaint filed by Anonymous against City Librarian Michael Lambert and the Public Library for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.25, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19123: Complaint filed by Paul Kniha against the San Francisco Municipal Executive Association for allegedly violating Administrative Code, (Sunshine Ordinance) Sections 67.21 by failing to respond to a public records in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19124: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Chief William Scott and Lt. R. Andrew Cox and the Police Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, 67.25, 67.26, 67.27, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner, failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner, failing to justify withholding of records and failing to maintain a Proposition G calendar.
File No. 19125: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Controller's Office for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b)(c)(k), 67.26, 67.27, by failing to respond to a request for records in a timely and/or complete manner, failing to assist, withheld more than the minimally exempt portion of a public record, failing to justify withholdings with clear reference to exemption statute or case law and failing to provide an exact copy of records.
File No. 19127: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Department of Police Accountability for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, 67.25, 67.26, 67.27, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request for records in a timely and/or complete manner, failing to assist, withheld more than the minimally exempt portion of a public record, failing to justify withholdings with clear reference to exemption statute or case law and failing to provide an exact copy of records.
Cheryl Leger
Assistant Clerk, Board of Supervisors
Tel: 415-554-7724
<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=104> Click here<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=104> to complete a Board of Supervisors Customer Service Satisfaction form.
The Legislative Research Center<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=9681> provides 24-hour access to Board of Supervisors legislation, and archived matters since August 1998.
Disclosures: Personal information that is provided in communications to the Board of Supervisors is subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act and the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance. Personal information provided will not be redacted. Members of the public are not required to provide personal identifying information when they communicate with the Board of Supervisors and its committees. All written or oral communications that members of the public submit to the Clerk's Office regarding pending legislation or hearings will be made available to all members of the public for inspection and copying. The Clerk's Office does not redact any information from these submissions. This means that personal information-including names, phone numbers, addresses and similar information that a member of the public elects to submit to the Board and its committees-may appear on the Board of Supervisors website or in other public documents that members of the public may inspect or copy.
-
image001_CK1zY5D_LdBJrw8_IHDY4Nf_LpybLXU
From: San Francisco Controller's Office
Hello Anonymous:
We have received your questions which are listed here:
1. Which attachments did you provide or withhold? For example: 3 listed on pg 1, 7 on pg 2, 1 on pg 4, 1 on pg 5, 7 on pg 8, 1 on pg 10. The request specifically requested all attachments.
2. There are dozens of redactions throughout your responses. You are required by law (SFAC 67.26) to provide a clear reference to a justification for each and every redaction or full document withheld, and (SFAC 67.27) you must use a statute or case law dictating exemption.
3. You were requested to provide documents in specified electronic format. Why have you printed and scanned these documents, thus failing to provide an exact copy of the records? No legal justification has been provided.
Thank you for the feedback on your request. Here is our response:
1) We provided all responsive emails to you. We also provided the documents that were attached to the provided emails. Some attachments were listed multiple times throughout the emails, but were the same documents so duplicate versions of the identical attachments were not provided. This might explain your confusion when you write: "3 listed on pg 1, 7 on pg 2, 1 on pg 4, 1 on pg 5, 7 on pg. 8." For example, the 7 attachments listed on page two are the same attachments listed on page 8. To make this easier to understand we are including a matrix of the attachments under item #2. In our review of all the emails and attachments, we did discover two missing spreadsheets. They are attached and are entitled: FY19 Cash-Receipts Collection Point Survey_FA and Cash Receipts Procedures - Admissions (review).
2) The timeline of your request corresponded with a Cash Handling Audit, conducted by the Controller's Office Audit Division. The redactions made to the documents related to Cash Handling were made to maintain the security of the cash handling procedures at FAMSF's locations. See the matrix below for the legal justifications for the redactions.
[cid:image001.png@01D5B1BB.3E2E2570]
3) The PDF of the documents are the original and are unmodified beyond the redactions. These records are being produced in a PDF format and the requested metadata is being withheld to protect the integrity and security of the original record and to avoid the unwarranted disclosure of data that could pose a risk to the city's systems and network and/or the inadvertent disclosure of exempt confidential or privileged information. See Cal. Gov. Code 6253.9 (a)(1), (f) and 6254.19.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5B1BB.3E2E2570]
From: requests@muckrock.com <requests@muckrock.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 9:49 AM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
December 3, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
RE: SOTF 19125
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
Deputy Controller Rydstrom,
Earlier today I received your response to SOTF Complaint 19125. Thank you.
However, it appears your response does not actually deny most of my allegations. My understanding is that if you do not deny my allegations, I will win by default. While I am happy to win, I would also like to understand why the City does not follow all the Sunshine rules as written.
You do not appear to deny or even discuss allegations #1, 3, or 4 of my complaint.
It appears you dispute the 2nd paragraph of allegation #2, but there is no response to para #1 of allegation #2.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1icCIN%3ADC4O2keadi9JMwOnyzo9bygm554&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Dec. 3, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
** File 19125 **
Thanks Ms. Leger! Sadly it appears the Controller's office has not responded to the allegations. I will follow up with them directly as well.
---
On Dec. 3, 2019:
Subject: FW: SOTF - Complaint Filed with the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force - File No. 19125
Dear Anonymous: I received this email this morning.
Cheryl Leger
Assistant Clerk, Board of Supervisors
Tel: 415-554-7724
[CustomerSatisfactionIcon]<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=104> Click here<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=104> to complete a Board of Supervisors Customer Service Satisfaction form.
The Legislative Research Center<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=9681> provides 24-hour access to Board of Supervisors legislation, and archived matters since August 1998.
Disclosures: Personal information that is provided in communications to the Board of Supervisors is subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act and the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance. Personal information provided will not be redacted. Members of the public are not required to provide personal identifying information when they communicate with the Board of Supervisors and its committees. All written or oral communications that members of the public submit to the Clerk's Office regarding pending legislation or hearings will be made available to all members of the public for inspection and copying. The Clerk's Office does not redact any information from these submissions. This means that personal information-including names, phone numbers, addresses and similar information that a member of the public elects to submit to the Board and its committees-may appear on the Board of Supervisors website or in other public documents that members of the public may inspect or copy.
---
On Dec. 2, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
To Whom It May Concern:
We write to provide an update on the status of our consideration of your petitions. You have submitted eighteen separate petitions to the Supervisor of Records and numerous other follow up communications concerning prior petitions. We have already responded to twelve of your petitions.
Due to the volume of petitions and the complexity of the issues raised, we are continuing to invoke the rule of reason and will respond to your petitions within a reasonable time period with the goal of addressing each petition within 30 days of submission. We understand you disagree with this basis. As we recently explained in response to one of your complaints with the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force, we strive to respond to petitions within the 10-day period specified in Section 67.21(d), but we don't view it as an absolute deadline. Particularly here, where the issues raised are novel and you have submitted numerous petitions over a short time period, responding within 10 days is not feasible because doing so would unreasonably impinge on our ability to perform our other responsibilities.
Best,
Bradley Russi
Deputy City Attorney
Office of City Attorney Dennis Herrera
City Hall, Room 234
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Pl., San Francisco, CA 94102
www.sfcityattorney.org<http://www.sfcityattorney.org>
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2019 8:58 PM
To: Supervisor Records <supervisor.records@SFCITYATTY.ORG<mailto:supervisor.records@SFCITYATTY.ORG>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
November 20, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Supervisor of Records,
This is a new 67.21(d) petition regarding the Controller's Nov 20 response to (solely) parts #5 and #6 of our Sept 13 records request. Please determine in writing that some or all of the following records or some parts thereof are public (references are to Controller's responsive record collection "MuckRock_80368-97597279" which you may get from the Controller):
1. All attachments for the provided emails. For example: 3 listed on pg 1, 7 on pg 2, 1 on pg 4, 1 on pg 5, 7 on pg 8, 1 on pg 10. The request specifically requested all attachments.
2. Dozens of redactions throughout the responses. Since no clear reference (or any reference at all) to statutory or case law justifications were provided, I challenge all the redactions as unlawful, and all should be public parts of records.
3. Exact copies of the emails and their attachments. The Controller was requested to provide documents in specified electronic formats. They printed and scanned these documents, thus failing to provide an exact copy of the records, which are public records. No legal justification has been provided.
4. Any documents thus far fully withheld. We do not know if any documents were withheld or not, and no justifications were provided.
The original request is copied below. Parts 1-4 and 7-9 of the request are not being appealed in this petition, but we reserve the right to appeal them at another time.
Sincerely,
Anonymous
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iXeXS%3AIzR9Yyak4lmZGqfzZabChb7-IM4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dsupervisor.records%252540sfcityatty.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Nov. 20, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
Thank you for your Nov 20 response to #5 and #6 of our Sept 13 records request.
A few issues:
- Which attachments did you provide or withhold? For example: 3 listed on pg 1, 7 on pg 2, 1 on pg 4, 1 on pg 5, 7 on pg 8, 1 on pg 10. The request specifically requested all attachments.
- There are dozens of redactions throughout your responses. You are required by law (SFAC 67.26) to provide a clear reference to a justification for each and every redaction or full document withheld, and (SFAC 67.27) you must use a statute or case law dictating exemption.
- You were requested to provide documents in specified electronic format. Why have you printed and scanned these documents, thus failing to provide an exact copy of the records? No legal justification has been provided.
I intend to appeal these issues and the timeliness of your response to SOTF, the Supervisor of Records and/or Superior Court.
Sincerely,
Anonymous
---
On Nov. 20, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hi,
We have completed items 5 & 6. We apologize for the delay. Please find the attachments. If you have any questions, please let us know.
This concludes your public records request. To expedite your future requests, please submit your request through our public records portal<https://sfcontroller.org/contact-us-3>.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image003.png@01D59FB5.0476A900]
From: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2019 2:05 PM
To: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>; CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hi,
We are following up on your request for items 5 and 6. We are processing this item and we will have a response to you next week.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image004.png@01D59FA2.F5C0A8A0]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com%3cmailto:requests@muckrock.com>> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com%3cmailto:requests@muckrock.com>>>
Sent: Friday, October 4, 2019 6:09 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org%3cmailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org%3cmailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
October 4, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you, however I do not believe you have completed these 2 requests:
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
Contrary to your prior concern, I do not need you to search all CCSF employees' records - I only need you to search those in your department. But remember, if your department or its employees "prepared, used, owned, or retained" a communication between some *other* City employee and COFAM or FAMF, you must still turn it over. For example if your employee has a forwarded email between a FAMSF employee and COFAM, you must disclose it.
I will also proceed against FAMSF and the City Attorney directly - however: that does not absolve your agency of its own responsibilities under the CPRA and Sunshine Ordinance.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com%3cmailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Oct. 4, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
To Whom it May Concern:
Thank you for your public records request. The Controller's Office has conducted a diligent search for any records responsive to your request that it possesses. Please see this link<http://sfcontroller.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Auditing/Fine%20Arts%20Museums%20Audit%20Report%20%2810.27.16%29_0.pdf> for an audit report from October 2016. The Controller's Office has previously provided the payment transaction records for both COFAM and FAMF and does not have any additional contractual/legal/MOU records re COFAM and/or FAMF. If such information exists, it would be at the departmental level or with the City Attorney. To submit a public records request with the Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco, please find the contact information here<https://www.famsf.org/about/board-of-trustees/meetings-and-agendas>; for the City Attorney, please email cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org%3cmailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org%3cmailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org%3cmailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org%3cmailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>>>.
This concludes your public records request.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D57AD5.71B29790]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com%3cmailto:requests@muckrock.com>> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com%3cmailto:requests@muckrock.com>>>
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2019 5:33 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org%3cmailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org%3cmailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
September 26, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com%3cmailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com%3cmailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
[Image removed by sender.]
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
[http://email.requests.muckrock.com/o/eJwNyksOgyAQANDTlCWZQUbHBZtqz9Hw0xpBUtCev25fXjBEvYjZbum9BYOgBs1KfIxzXXCEjiyMo-2QA5HXaHHwC4ElsRkFOCIAAQITS5QzMahnT0PPr27m6aGhxu8V29lkvvxei9-lL1lU48tx1pJSrDccd2zLWn6y1PUPlyUrUA]
---
On Oct. 24, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hi,
Our team is still processing your request. We appreciate your patience and we hope to complete your request shortly. We will circle back again soon to give an update / complete.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image001.png@01D58A80.23058930]
From: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2019 2:05 PM
To: requests@muckrock.com; CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hi,
We are following up on your request for items 5 and 6. We are processing this item and we will have a response to you next week.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image003.png@01D58A80.22F69510]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Sent: Friday, October 4, 2019 6:09 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
October 4, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you, however I do not believe you have completed these 2 requests:
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
Contrary to your prior concern, I do not need you to search all CCSF employees' records - I only need you to search those in your department. But remember, if your department or its employees "prepared, used, owned, or retained" a communication between some *other* City employee and COFAM or FAMF, you must still turn it over. For example if your employee has a forwarded email between a FAMSF employee and COFAM, you must disclose it.
I will also proceed against FAMSF and the City Attorney directly - however: that does not absolve your agency of its own responsibilities under the CPRA and Sunshine Ordinance.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Oct. 4, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
To Whom it May Concern:
Thank you for your public records request. The Controller's Office has conducted a diligent search for any records responsive to your request that it possesses. Please see this link<http://sfcontroller.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Auditing/Fine%20Arts%20Museums%20Audit%20Report%20%2810.27.16%29_0.pdf> for an audit report from October 2016. The Controller's Office has previously provided the payment transaction records for both COFAM and FAMF and does not have any additional contractual/legal/MOU records re COFAM and/or FAMF. If such information exists, it would be at the departmental level or with the City Attorney. To submit a public records request with the Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco, please find the contact information here<https://www.famsf.org/about/board-of-trustees/meetings-and-agendas>; for the City Attorney, please email cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org%3cmailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>>.
This concludes your public records request.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D57AD5.71B29790]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2019 5:33 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
September 26, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
[Image removed by sender.]
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
[http://email.requests.muckrock.com/o/eJwNyksOgyAQANDTlCWZQUbHBZtqz9Hw0xpBUtCev25fXjBEvYjZbum9BYOgBs1KfIxzXXCEjiyMo-2QA5HXaHHwC4ElsRkFOCIAAQITS5QzMahnT0PPr27m6aGhxu8V29lkvvxei9-lL1lU48tx1pJSrDccd2zLWn6y1PUPlyUrUA]
---
On Oct. 18, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hi,
We are following up on your request for items 5 and 6. We are processing this item and we will have a response to you next week.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image001.png@01D585BC.FA816EB0]
From: requests@muckrock.com <requests@muckrock.com>
Sent: Friday, October 4, 2019 6:09 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
October 4, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you, however I do not believe you have completed these 2 requests:
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
Contrary to your prior concern, I do not need you to search all CCSF employees' records - I only need you to search those in your department. But remember, if your department or its employees "prepared, used, owned, or retained" a communication between some *other* City employee and COFAM or FAMF, you must still turn it over. For example if your employee has a forwarded email between a FAMSF employee and COFAM, you must disclose it.
I will also proceed against FAMSF and the City Attorney directly - however: that does not absolve your agency of its own responsibilities under the CPRA and Sunshine Ordinance.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Oct. 4, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
To Whom it May Concern:
Thank you for your public records request. The Controller's Office has conducted a diligent search for any records responsive to your request that it possesses. Please see this link<http://sfcontroller.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Auditing/Fine%20Arts%20Museums%20Audit%20Report%20%2810.27.16%29_0.pdf> for an audit report from October 2016. The Controller's Office has previously provided the payment transaction records for both COFAM and FAMF and does not have any additional contractual/legal/MOU records re COFAM and/or FAMF. If such information exists, it would be at the departmental level or with the City Attorney. To submit a public records request with the Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco, please find the contact information here<https://www.famsf.org/about/board-of-trustees/meetings-and-agendas>; for the City Attorney, please email cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org%3cmailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>>.
This concludes your public records request.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D57AD5.71B29790]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2019 5:33 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
September 26, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
Please see my response and a proposal for compromise in SOTF Case 19125 that would involve me withdrawing my complaint if the Controller agrees.
Please let me know your response by Dec. 17, noon (before the SOTF meeting).
NOTE: Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. The email address sending this request is a publicly- viewable mailbox. All of your responses (including all responsive records) may be instantly and automatically available to the public online via the MuckRock.com FOIA service used to issue this request (though the requester is an anonymous user, not a representative of MuckRock). Nothing herein is legal, IT, or professional advice of any kind. The author disclaims all warranties, express or implied, including but not limited to all warranties of merchantability or fitness. In no event shall the author be liable for any special, direct, indirect, consequential, or any other damages whatsoever. The digital signature, if any, in this email is not an indication of a binding agreement or offer; it merely authenticates the sender. Please do not include any confidential information, as I intend that these communications with the City all be public records.
Sincerely,
Anonymous
From: San Francisco Controller's Office
Anonymous Public Information Requestor,
Thank you for your offer to withdraw your Sunshine Complaint #19125. Our office is committed to timely, complete responses for all public information requests and works hard to satisfy the over 400+ requests we receive annually.
The Controller's Office has provided you with all responsive information and records, albeit in a PDF format that included manual redaction, instead of electronic redaction. Your recommended procedural update regarding our use of PDF electronic redaction is something we are reviewing and once staff are trained on that functionality, we plan to employ that approach going forward.
Thank you for your suggested procedural updates and for your consideration of the withdrawal of your Sunshine Compliant #19125.
Respectfully,
Todd Rydstrom
Deputy Controller
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5B4C5.5E3F6E70]
From: requests@muckrock.com <requests@muckrock.com>
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2019 3:40 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request #SOTF 19125
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
December 13, 2019
This is a follow up to request number SOTF 19125:
Please see my response and a proposal for compromise in SOTF Case 19125 that would involve me withdrawing my complaint if the Controller agrees.
Please let me know your response by Dec. 17, noon (before the SOTF meeting).
NOTE: Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. The email address sending this request is a publicly- viewable mailbox. All of your responses (including all responsive records) may be instantly and automatically available to the public online via the MuckRock.com FOIA service used to issue this request (though the requester is an anonymous user, not a representative of MuckRock). Nothing herein is legal, IT, or professional advice of any kind. The author disclaims all warranties, express or implied, including but not limited to all warranties of merchantability or fitness. In no event shall the author be liable for any special, direct, indirect, consequential, or any other damages whatsoever. The digital signature, if any, in this email is not an indication of a binding agreement or offer; it merely authenticates the sender. Please do not include any confidential information, as I intend that these communications with the City all be public records.
Sincerely,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com
Upload documents directly: https://www.muckrock.com/
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Dec. 13, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello Anonymous:
We have received your questions which are listed here:
1. Which attachments did you provide or withhold? For example: 3 listed on pg 1, 7 on pg 2, 1 on pg 4, 1 on pg 5, 7 on pg 8, 1 on pg 10. The request specifically requested all attachments.
2. There are dozens of redactions throughout your responses. You are required by law (SFAC 67.26) to provide a clear reference to a justification for each and every redaction or full document withheld, and (SFAC 67.27) you must use a statute or case law dictating exemption.
3. You were requested to provide documents in specified electronic format. Why have you printed and scanned these documents, thus failing to provide an exact copy of the records? No legal justification has been provided.
Thank you for the feedback on your request. Here is our response:
1) We provided all responsive emails to you. We also provided the documents that were attached to the provided emails. Some attachments were listed multiple times throughout the emails, but were the same documents so duplicate versions of the identical attachments were not provided. This might explain your confusion when you write: "3 listed on pg 1, 7 on pg 2, 1 on pg 4, 1 on pg 5, 7 on pg. 8." For example, the 7 attachments listed on page two are the same attachments listed on page 8. To make this easier to understand we are including a matrix of the attachments under item #2. In our review of all the emails and attachments, we did discover two missing spreadsheets. They are attached and are entitled: FY19 Cash-Receipts Collection Point Survey_FA and Cash Receipts Procedures - Admissions (review).
2) The timeline of your request corresponded with a Cash Handling Audit, conducted by the Controller's Office Audit Division. The redactions made to the documents related to Cash Handling were made to maintain the security of the cash handling procedures at FAMSF's locations. See the matrix below for the legal justifications for the redactions.
[cid:image001.png@01D5B1BB.3E2E2570]
3) The PDF of the documents are the original and are unmodified beyond the redactions. These records are being produced in a PDF format and the requested metadata is being withheld to protect the integrity and security of the original record and to avoid the unwarranted disclosure of data that could pose a risk to the city's systems and network and/or the inadvertent disclosure of exempt confidential or privileged information. See Cal. Gov. Code 6253.9 (a)(1), (f) and 6254.19.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5B1BB.3E2E2570]
From: requests@muckrock.com <requests@muckrock.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 9:49 AM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
December 3, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
RE: SOTF 19125
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
Deputy Controller Rydstrom,
Earlier today I received your response to SOTF Complaint 19125. Thank you.
However, it appears your response does not actually deny most of my allegations. My understanding is that if you do not deny my allegations, I will win by default. While I am happy to win, I would also like to understand why the City does not follow all the Sunshine rules as written.
You do not appear to deny or even discuss allegations #1, 3, or 4 of my complaint.
It appears you dispute the 2nd paragraph of allegation #2, but there is no response to para #1 of allegation #2.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1icCIN%3ADC4O2keadi9JMwOnyzo9bygm554&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Dec. 3, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
** File 19125 **
Thanks Ms. Leger! Sadly it appears the Controller's office has not responded to the allegations. I will follow up with them directly as well.
---
On Dec. 3, 2019:
Subject: FW: SOTF - Complaint Filed with the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force - File No. 19125
Dear Anonymous: I received this email this morning.
Cheryl Leger
Assistant Clerk, Board of Supervisors
Tel: 415-554-7724
[CustomerSatisfactionIcon]<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=104> Click here<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=104> to complete a Board of Supervisors Customer Service Satisfaction form.
The Legislative Research Center<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=9681> provides 24-hour access to Board of Supervisors legislation, and archived matters since August 1998.
Disclosures: Personal information that is provided in communications to the Board of Supervisors is subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act and the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance. Personal information provided will not be redacted. Members of the public are not required to provide personal identifying information when they communicate with the Board of Supervisors and its committees. All written or oral communications that members of the public submit to the Clerk's Office regarding pending legislation or hearings will be made available to all members of the public for inspection and copying. The Clerk's Office does not redact any information from these submissions. This means that personal information-including names, phone numbers, addresses and similar information that a member of the public elects to submit to the Board and its committees-may appear on the Board of Supervisors website or in other public documents that members of the public may inspect or copy.
---
On Dec. 2, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
To Whom It May Concern:
We write to provide an update on the status of our consideration of your petitions. You have submitted eighteen separate petitions to the Supervisor of Records and numerous other follow up communications concerning prior petitions. We have already responded to twelve of your petitions.
Due to the volume of petitions and the complexity of the issues raised, we are continuing to invoke the rule of reason and will respond to your petitions within a reasonable time period with the goal of addressing each petition within 30 days of submission. We understand you disagree with this basis. As we recently explained in response to one of your complaints with the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force, we strive to respond to petitions within the 10-day period specified in Section 67.21(d), but we don't view it as an absolute deadline. Particularly here, where the issues raised are novel and you have submitted numerous petitions over a short time period, responding within 10 days is not feasible because doing so would unreasonably impinge on our ability to perform our other responsibilities.
Best,
Bradley Russi
Deputy City Attorney
Office of City Attorney Dennis Herrera
City Hall, Room 234
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Pl., San Francisco, CA 94102
www.sfcityattorney.org<http://www.sfcityattorney.org>
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2019 8:58 PM
To: Supervisor Records <supervisor.records@SFCITYATTY.ORG<mailto:supervisor.records@SFCITYATTY.ORG>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
November 20, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Supervisor of Records,
This is a new 67.21(d) petition regarding the Controller's Nov 20 response to (solely) parts #5 and #6 of our Sept 13 records request. Please determine in writing that some or all of the following records or some parts thereof are public (references are to Controller's responsive record collection "MuckRock_80368-97597279" which you may get from the Controller):
1. All attachments for the provided emails. For example: 3 listed on pg 1, 7 on pg 2, 1 on pg 4, 1 on pg 5, 7 on pg 8, 1 on pg 10. The request specifically requested all attachments.
2. Dozens of redactions throughout the responses. Since no clear reference (or any reference at all) to statutory or case law justifications were provided, I challenge all the redactions as unlawful, and all should be public parts of records.
3. Exact copies of the emails and their attachments. The Controller was requested to provide documents in specified electronic formats. They printed and scanned these documents, thus failing to provide an exact copy of the records, which are public records. No legal justification has been provided.
4. Any documents thus far fully withheld. We do not know if any documents were withheld or not, and no justifications were provided.
The original request is copied below. Parts 1-4 and 7-9 of the request are not being appealed in this petition, but we reserve the right to appeal them at another time.
Sincerely,
Anonymous
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iXeXS%3AIzR9Yyak4lmZGqfzZabChb7-IM4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dsupervisor.records%252540sfcityatty.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Nov. 20, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
Thank you for your Nov 20 response to #5 and #6 of our Sept 13 records request.
A few issues:
- Which attachments did you provide or withhold? For example: 3 listed on pg 1, 7 on pg 2, 1 on pg 4, 1 on pg 5, 7 on pg 8, 1 on pg 10. The request specifically requested all attachments.
- There are dozens of redactions throughout your responses. You are required by law (SFAC 67.26) to provide a clear reference to a justification for each and every redaction or full document withheld, and (SFAC 67.27) you must use a statute or case law dictating exemption.
- You were requested to provide documents in specified electronic format. Why have you printed and scanned these documents, thus failing to provide an exact copy of the records? No legal justification has been provided.
I intend to appeal these issues and the timeliness of your response to SOTF, the Supervisor of Records and/or Superior Court.
Sincerely,
Anonymous
---
On Nov. 20, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hi,
We have completed items 5 & 6. We apologize for the delay. Please find the attachments. If you have any questions, please let us know.
This concludes your public records request. To expedite your future requests, please submit your request through our public records portal<https://sfcontroller.org/contact-us-3>.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image003.png@01D59FB5.0476A900]
From: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2019 2:05 PM
To: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>; CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hi,
We are following up on your request for items 5 and 6. We are processing this item and we will have a response to you next week.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image004.png@01D59FA2.F5C0A8A0]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com%3cmailto:requests@muckrock.com>> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com%3cmailto:requests@muckrock.com>>>
Sent: Friday, October 4, 2019 6:09 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org%3cmailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org%3cmailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
October 4, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you, however I do not believe you have completed these 2 requests:
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
Contrary to your prior concern, I do not need you to search all CCSF employees' records - I only need you to search those in your department. But remember, if your department or its employees "prepared, used, owned, or retained" a communication between some *other* City employee and COFAM or FAMF, you must still turn it over. For example if your employee has a forwarded email between a FAMSF employee and COFAM, you must disclose it.
I will also proceed against FAMSF and the City Attorney directly - however: that does not absolve your agency of its own responsibilities under the CPRA and Sunshine Ordinance.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com%3cmailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Oct. 4, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
To Whom it May Concern:
Thank you for your public records request. The Controller's Office has conducted a diligent search for any records responsive to your request that it possesses. Please see this link<http://sfcontroller.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Auditing/Fine%20Arts%20Museums%20Audit%20Report%20%2810.27.16%29_0.pdf> for an audit report from October 2016. The Controller's Office has previously provided the payment transaction records for both COFAM and FAMF and does not have any additional contractual/legal/MOU records re COFAM and/or FAMF. If such information exists, it would be at the departmental level or with the City Attorney. To submit a public records request with the Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco, please find the contact information here<https://www.famsf.org/about/board-of-trustees/meetings-and-agendas>; for the City Attorney, please email cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org%3cmailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org%3cmailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org%3cmailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org%3cmailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>>>.
This concludes your public records request.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D57AD5.71B29790]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com%3cmailto:requests@muckrock.com>> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com%3cmailto:requests@muckrock.com>>>
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2019 5:33 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org%3cmailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org%3cmailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
September 26, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com%3cmailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com%3cmailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
[Image removed by sender.]
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
[http://email.requests.muckrock.com/o/eJwNyksOgyAQANDTlCWZQUbHBZtqz9Hw0xpBUtCev25fXjBEvYjZbum9BYOgBs1KfIxzXXCEjiyMo-2QA5HXaHHwC4ElsRkFOCIAAQITS5QzMahnT0PPr27m6aGhxu8V29lkvvxei9-lL1lU48tx1pJSrDccd2zLWn6y1PUPlyUrUA]
---
On Oct. 24, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hi,
Our team is still processing your request. We appreciate your patience and we hope to complete your request shortly. We will circle back again soon to give an update / complete.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image001.png@01D58A80.23058930]
From: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2019 2:05 PM
To: requests@muckrock.com; CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hi,
We are following up on your request for items 5 and 6. We are processing this item and we will have a response to you next week.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image003.png@01D58A80.22F69510]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Sent: Friday, October 4, 2019 6:09 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
October 4, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you, however I do not believe you have completed these 2 requests:
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
Contrary to your prior concern, I do not need you to search all CCSF employees' records - I only need you to search those in your department. But remember, if your department or its employees "prepared, used, owned, or retained" a communication between some *other* City employee and COFAM or FAMF, you must still turn it over. For example if your employee has a forwarded email between a FAMSF employee and COFAM, you must disclose it.
I will also proceed against FAMSF and the City Attorney directly - however: that does not absolve your agency of its own responsibilities under the CPRA and Sunshine Ordinance.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Oct. 4, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
To Whom it May Concern:
Thank you for your public records request. The Controller's Office has conducted a diligent search for any records responsive to your request that it possesses. Please see this link<http://sfcontroller.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Auditing/Fine%20Arts%20Museums%20Audit%20Report%20%2810.27.16%29_0.pdf> for an audit report from October 2016. The Controller's Office has previously provided the payment transaction records for both COFAM and FAMF and does not have any additional contractual/legal/MOU records re COFAM and/or FAMF. If such information exists, it would be at the departmental level or with the City Attorney. To submit a public records request with the Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco, please find the contact information here<https://www.famsf.org/about/board-of-trustees/meetings-and-agendas>; for the City Attorney, please email cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org%3cmailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>>.
This concludes your public records request.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D57AD5.71B29790]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2019 5:33 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
September 26, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
[Image removed by sender.]
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
[http://email.requests.muckrock.com/o/eJwNyksOgyAQANDTlCWZQUbHBZtqz9Hw0xpBUtCev25fXjBEvYjZbum9BYOgBs1KfIxzXXCEjiyMo-2QA5HXaHHwC4ElsRkFOCIAAQITS5QzMahnT0PPr27m6aGhxu8V29lkvvxei9-lL1lU48tx1pJSrDccd2zLWn6y1PUPlyUrUA]
---
On Oct. 18, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hi,
We are following up on your request for items 5 and 6. We are processing this item and we will have a response to you next week.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image001.png@01D585BC.FA816EB0]
From: requests@muckrock.com <requests@muckrock.com>
Sent: Friday, October 4, 2019 6:09 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
October 4, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you, however I do not believe you have completed these 2 requests:
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
Contrary to your prior concern, I do not need you to search all CCSF employees' records - I only need you to search those in your department. But remember, if your department or its employees "prepared, used, owned, or retained" a communication between some *other* City employee and COFAM or FAMF, you must still turn it over. For example if your employee has a forwarded email between a FAMSF employee and COFAM, you must disclose it.
I will also proceed against FAMSF and the City Attorney directly - however: that does not absolve your agency of its own responsibilities under the CPRA and Sunshine Ordinance.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
Thank you - please provide a signed letter (such as a PDF) from the Controller (or Deputy Controller), and I will forward it to SOTF along with my withdrawal of 19125. One thing we need for a withdrawal of 19125, in such a letter is a specific, explicit commitment that your Office will in fact provide footnotes or other clear references to legal justifications for exemption in all responses with redactions or where entire records are withheld (SFAC 67.26, 67.27).
NOTE: Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. The email address sending this request is a publicly- viewable mailbox. All of your responses (including all responsive records) may be instantly and automatically available to the public online via the MuckRock.com FOIA service used to issue this request (though the requester is an anonymous user, not a representative of MuckRock). Nothing herein is legal, IT, or professional advice of any kind. The author disclaims all warranties, express or implied, including but not limited to all warranties of merchantability or fitness. In no event shall the author be liable for any special, direct, indirect, consequential, or any other damages whatsoever. The digital signature, if any, in this email is not an indication of a binding agreement or offer; it merely authenticates the sender. Please do not include any confidential information, as I intend that these communications with the City all be public records.
Sincerely,
Anonymous
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
Please let me know by Jan. 7 noon whether or not you will accept the offer made on Dec. 13: https://cdn.muckrock.com/outbound_request_attachments/94383620Anonymous/80368/19125-Offer-Controller-20191213-f.pdf in its entirety.
If we do not hear from you by then, we will withdraw the offer and proceed to have the Task Force find you in violation of the Sunshine Ordinance and issue appropriate orders.
We intend to have every City agency that violates the Sunshine Ordinance to commit to fully follow the Sunshine Ordinance. We are happy to get those commitments via a voluntary and binding undertaking by an agency or through an SOTF order, but we will not accept informal, non-binding commitments. Your lack of training also does not excuse non-compliance.
NOTE: Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. The email address sending this request is a publicly- viewable mailbox. All of your responses (including all responsive records) may be instantly and automatically available to the public online via the MuckRock.com FOIA service used to issue this request (though the requester is an anonymous user, not a representative of MuckRock). Nothing herein is legal, IT, or professional advice of any kind. The author disclaims all warranties, express or implied, including but not limited to all warranties of merchantability or fitness. In no event shall the author be liable for any special, direct, indirect, consequential, or any other damages whatsoever. The digital signature, if any, in this email is not an indication of a binding agreement or offer; it merely authenticates the sender. Please do not include any confidential information, as I intend that these communications with the City all be public records.
Sincerely,
Anonymous
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
Please let me know by Jan. 7 noon whether or not you will accept the offer made on Dec. 13: https://cdn.muckrock.com/outbound_request_attachments/94383620Anonymous/80368/19125-Offer-Controller-20191213-f.pdf in its entirety.
If we do not hear from you by then, we will withdraw the offer and proceed to have the Task Force find you in violation of the Sunshine Ordinance and issue appropriate orders.
We intend to have every City agency that violates the Sunshine Ordinance to commit to fully follow the Sunshine Ordinance. We are happy to get those commitments via a voluntary and binding undertaking by an agency or through an SOTF order, but we will not accept informal, non-binding commitments. Your lack of training also does not excuse non-compliance.
NOTE: Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. The email address sending this request is a publicly- viewable mailbox. All of your responses (including all responsive records) may be instantly and automatically available to the public online via the MuckRock.com FOIA service used to issue this request (though the requester is an anonymous user, not a representative of MuckRock). Nothing herein is legal, IT, or professional advice of any kind. The author disclaims all warranties, express or implied, including but not limited to all warranties of merchantability or fitness. In no event shall the author be liable for any special, direct, indirect, consequential, or any other damages whatsoever. The digital signature, if any, in this email is not an indication of a binding agreement or offer; it merely authenticates the sender. Please do not include any confidential information, as I intend that these communications with the City all be public records.
Sincerely,
Anonymous
From: San Francisco Controller's Office
Good Afternoon:
Notice is hereby given that the Compliance and Amendments Committee of the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force shall hold hearings on complaints listed below to determine if the Task Force has jurisdiction pursuant to Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.21(e). A hearing to review the merits of the complaint will be scheduled on a future date.
The Complainant and Respondent are NOT REQUIRED to attend the January 28, 2020, Committee meeting but may attend to provide testimony related to the above listed determinations only.
Date: January 28, 2020
Location: City Hall, Room 408
Time: 4:30 p.m.
Complaints:
File No. 19091: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Mayor London Breed, the Office of the Mayor, Hank Heckel, Sean Elsbernd, Andres Power, Andrea Bruss, Marjon Philhour, Jeff Cretan, Sophia Kittler for allegedly violating Administrative Code, (Sunshine Ordinance) Sections 67.21, 67.26, 67.27 and 67.29-7, by failing to respond to a request for public records in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19094: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Linda Gerull and the Department of Technology for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, 67.25, 67.26 and 67.27 by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19097: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Public Works for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, 67.26 and 67.27, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19109: Complaint filed by Stephen Malloy against Dept. of Public Health for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.24, 67.25, 67.26 and 67.27 by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19110: Complaint filed by Stephen Malloy against the Fire Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.24, 67.25, 67.26 and 67.27 by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19117: Complaint filed by Conrad Wu against the Public Utilities Commission for allegedly violating Administrative Code, (Sunshine Ordinance) Sections 67.25 by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19118: Complaint filed by Paul Ondik against the Police Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b), by failing to respond to a records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19119: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Department of Technology for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b), 67.26 and 67.27 by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19120: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Office of the City Attorney for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b)(c), 67.26, 67.27, by failing to respond to a request for public records in a timely and/or complete manner; failing to justify withholding of records and failing to provide assistance.
File No. 19121: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Police Commission for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b)(k), 67.26 and 67.27, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner; withholding more than the minimum and failing to justify withholding.
File No. 19122: Complaint filed by Anonymous against City Librarian Michael Lambert and the Public Library for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.25, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19123: Complaint filed by Paul Kniha against the San Francisco Municipal Executive Association for allegedly violating Administrative Code, (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.21, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19125: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Controller's Office for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b)(c)(k), 67.26, 67.27, by failing to respond to a request for records in a timely and/or complete manner, failing to assist, withheld more than the minimally exempt portion of a public record, failing to justify withholdings with clear reference to exemption statute or case law and failing to provide an exact copy of records.
File No. 19126: Complaint filed by Ann Treboux against the San Francisco Arts Commission for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.25, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19128: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Chief William Scott, Sgt. Brian Rodriguez, Michael Andraychak and the Police Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, 67.25, 67.26, 67.27 and 67.29-7(a), by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19130: Complaint filed by Stephen Malloy against Chesa Boudin and the District Attorney's Office for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.21, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19131: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Jose Cisneros, Theresa Buckley and the Treasurer's Office for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, 67.24, 67.26, 67.27, by failing to respond to a request for records in a timely and/or complete manner, failing to assist, withheld more than the minimally exempt portion of a public record.
File No. 19132: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Mary Ellen Carroll and the Department of Emergency Management for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21 and 67.25, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19133: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Tom Maguire and the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21 and 67.25, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19134: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Rob Reiter and City Hall Building Management for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21 and 67.25 by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19135: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Vicki Hennessy and the Sheriff's Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21 and 67.25 by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19136: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Naomi Kelly and the Office of the City Administrator for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21 and 67.25 by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19137: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Thomas P. Campbell and the Fine Arts Museum for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, 67.25 and 67.34 by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19138: Complaint filed by Stephen Malloy against the University of California, Regents of the University of California, for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19139: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Jeanne Buick, Henry Voong and the Department of Human Resources for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.24, 67.26 and 67.27(a), by withholding public records.
File No. 19140: Complaint filed by Stephen Malloy against the Department of Human Resources for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21and 67.25, by failing to respond to a request for public records in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19141: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Chief William Scott and the Police Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21 and 67.25, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19143: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Sheriff Vicki Hennessy, James Wilson and the Sheriff's Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.24, 67.25 and 67.27, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19144: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Department of Police Accountability for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections, 67.21, 67.24, 67.26 and 67.27, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19145: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Police Commission for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.5 and 67.21, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19146: Complaint filed by Anonymous against City Librarian Michael Lambert and the Public Library for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.21, by failing to request for public records in a timely and/or complete manner.
The agenda and packet material for the meeting is available online at the following link:
Cheryl Leger
Assistant Clerk, Board of Supervisors
Tel: 415-554-7724
<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=104> Click here<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=104> to complete a Board of Supervisors Customer Service Satisfaction form.
The Legislative Research Center<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=9681> provides 24-hour access to Board of Supervisors legislation, and archived matters since August 1998.
Disclosures: Personal information that is provided in communications to the Board of Supervisors is subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act and the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance. Personal information provided will not be redacted. Members of the public are not required to provide personal identifying information when they communicate with the Board of Supervisors and its committees. All written or oral communications that members of the public submit to the Clerk's Office regarding pending legislation or hearings will be made available to all members of the public for inspection and copying. The Clerk's Office does not redact any information from these submissions. This means that personal information-including names, phone numbers, addresses and similar information that a member of the public elects to submit to the Board and its committees-may appear on the Board of Supervisors website or in other public documents that members of the public may inspect or copy.
-
image001_iLCFbg4_pB2iO0j_2eRtD52_nRYIabn_dtOJDoS
From: San Francisco Controller's Office
Good Afternoon:
Notice is hereby given that the Compliance and Amendments Committee of the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force shall hold hearings on complaints listed below to determine if the Task Force has jurisdiction pursuant to Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.21(e). A hearing to review the merits of the complaint will be scheduled on a future date.
The Complainant and Respondent are NOT REQUIRED to attend the January 28, 2020, Committee meeting but may attend to provide testimony related to the above listed determinations only.
Date: January 28, 2020
Location: City Hall, Room 408
Time: 4:30 p.m.
Complaints:
File No. 19091: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Mayor London Breed, the Office of the Mayor, Hank Heckel, Sean Elsbernd, Andres Power, Andrea Bruss, Marjon Philhour, Jeff Cretan, Sophia Kittler for allegedly violating Administrative Code, (Sunshine Ordinance) Sections 67.21, 67.26, 67.27 and 67.29-7, by failing to respond to a request for public records in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19094: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Linda Gerull and the Department of Technology for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, 67.25, 67.26 and 67.27 by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19097: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Public Works for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, 67.26 and 67.27, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19109: Complaint filed by Stephen Malloy against Dept. of Public Health for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.24, 67.25, 67.26 and 67.27 by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19110: Complaint filed by Stephen Malloy against the Fire Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.24, 67.25, 67.26 and 67.27 by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19117: Complaint filed by Conrad Wu against the Public Utilities Commission for allegedly violating Administrative Code, (Sunshine Ordinance) Sections 67.25 by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19118: Complaint filed by Paul Ondik against the Police Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b), by failing to respond to a records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19119: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Department of Technology for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b), 67.26 and 67.27 by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19120: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Office of the City Attorney for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b)(c), 67.26, 67.27, by failing to respond to a request for public records in a timely and/or complete manner; failing to justify withholding of records and failing to provide assistance.
File No. 19121: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Police Commission for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b)(k), 67.26 and 67.27, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner; withholding more than the minimum and failing to justify withholding.
File No. 19122: Complaint filed by Anonymous against City Librarian Michael Lambert and the Public Library for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.25, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19123: Complaint filed by Paul Kniha against the San Francisco Municipal Executive Association for allegedly violating Administrative Code, (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.21, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19125: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Controller's Office for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21(b)(c)(k), 67.26, 67.27, by failing to respond to a request for records in a timely and/or complete manner, failing to assist, withheld more than the minimally exempt portion of a public record, failing to justify withholdings with clear reference to exemption statute or case law and failing to provide an exact copy of records.
File No. 19126: Complaint filed by Ann Treboux against the San Francisco Arts Commission for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.25, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19128: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Chief William Scott, Sgt. Brian Rodriguez, Michael Andraychak and the Police Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, 67.25, 67.26, 67.27 and 67.29-7(a), by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19130: Complaint filed by Stephen Malloy against Chesa Boudin and the District Attorney's Office for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.21, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19131: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Jose Cisneros, Theresa Buckley and the Treasurer's Office for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, 67.24, 67.26, 67.27, by failing to respond to a request for records in a timely and/or complete manner, failing to assist, withheld more than the minimally exempt portion of a public record.
File No. 19132: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Mary Ellen Carroll and the Department of Emergency Management for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21 and 67.25, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19133: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Tom Maguire and the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21 and 67.25, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19134: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Rob Reiter and City Hall Building Management for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21 and 67.25 by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19135: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Vicki Hennessy and the Sheriff's Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21 and 67.25 by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19136: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Naomi Kelly and the Office of the City Administrator for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21 and 67.25 by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19137: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Thomas P. Campbell and the Fine Arts Museum for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, 67.25 and 67.34 by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19138: Complaint filed by Stephen Malloy against the University of California, Regents of the University of California, for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19139: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Jeanne Buick, Henry Voong and the Department of Human Resources for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.24, 67.26 and 67.27(a), by withholding public records.
File No. 19140: Complaint filed by Stephen Malloy against the Department of Human Resources for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21and 67.25, by failing to respond to a request for public records in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19141: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Chief William Scott and the Police Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.21 and 67.25, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19143: Complaint filed by Anonymous against Sheriff Vicki Hennessy, James Wilson and the Sheriff's Department for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.24, 67.25 and 67.27, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19144: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Department of Police Accountability for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections, 67.21, 67.24, 67.26 and 67.27, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19145: Complaint filed by Anonymous against the Police Commission for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Sections 67.5 and 67.21, by failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and/or complete manner.
File No. 19146: Complaint filed by Anonymous against City Librarian Michael Lambert and the Public Library for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.21, by failing to request for public records in a timely and/or complete manner.
The agenda and packet material for the meeting is available online at the following link:
Cheryl Leger
Assistant Clerk, Board of Supervisors
Tel: 415-554-7724
<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=104> Click here<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=104> to complete a Board of Supervisors Customer Service Satisfaction form.
The Legislative Research Center<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=9681> provides 24-hour access to Board of Supervisors legislation, and archived matters since August 1998.
Disclosures: Personal information that is provided in communications to the Board of Supervisors is subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act and the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance. Personal information provided will not be redacted. Members of the public are not required to provide personal identifying information when they communicate with the Board of Supervisors and its committees. All written or oral communications that members of the public submit to the Clerk's Office regarding pending legislation or hearings will be made available to all members of the public for inspection and copying. The Clerk's Office does not redact any information from these submissions. This means that personal information-including names, phone numbers, addresses and similar information that a member of the public elects to submit to the Board and its committees-may appear on the Board of Supervisors website or in other public documents that members of the public may inspect or copy.
-
image001_NUYZpfO_LbMJ7B1_Irnf0qo_0WvbNjv_onQ3If4
From: San Francisco Controller's Office
Anonymous Public Information Requestor,
The Controller's Office has provided you with all responsive information and records. Thank you for your suggested procedural updates, we will consider them when next updating our process.
Respectfully,
Todd Rydstrom
Deputy Controller
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image001.png@01D5CACC.6F5554A0]
From: requests@muckrock.com <requests@muckrock.com>
Sent: Friday, January 3, 2020 8:31 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request #SOTF 19125
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
January 3, 2020
This is a follow up to request number SOTF 19125:
Please let me know by Jan. 7 noon whether or not you will accept the offer made on Dec. 13: https://cdn.muckrock.com/outbound_request_attachments/94383620Anonymous/80368/19125-Offer-Controller-20191213-f.pdf in its entirety.
If we do not hear from you by then, we will withdraw the offer and proceed to have the Task Force find you in violation of the Sunshine Ordinance and issue appropriate orders.
We intend to have every City agency that violates the Sunshine Ordinance to commit to fully follow the Sunshine Ordinance. We are happy to get those commitments via a voluntary and binding undertaking by an agency or through an SOTF order, but we will not accept informal, non-binding commitments. Your lack of training also does not excuse non-compliance.
NOTE: Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. The email address sending this request is a publicly- viewable mailbox. All of your responses (including all responsive records) may be instantly and automatically available to the public online via the MuckRock.com FOIA service used to issue this request (though the requester is an anonymous user, not a representative of MuckRock). Nothing herein is legal, IT, or professional advice of any kind. The author disclaims all warranties, express or implied, including but not limited to all warranties of merchantability or fitness. In no event shall the author be liable for any special, direct, indirect, consequential, or any other damages whatsoever. The digital signature, if any, in this email is not an indication of a binding agreement or offer; it merely authenticates the sender. Please do not include any confidential information, as I intend that these communications with the City all be public records.
Sincerely,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com
Upload documents directly: https://www.muckrock.com/
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Dec. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request #SOTF 19125
Thank you - please provide a signed letter (such as a PDF) from the Controller (or Deputy Controller), and I will forward it to SOTF along with my withdrawal of 19125. One thing we need for a withdrawal of 19125, in such a letter is a specific, explicit commitment that your Office will in fact provide footnotes or other clear references to legal justifications for exemption in all responses with redactions or where entire records are withheld (SFAC 67.26, 67.27).
NOTE: Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. The email address sending this request is a publicly- viewable mailbox. All of your responses (including all responsive records) may be instantly and automatically available to the public online via the MuckRock.com FOIA service used to issue this request (though the requester is an anonymous user, not a representative of MuckRock). Nothing herein is legal, IT, or professional advice of any kind. The author disclaims all warranties, express or implied, including but not limited to all warranties of merchantability or fitness. In no event shall the author be liable for any special, direct, indirect, consequential, or any other damages whatsoever. The digital signature, if any, in this email is not an indication of a binding agreement or offer; it merely authenticates the sender. Please do not include any confidential information, as I intend that these communications with the City all be public records.
Sincerely,
Anonymous
---
On Dec. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request #SOTF 19125
Anonymous Public Information Requestor,
Thank you for your offer to withdraw your Sunshine Complaint #19125. Our office is committed to timely, complete responses for all public information requests and works hard to satisfy the over 400+ requests we receive annually.
The Controller's Office has provided you with all responsive information and records, albeit in a PDF format that included manual redaction, instead of electronic redaction. Your recommended procedural update regarding our use of PDF electronic redaction is something we are reviewing and once staff are trained on that functionality, we plan to employ that approach going forward.
Thank you for your suggested procedural updates and for your consideration of the withdrawal of your Sunshine Compliant #19125.
Respectfully,
Todd Rydstrom
Deputy Controller
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5B4C5.5E3F6E70]
From: requests@muckrock.com <requests@muckrock.com>
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2019 3:40 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request #SOTF 19125
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
December 13, 2019
This is a follow up to request number SOTF 19125:
Please see my response and a proposal for compromise in SOTF Case 19125 that would involve me withdrawing my complaint if the Controller agrees.
Please let me know your response by Dec. 17, noon (before the SOTF meeting).
NOTE: Please be certain you have properly redacted all of your responses. Once you send them to us, there is no going back. The email address sending this request is a publicly- viewable mailbox. All of your responses (including all responsive records) may be instantly and automatically available to the public online via the MuckRock.com FOIA service used to issue this request (though the requester is an anonymous user, not a representative of MuckRock). Nothing herein is legal, IT, or professional advice of any kind. The author disclaims all warranties, express or implied, including but not limited to all warranties of merchantability or fitness. In no event shall the author be liable for any special, direct, indirect, consequential, or any other damages whatsoever. The digital signature, if any, in this email is not an indication of a binding agreement or offer; it merely authenticates the sender. Please do not include any confidential information, as I intend that these communications with the City all be public records.
Sincerely,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com
Upload documents directly: https://www.muckrock.com/
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Dec. 13, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello Anonymous:
We have received your questions which are listed here:
1. Which attachments did you provide or withhold? For example: 3 listed on pg 1, 7 on pg 2, 1 on pg 4, 1 on pg 5, 7 on pg 8, 1 on pg 10. The request specifically requested all attachments.
2. There are dozens of redactions throughout your responses. You are required by law (SFAC 67.26) to provide a clear reference to a justification for each and every redaction or full document withheld, and (SFAC 67.27) you must use a statute or case law dictating exemption.
3. You were requested to provide documents in specified electronic format. Why have you printed and scanned these documents, thus failing to provide an exact copy of the records? No legal justification has been provided.
Thank you for the feedback on your request. Here is our response:
1) We provided all responsive emails to you. We also provided the documents that were attached to the provided emails. Some attachments were listed multiple times throughout the emails, but were the same documents so duplicate versions of the identical attachments were not provided. This might explain your confusion when you write: "3 listed on pg 1, 7 on pg 2, 1 on pg 4, 1 on pg 5, 7 on pg. 8." For example, the 7 attachments listed on page two are the same attachments listed on page 8. To make this easier to understand we are including a matrix of the attachments under item #2. In our review of all the emails and attachments, we did discover two missing spreadsheets. They are attached and are entitled: FY19 Cash-Receipts Collection Point Survey_FA and Cash Receipts Procedures - Admissions (review).
2) The timeline of your request corresponded with a Cash Handling Audit, conducted by the Controller's Office Audit Division. The redactions made to the documents related to Cash Handling were made to maintain the security of the cash handling procedures at FAMSF's locations. See the matrix below for the legal justifications for the redactions.
[cid:image001.png@01D5B1BB.3E2E2570]
3) The PDF of the documents are the original and are unmodified beyond the redactions. These records are being produced in a PDF format and the requested metadata is being withheld to protect the integrity and security of the original record and to avoid the unwarranted disclosure of data that could pose a risk to the city's systems and network and/or the inadvertent disclosure of exempt confidential or privileged information. See Cal. Gov. Code 6253.9 (a)(1), (f) and 6254.19.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5B1BB.3E2E2570]
From: requests@muckrock.com <requests@muckrock.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 9:49 AM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
December 3, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
RE: SOTF 19125
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
Deputy Controller Rydstrom,
Earlier today I received your response to SOTF Complaint 19125. Thank you.
However, it appears your response does not actually deny most of my allegations. My understanding is that if you do not deny my allegations, I will win by default. While I am happy to win, I would also like to understand why the City does not follow all the Sunshine rules as written.
You do not appear to deny or even discuss allegations #1, 3, or 4 of my complaint.
It appears you dispute the 2nd paragraph of allegation #2, but there is no response to para #1 of allegation #2.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1icCIN%3ADC4O2keadi9JMwOnyzo9bygm554&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Dec. 3, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
** File 19125 **
Thanks Ms. Leger! Sadly it appears the Controller's office has not responded to the allegations. I will follow up with them directly as well.
---
On Dec. 3, 2019:
Subject: FW: SOTF - Complaint Filed with the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force - File No. 19125
Dear Anonymous: I received this email this morning.
Cheryl Leger
Assistant Clerk, Board of Supervisors
Tel: 415-554-7724
[CustomerSatisfactionIcon]<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=104> Click here<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=104> to complete a Board of Supervisors Customer Service Satisfaction form.
The Legislative Research Center<http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=9681> provides 24-hour access to Board of Supervisors legislation, and archived matters since August 1998.
Disclosures: Personal information that is provided in communications to the Board of Supervisors is subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act and the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance. Personal information provided will not be redacted. Members of the public are not required to provide personal identifying information when they communicate with the Board of Supervisors and its committees. All written or oral communications that members of the public submit to the Clerk's Office regarding pending legislation or hearings will be made available to all members of the public for inspection and copying. The Clerk's Office does not redact any information from these submissions. This means that personal information-including names, phone numbers, addresses and similar information that a member of the public elects to submit to the Board and its committees-may appear on the Board of Supervisors website or in other public documents that members of the public may inspect or copy.
---
On Dec. 2, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
To Whom It May Concern:
We write to provide an update on the status of our consideration of your petitions. You have submitted eighteen separate petitions to the Supervisor of Records and numerous other follow up communications concerning prior petitions. We have already responded to twelve of your petitions.
Due to the volume of petitions and the complexity of the issues raised, we are continuing to invoke the rule of reason and will respond to your petitions within a reasonable time period with the goal of addressing each petition within 30 days of submission. We understand you disagree with this basis. As we recently explained in response to one of your complaints with the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force, we strive to respond to petitions within the 10-day period specified in Section 67.21(d), but we don't view it as an absolute deadline. Particularly here, where the issues raised are novel and you have submitted numerous petitions over a short time period, responding within 10 days is not feasible because doing so would unreasonably impinge on our ability to perform our other responsibilities.
Best,
Bradley Russi
Deputy City Attorney
Office of City Attorney Dennis Herrera
City Hall, Room 234
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Pl., San Francisco, CA 94102
www.sfcityattorney.org<http://www.sfcityattorney.org>
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2019 8:58 PM
To: Supervisor Records <supervisor.records@SFCITYATTY.ORG<mailto:supervisor.records@SFCITYATTY.ORG>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
November 20, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Supervisor of Records,
This is a new 67.21(d) petition regarding the Controller's Nov 20 response to (solely) parts #5 and #6 of our Sept 13 records request. Please determine in writing that some or all of the following records or some parts thereof are public (references are to Controller's responsive record collection "MuckRock_80368-97597279" which you may get from the Controller):
1. All attachments for the provided emails. For example: 3 listed on pg 1, 7 on pg 2, 1 on pg 4, 1 on pg 5, 7 on pg 8, 1 on pg 10. The request specifically requested all attachments.
2. Dozens of redactions throughout the responses. Since no clear reference (or any reference at all) to statutory or case law justifications were provided, I challenge all the redactions as unlawful, and all should be public parts of records.
3. Exact copies of the emails and their attachments. The Controller was requested to provide documents in specified electronic formats. They printed and scanned these documents, thus failing to provide an exact copy of the records, which are public records. No legal justification has been provided.
4. Any documents thus far fully withheld. We do not know if any documents were withheld or not, and no justifications were provided.
The original request is copied below. Parts 1-4 and 7-9 of the request are not being appealed in this petition, but we reserve the right to appeal them at another time.
Sincerely,
Anonymous
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iXeXS%3AIzR9Yyak4lmZGqfzZabChb7-IM4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dsupervisor.records%252540sfcityatty.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Nov. 20, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
Thank you for your Nov 20 response to #5 and #6 of our Sept 13 records request.
A few issues:
- Which attachments did you provide or withhold? For example: 3 listed on pg 1, 7 on pg 2, 1 on pg 4, 1 on pg 5, 7 on pg 8, 1 on pg 10. The request specifically requested all attachments.
- There are dozens of redactions throughout your responses. You are required by law (SFAC 67.26) to provide a clear reference to a justification for each and every redaction or full document withheld, and (SFAC 67.27) you must use a statute or case law dictating exemption.
- You were requested to provide documents in specified electronic format. Why have you printed and scanned these documents, thus failing to provide an exact copy of the records? No legal justification has been provided.
I intend to appeal these issues and the timeliness of your response to SOTF, the Supervisor of Records and/or Superior Court.
Sincerely,
Anonymous
---
On Nov. 20, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hi,
We have completed items 5 & 6. We apologize for the delay. Please find the attachments. If you have any questions, please let us know.
This concludes your public records request. To expedite your future requests, please submit your request through our public records portal<https://sfcontroller.org/contact-us-3>.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image003.png@01D59FB5.0476A900]
From: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2019 2:05 PM
To: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>; CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hi,
We are following up on your request for items 5 and 6. We are processing this item and we will have a response to you next week.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image004.png@01D59FA2.F5C0A8A0]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com%3cmailto:requests@muckrock.com>> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com%3cmailto:requests@muckrock.com>>>
Sent: Friday, October 4, 2019 6:09 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org%3cmailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org%3cmailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
October 4, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you, however I do not believe you have completed these 2 requests:
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
Contrary to your prior concern, I do not need you to search all CCSF employees' records - I only need you to search those in your department. But remember, if your department or its employees "prepared, used, owned, or retained" a communication between some *other* City employee and COFAM or FAMF, you must still turn it over. For example if your employee has a forwarded email between a FAMSF employee and COFAM, you must disclose it.
I will also proceed against FAMSF and the City Attorney directly - however: that does not absolve your agency of its own responsibilities under the CPRA and Sunshine Ordinance.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com%3cmailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Oct. 4, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
To Whom it May Concern:
Thank you for your public records request. The Controller's Office has conducted a diligent search for any records responsive to your request that it possesses. Please see this link<http://sfcontroller.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Auditing/Fine%20Arts%20Museums%20Audit%20Report%20%2810.27.16%29_0.pdf> for an audit report from October 2016. The Controller's Office has previously provided the payment transaction records for both COFAM and FAMF and does not have any additional contractual/legal/MOU records re COFAM and/or FAMF. If such information exists, it would be at the departmental level or with the City Attorney. To submit a public records request with the Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco, please find the contact information here<https://www.famsf.org/about/board-of-trustees/meetings-and-agendas>; for the City Attorney, please email cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org%3cmailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org%3cmailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org%3cmailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org%3cmailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>>>.
This concludes your public records request.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D57AD5.71B29790]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com%3cmailto:requests@muckrock.com>> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com%3cmailto:requests@muckrock.com>>>
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2019 5:33 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org%3cmailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org%3cmailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
September 26, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com%3cmailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com%3cmailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
[Image removed by sender.]
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
[http://email.requests.muckrock.com/o/eJwNyksOgyAQANDTlCWZQUbHBZtqz9Hw0xpBUtCev25fXjBEvYjZbum9BYOgBs1KfIxzXXCEjiyMo-2QA5HXaHHwC4ElsRkFOCIAAQITS5QzMahnT0PPr27m6aGhxu8V29lkvvxei9-lL1lU48tx1pJSrDccd2zLWn6y1PUPlyUrUA]
---
On Oct. 24, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hi,
Our team is still processing your request. We appreciate your patience and we hope to complete your request shortly. We will circle back again soon to give an update / complete.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image001.png@01D58A80.23058930]
From: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2019 2:05 PM
To: requests@muckrock.com; CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hi,
We are following up on your request for items 5 and 6. We are processing this item and we will have a response to you next week.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image003.png@01D58A80.22F69510]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Sent: Friday, October 4, 2019 6:09 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
October 4, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you, however I do not believe you have completed these 2 requests:
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
Contrary to your prior concern, I do not need you to search all CCSF employees' records - I only need you to search those in your department. But remember, if your department or its employees "prepared, used, owned, or retained" a communication between some *other* City employee and COFAM or FAMF, you must still turn it over. For example if your employee has a forwarded email between a FAMSF employee and COFAM, you must disclose it.
I will also proceed against FAMSF and the City Attorney directly - however: that does not absolve your agency of its own responsibilities under the CPRA and Sunshine Ordinance.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iGYZ7%3A43lKSDYp0FNgq5uKE5fysjo3kKA&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Oct. 4, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
To Whom it May Concern:
Thank you for your public records request. The Controller's Office has conducted a diligent search for any records responsive to your request that it possesses. Please see this link<http://sfcontroller.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Auditing/Fine%20Arts%20Museums%20Audit%20Report%20%2810.27.16%29_0.pdf> for an audit report from October 2016. The Controller's Office has previously provided the payment transaction records for both COFAM and FAMF and does not have any additional contractual/legal/MOU records re COFAM and/or FAMF. If such information exists, it would be at the departmental level or with the City Attorney. To submit a public records request with the Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco, please find the contact information here<https://www.famsf.org/about/board-of-trustees/meetings-and-agendas>; for the City Attorney, please email cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org<mailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org%3cmailto:cityattorney@sfcityatty.org>>.
This concludes your public records request.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D57AD5.71B29790]
From: requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com> <requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>>
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2019 5:33 PM
To: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Cc: CON, Controller (CON) <controller.con@sfgov.org<mailto:controller.con@sfgov.org>>
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
San Francisco Controller's Office
PRA Office
Room 316
1 Doctor Carlton B Goodlett Place
SF, CA 94102
September 26, 2019
This is a follow up to a previous request:
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
In all cases, please provide only those copies of records available without any fees. If you determine certain records would require fees, please instead provide the required (free) notice of which of those records are available and non-exempt for inspection in-person if we so choose.
Thanks,
Anonymous
Filed via MuckRock.com
E-mail (Preferred): requests@muckrock.com<mailto:requests@muckrock.com>
Upload documents directly: https://accounts.muckrock.com/accounts/login/?url_auth_token=AABkCAyh6oIMQAfU-Xq1NDoOv1c%3A1iDeBh%3AoTvaM6_GbMEvAZo1mYW29uTsKn4&next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.muckrock.com%2Faccounts%2Flogin%2F%3Fnext%3D%252Faccounts%252Fagency_login%252Fsan-francisco-controllers-office-558%252Fimmediate-disclosure-request-citycofamfamf-relationship-controller-80368%252F%253Femail%253Dcontroller.con%252540sfgov.org
Is this email coming to the wrong contact? Something else wrong? Use the above link to let us know.
For mailed responses, please address (see note):
MuckRock News
DEPT MR 80368
411A Highland Ave
Somerville, MA 02144-2516
PLEASE NOTE: This request is not filed by a MuckRock staff member, but is being sent through MuckRock by the above in order to better track, share, and manage public records requests. Also note that improperly addressed (i.e., with the requester's name rather than "MuckRock News" and the department number) requests might be returned as undeliverable.
[Image removed by sender.]
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Thank you for the documents. However, certain of your responses are improper, so I will give you a chance to correct them, but please do so immediately and not in 10 days, otherwise I will have to file a complaint.
Please read carefully the definition of a public record in the CPRA. You are required to disclose non-exempt records if your agency retains, uses, prepares, or owns the record; it does not matter whether your office is a party to the document. Therefore the following responses are insufficient:
> 1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
> 2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
> 9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
You were not asked for agreements or policies between your office and FAMF/COFAM, you were asked for those between the *City* and FAMF/COFAM. If your office retained, owned, used, or perpared any such agreement or other document, you must turn it over, even if for example a different city agency is named in the document. For example, its quite possible your office has a copy of agreements or policies between FAMSF and FAMF/COFAM, and if so, you must disclose them.
Thanks,
Anonymous
---
On Sept. 26, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello and thank you for your request to the City and County of San Francisco Controller's Office. Please see below for responses to your nine questions.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and COFAM.
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possession that were not executed
* There are no contracts/MOUs/legal agreements between the San Francisco Controller's Office and FAMF.
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
* This request is extremely broad given that some 30k employees work for CCSF. To expeditiously handle this request, would it be possible to narrow this request to specific departments or individuals?
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment A for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving COFAM between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
* See Attachment B for the last 5 years of payments. There is no record of transactions involving FAMF between your requested dates. We have provided the last five years of payments for your reference.
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
* The Controller's Office has no agency policy or memorandum between the Controller's Office and FAMF or COFAM.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D5748D.6EB9AA90]
---
On Sept. 17, 2019:
Subject: RE: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
Hello:
This confirms receipt of your public records request. We are currently researching the matter and we will be in touch.
Best,
The Office of the Controller
[cid:image002.png@01D56D3C.73311700]
---
On Sept. 13, 2019:
Subject: California Public Records Act Request: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship (Controller)
RE: Immediate Disclosure Request - City/COFAM/FAMF Relationship
To Whom It May Concern:
** Please redact your responses correctly! This is a public mailbox, and all of your responses (including emails, attachments, file shares, and the disclosed records) may be automatically and instantly available to the general public on the MuckRock.com service used to issue this request (though I am not a MuckRock representative). Once you send them to us, there's no going back. **
I would like to get to the bottom of the intriguing relationship between the City, COFAM and FAMF.
Pursuant to the Sunshine Ordinance and CPRA, I hereby request the following records as 9 distinct Immediate Discloure Request(s) from the San Francisco Controller's Office - note that you must turn over any records that your agency prepares, owns, uses or retains, even if they are about a different city agency or not from the city at all. Note also that you may argue some of them are not immediately answerable but must still immediately answer the ones that are. Many of these records involve the city agency Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (FAMSF) - but I want all records, whether for FAMSF or otherwise. Where "City" is used below it means: the City as a legal entity, and any of its boards, departments, trusts, commissions, and so forth, and its commissioners, trustees, other officers and employees. Where "COFAM" and "FAMF" are used, it includes each legal entity and its boards, trustees, subsidiaries, other officers, and employees.
1. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Corporation of the Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco (COFAM), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
2. all past/present legal/contractual/MOU relationships between the City and Fine Arts Museums Foundation (FAMF), including any drafts in your possesion that were not executed
3. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving COFAM, from Jan 1 2018 to present
4. all accounting records/line items reflecting a transaction to, from, or involving FAMF, from Jan 1 2018 to present
5. all correspondence* (asterisk means including all attachments, exhibits, memos, metadata, headers, emails, invoices, payments, checks, physical mail/notes, text, SMS, MMS, or any chat app messages, and in their original electronic format or scan of physical documents) between City and COFAM between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
6. all correspondence* between City and FAMF between Jan. 1, 2018 and Sept. 12 2019 (inclusive)
7. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and COFAM, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
8. every invoice, payment, or check between the City and FAMF, including any drafts in your possession that were not executed, between Jan. 1, 2018 and present
9. every agency policy or memorandum discussing the relationship between the City, and FAMF or COFAM
I would like to remind you that you need to indicate for each request above, whether you did or did not have responsive records (separate from whether or not you withheld them).
I request under SFAC 67.21(c) a statement regarding the existence/non-existence, form, quantity, and nature of records responsive to each of the 9 requests, regardless of whether they are exempt from disclosure. This statement must be provided within 7 days and there are no extensions.
Remember any record retained, owned, used, or prepared by your office must be included. If a city employee possesses a COFAM or FAMF document, you must disclose it. If COFAM or FAMF are holding records that were prepared or used by your office, you must disclose it.
We remind you of your obligations to provide electronic records in any format we request them in, as long that format is available to you OR easy to generate (SFAC 67.21(l)). Therefore, emails exported in the .eml or .msg format with all non-exempt headers, metadata, attachments, etc. are best. All other documents may be provided as text .PDFs.
If you choose to convert documents, for example, to PDF or printed format (even though we have specifically emails in .eml or .msg formats), to easily redact them, you must still ensure that you have preserved a full copy of the original conversation record, which contains formatting, images, colors, attachments, and many detailed headers beyond the generally used From/To/Subject/Sent/etc.
If you send PDFs, please use only text/search PDFs, not image/scanned PDFs. You must make exact copies of records under the CPRA - do not exclude color, formatting, images, or any other content that may be lost by printing and scanning records incorrectly.
You also must justify each and every withholding or redaction with particularity. Use footnotes or inline markings for example, and justify each such redaction with a legal citation (statute, ordinance, or case law). If you withhold metadata/headers, even if you don't visually redact them, you are still withholding and must justify it.
If you provide the wrong format or withhold non-exempt parts of records, you may be in violation of SF Admin Code 67.21, 67.26, 67.27, Govt Code 6253(a), 6253.9, and/or 6255, and we may challenge your decision in court, before the Supervisor of Records, and/or the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
From: twitter.com/journo_anon Public Records Requester
Thank you. We shall proceed with the SOTF procedure without a binding letter.
--Anonymous
Files
pages