Request #19-3625
  Closed

RE:  California Public Records Act Request regarding Union Membership and the case of

Janus v. AFSCME (2018) 138 S. Ct. 2448, 201 L.Ed.2d 924

To whom it may concern:

This letter is being sent on behalf of California Policy Center, Inc. I request you direct this
letter to the responsible city person to respond to the following CPRA request.

PUBLIC RECORDS ACT REQUEST

ALL DOCUMENTS REGARDING THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT DECISION OF JANUS V. AFSCME  FROM JANUARY
1, 2018 TO

THE DATE OF THIS LETTER AS SET FORTH BELOW

Pursuant to the California Public Records Act, Govt. Code §§ 6250-6276.48, California Policy Center
(“Requestor”) respectfully requests to inspect all public records in the possession or control of
the City of San Diego (“San Diego” or “city”), which includes:

1.   Every Councilmember on the Council of the city of San Diego, members of their staff;

2.   Every other employee and agent of the city of San Diego,

3.   Every Union Official and anyone using city of San Diego communications devices, information
technology equipment, facilities, paper, voicemails, etc.

whether or not those “writings” or “documents” are maintained by the city of San Diego or by
someone else on its behalf, relating in any way to:

A.  The recalling, deletion, censoring, screening and/or concealment of any physical or electronic
mail from an employee’s physical or electronic mailbox with or
without the knowledge of that employee regarding an employee’s rights and/or the Janus v. AFSCME
(2018) 138 S. Ct. 2448, 201 L.Ed.2d 924 the decision of the United States Supreme Court on the
issues of union membership, agency fee payers, dues for union membership and/or agency fee payers
and efforts of individual employees to leave their union;

B.  Any communication between any and all union representatives or members of collective bargaining
units and any city technological support personnel on the subject matter of item A above; and

C.  Any communication between any and all city Personnel and any city IT personnel regarding the
recalling, deletion, censoring or concealment of any physical or electronic mail from an employee’s
physical or electronic mailbox / account with or without the knowledge of that employee on the
subject matter of item A above.

This request is for any and all writings and communications (including but not limited to, letters,
electronic communications, e-mails, text messages, notes, memorandums, messages) whether or not
those communications are stored in city files and/or servers or on personal devices / accounts such
as private electronic mail accounts or cellular telephones.

These writings specifically include policies and procedures on this topic adopted or under
consideration to be adopted by the City Council, or any other office of the city of San Diego,
including its Human Resources Department.

The writings and communications on this subject being sought are those by and between the city of
San Diego and any collective bargaining unit (i.e. union) representing employees of the city of San
Diego.  In addition CPC seeks records of writings and communications by and between the city of San
Diego and the San Diego County Department of Education on these subjects as well as writings and
communications within the city of San Diego.

CPC is aware of the exemption for personnel matters as it applies to individual employees of
Government Code section 6254 (c).  It is also aware that this exemption does NOT apply to classes
of employees.  In other words, if there are documents that match those requested by CPC as stated
herein, that contain a specific employee’s name or other personal identification (such as his or
her social security number), CPC wishes to inspect and/or copy this document after the city has
redacted that employee’s name or other personal identification information.

The time frame for this Request is January 1, 2018 and the date of this letter (July 31, 2019).

2  REQUEST FOR INFORMATION IN ELECTRONIC FORMAT PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 6253.9 (A) (2) & (E).

CPC is seeking these records in any and all electronic formats city of San Diego keeps them in.  
Under the Public Records Act, the city of San Diego is required to deliver the information in
whatever electronic format it is in no matter whether it is Excel, Word, WordPerfect or some other
program or programs.  Government Code section 6253.9 (a)

(2) & (e).  My request extends to receipt of this information in the electronic format the city
maintains these records in.  Delivery of this information to me by electronic mail
(jackson@calpolicycenter.org) or via a thumb drive or via a disk is fine.  I can supply the city
with a thumb drive if needed.  Please advise what electronic format these records are kept in.

In addition, if there are documents that satisfy this request that are in both electronic and paper
formats, I offer to receive the electronic version of those records and forgo inspection and
potential photocopying of those paper copies.  It is hoped that this will save the city and my
time, trouble and expense.

If you anticipate that data compilation, extraction, or programming will be required to satisfy a
request (per Section 6253.9(b)), please provide a written estimate and justification for same.

REQUEST FOR INSPECTION OF DOCUMENTS

For any records not delivered electronically, once my agent and/or I have had an opportunity to
inspect these records, we will designate which documents we will wish to obtain copies from the
city and its agents, employees, consultants, etc.  If a document exists in both electronic and
paper formats, I select to receive a copy of the electronic version of the document.  This should
save both the city time and funds in duplication time and costs and my duplication costs.

The California Public Records Act requires the city to “reveal the general nature of the documents
withheld,” and to “set forth the names and titles or positions of each person responsible for the
denial.”  Cal. Govt. Code Section 6253 (d).  I emphasize CPC’s request for a specific response and
all applicable exemptions to the request.  A blanket list of exemptions that may or may not apply
to the request coupled with a failure to indicate the existence of documents responsive to the
request denies us the ability to evaluate whether the city has justifiably withheld responsive
documents.  Denying CPC this opportunity frustrates the Legislature’s primary purpose in enacting
the California Public Records Act, which is to “maximize public access to agency records.”

We agree that after our inspection of documents made available, to pay the direct cost of
duplicating any and all responsive writings we request to have copied in accordance with Section
6253(b).  However we will not pay for any charges related to searching, reviewing or redacting
documents or portions thereof.  Cal. Govt. Code Section 6253(b).

3


There is no question that the city is a public entity subject to the Public Records Act pursuant to
Government Code section 6252 and it must comply with the Request as set forth under the Act.

Terms utilized that are defined by the California Public Records Act should be given their full
meaning.  Thus, for example, a request for any “writing” includes a request for “any handwriting,
typewriting, printing, Photostatting, photographing, photocopying, transmitting by electronic mail
or facsimile, and every other means of recording upon any tangible thing any form of communication
or representation, including letters, words, pictures, sounds, or symbols, or combinations thereof,
and any record thereby created, regardless of the manner in which the record has been stored.  Cal.
Govt Code section 6252 (g).  In keeping with the provisions of the California Public Records Act,
“writing” includes any preliminary drafts, notes or interagency or intra-agency memoranda” unless
such draft items are “not retained…in the ordinary course of business” and “the public interest in
withholding clearly outweighs the public interest in disclosure.”

Additionally, certain common terms should be given broad interpretation.  For example, “relating
to” means, in addition to the usual and customary meaning, depict or depicting discuss or
discussing, refer to or referring, reflect or reflecting, support or supporting, refute or
refuting, address or addressing, evidence or evidencing, or record or recording.

For the purposes of this letter, a reference to an entity or body, such as the city includes any
and all representatives of the entity or body.

CITY OF SAN DIEGO’S RESPONSE TO  OUR  REQUESTS  ARE DUE  WITHIN TEN DAYS

In accordance with Section 6253 (c),  please contact me within ten (10) days of your receipt of
this request and notify me whether this request seeks copies of dis-closable public records in the
city’s possession, and, if not, the reasons for such determination. We will wish to make an
appointment with you to review the dis-closable records at your office.

Thank you in advance for your courtesy and cooperation in this matter.


Received

July 30, 2019 via email


Departments

City Council District 4

Documents

Public

(loading...)

Staff

Point of Contact

Angela Laurita

Request Published Public
November 22, 2019, 9:36pm
Request Closed Public

02. Released

All responsive documents have been released pursuant to the California Public Records Act.

November 19, 2019, 4:40pm by Jenny Williams
Department Assignment Public
Added: City Council District 4.
November 19, 2019, 4:09pm by Angela Laurita, Public Records Administration Manager
Department Assignment Public
Removed: City Council District 4.
November 8, 2019, 10:08am by Jenny Williams
Department Assignment Public
Removed: City Council District 7.
October 17, 2019, 2:25pm by Lisa Scott
Document(s) Released Public
CD7_19-3625.pdf
October 17, 2019, 2:24pm by Lisa Scott
Department Assignment Public
Removed: City Council Administration.
October 14, 2019, 1:50pm by Lori Witzel
Document(s) Released   Details Public
AGC Monday Morning Quarterback.pdf
AGC Monday Morning Quarterback-1.pdf
Alert - Major Union Ruling at SCOTUS.pdf
Austin wins paid sick days, and so much more in this month’s newsletter!.pdf
Help with lifting up Local Progress Janus op-ed in The Nation on Monday 2_26!.pdf
ICYMI_ Major Privacy Bill Passes in CA.pdf
Join the Conversation_ The #FightingForFamilies Week of Action Starts Today!.pdf
Join the Conversation_ The #FightingForFamilies Week of Action Starts Today!-1.pdf
Join the fight back against the latest Supreme Court attack on working people.pdf
Join the fight back against the latest Supreme Court attack on working people-4.pdf
Labor & Employment Legal Alert_ Janus v. AFSCME.pdf
NCTQ Teacher Trendline_ Janus v. AFSCME.pdf
Need Before Greed.pdf
RE_ Working People's Day of Action in San Diego on 2_24.pdf
Register for our June 1 briefing on Building Worker Power.pdf
Register for our June 1 briefing on Building Worker Power-1.pdf
Rev. Shane Harris releases a statement on Wednesday's SCOTUS ruling.pdf
SDBJ.com Daily eNews.pdf
Soda ducks one tax, but may face another.pdf
Stand up and Fight Back! 💪🏿.pdf
STATEMENT _ Asm. Todd Gloria Reacts to U.S. Supreme Court's Ruling in Janus v. AFSCME.pdf
The Supreme Court has just dealt a blow to workers’ rights .pdf
The Supreme Court has just dealt a blow to workers’ rights 1.pdf
They Say Cut Back, We Say Fight Back! .pdf
They Say Cut Back, We Say Fight Back! -2.pdf
They Say Cut Back, We Say Fight Back! -3.pdf
Weekly CALmatters 06_30_2018 TEST TEST TEST.pdf
Working People's Day of Action in San Diego on 2_24.pdf
Working People's Day of Action in San Diego on 2_24-1.pdf
October 8, 2019, 10:02am by Lori Witzel
Document(s) Released   Details Public
AGC Monday Morning Quarterback.pdf
AGC Monday Morning Quarterback-1.pdf
Alert - Major Union Ruling at SCOTUS.pdf
Austin wins paid sick days, and so much more in this month’s newsletter!.pdf
CA Cities Advocate, July 2, 2018 MC.pdf
CA Cities Advocate, July 2, 2018.pdf
CA Cities Advocate, June 18, 2018.pdf
CA Cities Advocate, June 18, 2018-1.pdf
Fighting a billionaire attack on working people and more in this month’s newsletter!.pdf
Join the Conversation_ The #FightingForFamilies Week of Action Starts Today!.pdf
Join the fight back against the latest Supreme Court attack on working people.pdf
Register for our June 1 briefing on Building Worker Power.pdf
SDBJ.com Daily eNews.pdf
Soda ducks one tax, but may face another.pdf
Stand up and Fight Back! 💪🏿.pdf
Stand up and Fight Back! 💪🏿MC.pdf
The Supreme Court has just dealt a blow to workers’ rights .pdf
They Say Cut Back, We Say Fight Back! .pdf
Today's Janus decision hurts us all.pdf
Weekly CALmatters 06_30_2018 TEST TEST TEST.pdf
October 8, 2019, 10:00am by Lori Witzel
Document(s) Released   Details Public
BREAKING_ Major Privacy Bill Passes in CA.pdf
CA Cities Advocate, July 2, 2018.pdf
CA Cities Advocate, June 18, 2018.pdf
California City News Update.pdf
ICYMI_ Major Privacy Bill Passes in CA.pdf
NCTQ Teacher Trendline_ Janus v. AFSCME.pdf
SDBJ.com Daily eNews LZ.pdf
SDBJ.com Daily eNews.pdf
Soda ducks one tax, but may face another.pdf
Weekly CALmatters 06_30_2018 TEST TEST TEST.pdf
AGC Monday Morning Quarterback.pdf
AGC Monday Morning Quarterback-1.pdf
Alert - Major Union Ruling at SCOTUS.pdf
October 8, 2019, 9:57am by Lori Witzel
Department Assignment Public
Removed: City Council District 9.
September 23, 2019, 11:08am by Brenda Lugo
Document(s) Released to Requester Public
19-3625_CD9.pdf
September 23, 2019, 11:07am by Brenda Lugo
Department Assignment Public
Removed: Personnel.
August 23, 2019, 2:26pm by Anne Lamen Aban
Department Assignment Public
Removed: City Council District 3.
August 23, 2019, 1:23pm by Brett Weise
Document(s) Released Public
FW ADVISORY Campaign Seeks to Cut Off Campaign Cash to CA Politicians.msg
Re Working People's Day of Action in San Diego on 224.msg
August 23, 2019, 1:22pm by Brett Weise
Department Assignment Public
Removed: City Council District 6.
August 22, 2019, 2:13pm by James Hauser
Document(s) Released to Requester Public
Request #19-3625-CD6.pdf
August 22, 2019, 2:10pm by James Hauser
Department Assignment Public
Removed: Human Resources.
August 19, 2019, 9:32am by Ginger Rodriguez, Public Records Administration Coordinator
Department Assignment Public
Removed: Information Technology.
August 15, 2019, 3:54pm by Ian Brazill
Department Assignment Public
Removed: City Attorney.
August 14, 2019, 3:32pm by Danielle Fawcett, Paralegal, Office of the City Attorney
Department Assignment Public
Removed: City Clerk.
August 8, 2019, 2:30pm by Tina Davis
Department Assignment Public
Removed: City Council District 8.
August 8, 2019, 12:55pm by Lisa Schmidt
Document(s) Released to Requester Public
CD8 19-3625.pdf
August 8, 2019, 12:54pm by Lisa Schmidt
Department Assignment Public
Removed: City Council District 2.
August 8, 2019, 12:00pm by Monica Eslamian
Department Assignment Public
Removed: City Council District 1.
August 7, 2019, 4:32pm by Steven Hadley, Council Representative
Department Assignment Public
Removed: City Council District 5.
August 5, 2019, 3:51pm by Heidi Palmer, Director of Office Administration
Department Assignment   Details Public
City Attorney, City Clerk, City Council Administration, City Council District 1, City Council District 2, City Council District 3, City Council District 4, City Council District 5, City Council District 6, City Council District 7, City Council District 8, City Council District 9, Human Resources, Information Technology, Personnel
August 1, 2019, 3:51pm by Ginger Rodriguez, Public Records Administration Coordinator
Request Opened Public
Request received via email
August 1, 2019, 3:51pm by Ginger Rodriguez, Public Records Administration Coordinator
Show All History Items