calendar for a vote i believe that item 4 there's no need for. >> item 5 discussion and possibly action on a matter of the nixon o moigsz for the sunshine ordinance hearing regarding the alleged violation of the sunshine violation and responsibility rebecca and supervisor deputy director is the complanlt

present. >> mr. chair, i have to recuse myself from this in going to the materials there are containments by two street artists which payroll bear on the motivator well, they're in there in any be event i represented them 40 years ago so in terms of fact they're in there i think i want to recuse myself from this. >> there has to be a motion. >> how do the other commissioners feel. >> your recused? all in favor, say i. >> i. >> make a motion and second it. >> i'll make the motion and all in favor, say i. >> any public comment on the

recusal? >> i want to submit a sunshine complaint there office no reason to put outline i all those documents in there around. >> this is just commissioner president keane is asked to be excused because his past connections and all we're voting on whether or not we are going to do that. >> the matter took place 40 years ago i don't believe he's had communication with the characterize. >> i have i see them regularly their friend of mine. >> okay all in favor, say i. >> i. >> carried forward nothing

commissioner president keane you may step out dough have to. >> sit down maybe. >> can i sit in the back all right. you want to make our presentation. >> hi commissioners this complaint why brand new a violation of 4 e 6732 that abc d and section 6265 of the california records act rebecca didn't cite a legal reason for withholding an overwhelm with response to an eir in a phone conversation in 2015 she read the e-mail in question over the phone and provide the name of the authority who was a street artist in a stand next to mine she explained who this person

was there was no request from the lady to keep he or she her identity more fear of the rattion no claim of hazard time it was read to me and this other street artist showed me the e-mail the background is on i do not think second howard does or did a 45-minute of inspection on my stand at figured out and market street i videotaped it from my phone as i have a right to open the public sidewalk remember to the commission office and crow didn't want to located the tape so i could show you her at a later time and she'd send me a followup e-mail and on january 6

i got her open the phone and she read the overwhelm and give the identity of the authority and asked who it was was it was the next stand next to mine she building there was a - i photoed her staples i ask for a copy of the e-mail she roughed and i said i'll send on dr she read the overwhelm over the phone and under the section of the sunshine ordinance the to artists commission is not a law enforcement entity and therefore, must turnover the e-mail the fact that crow stated there was no such e-mail foster

confused the issue article 9 the san francisco artists commission is not a law enforcement body and the name of in0 format was give to me on january 6. crows response included in our packet was filed on april 21st at 11 - 811 a.m. the deadline was april 20th navigate the letter should not be considered at all that whatever it trying to show through the previous sunshine complaint of orders is that crow explicit appear in many sunshine hearings and failed to notify the staff she was going on vacation and, in fact thank you complooipz compiles hearing in

december when with had 3 that executive minutes were somehow lost no one was representing the commission at a hearing i was denied any due process rights the san francisco arts commission didn't supply an response and submitted an appeal based on the appeal at the last second so the san francisco arts commission has a long history of late responses and claims the city attorney advise yes, no name of the deputy city attorney or an e-mail included in the packet evicts to provide somehow a broad overview of the street artists program that is not the subject of the hamburger today,

she seeks to move it away from the heart of sunshine violations 6726 rebecca critically has not had sunshine train and only because howard has had good many orders of determination levied against him advertised the suggestion of victor young from the task force she take on this role she's not assisted in any way of providing documents they've never returned a phone call or returned an e-mail just as a additional thing in anymore letter she states this the program director and members are out on the street everyday that is not true i worked for six weeks from thanksgiving to december everyday i didn't see one out there

the lottery system insures that no fighting over space occurs so in the not to composition for visible spates there's no system within the street artists program arrest the commission to register exclaims on streets or supposed violations i could send an overwhelm but never get a respond i've done many myself i find it difficult to building one e-mail conversations exchange over me when i've sent many overwhelms and not once got a response with regards to the affidavit letter this was a late filing on april 21st at 11:00 a.m. the cut

off was april 20th and member is an actually member of the task force and they have been complained filed on him he represented himself a private citizen yet gets back inform evidence glaendz on his time from the task force and in this letter he accredits wrong information and misleading information again, i explicit foil multiple dirs the person has never apologized and states the same thing again and again of after - he's been represent planned several times for bizarre behavior at meetings and i don't think his letter should be considered tell you

the memo should not be considered she's not the attorney of record the managing attorney for the government team didn't cite the section of the sunshine ordinance and he seeks to leave the focus of this hearing from the sunshine violation by providing other facts which have not relevance it is not a law enforcement entity and any decision that a set the record straight artists makes to testify at the public hearing at another artist hamburger is a type of retaliation is on them the site of the go government site didn't apply the good government code states there are 5 hundred

statutes listed that would apply to confidentiality but streetcar arts issues do - are not one off the 5 hundred that are in that category so in summary the e-mail in questioning which is the subject of hearing should be turned out over to me there was never a cite of any legal rachel norton when critical first said we don't have an e-mail relate to that but after an investigation by the staff she milled to having an e-mail should be turned over in a redictated form i received a notice of violation on this supposed eyewitness account that's my right

as anybody's right to receive the documents they request i believe that i should receive the e-mail that i'm asking for >> thank you commissioner president keane are we taking questions at the end. >> is the ms. crow present? you have 10 minutes to foil a response >> good evening, commissioners and directors i'm rebecca deputy city attorney and cfo of the arts commission i submitted a letter for our report and here to answer any questions about the issue that you have thank you. >> commissioner hur do you -

>> please all she said she submitted a letter. >> ms. danish do you want to respond she said she submitted a letter if you want to make another 5 minute presentation. >> the set the record straight art program is separate from the other goes on of the arts commission i've been more or less discriminate against false filings for a number ever years i nodded in my responses they have been consistent mistakes on the part of howard and i was in criminal court for two years accused ever stalking a secretaries i don't know she didn't appear and i never got an

explanation expect the phones were rolling over most recently, i went up there to renew a permit about 6 weeks ago it is a very simple thing should take minutes you present a money order they run it through a lamination machine they didn't want to open the door howard said there was a restraining order against me and they ran it down to the staurgd i videotaped the incident as parenting of the ethics commission was coming into work she was scream to call 9-1-1 i went to the manage to explain p there was no restraining order and you couldn't prevent me from

coming into the office there was so-called stalking events on top of and this response for rebecca crow particularly around the issue of certain select streetcar artists suggest the claishgz have a history of hament /* hament we don't say a mechanism to voice and only 3 minutes at 6 street artist hamburgers a year we have not given a document that we request have to make i dr and follow-up on the sunshine complaints we are purchasing slander as a sults resulted to foiling for those complaints other at public

hearing and howard walks alone and has a history of false if anything information you see is it in the clark's complaint he not limited to audiotape of a public hearing i have a videotape of the incident no one ever asked to see it was my right to voluntary on a public sidewalk i always could it to protect myself and he falsified an inspection and issued a warning bans the fact of an eyewitness of an e-mail there is one that exists and i i know the identity of person i've seen that but it has nothing to do with with supposed interrupting of the staff person with the concern shows videotaping of her stand my comments are that this is the

difficult position to be in because we pay for permits we are not tread equitablely one stand to another because of this one individual doing the inspections or inspections alone in the streets calling someone for a hearing and letting the other one go with engross violations that have begun on for years it is a very hard situation to be in i believe that i know i never interrupted the duties avenue staff person never blocked any stand awhile someone was doing an inspection i have voluntary for otherwise the reason they don't want to turnover the omen

it is the relevant of the notice of the woorn there was no eyewitness because it didn't to that. >> thank you commissioner hur. >> i have some questions first for ms. danish. >> ms. danish are you testify that mr. many crow read the e-mail you want her to turnover. >> the event took place on a friday i went out of my woo to go to the office they never pick up the phone it was about 5 o'clock i rank the buzzer and i said come out and i've not had words with her i've gone out of how way to meet and help the

situation along because those legions leakages of events are stressful. >> so you went into the office. >> it was a friday she cracked the donor and said i'll talk to lazzaro you'll get an overwhelm on monday, i was able to get her on the phone on tuesday she read the e-mail. >> she read it to you. >> how do you know you she told me this is the overwhelm this was the stand next to you. >> okay. is that the end of the month to month. >> yes. it is what you mind forwarding it to me she said she wouldn't i know i'll make an dr for this particular e-mail. >> i did not see the e-mail in our packet. >> it's in the packet.

>> no, no not our e-mail but the e-mail you're trying to determine. >> oh no, not in the packet. >> seem like an important thing for the commission to have in order to determination e determine who it should be turned over let me ask we have the city attorney's letter which disagrees with the staffs recommendations and as i read your letter seems like those agencies by a rough to produce anything simply saying its an investigation or sits confident

or reveals someone's name isn't there a review of the document. >> decrease a due process law in place within the city attorney's office with respect to this matter i've not consulted with deputy city attorneys or city attorney andrew shed that may have spoken with the staff about this if you want in their opinion i'll prepare to offer thoughts about the legal issues unlike but i generally happening happen to ago with the adopting but want to make it clear our officer in a variety of matters process that and this is a a matter of them. >> i read it and it smell it is

carr blafrn if a government agency didn't want to produce a document it simply says oh, part of our investigation or reveals the complainants name who reviews that. >> i suppose you're correct if i mean you know our viewer is that and my view is that the informant privilege identification do, in fact apply and the sunshine ordinance didn't agreeing combat those privileges if the city departments you know in communication with their deputy city attorney reviews a particular request and feels the question request is or certain parts of documents fall within the privileges those documents will not be turned over and i

suppose the requester could seek legal action if the disclosures or disclosure they feel was not laugh dpu but the city departments in conjunction with the departments will advise if for example, the identity of an informant a whistle blower if this is information is called for and particular request not furnished over those particular issues are under the sunshine ordinance. >> didn't did responding agency have to be specific why it is not turned over is that all they can do. >> the sunshine ordinance requires a disclosure nor a particular statutory permission

and all that was said was confident we would occur with concur with the staff's recommendation that when this documents or e-mail was not turned over there should have seen a more eloquent statement why the reason i feel this is a separate question whether this is actually a proper or improper refusal to turnover the e-mail and on the legal question of whether the informant privilege i can go into why we believe that's the case. >> i think that follow-up with commissioner hur what he said in this case in order for us to find that the refusal to produce that was illegal we need to see the overwhelm do we.

>> i think that it's possible to do an in camera review to make that determination so you're not preincluded from doing that but generally speaking the public is allowed to see this e-mail. >> commissioner. >> i have questions for ms. crow. >> okay ms. crow do you read the e-mail to ms. danish. >> no. >> did she do you recall her coming to speak to you about the issue. >> your denying she came to speak with you. >> correct.

>> what about the subsequent phone call did that happen. >> i do remember a phone call yes. >> what was said during the phone call. >> i can't remember exactly what was said this was months ago and we receive a lot of phone calls from ms. danish i understand she was agitated about a allegation alteration that took place between our program director and she wanted to know if there were any females that were from anyone that may have witnessed the event the issue. >> what did you is in response. >> i said we had an overwhelm from a witness. >> what else did you say. >> that's it. >> what did she saw in

response. >> i don't remember her saying anything. >> do you remember remember when the conversation occurred. >> early in january. >> were you in the office my yes. >> do you know what time. >> i don't know the time. >> do you remember imagine or anything else about that time. >> no. >> thank you. >> ms. crow so we've established the e-mail exists my lion of questioning my questions do make sense otherwise. >> i shared the e-mail with the staff during the course of their investigation. >> ms. crow did how soon after did you gave me the city attorney or what's the

combroishl processed i want to hear more. >> sure so i was responsible for responding to sunshine requests temporarily awhile our information officer was on maternity leave obvious trying to respond in a timely matter the next business day didn't also give us a lot of time and those issues but in this particular in advance the program director has an extensive meticulous records hose kept over the years hose been managing the program over 40 years ago so he has the historic foils of the years ease alone relying on the information so he give me the language

around the response and unfortunately i was not aware of the specific codes in the code section that relates to the lunge which obviouslyi am now. >> so just so i'm clear you're saying you never told her who sent the e-mail. >> correct. >> i mean it seems to me that the overwhelm will resolve the issue if we see the overwhelm we will know who is telling the truth. >> the documents related to this case are public documents and we put the overwhelm in there. >> i know you can't put it in the public packet