>> on the executive director's report. >> thank you, dr. kerr again. this chart on the first page of the director's report, that has 6 categories of investigations and enforcements, mr. st. croix introduced that chart in 2006, but the first month that this chart was introduced that was whistle blower/sunshine ordinance. since then, in the last six years, the word whistle blower has not appeared. now whistle blower retaliation is arguably a more serious problem than any of these because it involves the destruction of someone's professional life and personal life, too. and it is part of your responsibility to over see whistle blower protection. so i would suggest and plead that whistle blower retaliation be one of the categories so that you know how many complaints come in, and you can track whether any of them gets substan ated. thank you. >> commissioners, ray heart, director of san francisco open government. i do read these reports. i read every one of them, front to back and i go back and make notes on them and everything else because i really do wan

dr. derek kerr. and i have comment that relates to the executive director's report and your annual report to the board. as you know, protection of whistle blowers is one of your mandates, it is in article four of the campaign and government conduct code. but your work in this area is invisible. there is nothing about whistle blower retaliation in your minutes for the last seven years, or your director's reports, or your annual reports. recently the controller's whistle blower program has been reporting retaliation complaints. 17, this year, none substantiate. since 1995 none have been by this body. each year you are required to provide a report to the board of supervisors. one requirement is that you note the number of complaints that you have received. another requirement is to report, the type of conduct complained about, unquote. and so please consider adding whistle blower retaliation to the categories of complaints, that are listed in the director's report, and that should be listed in the annua

to pressure to make a disclosure if such disclosure is possible and we need to protect not just dr. kerr not just mr. revera and not just any particular whistle blower, but we need to protect future whistle blowers from a come pull son to disclose and the investigatory files if any part of them were disclosable you run a very serious risk of not being able to conduct the investigation. who is going to talk to an investigator if they think that any part of their interview, that the fact that they were interviewed, the time that they were interviewed, that it could be disclosed and i think that there is an important public benefit to being able to protect them from such disclosures so that we can do the very work that we are talking about. so, you know, the notion that we just you know, we don't care about what is in the files and we just want to rubber stamp, you know, the analysis, is totally, unfounded. i think to the contrary, we have spent an enormous amount of time trying to get this right and frankly i recent the idea that we have not given it detailed thought. >> additional public

kerr. it says dr. clark kerr has recently been formally inaugurated as president of the university of california, and as a consequence as the head of all eight campuses of the university located in both northern and southern california. dr. kerr has always given the impression that he is a, quote, liberal, end quote, in the educational field, that he is not in sympathy with loyalty oaths by state and university officials, and that he's also not in complete accord with the fact that various branches of the state and local government must conduct security investigations of individuals on the various campuses of the university of california, especially where those individuals take part in classified contracts. with this background in mind, the following is being brought to the attention of the bureau merely for its information. and in the event that the bureau may receive some inquiry concerning dr. kerr who at best is a highly controversial figure in california education. so that's 1958, and a few years l

dr. eric kerr. the word complaint runs through this document. i am concerned because a complaint is fundamentally different from a sunshine referral or order of determination. by mixing all the terms up we lose exattitude that will come in handy at some point. and also by declaiming a complaint by order of determination, you are treating a citizen complaint the same way as the careful deliberations of the sunshine task force. it doesn't make sense to me. and keeping the word complaint in this. because that's how the document was drafted and it will disrupt some paragraphs. i don't see that as a sufficiently strong argument to keep them mixed together. my second point is

dr. eric kerr. the word complaint runs through this document. i am concerned because a complaint is fundamentally different from a sunshine referral or order of determination. by mixing all the terms up we lose exattitude that will come in handy at some point. and also by declaiming a complaint by order of determination, you are treating a citizen complaint the same way as the careful deliberations of the sunshine task force. it doesn't make sense to me. and keeping the word complaint in this. because that's how the document was drafted and it will disrupt some paragraphs. i don't see that as a sufficiently strong argument to keep them mixed together. my second point is where, the sunshine task force is a mutual review body. and to connect them with the complainant or respondent compromises their position. they should not represent anyone but their conclusion. thank you. >> i have three points that come to my mind. number one is the whole issue again of complaint referral. i have been at the sunshine hearings, and all of you need to go and pay a

dr. derek kerr again. one of the things that prompted mr. shaw's request, was the fact that retaliation had already occurred against the two whistle blowers who reported the misappropriations from the gift fund. i understand the they theory cal concept of protecting them in the future by keeping things confidential. but it doesn't work in reality, you see? now, if you conduct the f.b.i., and ask for information about a closed case, they will tell you that how they investigated the process is confidential. some of the information is confidential but they will still send you the file, sometimes it will be completely blackened out. but you know that there is something. but here with ethics, and with the coll

dr. derek kerr again. one of the things that prompted mr. shaw's request, was the fact that retaliation had already occurred against the two whistle blowers who reported the misappropriations from the gift fund. i understand the they theory cal concept of protecting them in the future by keeping things confidential. but it doesn't work in reality, you see? now, if you conduct the f.b.i., and ask for information about a closed case, they will tell you that how they investigated the process is confidential. some of the information is confidential but they will still send you the file, sometimes it will be completely blackened out. but you know that there is something. but here with ethics, and with the controllers program, the investigations are non-existent. but the retaliation occurs while no investigation goes on for two years, well, two years and two months. >> in this case it is closed, it is a closed case, ethics said that it is not in their jurisdiction, we gave permission to disclose whatever was disclosable and the least they could do

dr. kirk who is at best a highly controversial figure of california education. that is 1958. a few years later there is another document which even more pointedly expressedes j. edgar hoover's view of clark kerr. this is dated march 20, 1961. it concerns a visit to the campus of someone named frank wilkinson who had been a housing official in los angeles and had been called to testify before the house un-american activities committee and refused. wilkinson was going to come to the campus and give a speech. certain people were very unhappy about this. this memo summarizes that and we see on the last page hoover's handwriting and his characteristic jagged score all, he writes i am absolutely opposed to this crowd of bleeding hearts at berkeley using the fbi to get off the hook. i know kerr is no good and i doubt the vice chancellor, is. that to me was an astonishing document. here was the head of the nation's largest law enforcement agency saying very bluntly that the head of his leading public university and one of the most eminent educators in america was rotten to the court essentially. is reflected the fbi's view of clark kerr. >> later intervened with lyndon johnson when he was considering