kawa. i vote for that as we can interpret it as a motion to amend. >> you want to state your amendment for the record? >> that the retention of mr. kawa's calendar was indeed required by existing law. and i wouldn't go in farther than that. >> i second that as a motion. >> are you withdrawing your motion? >> yes. >> all right. any, i have got to say, i vote against it, but it comes up because i don't understand what it is that you are pointing to. >> mainly what i'm pointing to is the overall collective aspect of the sunshine ordinance, good government, brown act, in regard to public records. the city attorney's interpretation of this particular calendar as a public record, and the underlying requirements within those ordinances and the policies that speak to those ordinances that those things should be preserved. i know i'm casting a broad net here, and i know i'm doing it in a vague way. but i think ratted than just give a pass to the whole idea that records of such moment and significanc

kawa. i vote for that as we can interpret it as a motion to amend. >> you want to state your amendment for the record? >> that the retention of mr. kawa's calendar was indeed required by existing law. and i wouldn't go in farther than that. >> i second that as a motion. >> are you withdrawing your motion? >> yes. >> all right. any, i have got to say, i vote against it, but it comes up because i don't understand what it is that you are pointing to. >> mainly what i'm pointing to is the overall collective aspect of the sunshine ordinance, good government, brown act, in regard to public records. the city attorney's interpretation of this particular calendar as a public record, and the underlying requirements within those ordinances and the policies that speak to those ordinances that those things should be preserved. i know i'm casting a broad net here, and i know i'm doing it in a vague way. but i think ratted than just give a pass to the whole idea that records of such moment and significanc

kawa. i vote for that as we can interpret it as a motion to amend. >> you want to state your amendment for the record? >> that the retention of mr. kawa's calendar was indeed required by existing law. and i wouldn't go in farther than that. >> i second that as a motion. >> are you withdrawing your motion? >> yes. >> all right. any, i have got to say, i vote against it, but it comes up because i don't understand what it is that you are pointing to. >> mainly what i'm pointing to is the overall collective aspect of the sunshine ordinance, good government, brown act, in regard to public records. the city attorney's interpretation of this particular calendar as a public record, and the underlying requirements within those ordinances and the policies that speak to those ordinances that those things should be preserved. i know i'm casting a broad net here, and i know i'm doing it in a vague way. but i think ratted than just give a pass to the whole idea that records of such moment and significanc

kawa should or should not have erased his calendar. i stand by that his electronic calendar is a public record. so, that's basically my analysis. in the end, you have a choice before you. you can make a policy decision in the same way that the task force did to incorporate the record