ray hartz. >> i assume that i have ten minutes. >> ray hartz san francisco open government what changed from the time that this was heard back in february? for the benefit of the

>> commissioners, ray hartz director of san francisco open government. i would much rather be home reading a good book and i am sure that you would rather i be anywhere else do anything else than here. i am going to talk tonight about the fact that although i am some what in some people's minds intemp erate and aggressive or whatever you want to call it. i have good reasons for doing so and i would like to spend this time talking about that. you all know gomez and wass the president of the library and you recommended to the mayor's office that she be removed for standards that fell below those appropriate for a public official. the learned lesson of miss gomez, here we have a letter recommending the approval or the removal, a year later, they sent another letter saying what is going on. and as far as i know you have never gotten a response. it appeared in the paper waiting recall. and the lesson that miss gomez learned is that you can't stop people from speaking because you will have them nouned violation. so what she does in step is picks comments that

>> commissioners ray hartz director of san francisco open government. i think that the important part of 67.26 reads as follows, information that is exempt from disclosured shall be masked in order that the non-exempt portion of the record may be released and keyed by footnote or other clear reference to the appropriate justification for withholding the required by section 67.27 of this article. i think that is pretty clear. and i like to point out another thing and nowhere in the sunshine ordinance task hearings, have we actually received anything to show what the city attorney said about this matter. is there any possibility that maybe the discussion was held and was very convoluted and miss patterson misunderstand what the city attorney said and or any possibility that someone might come over and to cover their back side and said that the attorney said it. nowhere have you got anything to show what the city attorney said about this matter. and you are going on and on and on about the city at attorney said this or that and you have no idea and you jus

ray hartz. >> i assume that i have ten minutes. >> ray hartz san francisco open government what changed from the time that this was heard back in february? for the benefit of the commissioner who was not here, this is what we are talking about, section 67.16 of the minutes and any person speaking during a public period may supply a brief written summaris for their common, 150 words and shall be included in the minutes. and i would ask each of you especially those of you who are attorneys if we were in superior court under oath and someone says what does in the minutes mean to you? what does it mean to you. >> the city attorney seems to think that it means all of this stuff, the summy is not part of the body of the minutes or, and it may state oso. >> it may be included as a attachment and they may reject the summary if it exceeds the word limit or is not an active summary of the speaker's comments. this has never been a choice about following the direction of the city attorney, it has been a direction about choosing what you want to do. and using the city attorney's advice to justify it

>> commissioners ray hartz director of san francisco open government. after all of this you have decided for the arts commission that they can redact the addresses. but what about every other city body? when i go to the library commission, and i fill out a card could they redact it or just pass it out? >> if i come here could you redact it or pass it out? >> i mean, the very, if you listened to your own arguments and your own discussions, that is the real question. what is right? what does the law require and what does it prohibt. >> you are willing to take these very vague things about we think that we know what was redacted and we are told what the city attorney said and we don't have anything in writing to actually say that. we have a memo that refers to the constitution. but, is there any legal statement as to what part of the constitution and what specifically had addresses? and as a result, you may, and in this case, you may decide that it is as far as this particular matter and this particular arts commission, they were okay. and if there are fiv

commissioners ray hartz, director of san francisco open government. i know pastor gavin quite well and it relates to the board of supervisors handling of the park and she has been evicted and has been for a large part homeless during a significant portion of the ongoing efforts here. and this was also subject to the case in federal court one in superior court and that throws an extra winkle into it. i also believe that she is unable to get healthcare, and as a result asking her to produce a doctor's note when she has no access to a doctor, is an reasonable expectation. now, i will be honest with you and you can take this as it is and you will not like it. you guys have dragged your feet on sunshine issues for literally a decade. and it went on and on and on and on and on and on. and as it is, even though the law specifically says that the complaints have to be heard in 45 days, it usually takes 6 to 9 months to he even get your first hearing and then to subcommittee and then round and round in circles and then you drag it on for six months and a year

>> commissioners, ray hartz, director of san francisco government. 67.30 the sunshine ordinance subsection c. the task force shall advise the board of supervisors and provide information on other city departments on appropriate ways in which to implement this chapter. that is the authority that the sunshine task force has. does the city attorney have the ability to over or to review and override those? yes he does, but he needs to give a legal justification he can't just say which he did in the case of 150-word summaries i say my opinion is different. he did not site any law or any statue or any justification, i will go back to mr. hur's argument i will now send all of my idr and my information requests and anything that i have directly to the department head and specifically with the department head because that is the person who receives annual sunshine training and annual sunshine declaration and has the responsibility as the department head to insure everyone in the department follows the law. if someone does not follow the law, it is his or her responsibility. i was in the navy, in th