Sunday, August 03, 2014

San Diegans are paying to defend a politician who claims San Diegans have no right to obtain records

You think that just because you're paying the lawyer, that means he's acting in your interest?

No, public entity lawyers protect public officials.  They rarely seek to protect the public.  (Mike Aguirre was an exception to this rule.  He believed he represented the people of San Diego.)

We elected them--and now we're paying for their efforts to keep us ignorant of what's going on.

Both Voice of San Diego and UT-San Diego  are covering the topic:

Morning Report: What to Watch for in Big PD Misconduct Deal

...San Diegans are now in the position of paying to defend a politician who claims San Diegans have no right to obtain the records of public business he has conducted over his personal devices and accounts.
Goldsmith’s office recently coughed up around 1,000 emails relating to city business that went to his personal account, but noted he wasn’t legally required to do so. 
Secret Public Records
On the topic of the public’s interest, the Public Utility Commission decided to withhold an expert report on what went wrong at the San Onofre nuclear power plant. Full disclosure of that report wouldn’t be in the public’s best interest either, according to a PUC attorney.
Shortly after denying the request to release the report in defense of the public’s best interest, the PUC released the report...

 The issue of concealing public business in private emails will be addressed by the California Supreme Court in  Smith v. City of San Jose (March 19, 2013, No. 1-09-CV-150427).

State's high court takes email case

Justices will decide whether officials can keep public business secret by using personal devices

The California Supreme Court will review a lower court ruling that kept otherwise public records out of public hands if they were sent using private email accounts and devices.

The San Jose case involves a resident who asked to see emails and texts of City Council members but was rejected because the communication took place on personal devices and accounts. It’s garnering statewide interest as electronic devices make it possible for public officials to handle more public business outside the usual communications systems...

No comments: