Retention law. That policy decision is best left in the form of a call for a change in the law, a call to the board of supervisors to incorporate the record retention ordinance into the sunshine ordinance so there are some teeth there. It is arguably not an unenforcement action. Its not best to make that policy decision, but you could make that decision. Therefore in the memo we highlight the ways the commission can enforce the sunshine ordinance. Unfortunately there is no way to deal with a past violation like this. You cant watch this authority and cant create the calendar. And unfortunately those penalties dont exist because the ordinance doesnt contemplate this situation because its not a retained record and therefore not something that could be produced. So i leave you with that. Im open to questions. I believe you also have someone from the Mayors Office here and mr. Pet trellis is obviously here. I will let mr. Pet trellis have 5 minutes to make his case. Before i get started, i want to try to zoom in on the City Attorneys letter on the specific. There. Start the clock. Is this the september 15th letter . Yes, the september 15th letter page 3. Hello, my name is michael pet trellis. I like to look at Public Documents from international governments, federal governments, state and local government. And i filed a request earlier this year for steve kawas calendar and emails, and in one of the responses from the City Attorney dated september 15th, the City Attorney cites as a Good Government. I will read. Ful the vast majority of the Public Record in the citys possession do not go in the records retention law. Therefore the city may destroy these records at any time. For example, as a general rule, employees may immediately dispose of so message slips, notes of meetings, research notes, prepared for the personal use of the employee creating them and the large majority of email communications. Okay, sf govtv please come back to me, im done reading. It is very disturbing that the City Attorney continually cite the government guide and fails to mention it is not law. To have the City Attorney state that many of the record, actually the vast majority of Public Record do not fall under records retention law. Its in and of itself very disturbing. We need a watch dog, not a lapdog to the Mayors Office and others at city hall. I cannot worry about the City Attorneys grace. And the Large Communications are easily disposed of is very disturbing. To come to my request on the calendar. Let me show in the overhead again. We can go back to you can see this was kawas calendar from july 13th, to july 19, 2015. Totally blank there. A few weeks later, he did produce a calendar listing what time a meeting began and that was a good start. But i want you to really take into account the blank account. Do not interrupt me. I really want you want me to take you seriously . What are you referring, you said a couple weeks later. May i have my 20 seconds back that he interrupted for. I want my Public Comment presented which is about this case. I want to present it uninterrupted. It would be helpful if you could let us know what page you are referring to. I am looking at item 5, attachment 1, its a june 30th letter from leanne pell um. In the back, the document does not list a page number at the bottom for the actual document, but it list no. 2 page for the calendar that was provided to me. If you can look at july 6, 2015, through july 19, 2015. Have you seen these what im referring to . Okay, lets start the clock. Next question, you said he showed you something later that had an entry in it. I will answer that as long as you are not eating into my time. As you will see from february 16th, all right. Go ahead. Im with you. Let me ask this further question of staff, how were these february 15th to whatever it was, how were those obtained . Were those voluntarily provided by mr. Kawa . I believe mr. Kawa was deleting his emails manually every 2 weeks. These happened to be in the time period where he wasnt deleting them. These are the 2 weeks he had. Whats the date that he provided them . Hes providing his whatever, his personal calendar electronically from january 22, 2016, to march 30, 2016. What is the date he provided it to the staff . These are provided to the Sunshine Ordinance Task force. Do you know from the task force. He was deleting his records and then he wasnt deleting them anymore. Im not sure when he provided these to the task force. But these are for the in you time period. Going forward, hes not doing it anymore. Hes presently keeping in yes. Presumably for 2 years. Im not sure for whatever they are keeping the retention policy. The other question i have maybe to shorten this. What is you reconstruct the 2015 calendar. Its all blank. Is he supposed to reconstruct it . Right. That is the theory. Exactly. Once they are destroyed, we dont have any authority whether or not the destruction itself was a violation of the sunshine order. The commissions made no order obviously, but the theory is he can go and reconstruct it. A year later, year 1 2. Okay. Im really learning how dysfunctional this body is this evening, why dont you present your claim . Here we go again. You guys interrupt me. You asked me to make a 5minute presentation. Mr. Pet trellis in your own words [ overlapping speakers ] i would like to finish my 5 minutes of presentation. Dont you want to convince us, we are the body you have to convince. I would be on trial by you attorneys. I came in here and i read this, i thought hes got a good point. Once again, you are talking me out of going along with it just by virtue of your complete inability. May i finish . You will have plenty of time after i get my 5 minutes to engage in your trashing of the public. You are finished on this one. You had me in the beginning. You just lost me. To get a Public Document out of the mayors at times requires incredibly thick skin and requires a lot of intensity to pursue a complaint with the Sunshine Ordinance Task force. Even more tenacity. Every step along the way there is dysfunction. A lesser public sunshine advocate would have given up a long time ago. The bottom line of my complaint is that steve kawa, the mayors chief of staff was destroying Public Records. You have heard by the City Attorney giving a lesson to immediate destruction of numerous Public Records. This has been going on for years. You here at the Ethics Commission and the Sunshine Ordinance Task force are well aware of the terrible state of records retention here at city hall, and then what the public has to go through to actually obtain those records. We do not have a friend in the City Attorneys office. I have learned after years of monitoring this Ethics Commission, public sunshine advocates do not have friends here. You want to say my bad breath is the problem, go ahead, i have heard it before. Im here to say, the mayors chief of staff, steve kawa who has basically been running city hall for 20 years has been destroying records and doing so with the City Attorneys blessing. I believe you commissioners had a duty to go over the voluminous records before showing up tonight. I believe you have to get back to some decorum where you respect the public and the complainant and allow us to speak without being interrupted. Thank you. I understand there is someone here on behalf of mr. Kawa . Public speaker hi, i am steve kaba from the Mayors Office. I would say im happy to be here tonight, i dont know those are accurate words. I do think its going to be informative, not only me but the other 30,000 City Employees. This issue was brought as a complaint by mr. Pet trellis regarding my calendar to the Sunshine Task force. Yes, i have been in the Mayors Office for nearly 20 years and city hall for 25. I take my job quite seriously, and i take my obligations quite seriously. Every year we have a session with the City Attorneys office regarding records retention. One issue that comes up every year is calendar. Im sure you are aware about prop g calendar where the issue came with the Sunshine Task force because i was a Department Head. Im not a Department Head. Im not covered by prop g, im not an elected official. Im not covered by prop g. So they morphed it into another issue. What will we retain because we will retain it. When it comes to mayors calendars, prop g for mayors calendar, not staff calendar. So it is my practice to keep it for 2 weeks and move on. Thats why commissioner kopp is what you have there, the Sunshine Task force asked me for what i had and i gave it to them. When did you give it to them . When it first a rose commissioner kopp. Approximately, this year, right . I think in february. I dont recall. The last one is, i dont know march 28th or 29. Yes, sir. So when this was here before the Sunshine Task force, it was amazing to me how much confusion exist about whether or not the advice we were getting from the City Attorneys office, not me, but City Employees was the right advice and the Sunshine Task force i guess was saying it wasnt. I have been keeping my calendar because what is the correct process here . In watching this process tonight, im going to really ask you all of the Ethics Commission to help all of us in this city and City Government and City Employees to undisbanned the process because i was following it. And now im here before you tonight, once again not for me because i know i did the right thing, but for other City Employees watching this or hearing about this. So im happy to answer any questions. Once the complaint was filed, have you since that time kept your calendars . Yes, because i didnt know what is sunshine or ethics or somebody else was going to say with the advice being given was not the right advice. What kind of information did you traditionally put on your calendars . I think commissioner kopp, you all have a copy of pretty much thats my calendar. As you can see there is a lot of repetition on it. I am the chief of staff. So you see a lot of staff meetings. The title goes with the job, and the job is working with the staff. Go ahead. Yes. I think mr. Kawa, youve been acting in good faith, but i think the City Attorney has been miss advising you, and to that extent, i hate to say it, you about i agree with the gentleman who spoke before you because just in regard to a number of reference, i will reference a couple of things including the memo sent to us by elena smith regarding the fact that the Public Records act is being parsed much to strictly and through too many avenues and meanderings to have any value. But the one sentence i see at page 3 of the report from liena, the City Attorney agrees that mr. Kawas calendar is Public Record. But argue that mr. Kawas calendar is not a city record. I dont know what that means. That becomes an exercise in absurdity. What we want is, we want as much transparency in regard to the way City Government is run. Even though you are not a Department Head, you are a major official in the Mayors Office in regard to so many things that are coming your way that the citizenry and the public is entitled to know about it. Therefore, in my opinion that under all of the Good Government act, excuse me, the open records acts and the transparency and the sunshine ordinances, those calendars should be maintained. I also agree, again, very rel at reluctantly with the gentleman who spoke before you because of his object obnoxious and counterproductive manner. But the Cities Office giving their opinion. But decided as law for something and weve seen this before and i have made this comment before. Its inappropriate to cite it as law. But i think you havent done anything wrong. I commend you for the fact that when this controversy began and you saw this could be a problem, you then started maintaining your calendar. I commend you for doing it. I think the City Attorney should revise its advice to city officials and to City Government employees to make it much more expansive in regard to what is indeed a the mayor has to retain all his records. He cant delete anything because hes supposed to maintain that for office for the next person that comes in. Those are the only situations where the sunshine ordinance calls itself. If there is a will full violation, if someone willfully violates the law destroyed record, then that goes to the District Attorney because its a crime. Chairman, first, that suggest some work for you. And for bearing and recommendation legislation and i guess we recommend it to the board of supervisors. And mr. Chairman, i would urge that that be done. I dont want to step on the executive directors toes or the chairs, but any event thats clear. Secondly, relevant to that, there is some questions, there is also a question raised on page 8 of a report from the Sunshine Task force, and i guess i have got to have somebody not here not now explain to me why the heck there is a Sunshine Ordinance Task force. Why it isnt part of an Ethics Commission. But that will come. The former supervisor shelly who drafted the thing. Is that right . Thats whenever the sunshine ordinance initiated. I think i will ask mr. Brag man. I hear from the sunshine ordinance from him all the time. On page 8 is a footnote saying the ordinances will full violation and we believe the Ethics Committee should amend their definition to encompass such reckless action to cover the circumstances of this matter. And i would like that examined legally in terms of pro pounding an ordinance for adoption because it is not to try to make a finding as to whether conduct there was will full or reckless. Thirdly, im curious and the claim antican answer this as to whether hes taking this to the District Attorney. I see a reference on page 7 of that same june 30, 2016, order of determination to be District Attorney statement, january 22, 2016. All i can tell you is we have been investigating irregularities from local government for quite some time which is a possibility. Lastly, on a memorandum january 8th of this year from a deputy City Attorney, he raises questions mr. Kawa, about questions that might assist this determining facts. I know this maybe a bit repetitive, but he says that kawa purposely deleted his items 2 weeks after they have been completed. The answer to that was past tense, yes. Is that correct . To be absolutely accurate, i personally do not. I have an assistant. Someone does it for you. Yes. At that time. Is any physical copy of the calendar printed to maintain the deleted entries. And if there is none, if not, how would kawa reconstruct his meeting at a later day if that would be necessary as i asked a little while ago. Is this a policy of the Mayors Office generally or particular to kawa and the answer to that was, particular to you . Yes, people have their personal calendars and calendars with staff. So was it a policy. It was up to you . Yes. All right. The record is relevant and you have changed your custom and practice and now you are retaining them. I have been following the process. But are you retaining and you gave us examples for 2 years. Yes. You mentioned 2 years earlier, commissioner kopp, that 2year retention is in regard to prop g calendars, i believe. It says 2 years. Once again, im sorry to correct you, you cant say it a Public Record. If you are, you are saying the Ethics Commission wants to get rid of Public Records because your records retention says calendar. Category 5, doesnt need to be retained prop g. The District Attorney does say it has to be kept. Under sunshine if you have it. Just eliminate future disputes and arguments taking up staff time, our time means nothing. So your time is my time. 2 years seems to be a standard. Would you agree . Prop g says yeah. Also im thinking about a case in l. A. 1st Amendment Coalition is pursuing it. The l. A. City council to say 2year retention. Some guy left the council and burned all his documents. All right. Anyway, its going to be some period of time, a year, a year 1 2, 2 years. And that ought to be identified and nailed down in law or regulation. And all right, the rest of it i