SCV Talk · Archive
Nine years of the Valley’s town square · 2006–2015
SCV Talk
October 19, 2010· scvtalk.com · WordPress (SCVTalk 3.0) · Wayback capture

City releases some Library documents

By NickelDime — John B.

Image not recoveredimwithdon.jpg

Save Our Libraries (SOL) scored a small victory today in the ongoing  struggle to prevent our libraries from seceding from the LA County system: some of the documents related to the library decision have been released to SOL in response to a public records request by attorney Don Ricketts:

19 OCTOBER 2010

SANTA CLARITA, CA

“CITY RELENTS AND PRODUCES LIBRARY DOCS”

Following the filing of suit to compel production of records that were
requested by Save Our Libraries (SOL) under the Public Records Act,
the City has advised SOL that after further review of “the documents
that were withheld in our response to your two public records
requests” it has “determined that all documents withheld pursuant to
Government Code Sections 6254(a), preliminary draft exemption, and
6254(c), unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, are subject to
disclosure.”

The City produced a significantly greater number of documents than
were previously produced.  They included hundreds of communications
objecting to the LSSI takeover and correspondence with LSSI long
before Council Member Laurie Ender made the first public disclosure
that a takeover was being considered in July, and long before the
request for proposals to operate the libraries was issued.   (The
request for proposals was issued before the City Council had voted to
withdraw from the County system.)

The documents were copied and are being analyzed and indexed and will
be further discussed when the review is completed.

Here is the cover page from the City, signed by City Clerk Sarah P. Gorman:
SOL note from City

The City’s initial reluctance to release these internal documents put them in a pickle: if they continued to withhold documents that were not covered by attorney client privilege, they would risk violating the Public Records Act.  The secrecy fit the opposition’s narrative that the process lacked transparency; their release now confirms the suspicion, especially since there remains an untold number of additional documents still being withheld.  There are also some other potential documents that were apparently attached to emails but were not available for immediate release.  I’m speculating, but it is possible that the City Clerk’s office was combing printed emails that reference attachments that were not printed as part of the internal discovery process.

Comments (28)

  1. Lori RivasOctober 19, 2010 at 8:14 pm
    Plus “hidden” attachments, which were formally not provided to the city clerk’s office – what’s up with that? It just gets stinkier and stinkier.
  2. Daddy Joe GOctober 19, 2010 at 8:34 pm
    The city is in a catch 22. They would like to save face, but can’t decide which one.
  3. Don RickettsOctober 19, 2010 at 10:02 pm
    Who is that young man?
  4. Library User MichaelOctober 20, 2010 at 4:10 am
    Just some guy who likes to sweep the walk to keep the sidewalk clean…
  5. Coastal SageOctober 20, 2010 at 1:31 pm
    You go, Don.
  6. David GaunyOctober 19, 2010 at 10:02 pm
    And there you have it… What’s really sad is that the library is just the latest example of our city’s chronic refusal to act in good faith. Rather than engage the public, a small circle of people at City Hall are driving the agenda, making the decisions, and burying the evidence. When the public complains, we are forced into an expensive lawsuit before the city will disclose anything. Too often this is the rule rather than the exception and it has little to do with “public service.” I, for one, do not want my tax dollars used against me in this way and if the library issue is what finally wakes people up to the problem, then Godspeed.
  7. mikeOctober 19, 2010 at 10:13 pm
    Why is Dave Gauny making sense?
  8. SterlingOctober 20, 2010 at 7:04 pm
    You’re right Dave. How long have we known this while the people have shoved their heads in the sand?
  9. SCV ReaderOctober 20, 2010 at 4:33 am
    David gets in front of any popular issue where he can be visibile whether its stopping the hospital expansion, demonizing immigrants here illegally, or stopping the privatization of the libraries. Don’t expect a consistent political view.
  10. cashOctober 20, 2010 at 8:03 am
    You’re kidding, right! What meaningful and less popular issues has David failed to engage. Seems the point he is making is that the Kenny the Skamp and the Council are less than open with their deliberations. Unless of course you are a member of the GOBN, which is always an entitlement to a first hand look. I wonder if the Staff discussed with the Chamber of Commerce, at the standing monthly, pre council meeting meeting, the city plan to take over the library. They may have and the Chamber supported the idea. The GOBN approval is all the council thinks it needs in the way of support of a given project. The general public opinion is just noise in the system.
  11. navigatorOctober 20, 2010 at 8:33 am
    It was not discussed
  12. cashOctober 20, 2010 at 8:38 am
    Never discussed with the GOBN, I doubt it very much.
  13. navigatorOctober 20, 2010 at 8:54 am
    Never discussed at the Chamber Council Agenda meetings.
  14. cashOctober 20, 2010 at 2:32 pm
    Got it. Are minutes kept for these meetings? I am guessing no!
  15. navigatorOctober 20, 2010 at 3:03 pm
    Good guess
  16. Daddy Joe GOctober 20, 2010 at 10:20 am
    OMG I’m agreeing with cash! The keystone council does, indeed, make strange bedfellows.
  17. augustOctober 20, 2010 at 5:23 am
    So…the glove fits. I too find myself with a strange bedfellow–David Gauny. But he’s right; it’s unfortunate tax money has to be spent on a law suit, but with the current city council, it’s unavoidable. All we want is our libraries back…among other things.
  18. NanAndSamOctober 20, 2010 at 5:31 am
    City Clerk Sarah P. Gorman is pretty funny. Attachments are referenced, but she’ll have to see “if they exist.” She should run for city council. Don’t they get it ? We’re not going away, and we’re not giving up till we get our libraries back.
  19. SCV SageOctober 20, 2010 at 9:52 am
    Remember that our current City Clerk Sarah Gorman is a licensed attorney. She used to work at Burke Williams & Sorenson — the folks who are hired to be our City Attorneys by the City Council, essentially since we became a City if not longer. In fact, rumor has it that this firm was involved in helping some of our former City manager’s to write their City contracts too. If we litigate, guess who gets to bill the City for it — Burke Williams, et al. It is quite a web these spiders have woven.
  20. Coastal SageOctober 20, 2010 at 1:26 pm
    Lest no one forget, City Clerk Sarah P. Gorman is not only a Burke Williams & Sorensen lawyer, but she has very extensive experience as a trial/appellate lawyer representing city clerks who have been accused of wrongdoing. The City Manager hiring Ms. Gorman is akin to George Bush II hiring Ken Starr to fight a traffic ticket. I certainly miss our former City Clerk who never manipulated the public records act document production process, as far as I could tell. I don’t know whether she retired because she wanted to, or because she found her relationship with her boss, City Manager Ken Pulskamp untenable. However, in complaining about the management of Santa Clarita, all of you commenters need to understand that Mr. Pulskamp’s hiring of the very expensive Ms. Gorman, as a full time City Clerk, a traditionally non-lawyer position, is a significant indication of something, perhaps ****noia?
  21. cashOctober 20, 2010 at 2:45 pm
    A job that pays way to much for the level of responsibility and accountability. Bottom of range should be the top pay. Minimum qualification DO NOT SUPPORT THE KIND OF SALARY AND BENEFITS PAID FOR THE POSITION. Title: CITY CLERK Class Code: CC55 Salary: $41.93 – $50.97 Hourly $3,354.53 – $4,077.45 Biweekly $7,268.15 – $8,834.48 Monthly $87,217.80 – $106,013.76 Annually Print Job Information Email me when jobs like this become available Definition Benefits Under general direction, plans, manages, oversees, and directs the operations and services of the City Clerk Division, which includes the statutory responsibility of city clerk, municipal elections, records management, purchasing, and risk management; organizes, supervises, reviews and participates in the work of professional, technical and office support staff; coordinates activities with other City officials, departments, outside agencies, organizations, and the public; ensures compliance with the Brown Act, Election Code, Political Reform Act and Public Records Act; provides responsible and complex staff support to, and serves as a technical resource for, the City Council and City Manager and other City personnel; performs other related duties as required. Distinguishing Characteristics: The City Clerk is the management level class, which oversees all functions and operations of the City Clerk Division of the Administrative Services Department and is responsible for the activities of the Division, including fulfilling the statutory responsibilities of city clerk, municipal elections, records management, purchasing, and risk management. The incumbent is expected to exercise independent judgment and initiative in establishing efficient and effective operations consistent with applicable laws, City policies, and administrative guidelines. This classification is distinguished from the next higher classification of Director of Administrative Services in that the latter has overall responsibility for the administration of the Administrative Services Department. Supervision Received and Exercised: Receives general direction from the Director of Administrative Services. Exercises direct and indirect supervision over assigned staff. Essential Functions: (include but are not limited to the following) • Accepts management responsibility for all of the City Clerk Division related activities and services, including fulfilling the statutory responsibilities of city clerk, municipal elections, records management, purchasing, and risk management; coordinates activities with other City officials, departments, outside agencies, organizations, and the public; attends City Council meetings. • Develops, implements, and maintains the City Clerk Division goals, objectives, priorities, policies, procedures, and work plan; ensures that established goals and priorities are achieved. • Works directly with City personnel in the development and interpretation of City and department policies; confers with legal advisors and City officials regarding management problems. • Plans, directs, assigns and coordinates the City Clerk Division work plan through appropriate Division staff; reviews and evaluates work methods, procedures, and service delivery methods for improving organizational performance, enhancing services, and meeting goals; identifies opportunities for improvement and implements changes to standard operating procedures to enhance services; identifies and resolves problems. • Prepares and manages the City Clerk Division budget; prepares forecasts of necessary funds for staffing, materials, and supplies; presents, justifies, and defends programs, operations, and activities; monitors and approves expenditures; discusses and resolves budget issues with appropriate staff and implements adjustments as necessary. • Selects, trains, and evaluates personnel; provides or coordinates in-service training and employee recognition programs; identifies and resolves City Clerk staff deficiencies; fulfills discipline procedures; reviews the work of department personnel to ensure compliance with applicable federal, state and local laws, codes, and regulations. • Serves as the municipal filing officer as provided for by law; records and maintains minutes, ordinances, and resolutions; keeps accurate records of the proceedings of the City Council; coordinates preparation of City Council agenda packets, meeting minutes, and calendars; publishes legal notices, hearings, ordinances, and street vacations; follows up on Council actions to ensure timely preparation, indexing and filing of agreements, resolutions, ordinances, and vital records; updates and maintains the Municipal Code and Unified Development Code to reflect actions of the Council; receives, accepts, and processes subpoenas and liability claims. • Administers oaths or affirmations; certifies authenticity of municipal corporate documents for public officials, governmental agencies, courts, and the general public, including ordinances, resolutions, agreements, deeds, and other official documents. • Works closely with risk management staff to ensure compliance with City policy and applicable federal and state laws regarding employee safety and insurance safety programs, investigation and processing of personal injury and property damage claims, and citywide contract administration. • Works closely with purchasing staff to ensure compliance with City policy and applicable federal and state laws regarding soliciting City quotations, bids, and proposals, evaluating and awarding City contracts, and approving City purchases and contract agreements. • Ensures compliance with, and advises management and employees regarding, the Brown Act, Election Code, Political Reform Act, and Public Records Act. • Plans and directs the conduct of municipal elections. • Provides assistance to the Director of Administrative Services, City Manager, City Council, and all City Staff; serves as a technical resource; coordinates pertinent information, resources, and work teams necessary to support a positive and productive environment; drafts proposed resolutions and ordinances; prepares correspondence, reports, and makes recommendations to the City Manager. • Demonstrates a full understanding of applicable laws, policies, procedures, and work methods associated with assigned duties; responds to questions and concerns from the general public; provides information as is appropriate and resolves public service complaints. • Attends and participates in professional and community meetings; stays current on issues relative to the fields of public administration, elections, financial disclosure, conflicts of interest, city clerk services, public meetings, public records, purchasing, and risk management; responds to and resolves sensitive and complex community and organizational inquiries, issues, and complaints; establishes and maintains a customer service orientation within the department. • Establishes positive working relationships with representatives of community organizations, state/local agencies, City management and staff, and the public. Physical, Mental & Working Conditions: Position requires prolonged sitting, standing, walking, reaching, twisting, turning, kneeling, bending, squatting, and stooping in the performance of daily activities. The position also requires grasping, repetitive hand movement, and fine coordination in preparing agendas, resolutions and minutes using a computer keyboard. Additionally, the position requires near and far vision in reading written reports and work related documents. Acute hearing is required when providing phone and personal service. The need to lift, drag, and push files, paper, and documents weighing up to 25 pounds, as well as speech sufficient to communicate in group settings without the aid of a microphone, is also required. Some of these requirements may be accommodated for otherwise qualified individuals requiring and requesting such accommodations. Quali
  22. Daddy Joe GOctober 20, 2010 at 10:23 am
    Sounds like an 18 minute gap to me. Has Rosemary Woods moved to SCV?
  23. mikecOctober 20, 2010 at 6:07 am
    What I love about litigation: motions to compel and privilege logs!
  24. Alan FerdmanOctober 20, 2010 at 9:52 am
    Make no mistake, the Library issue is not about the current Library employees, or the Union, or the City getting a fair share of funds, or the County. It is about the process, or lack there of, the City used to make the decision to withdraw from the County Library System. If the decision would have been made using an open process, that put forth a logical argument and obtained community support, this controversy would have been avoided. I find the idea that such a diverse collection of groups, who are normally at odds with each other, have come together to fight this common cause, fascinating.
  25. Coastal SageOctober 20, 2010 at 1:41 pm
    I am always convinced that public agencies NEVER produce every document the public records act requires. Just like in regular court discovery, it’s always a game, to see what documents people are hiding, thinking they will get away with it. Usually, the “hiders” are managers who refuse to dig through their desk drawers to find production-mandated documents thinking their employer’s own lawyer will never find out. These days, it’s “email deleters” who do much of the hiding. However, in this case, City Clerk Gorman’s letter intrigues me, because it goes to the heard of when the necessity of producing a document created by someone who happens to be an attorney is an issue. Ms. Gorman says “the City maintains that those documents falling under…attorney work product are exempt and will not be disclosed.” So Ms. Gorman since you are the City Clerk, not an attorney for the City of Santa Clarita, the public’s position will always be that any documents you draft while sitting in your office or at home are produceable because your job title, created by the Legislature, does not envision that you would be an attorney. Ms. Gorman do you care to amend your communication saying that you have produced all documents? Remember, under the Public Records Act, you are required to prepare the equivalent of a privilege log which is used in civil litigation. The plaintiff, as well as the public in Santa Clarita, have the right to see an inventory (author, recipients, title of document and date) of what you have not produced under the Public Records Act.
  26. Coastal SageOctober 20, 2010 at 1:48 pm
    p.s. Frank has no right to attorney work product privilege either.
  27. Coastal SageOctober 20, 2010 at 1:45 pm
    By the way, many of us are anxiously awaiting the production, under the Public Records Act, of the signed contract between the City and LSSI. Does it exist? I don’t know, but LSSI employees have been telling people who work for the City of Camarillo that it does. I fear that the City is playing the same “hide the resolution or contract for 61 days” game that CLWA learned to play several years ago.
  28. Daddy Joe GOctober 20, 2010 at 3:07 pm
    At this point, I don’t care if the library is owned by the county, the city, or the Russian Mafia. I don’t care if the librarian has a PhD from MIT or is a high school dorpout. I don’t care if the library employees are union or non-union or are hired in the Do-It Center parking lot. All I care about is getting the books I want. And I’m not talking about the general ledger.

Preserved as part of the SCV Talk Archive. Text is presented as originally published; presentation has been standardised for readability. The original capture is available at the Internet Archive.

Support