The office’s policy is secrecy and non-disclosure. Relax to the logic of the situation.

“The strength of the FOIA’s prodisclosure presumption is demonstrated by the rule that any document must be disclosed unless there is explicit authorization for withholding. The privacy exemption (exemption 6) allows withholding only when necessary to prevent “clearly unwarranted” invasions of privacy. There are two built-in administrative biases in favor of disclosure. First, the exemptions are permissive; they allow withholding but never require it. Second, although sanctions are available to penalize an official who improperly withholds a document, there are no sanctions for wrongful release of a document.”

While our FOIA creates a presumption favoring disclosure, our City government operates under the opposite presumption, disclosing only that information which it can be compelled to release.

It is easy to call upon Council to change this. The reality, however, is more difficult. This was demonstrated when I proposed releasing an innocuous legal opinion regarding tax assessments performed after a successful appeal to the State Tax Tribunal. While the FOIA and the attorney-client privilege are separate issues, they reveal a similar mode of operation. Rather than just waiving the attorney-client privilege, Council asked for a new version of that opinion to be written for public consumption. Nothing in the original opinion could possibly prejudice the City, but to maintain the legal fiction that these opinions must be kept secret, the City Attorney’s office will produce a new document with the same underlying opinion.

These efforts to maintain secrecy are inexplicable. I am committed to opening our government to its constituents and I hope residents will help elect other Council members who support transparency. Reform will require support of 6 members of Council. Perhaps the 2014 election will provide us with additional votes to accomplish these changes.

Bingo: “So I think the city administration and the city council should stop letting city attorneys make them appear foolish when it comes to the FOIA. A useful first step would be for the council to direct its city attorney to provide responses – suitable for a public audience – to all of the questions raised by The Chronicle in its March 4, 2013 commentary on a new draft FOIA policy.”

[link]