Bob Filner, the Democrat Mayor of San Diego thinks he is Arnold Schwarzenegger, without the muscles or accent. Both are serial sexual harassers. Both fondled woman. Both apologized and think that is enough. Arnold got away with it—will Filner.
The real shock is that NOW, the John Burton, chair of the California Democrat Party and Guv Brown have nothing about the boorish and emotionally brutal treatment of women by Filner. To me, silence is consent—and the Democrats are closing ranks. Women beware, do not be alone in a room with Bob Filner, unless you like to be harassed.
Now, Filner has gone the next step in his efforts to close down the city of San Diego to the people—he is trying to keep lawsuits against the city private.
“Terry Francke, general counsel for Californians Aware, a free speech advocacy group, said that the city seems to be abusing the open records law.
“They are not free to demand a written request,” Francke said. “That much has been established in case law. And it’s equally clear that claims are public. That also comes from case law. They have no basis for any kind of a 10-day delay, because they only purpose of a 10-day delay is to allow a careful consideration of whether the request record is actually public and there’s no doubt about that. Claims are as public as city council agendas.”
San Diego clams up on claims
Basic public document no longer available for on-demand review
By Trent Seibert, San Diego U-T, 7/11/13
Claims against the city, basic public records that used to be available on request, no longer are in San Diego.
The California Public Records Act requires government documents to be available for public inspection during business hours. In practice, many requests for public records become subject to a days-long or even weeks-long process while officials find and review documents.
One exception was claims against the city, a document filed as a precursor to a lawsuit. The claims often involve vehicles that hit potholes or people who trip on sidewalks. Until recently, those documents were available for public review at the city’s risk management department.
No more.
U-T Watchdog went to check the claims this week, to see whether sexual harassment claims had been filed against Mayor Bob Filner.
City Supervising Claims Representative Janice Ellis told the Watchdog that the public used to be able to review claims on a same-day basis, but that now city policy dictates the public ask for them via a records request.
She did not say exactly when those rules changed except to say the changes were recent.
Mayor Bob Filner, who took office in December, has portrayed himself as a proponent of the California Public Records Act.
“I believe in transparency,” Filner said in an unrelated interview last month. “We‘re trying to open up the whole process.”
The records act allows governments 10 days to respond to records requests under certain limited circumstances — a deadline that was almost lifted in Sacramento last month before a groundswell of support emerged for keeping the deadline in place.
Terry Francke, general counsel for Californians Aware, a free speech advocacy group, said that the city seems to be abusing the open records law.
“They are not free to demand a written request,” Francke said. “That much has been established in case law. And it’s equally clear that claims are public. That also comes from case law. They have no basis for any kind of a 10-day delay, because they only purpose of a 10-day delay is to allow a careful consideration of whether the request record is actually public and there’s no doubt about that. Claims are as public as city council agendas.”
U-T Watchdog contacted City Attorney Jan Goldsmith’s office to see whether Goldsmith believes the law is being followed with regard to claims being withheld from view.
Assistant City Attorney Paul Cooper replied in a statement, “In general, readily available public records should be made available for inspection upon request by any member of the public without delay. In some circumstances, requested public records may need to have confidential information redacted which may temporarily delay the inspection by the requestor. ”
