Madam City Clerk, can we get a roll call?

Yes.

Commissioners Harris.

Bowling.

Present.

T.

Chair Miley.

Present.

Uh, for present, and hopefully, um, Commissioner Schwartz will be able, he's joining remotely and hopefully he'll get on momentarily, and we'll be able to add him when he's ready.

All right, thank you.

Um, see you here, so that's item one.

Item two on our agenda is non-agenda public comment.

So if there's any members of the public who would like to speak in person or online, uh, I believe they either need to raise their hand or fill out a speaker slide.

Yes.

Uh, the first one is in person, Rita Lark.

Good evening.

My name is Rita Lark.

And the reason that I'm here tonight, I came to tell you a story.

My story starts with I came to Alameda four months ago, and I was living in uh Village of Love shelter.

Okay, I was lucky to get an apartment at the uh Esperanza.

Since I've been there, keys have been stolen out of the keybox from the uh maintenance supervisor and the co-worker.

And the drugs they keep escalating, and we have sex traffic and marine that keeps coming up in there.

All these terrible things have been documented with the police department here.

And my question is: why should a person like me that came out of homelessness?

I'm 66 years old.

I have a service animal.

Every time I come home, I find more damages in my house, like it's been pissed out from my couch to my love seat in my bedroom use where the maintenance supervisor, he likes to have sex with underage children.

Both of these men have been locked up and they released them and they let them come back to work.

I have talked with the management there, and nobody wants to control it.

Then I went through the latter.

I went from the unbudsman to the um manager, supposed to be the manager over this, and then uh I went to the even the director of Alameda Housing.

And I'm not getting through to what's really going on.

And so I went to a church yesterday and I spoke with this lady that donates clothes, and so she told me that she knows a lawyer that does free work, but I just wanted to let the city know that these are beautiful apartments, and it shouldn't be going like it is.

People are moving in and out of this place, and it should be a safe place for everyone.

Thank you.

Ms.

Lark, thank you for sharing.

Thank you.

But uh I appreciate you sharing and uh, you know, wish you the best in getting the support you need through the city or other service providers.

Have a good evening.

Thank you.

And we have one remote, uh Jake R.

Finkel.

Good evening.

Uh I assume you can hear me?

Yes.

Yes.

Yep.

Yeah, oh good, okay.

Um what I want to discuss tonight is um what the OGC's um uh tasks is, what you're supposed to be doing.

You know, the Brown Act was passed in the 1950s, give or take, and then um to make meetings open to the public.

It also uh addressed making uh uh public records available in around 2014, City of Alameda uh codified some of this for uh locally with the Sunshine Ordinance and the Open Government Commission.

Around nothing much was going on, and then around 2017, 2018, a citizen filed a complaint, the commission upheld it, went back to the council, and the council had to do a redo on some issue.

Uh since that time, the council has steadily chipped away at the commission's authority to a point where it appears now that you can't really do anything about anything.

Um so what I would like, yeah.

I mean, you do an annual report, and that's wonderful, but the the public records portion of the job is being done uh by computer.

The um commission no longer really has to uh evaluate complaints because there's a hired attorney who decides everything.

Uh and what I'm asking you to do is do something to help improve the transparency, uh, so that citizens can know what's going on.

Uh, you know, the mayor decided that uh people should not be able to address the council and non-agenda items.

Totally her doing, and it uh in view of our not having a newspaper locally, I think the ability to address the city council with non-agenda items, I think is very important.

Uh and so I would hope that you would take on the task of finding some way to enhance the openness uh of government.

There are a lot of things that are suboptimal, but the way staff approaches things.

They do they present their arguments, back them with uh uh surveys that have absolutely no statistical value.

And um I would just like to see if you guys can come up with something to improve the openness of our governance here at Alameda.

And I mean this in a very constructive constructive way.

I've been following the commission for that time.

Eight years.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comment.

Thank you.

And I will note for the record that Commissioner Schwartz is here, you should be able to see them on your screen.

And thank you to the speaker.

Okay.

All right.

So that uh concludes uh public comment.

Yes, we have no additional public comment.

All right.

Uh moving on to regular agenda items.

Our first item of business is item three A, uh, the minutes of the March 3rd, 2025 meeting.

Um, I'll ask if there are any commissioner questions or um corrections to note uh before opening it up for public comments seeing none, um Madam Clerk, are there any commenters?

There is none.

All right, back to the commission.

Do I have a motion to approve the March 3rd, 2025 minutes?

So move, moved and seconded.

Did I get it out first?

Yeah, I believe so.

Yes.

I believe we need a roll call vote for that.

Yes, since we have a remote attendee, we have to do all roll call votes tonight.

Um uh commissioners bowler.

Oh, uh yes.

Harris?

Yes, Schwartz?

Yes.

Tilas, yes, Chair Miley.

I uh five eyes.

All right, next item of business is item three B, uh, which I believe our last public commenters' uh comments might be germane to any discussion that might occur on this item.

Uh item 3B is discuss and provide direction on the 2025 annual report, including uh option uh to form a subcommittee.

Uh do I have any um uh maybe uh look to uh staff for a brief uh yeah presentation?

Yeah, so every year the commission um we bring this item to kind of let you guys decide how you want to do your annual report.

I kind of outlined staff was doing it for many years a few years ago.

The commission, when there was a lot going on, decided to take it on themselves and formed a subcommittee.

They did that for two years and then they kind of punted it back to staff for the last couple of years.

So it's totally um up to you guys how you want to handle it.

Um this year uh there are no complaints that have been heard.

There have been no complaint hearings, um, and so it's basically up to the commission to have a discussion about how you want to proceed with it.

And as the staff person, I'd be happy to prepare it or take any direction.

Uh, before we uh move to public comment uh and then discussion, are there any clarifying questions uh for the clerk?

Uh I just have one, um, that's okay.

Uh specifically on the tally of the number of records for the um did we get an exorbitant amount?

Was it like worthy of of any kind of report that we should probably dive into this round?

I it has not been exorbitant.

I I don't monitor the the police, they do their own, and they would give me that tally at the end of the year.

Um, but I haven't heard anything from them that it's been uh exorbitant, and so um it's pretty on par.

If you give me one second, I can tell you how many there were this year compared to last year because it's right online in the whole system.

So um but I can maybe answer that after we like do other things and just let you know.

Sure, thank you for uh pulling up that information.

Um, do you have a tally?

Just a question.

Do you have a tally of the number of open?

I know this may tie into what you're the number of requests that were made uh as opposed to um hearing matters that require to hear.

So yeah, so the tally the tally is exactly um the next request system that we're using the online system where people submit the portal through requests through the portal.

Um that one uh all of the information is there.

So this year I got enough time.

Uh there have been 449 requests submitted through that system.

Um if I go quickly to 2024.

Let me maybe go another.

Just to clarify, that's not police stuff.

So this aside from the police.

Right.

This is um the next request portal.

The city um didn't have the police participate in the next request portal because their requests most times are you know directly to people requesting reports that can't be posted publicly and things such like that.

And so um that's why they they do it outside the system, and they're very, they have different laws, different everything that applies.

So we saw uh that it was reasonable to handle them separately.

So yeah, so this one just is every other department citywide.

And so we we are a little higher, it looks like in 2024 there were 505 submitted the next request.

So a little bit October, maybe maybe it's slow in November, December.

I don't know.

So on par-ish.

Do we track within that uh like how long our lead time is?

And I know it's gonna be variable based on the requests, but do we do we know like a responsiveness to them or be tracking any of that?

Yes.

So that's what the system does, it tracks all of that, and and it even um, you know, staff can filter out and look at things that are still open, and when there's very voluminous ones, like sometimes we have like tens of tens of thousands of emails, and so those will be a rolling production, and you can just see when the new uh documents hit and that they're keeping going and that there's documents kind of being provided on a regular basis as the attorneys can keep, you know, doing all the redactions and review that's required.

Okay, one other follow-up on that.

Do you have any separation of the number?

Do you have any separation of the number of requests which are made that do not involve litigation?

Um there's I can kind of filter that.

I mean, um the ones that involve the attorney, I I the we give a count, like we can break down the count that's by department, and so we know the attorney's office were involved if there was any redactions or potential litigation or anything like that.

So um when I do the look at the end of the year, you know, it shows the full number of requests and then it shows each one that went to each department.

And there might be multiple departments involved.

The clerk and the attorney's office are always involved if emails requested, plus maybe another department or several.

And so we do get that breakdown.

The reason I ask in general terms is that uh if there's a lawyer involved on behalf of the person making the claim, they'll probably follow.

I would suspect they'll follow through as needed.

But if it's just uh, you know, if there's no lawyer involved, and maybe someone who's not so familiar with the rules and be interested in finding out, you know, how that works out for them and how it, you know, for the people who aren't represented.

I I can answer that a little bit.

I will say the vast majority do not involve lawyers.

Um, and even the ones that request emails, most of those aren't through lawyers, and a lot of, you know, discovery is often handled outside of next request, but definitely lawyers do use this tool.

Um what I would say is the the requester, if they've entered their email into the system, and even if they haven't entered their email in the system, they're able to look um and you know see what's happening and the deadlines and all of that and follow it.

So they are informed and know.

So it's a nice system for that because it does inform them even if they're not informed.

I believe I saw that just.

Clarifying question on that, you said so 449 requests, but then you said there's like 10,000 emails.

So is there like a back and forth happening, but it only goes down as one request?

I uh sorry, I should have clarified that.

There's individually in the system, distinctly 400, whatever the exact number was.

I'm sorry, and then but one request, for example, could request 10,000 emails, it could be a huge chunk and involve a lot of staff time just for that one singular.

Yeah, so that one instant, but then let's say they make the request, he gets his 10,000 pieces of documentation, and then they follow up and say, I need this, I need this other piece.

Is that a second request or still part of the first one?

No, that would be so what I'm saying is the attorney's office, they'll review like hundreds at a time and release hundreds at a time and do a rolling production so that the people are getting a steady, like, you know, number of documents coming in as the attorneys can do chunks and review them.

And so if during that course they asked for something else or changed it, um the city would most likely, you know, work with them on that or could say, hey, this is completely separate, we'll treat this as a separate request.

We it would be very case-specific.

Okay, so that 449 is like 449 parties who were asked for information rather than.

Not necessarily parties, because you know, 50 people.

Individuals, you need unique, unique askers.

Yeah, and you cases.

There could be the same asker could do 50 asks, right?

So good, good clarification.

Thank you.

Um, I I think uh the the question uh well, Commissioner uh Swartz, uh, do you have any any questions?

No, this is all been excellent.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I think I I do have one clarifying question.

Uh just refresh my memory if um because I think I've only been through one annual reporting period.

Um so if staff were to develop a report, draft a report for the commission, what does that process look like in terms of you know, do we reconvene to sign off on it?

Like uh are we involved?

Is anyone involved with you on kind of the the back end?

Like what what does that look like?

Um so usually what happens is I would just bring it back at your next meeting.

And um then if you wanted further revision or had anything you know additional you wanted to add, or if you wanted to punt it and continue it to another date, or make any changes or anything like that, you could do it at the next meeting.

What we did last year was because that we were having three new members, and that for the sake of consistency with that last commission, um, I went and took it to them in December, and then they approved it, you know, the end of last year, so that we didn't have to have you guys as new members trying to figure out what happened the year before.

So um, but usually the typical process is I bring something the end of this year and just bring it back on the next agenda.

Thank you for that.

I have one just quick clarifying question.

Can we provide you sort of input of the kind of things we would like in the report if we did a staff report like staff generator report for us?

Um, absolutely.

You can do it collectively as a commission, like at the meeting, you know, tonight, or you could do it at the next meeting when it returns, or if any commissioners have any thoughts or ideas of things that they would like me to include.

Um, you would just need to get it to me before the next meeting.

Okay.

And then I I think I do have one follow-up clarifying question on the the subcommittee front.

If there were a subcommittee formed, um, is that a brown act at body?

What does that subcommittee then look like?

Great question.

Oh, I'm sorry, I keep messing up the timer.

It's hard to talk in timer.

Um so uh it would look it would have be two members, um, and that would not have to have any posting requirements.

The two members would just go off and work on their own, um, you know, do whatever they want to do, and definitely they can talk to me and I can help them out or you know, type anything up they need typed up or anything like that, and then um those two members would just present back what they have, you know, prepared at the next meeting for the entire commission.

But you wouldn't be able to have contact with any other commissioner during that.

Got it.

Okay.

Seeing no further questions.

Uh are there any public comments on this item?

There are none.

All right.

Well, it's back to the commission for discussion.

Uh do I have any any takers to lead us off?

Sure.

I think you know, we talked about the main points.

Well, the first one we didn't have any hearings, so I think that's a stat first.

There was no hearings.

And like the second one was how many requests we had.

So I've put in, you know, 2025, 2024, line those up, then um the comment that you made, Commissioner Harris, about you know, which ones involved uh representation and not, that'd be a nice little chunk there.

Then if any other commissioners have any other details they want highlighted on it, and I think it's pretty simple report.

Yeah.

Commissioner uh Tilios.

Um I think that uh that kind of report really does lend itself to I think uh being staff led.

Um just my uh personal opinion.

Um I don't know if there's a strong preference uh one way or the other.

I think I think my sense of it is a staff report would be the most efficient and uh would you know uh allow us to review what the staff puts out.

So yeah, I totally agree.

I think that staff would given like what we're covering, there's nothing controversial that that really came up this year.

Uh most of my thoughts around this um are just if we can um look into specific types of data for the report, but staff can do that.

We don't have to do that.

That's it's specifically just tallying up.

Like I've I have thoughts around how many people maybe make requests that are from Alameda, how many are like from these agencies that just pull constant like next request of building permits or over fire code because I know those kind of flood us.

I'm curious to know the stats of like how many um things are not in that domain, how many are like from Malamedans, how many are not from these agencies, and then just sort of seeing a responsiveness to those uh this is mostly just out of transparency and about having a full report about the kind of activities that people are requesting I think um you also mentioned uh the a number of the requests have quite a few documents attached or and it would be helpful I think uh to get some uh information regarding the amount of documentation that is uh uh you know involved with the various requests.

Good point.

Yeah the nice thing with next request is it does um have the document database of anything that's been produced publicly.

Sometimes things are just given directly to people.

One of the actually very interesting ones that we commonly get is um for um anybody that has uncashed checks that the city has issued and that's just on rinse and repeat it just comes up and comes up and comes up and it's a couple different agencies that ask for it.

And just to not put that information out so publicly they do just release that directly to the requester even though it is public information.

So there's like various things where we kind of just use a little discretion just even though it is a public document.

But you know um just to address uh Vice Chair Bowling's comment a little bit a lot of them are only email addresses so I'll have no way of knowing if they are Alameda based versus non Alameda based but I can if they have addresses I can you know do an export of that and kind of take a quick look and tally up what has addresses you know and tell you the number that had addresses and the number that are Alameda versus somewhere else.

Does the next system um allow you does the next system allow you to see um who is followed up on their request by saying uh this isn't everything or I would need more um yeah not really um one thing um that sometimes happen um they I can see if requests have been reopened but I will tell you just off the top of my head I would say it's probably no more than two or three a year where they've said oh wait we still want this and then we reopen it because you know there it there can be uh an instance or a few instances where the city thinks we have satisfied it and they they kind of clarify and go, oh well I can see how somebody you know may not have put it down as clearly as they wanted and it's uh misunderstood.

That does occur but it's not a super great number thankfully.

I think a nice stat to have on there as well would be like okay request fill the one through five days five through ten days just to see that like hey you know what like eighty percent of stuff we got them but there's a couple stragglers to just have that stat this way you know the citizens know that hey so you all's working hard to get all this out but some things do take a little longer.

Sure.

And kind of to that same point I I know this might be difficult to track but the number of uh hours spent by staff because I know this is something that some of these requests are exorbitant they cost a lot of money for the city to fulfill it's interesting data out of transparency mostly um I don't want to make a lot of extra work for staff if this is like difficult to go uh analyze but if if there is anything um billable hours to attorneys like if there's anything uh it's interesting data just to know I think for the public to have an idea of the sense of the weight of some of these requests.

I think the attorney's office might be the only one who might have that kind of tracking and I can ask happy to ask but it might only be them.

But I'm happy to ask everybody but I think all of this is like it might be the only interne I I think a lot of this I don't want to create extra work uh exorbitant amount of work but it's it's interesting data points um and even going so far if if next request has these features to track easier in the future um but if it can make it more qualitative like uh they do actually have that um hours and um billing and the city elected not to do it because most departments don't have their employees track like that, and it would have been a lot of work for them to implement it and figure out how to coach their staff.

So we it's just not that commonly done throughout many departments, and so even though they have it, they most we we've never implemented it, but if down the road, you know, it ends up being something the city could implement later, but it's not a function we're using right now, but they do have it.

Thank you so much.

Good, good get these ideas out there.

Appreciate it.

There is there uh I kept unmute going to unmute my mic, and you guys were reading my mind, so yeah, these are all really great points.

Awesome.

Thank you.

Uh any uh closing remarks.

Uh Commissioner Sultz, beyond that.

I am very satisfied with this so far.

Okay, super.

So I am not seeing any other hands go up.

Do I have uh a motion to approve one of the staff recommendations uh for moving this report forward?

Yes.

So uh uh Commissioner Sultan, you're you're willing to make a motion um to um I I guess I'll maybe put it out there and if you you like the sound of it uh uh run with it.

So uh um make a motion to uh request staff uh draft the annual report for the commission based on tonight's discussion.

I second that, yes.

Actually, you made it.

There you go.

I make that yes.

All right.

Do we have a second to that motion?

I'll second that.

All right, thank you, Vice Chair.

Uh roll call vote.

Commissioners bowling.

Uh yes.

Harris.

Yes, shorts.

Yes.

Tilas.

Chair Miley.

Hi.

Bye bye.

All right, thank you.

Um, very efficient discussion.

Uh number four uh item on our agenda is staff communication.

So I just wanted to let um everyone on the commission know that there was a sunshine ordinance complaint that was filed uh by a member of the public that didn't have the facts and the data, and staff tried to work with the um person to get them to resubmit or amend theirs to make it clear.

Um the person was unwilling, so nothing was scheduled with the hearing officer.

Um, and so the complaint was considered you know not complete.

So a hearing couldn't be scheduled.

Um this was the previous person who'd filed a complaint and didn't show up for the hearing as well.

So um there that was the only you know complaint that was filed, but since it was not sufficient, it's not even a legitimate complaint at this point and nothing's proceeding further.

Um that individual did express they were gonna come to the meeting and speak tonight, but did not.

So all right.

Um thank you uh for that uh update.

Uh item five is uh commissioner agenda requests.

And there's none.

That was that would be if the commission submitted ahead of time and there's none.

Okay, uh so moving uh do we need to take public comment on uh no okay.

Um item six commissioner uh commission communications.

Do any commissioners have uh communications announcements that they'd like to uh make this evening?

All right, no, seeing seeing none, uh I think we will move to adjournment.

That's it.

All right, thank you.

Have a good evening.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.