Upload
l-a-paterson
View
218
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/12/2019 Transparency in Government Petition for Writ of Mandate
1/7
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
NE IL L. SHAPIRO (State Bar No. 5 154 7)LAW OFFICES OF NEILL. SHAPIRO2 100 Garden Road , Suite CMonter ey, Ca l if ornia 93940T eleph one: (83 1) 372 -3700Fac s imil e: (83 1) 372 -370 1
Attorneys for Pet itionerIRAN PAREN CY IN GOVERNME T
FILEAUG 0 5 2 14
TERES A RISICLERK OF T HE SUPERIOR C OURT
EPUT Y
C RMEN B OROZC O
UPERJOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF MO TEREY
11 TRANSPARENCY IN GOVERNMENT , anun in corpo rated assoc iat ion ,
Case No.: 2 87PE T ITION FOR WRIT O F MANDATE2
13
14
Petitioner,
V
C ITY OF CARMEL-BY -T H E-SEA , and15 Doe s 1 throu gh 10 , inc lus ive
16 Re spo nd ents .
1718
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Pe tition er Transpa rency in Gove mm ent ( Petit ioner ) com pl a ins of Re spondent C ity of
Carmel-By-The-Sea ( C ity or Respo nd ent ) as follow s:
PA RT I ES
1. Petitioner Tran spa r enc y in Government is a n unincorporat ed association of
ind iv idu al s w ho bel ieve that gove rnmen t represents it s consti
tuen ts be st whe n it opera tes open ly,
and when the pub li c h as read y access to the information it n eeds to monitor th e actions of its
governmenta l repr ese ntative s. Pe titioner s also believe th at gove rnmenta l entitie s shou ld be
requir ed t o comp ly wit h laws pr o tec t in g the ir ri ght to such access , includ ing t he Ca li forn ia Public
Record s Act , Government Code 6250 el q (th e PRA'' ).
I
PETI TI ON FOR WRIT OF MANDATE
8/12/2019 Transparency in Government Petition for Writ of Mandate
2/7
8/12/2019 Transparency in Government Petition for Writ of Mandate
3/7
vo luminou s amoun t of se p a rate a nd di stin ct reco rd s that are demanded in a single req uest, the C it
2 requires a n extension of tim e pursuant to Ca li fornia Government Co de Sec tion 6253 in order to
3 adequately de termin e wh e th er the R eco rd s Requ es t, in who le o r in part , seeks co pi es of disc losab
4 public r eco rd s in the po ssess ion of th e City and provide noti ce of the r easons therefore. That
5 lette r ( the Second Exte nsio n ) also said that th e 'City expects to provide its detem1ination no lat
6 th an Augus t 15 , 2014.
7 7. The City has not allowed Petitioner to have access to , or to obtain a cop y of, a
8 si ngle one of th e pu blic recor ds so ught by an d de sc rib ed in the Req ue st.
9 APPLICABLE LAW
1 8 Und er the Public R eco rd s Act, Government Code 6250 t seq. the City as a
local age ncy is o bli ga ted to gr ant publi c access to , and fo r a fee of no more than the ac tual cost
12 of copy in g to pro v ide copies of, any public record s to a m embe r of the pub lic w h o prope rly
3 requ ests s uc h access or co pi es, unl ess any specific rec ord is exempt from disclosure by the
4 provisions of Government Code 6254 e l seq or 6255 . Governme nt Co de 6252 (e) prov ides
5 th at the term public record s in c lud es any writin g co ntainin g in f ormation relat in g to the con du c
6 of the publ ic's business prepared, owned , use d, o r r etai n ed by any state o r local agency rega rdl ess
17 of phys ica l form o r ch arac te ristics. Pet itioner i s in f ormed and be lieves that reco rds described in18 th e R equ es t we re used a nd r etained by th e C ity to reco rd an d document its rece ip t ofPR.A requ est
19 and res pon ses th ereto and its paymen t of tax dollar s to outs id e counsel in co nnection w ith such
20 rece ipt and responses. As such , th e reco rd s desc rib ed in the Request are publ ic records ' and are
2 n ot exemp t from di scl osure by the term s of the Pub lic R eco rd s Act.
22 9 Peti tioner p erfo rm ed a ll requir em en ts placed on it by law to entit le it to access to ,
23 and to cop ies of , th e reco rd s desc ri bed in the Requ es t by makin g the request sufficiently spec ifi c a
24 to its sco pe, and by giv in g C ity th e ten full days arguabl y spec ifi ed in the PRAt o res pond t o th e
25 requ es t and to pr ov ide co pie s of the req uested reco rd s . Because of Petitioner ' s complia nce w ith
26 th e app licab le lega l r equ irement s, a nd becau se th e reco rds so u gh t are not exempt from d isclos ur e
27
28 3PETITION FOR WRJT OF MANDATE
8/12/2019 Transparency in Government Petition for Writ of Mandate
4/7
1 und er the law , P etition er ha s a clear, pr ese nt , and substantia l ri ght to the performance by th e C ity
2 o f its du ti es with respec t to acces s to and cop ies of those records.
3 10 Becau se Pe titioner h as in a ll res pect s comp lied wi t h th e requ irement s placed on it
4 by the PRA , and beca u se th e records to whi ch it soug ht and seeks ac cess a nd of whic h it so ught
5 an d see ks cop ies , were not and are not exempt from di sclo sure under th e provisions o f t he P RA ,
6 th e Ci ty has a cl ear, pr ese nt and a bso lute dut y to pr ov id e acces s to tho se documents and, for the
7 afo rem enti one d fee , cop ies o f t h ose do cu m ent. Re spond ent C ity failed to perform its dut ies in tha
8 reg a rd b y refus in g to pro v id e Pet iti oner access to , or cop ies of, d oc um ent s req uested.
9 11 P e ti t io ner is informed and b e li eves th at the C it y's grantin g to itself of the Fi rst
10 Extens ion , oste nsibl y becau se of " the n ee d to sea rch for , co ll ec t and ap p rop ri ately exa min e a
vo lumin ous amo un t of separate a nd di stinct records th at a re demande d in a s in g le reque s t," was a
12 s ta llin g tact ic by the Ci ty that lack s legal ju stifi catio n and co n st itute s a v io lati on of the PRA by
13 impr oper ly purportin g to extend th e statutory response time mandate d by th e PR A . Petition er is
14 in formed an d beli eves th at a ll of th e reque sts and responses so ught are logged , and retained , by a
15 s ingle indi vidual - the C ity C ler in a sing le location. or did the City nee d add itional tim e to
16 determine th at reque sts mad e pur s uant to th e PRA and the C ity's responses to those req u ests a re
17 th em se lves public record s that mu st be di sclo sed u nder th e PRA.
18 12 . Pe titi o ne r i s info rm ed an d b elieves that the City ' s g ran ting to it se lf of th e eco nd
19 Ex ten sion , ostensibly o n th e sa m e bas is as it g rant ed itself th e First Ex tensio n , equ al ly lac k s lega l
20 ju st ifi ca tion an d vio lates th e PR A . Mo reove r, Gove rnm ent Code 6253(c) , w hi ch authorize s an
2 1 ex ten sio n of tim e beyo nd th e initial ten-d ay s ta tu t ory dea dlin e for res po n se in limit ed, " unu sua l
22 c irc um stances ex p res s y pr ov id es that [n] o noti ce [of an extensio n] sha ll sp ec ify a date that
23 wou ld result in an exte nsion for mo r e than 4 da ys" fo r determina ti o n and, if ap pr opri ate , access
24 and the provision of cop ies. The Seco nd Extension tha t the C it y purport ed to grant it se l f res ult s i
25 an ex ten sion o f m ore th an 14 d ays in v io lation of the cite d s tatu tory provi sion ; the PR \ doe s no
26 p ermit seq uential ex te ns ion s to ex tend th e s tatutory d ea d lin e by more than a total of " 14 d ays.
27
28 4PETITIO N FOR WRIT OF MA NDA TE
8/12/2019 Transparency in Government Petition for Writ of Mandate
5/7
13. Th e Publi c Re co rd s Act grants P et iti oner the r igh t t o seek the re li ef soug ht her ein.
2 Governmen t C od e 625 8 pr ov ide s that [a)n y p erso n ma y institute proceeding s for injunctive o r
3 dec larator y relie f or w ri t of man date in any court of competent jur isd ic tion to enforce h is o r her
4 ri ght to in spec t or to re ce ive a copy of any publi c record o r class of publi c rec ords und er this
5 chapter.
6 14 . Pe titio ner has no pl ain , spee dy, and adequ ate reme d y at law o ther than th e rel ief
so ught by way of thi s Petition . Without the i ss ua nce o f a Writ of Mandate as p rayed herein,
8 ne ither P etiti one rs nor oth er member s of th e publi c w ill be granted access to o r a copies of
9 docu ments th a t conta in su bstan tive information abo ut the o p era tion and conduc t of n impmt ant
1 part of the public 's gove rnm e nt - the Citys compliance w ith , or lack of comp liance w ith , the
PRA .
12 15. Goverr m1ent Code 6 259( a) pr ov ide s that [w ]henever it is made to appea r by
13 ve r ified p etiti on to the super ior court of the coun ty where the reco rd s or so m e pa rt ther eof are
14 situated that certa in public reco rd s are b e ing improp er ly withhe ld fro m a member of the public , th
15 cou rt sha ll o rd er th e office r or p erson char ge d wi th w ithh o ldin g th e re c ords to d isc lose the pu b li c
1 6 recor d o r show cause why h e or she s hould not d o so . This Court s h ould i ss ue an Alternative
17Writ , compe llin g Res p ond en t t o di sclo se th e record s descr ibed in the Requ es t, o r to show ca use
18 be f ore th is Co urt w hy it sho uld not be requ ired t o do so.
9 WH EREFORE, PETIT IO ER PRAYS AS FOLLOWS:
2 1. Th at thi s Co urt iss ue an A lte rnati ve Writ of Mandate , commanding Respon dent
21 City to a llow th e in sp ec ti on of , and upon payme n t of th e s tat utory fee to provide cop ies of, a ll
22 req ues ts m ade pu rs uant to th e Publi c R ec o rd s Ac t and rece ived by th e C ity of Carmel during the
23 period Januar y 1, 20 14 , th r o ugh Jun e 30 . 2 014 , (2) the re spo nses, if a ny , to ea c h ofthc requests
24 ref erenced in (1) , and (3) recor ds re fl ec tin g the am o unt o f le ga l fe es in c urred by the C ity of Ca rm
25 w ith r espec t to th e reque sts refe rence d in 1 ), indi v idu a lly and in the aggregate, o r t o s how cau se
26 be f ore thi s Co urt at a da t e an d time to be spec ifi ed by the Court why it has not done so, a nd w h y
2 7
28 5PETITI ON FO R WRJT OF MA DATE
8/12/2019 Transparency in Government Petition for Writ of Mandate
6/7
1 sh ou ld not be compe lled to d o so; and
2 2 . That on the return of th e Alte rnati ve Writ and t he hea r in g o f t hi s Pet itio n, thi s Co u
3 iss ue its Pere mp t or y Wr it o f Mand a te command ing R es pon dent C ity to a llow inspec tio n of and ,
4 up o n p aym ent o f th e s ta tut o ry fee to pr ov ide c o p ies of, a ll requ es ts ma de pu r s ua nt to th e Publ ic
5 R ec o rd s Ac t and rec e ive d by th e C ity of C arm e l durin g t he p e riod Jan ua ry 1, 20 I4 , th ro ugh J une
6 30,2 0 14, 2) the res po n ses, if a ny, to eac h of th e requ es ts re fe ren ced i n 1) . and 3) reco rd s
7 refl ec tin g th e am o unt of lega l fees incurr ed b y the C it y of Cam1e l w ith r espec t to the requ es ts
8 refe renc ed in 1 ), ind ividu a ll y a nd in t he agg regate.
9
1
2
13
14
15
6
1 7
18
19
2
21
22
23
24
25
26
2 7
2 8
..
.J .
4
5.
For a n awa rd of atto rn ey s fee s to P etit io ne rs p ur s ua nt to Gov enm 1ent C ode 625 9
For c os ts of s ui t in c urr ed h erein ; a nd
For s uch ot he r and furth e r re lief as thi s Co urt d eems ju st a nd prope r.
D ated: Au g ust 5, 2014 NE IL L. SH A PIRO
6
LAW OF F ICE S OF NE ILL. SH A PIRO
Att o rn eys for P e titi onerTRA N SPARE N CY IN GO Y E RM ENT
PET ITI ON FOR W lT OF MA NDA T E
8/12/2019 Transparency in Government Petition for Writ of Mandate
7/7
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
2
3
4
15
6
7
18
9
2
2
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
VERIFICATION
I Ne il L Shapiro declare :
I am cou n sel o f record for Tran spa rency in Gov e rnm ent the Petitione r in this actio n. I
exec ute thi s Verification on beh alf of Petitioner beca use I h ave greater knowledge o f th e factuaJ
mat1ers a ll ege d above th an do es any m emb er o f P et ition e r I have rev ie wed the foregoing Petition
for Writ o f Mandate and know the conte nts thereof. I know of m y ow n per so nal knowledge that
the fa cts set forth above are true and COITec t except for those a lleged on information and b e li ef
and as to th em I believe them t o be tru e and correct.
xec ut ed at Mont e rey Ca li fornia thi s 5th day of August 2014. I decl are under penalty o
perjury tha t the fore go in g is true and correct.
7PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE