By Queer Lu : missionlocal – excerpt
Commission president wrangled votes for mayor’s pick to lead department, commissioner alleges, in violation of open meeting laws
A San Francisco planning commissioner is challenging the legality of Mayor Daniel Lurie’s appointment of the city’s new planning director, Sarah Dennis Phillips.
Kathrin Moore, the planning commission’s vice president, emailed the city attorney’s office stating that Lydia So, the president of the commission, has “clearly and unequivocally” violated the law.
Moore recounted that So called her and two other commissioners separately the night before the June 18 vote suggesting that they “act in support of the Mayor’s wish to recommend a particular individual to the Mayor to be the new Planning Director,” according to an email addressed to Deputy City Attorney Austin Yang that was obtained by Mission Local…
Multiple City Hall veterans with varying views on development have told Mission Local that they think Dennis Phillips, who was the director of the Office of Economic and Workforce Development and a former city planner, is “fantastic” and “qualified for the job.”…
“The whole purpose of these laws like the Brown Act … is transparency,” Wheaton said. “It’s to try as much as we can to wring the politics out of politics, to try to get people to do things on the merits and to be proud of what they’ve done and not have it be done with secret phone calls.”… (more)
It seems the problem is not with the appointee but with the process. Given the massive number of processes that and being ignored and circumvented, it is heathy to revisit this one that is so bravely contested. We at least have a chance to discuss the importance of our elected and our civil servants following the law. So much is being made of the lack of legal process on the national front which is seemingly difficult to address. There is no reason not to investigate the problem when it is close to home. No one after all is able the law.
It would be good for the citizens of San Francisco to be aware of the law and the ramifications for ignoring it where the Brown Act is concerned. People might be more likely to recognize improper actions when they see them and speak up.
We have been investigating other cases involving questionable actions taken by other departments through sunshine requests. It appears that normal protocol for condudcting business that effects the public has been dropped by some departments.
It will be interesting to see who is responsible for the decision to ignore the legal proceedings in such a public manner. What may the remedy be and how may we get back to legal proceedings?