The alternative title for this post could be, “What is going on that the Deputy’s Union doesn’t want made public?”
I think we all can agree that transparency in government is a critical component of the public being able to exercise our rights to interact in an informed way with their elected officials, and of course cast informed votes at the ballot box. It was an unfortunate blow to transparency when the COIN ordinance at the County of Orange was shelved due to legal reasons — that was the measure specifically designed to make sure that the public would be informed about the details of labor negotiations in an ongoing manner, so that they could give input to their elected officials, the five County Supervisors, when it matters.
I heard that the Deputy’s contract was about to be negotiated and thought that while it isn’t quite COIN (not by a long shot) that if I submitted, weekly, a public records act requesting information about any negotiations with the Deputy’s union, that this would at least provide some transparency, to the extent that I (and others who keep an eye on County government, whether reporters, citizens, etc.) could get information.
So on January 18th the FlashReport filed a public records act request with the County of Orange: “The request is that you send us the status and all documents of all negotiations, offers and counteroffers, supposals, formal or informal between the County of Orange and the Association of Orange County Deputy Sheriff’s.”
County Public Information Officer Jean Pasco acknowledged receipt and based on the law the County has until this Friday to respond to the quest.
FlashReport was copied on an email to the County CEO, County Counsel, and all of the Supervisors, from an attorney representing the Deputy’s union, threatening to go to court tomorrow morning to block the release of any records.
This was their email (with addressees removed, and the attorney’s contact information):
Dear All-
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT on January 28, 2016, at 8:30 a.m., or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard in a Department to be determined of the Orange County Superior Court, Central Justice Center, located at 700 Civic Center Drive West, Santa Ana, CA 92701, Petitioner Association of Orange County Deputy Sheriffs (“AOCDS”) will move, ex parte, for a temporary restraining order (“TRO”) prohibiting Respondents Orange County Executive Officer Frank Kim; County of Orange; and Orange County Board of Supervisors (collectively referred to as “Respondents”) from: producing any documents in response to the January 18, 2016, California Public Records Act (“CPRA”) request made by FlashReport which sought the “status and all documents of all negotiations, offers and counteroffers, supposals, formal or informal between the County of Orange and the Association of Orange County Deputy Sheriff’s” arising out of the collective bargaining between AOCDS and the County, and an order to show cause why a preliminary injunction should not be granted enjoining Respondents and their agents from committing the above-described acts during the pendency of this action. This application is made on the ground that great and/or irreparable injury will result to Petitioner before the matter can be heard on notice, as the documents are exempt from production pursuant to Government Code section 6255, and the production of the documents will undermine and interfere with the requirement of Government Code sections 3500 et. seq. of the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (“MMBA”) that the parties bargain in good faith.
Do you intend to oppose the application? Thanks. Adam
Adam E. Chaikin
Attorney
Olins Riviere Coates and Bagula, LLP
I spoke with Pasco this afternoon who told me that the union had been informed that the county would be releasing documents, and so clearly this attempt to “quash” our PRA is a response to that.
Interestingly the county just finished negotiations with the Orange County Employees Association, and had received several similar PRA’s concerning that negotiation — including from the Orange County Register, and from the head of OCEA Jennifer Muir. In all of those cases the county sent documents, and there were no legal threats (that would be have been funny, for Muir’s request to be challenged by her own union’s counsel — but she obviously respects the public records act process).
As of the posting of this story Pasco had not been notified that paperwork had been filed. She told me that absent a court order the county would provide me the responsive documents to my request this Friday.
Isn’t it a shame when unions will go to this extent to keep their discussions with the County out of the public eye?
It is OBVIOUS that something is going on that they do NOT want public. So I would request, and in fact IMPLORE the County, and specifically the Board of Supervisors not to continue with any negotiations or make any agreements with this union until the public has been informed. And if the union is successful in quashing this PRA, then I think Supervisors should demand a break and discussion internally about what can be done to make sure they can get public input.
I will update when I have more information about a potential court hearing, and of course report on how that goes. It is my hope that I get the responsive documents, and that frankly anyone who also wants them lets the county know.
In closing, there is an irony here because for over five years I was a public information officer with the Sheriff’s department. And I think it is an embarrassment to the Department that the union wouldn’t want transparency. Public servants are accountable to the public.