New mayor, same obfuscation.
Late last year, former San Francisco Mayor London Breed drew condemnation for her office’s habit of deleting text messages, a public record that citizens have the right to scrutinize under California and the city’s open government laws.
It seems Mayor Daniel Lurie is following in Breed’s footsteps.
New public records requests suggest Lurie is deleting or otherwise concealing his text messages.
“Boy, that sounds depressingly familiar,” said Karl Olson, a media law attorney whose litigation helped shape access to public records in California. “Access to public records is a fundamental and necessary right of every person in this state.”
The Standard requested all text messages between Lurie and constituents, and Lurie and government officials, from his first few days in office. The mayor’s office claimed no such records existed.
When The Standard asked the mayor’s office point blank if the mayor deletes his texts, spokesperson Charles Lutvak responded with a statement.
“The mayor complies with all records retention laws. We continue to review current policies to ensure they are up to date as communications technology evolves,” Lutvak said.
The Standard learned of Lurie’s missing texts when a tipster, William Fisher, tried to replicate the same records snafu that last year showed Breed was deleting her messages.
In June, Hazel Williams, who frequently files for public records, asked for text messages between Breed and Public Works Director Carla Short, making requests to both Public Works and the mayor’s office. Public Works produced text messages between the pair, but the mayor’s office said it had none.
Last month, Fisher requested Short’s text messages to Lurie, and vice versa, and received them from Public Works. On Feb. 10, Lurie texted Short a complaint about a sidewalk that needed cleaning. “From the supervisor. Let’s please work to get this cleaned up,” the mayor wrote. Short replied, “I spoke with him, we are sending a crew over.” The following day, Lurie directed Short to clean “a number of tents” near Mission and Howard, and at 196 Valencia St., across from the bar Zeitgeist. The disclosure also features street cleaning directives for other neighborhoods, like North Beach.
When Fisher requested text messages from the mayor’s office, staffers there told him they had no records to provide. This suggests that Lurie is deleting his text messages, advocates of open records say.
“I will say with 100% certainty, yes, that’s a public record, and should be turned over upon request and should be preserved as an official public record,” UC Irvine School of Law adjunct professor Susan Seager said, citing the California Public Records Act.
The mayor’s texts offer a window into how tax dollars are used and are a chief way for the public to provide a check on the government. Olson and Seager point to the 2017 State Supreme Court decision in San Jose vs. Ted Smith, which found that discussions of government business on private devices were subject to the California Public Records Act.
Lurie may be looking to keep his communications shrouded in other ways, too.
The mayor has turned to the encrypted messaging app Signal for some communications, sources tell The Standard. This reporter contacted Lurie on Signal; the mayor didn’t reply, but the message was marked as “read.”
Government use of Signal is under a public microscope after President Donald Trump’s administration accidentally texted plans to bomb Yemen to the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic using the encrypted messaging app. Local politicians have long used Signal for its timed-deletion features, seen as a way to bypass the city’s Sunshine Ordinance, which gives public access to most records produced by government officials.
The city attorney’s office declined to comment. However, in September, the city attorney wrote a memo to the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force outlining the city’s “Record Retention and Destruction Policy.” The policy states that not all text messages need to be kept by government officials and may be deleted.
“Some electronic records fit the definition of ‘records’ in the retention context. But most do not,” the policy memo said.
Olson litigated the landmark San Jose case that showed text messages are subject to open records laws — and based on that experience, he believes San Francisco’s policy relies on outdated state guidance.
“I disagree with them,” he said.
Seager, the law professor, reviewed the city attorney’s retention policy for The Standard. She said state law trumps the city ordinances cited in the policy.
“The city attorney is flatly wrong,” she said.