On August 11, 2008 Amanda Rice submitted a public document request asking for several items. She asked for copies of emails from General Manager Tammy Rudock to the Board during a given time period, copies of emails from CCSD to the League of Women’s Voters, and copies of any contract between CCSD and the League of Women’s Voters regarding the Prop. 218 protest. The CCSD response, signed by Ms. Rudock, said that she doesn’t retain “sent” emails, that there were no emails to the League nor was there any contract. The following is a reprint of my August 30th email to Ms. Rudock:

Dear Ms. Rudock,

At a time when there is a great deal on community concern about transparency at the CCSD, it is very disturbing to see the public records response received by Amanda Rice. In her request she asked for copies of some of your “sent” emails.

The attached public records response says in part ” Ms. Rudock does not retain sent emails in the regular course of business and I have checked and she did not retain any such emails.” Since the response letter is signed by you, could you please explain who the “I” refers to when the response is talking about your practices.

I have serious concerns, shared by many other Cambrians, that you do not retain “sent” emails. What record do you have of the electronic correspondence you have with others? As CCSD is a public agency, Cambrians have a right to access the records of public business, and ordinary and prudent business practice is to keep records of correspondence. Can you please provide me with an explanation of why such records are not retained.

Among the recipients of this message are the CCSD Board and the CCSD District Counsel. I sincerely hope that you will ensure that the practice of the General Manager maintaining no record of electronic correspondence will be terminated immediately. If this same practice is being followed by any other CCSD employees it should be terminated immediately as well.
Richard Davega
As you can see, I did not comment on the issue of there being no written evidence of any involvement by the League of Women’s Voters regarding the parameters of their involvement in the protest validation process. There also was apparently no written arrangement for the level of their service or the costs for these services.

How much longer are we going to allow these outrageous business practices and the veil of secrecy to remain at the CCSD?

Last 5 posts by RichDavega