Rachel Maddow's ACT UP Boi Photo on Display till 1/3

My friends and longtime queer photo documentarians, Rick Gerharter and Jane Philomen Cleland, have a terrific joint exhibit on display only until Sunday, January 3, at the main library.

Titled "Daily and Transcendent: 25 Years of Photojournalist Portraits," the show contains fantastic images of LGBT and HIV/AIDS activism and the folks behind the organizing.  Cleland and Gerharter made wise choices about which black and white and color photographs to include showing the breadth of our communities in the past quarter century.

In addition to the photos, Cleland and Gerharter each have a glass exhibition case featuring their press passes, political buttons and stickers, along with other artifacts from the conventions, conference and protests they covered. After looking at the photos and artifacts, I came away with a fuller understanding of the work and commitment of these documentarians.

The image that most captured my attention shows a younger Rachel Maddow, from back in the day when she was a member of ACT UP/Golden Gate, in her boi phase and was snapped by Gerharter.

He also included his contact sheet from his shoot with her. Gerharter took his Maddow photos on December 24, 1994, and this is his account of how he got the photos:

"Maddow was semi-famous on the occasion of her being the first out lesbian to be a Rhodes scholar. She was visiting friends in San Francisco over the Christmas holidays. She is from Castro Valley and maybe had family there. I met her there and took the photo. Not really much more. She was in town several years ago and Bevan Dufty was planning to introduce her at a local LGBT event. I happened to run into him near my home and he mentioned Maddow. I told him about the photo, he got a copy and then gave it to her at the event. He said she was surprised and happy, but I never heard anything from her."

A 2008 profile of Maddow from The Nation shed light on her ACT UP involvement:

"She earned a degree in public policy from Stanford before beginning work with ACT UP and the AIDS Legal Referral Panel. But Maddow had trouble breaking into treatment activism, which was then the rock-star world of AIDS policy. 'It was boys’ land,' she says. 'I knew like two women total who were doing treatment activism. And I didn’t totally get it. I’m not like Barbie–‘Math is hard!’–but it was a techie world, and I didn’t feel like I could be all that helpful.'”

Be sure to catch this show at the San Francisco main library at Grove and Market Streets before its last day, January 3!

Merry Christmas From Mike + Mike

Greetings of the season to all, near and far! Wishing everyone the best of times and company over the holidays. We're off to spend two nights at the St. Francis Hotel on Union Square. Our friend Dan is staying in our place while we're enjoying our staycation and gaycation in San Francisco. We're both happy to unplug from our computers. See you around Nob Hill waiting for Santa Claus to arrive!

SF Mayoral Aide: 'Cover the Costs' of Mario Woods Funeral

There wasn't much of interest in the several hundred pages of emails the Mayor's Office provided to me today in response to my public records request seeking files on the killing-by-cop death of Mario Woods.

What stood out among the emails was a two-pager from Mayor Ed Lee's senior adviser Paul Henderson dated 12/7/2015, stating the following:

"Here is a draft I created of what the statement [from the mayor] could look like for edits/modifications [sic]. 

"I think it's important we give folks something to measure and look forward to OTHER than the evaluation of whether or not last week's shooting is justified (which I think it is likely to be).

[Text of mayor's draft statement]

"A couple of things to note that I am hearing from the community and various other relevant folks.

"- SFPD is not being helpful in the open data conversations. (See the article in the Examiner this weekend). The State and Federal government have made great headway on the topic and there are some very easy reforms we can adopt to stay ahead of this growing criticism that will only continue to grow. The answers/solutions for this issue have been offered from our office (Joy), the AG's office and the 21 Century policing guideline.

"- We are doing more and there is an open RFP out (or coming shortly) regarding 'implicit bias' for city departments that we should be taking credit for. Community leaders will support our expansion of this issue.

"- I want to plant 3 points with Amos [Brown] to give him a playbook to support our announcement when he meets with AA leaders this evening. FYI he has asked Joe Marshall to help him come up with an agenda of how to work with the city and move something forward.

"- FYI because of how the shooting took place, the city does NOT cover funeral costs. And it would go a long way if we let it be known that 'we' are going to those costs (@7)."

Always good to read what City Hall officials are saying to each other in emails about SFPD personnel killing civilians. Mayor Ed Lee can issue his proclamations and directives at the department and police commission, but he's serious MIA on engaging with the Bayview and black communities, and allies concerned for cop accountability.

Let's see the mayor hold a town hall soon in the Bayview to hear from the community.

Sup. Breed Guilty of 3 Open Govt Law Violations

She's the most ardent anti-sunshine practitioner on the Board of Supervisors and her resistance to following open government law has earned her three violations at the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.

Earlier this year, I requested all of Breed's sent or received emails and she objected that the request was too broad. The SOTF disagreed and after a number of hearings, one of which nobody from Breed's office attended even though they were required to be present, Breed was found guilty of "failing to respond to a public records request in a timely and complete manner."

Another request of mine asked Breed for her emails from the first week of March, and her office again failed to comply as required by law so the SOTF has found her guilty of two additional sunshine violations. Three government transparency violations are now permanently on Breed's record.

It's my cautious belief that Breed and her staff will be more cooperative and compliant when receiving public records requests in the future.

Kiosk Ad Revenue: $4M for SF - $62M for JCDecaux

As long-time readers of this blog are well aware, I am no fan of various forms of street furniture cluttering our precious public sidewalks and spaces. Recently, I had to know how much ad revenue the City has received over an eight-year period and a public records request to the Department of Public Works delivered these responsive figures.

2007
SF:                 $498,600
JCDecaux:  $6,629,000

2008
SF:                 $555,300
JCDecaux:  $7,420,000

2009
[Complete omission. Estimate based on years where figures were provided.]
SF:                 $517,000
JCDecaux:  $7,490,000

2010
SF:                 $568,300
JCDecaux:  $7,597,800

2011
[Partial omission.]
SF:                 $603,800
JCDecaux:  $7,800,000
[Estimate based on other figures provided.]

2012
SF:                 $615,100
JCDecaux:  $8,786,000

2013
[Partial omission.]
SF:                 $715,300
JCDecaux:  $8,900,000
[Estimate based on other figures provided.]

2014
[Partial omission.]
SF:                 $604,600
JCDecaux:  $7,800,000
[Estimate based on other figures provided.]

Totals, accounting for omissions and estimates:
SF:                 $4,722,000
JDCecaux:   $62,521,800

Here are the public records for years 2007, 2008, 2010 and 2012, letters from JCDecaux to DPW in which revenue due SF and overall advertising revenue were both included:

2007

 2008

2010

2012

I asked DPW spokeswoman Rachel Gordon how this arrangement favoring the street furniture and advertising giant came to pass, and she said:

"The revenue structure is part of the contract that the City forged with JCDecaux in 1998. Part of the deal was that the company would install and operate the self-cleaning public toilets in exchange for advertising rights. 

"The contract expires in early 2017. We recently issued as RFP (request for proposal) asking interested vendors to submit proposals for operating public toilets once the current contract expires. The new contract opens the door to opportunity for more revenue, more public toilets, etc." 

[More info: http://sfpublicpress.org/files/contract.pdf and

http://sfdpw.org/?page=372.]

Even if the City were getting more of the ad revenue, I'd still be against the clutter of the kiosks and it sure as hell ain't worth an average of $7 million annually to maintain the public toilets.

FYI, there are 25 toilets and 114 kiosks owned and operated by JCDecaux on San Francisco's streets. We could use public toilets in the triple digits and the kiosks reduced to a dozen.

PM David Cameron: No LGBT Jamaica & UK Files

Remember my Freedom of Information request in October to the UK Prime Minister David Cameron for any emails and files pertaining to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Jamaicans from his advisers or embassy in Kingston, in the weeks leading up to his controversial visit to the island nation?

At the request of the PM's office, I amended and narrowed my broad request and new search was undertaken. The latest response states the office "does not hold information relevant to your refined request."

Some thoughts. Either the PM's office didn't conduct a thorough enough search or neither Cameron and his advisers and the embassy staff cared enough to put LGBT issues on the agenda during his visit. I would expect the prime minister would at minimum have received a status briefing on the current conditions of LGBT Jamaicans, wouldn't you?

Here is the three-page response from London:

Mission Arson Claims Debated at Fire Commission

At yesterday's San Francisco fire commission meeting, there was a lengthy debate about allegations of arson blazes in the past year or in the Mission District.

Since the commission's agenda is always vague about exactly what Fire Chief Joanne Hayes-White and her deputies will say during their verbal reports, there was no way anyone reading the December 17 agenda would know that arson was to be debated. All the agenda said was various division would present reports.

Deputy marshal Daniel DeCossio shared arson and investigation stats and commissioners questioned him about Mission community concerns, fire prevention and formally calendaring the matter for a commission meeting early in the new year.



I was there to request the commission investigate deputy Mark Gonzales' email to me regarding this video. I believe public safety hazard was created by this errant fire fighter and foolishly thought the SFFD would conduct a transparent probe. Not so. Gonzales wrote:

"With regard to the issue you raised related to a San Francisco Fire Department vehicle blocking the bus stop on Van Ness at Market,  I directed my staff to conduct an investigation into your concerns. We take safety-related issues very seriously. This matter was investigated by the Department and appropriate action was taken. Again, thank you for bringing this matter to our attention."

How convenient of the fire department to investigate itself, not contact the complainant for more detail, withholding the name of the SFFD deputy behind the wheel and what supposed action was taken! 

The City needs to discuss establishing an Office of Civilian Complaints to oversee the bad behaviors of fire fighters and deputies, but unlike the police OCC we need to guarantee an SFFD version is fully transparent with names and actions released to the public.

Anyone know why David Campos and no one from his office was at the commission, monitoring the debate? Here's an excerpt from last night's meeting regarding fires in the Mission:

Meth Legal Mess Involves an SF Fire Commissioner

A reader brought it to my attention that a blog operated by an anonymous person was alleging Ken Cleaveland, a member of the San Francisco fire commission, had tangential meth legal woes stemming from a former roommate.

FYI, Cleaveland, pictured, is also the vice president at the Building Owners and Manager's Association of SF.

I reached out to Cleaveland, who initiated airing fire commission meetings on SFGovTV and broadcasting them from City Hall begins in January, asking him to respond to the tangled claims he's involved in speed related legal troubles:

"I've been made aware of this post about a meth legal case in which you are mentioned: http://livefromsanfrancisco.blogspot.com/2015/12/updated-tim-shackelford-vs-xxx-xxxx.html

"There are a number of posts at that blog that reference your alleged problems with a former roommate who possibly was dealing speed. Frankly, I'm always suspicious about blogs where the author isn't clearly stated nor is a contact addy provided.

"What's your response to what is written at that blog about you? Lemme know."

Here's Cleaveland's reply:

"It’s complete bs, Michael. The soon-to-be former housemate’s ex-boyfriend had to have a restraining order issued against him by my housemate as he was defaming him (as he is doing to me, but worse) that actually caused him to lose his job. The guy is psycho and possibly dangerous. The DA’s office is already investigating him for his continued violation of the restraining order. 

"The guy who is defaming Tim (my roomie) and me (because I testified against him at the restraining order trial) is a guy named Matthew Martinez, who is definitely a meth head and has a long history of bad separations from past boyfriends." 

On the surface, this seems to a clear reminder of various ways of how destructive and damaging meth is to gay men and our community, whether we use the drug or not. Let's see how these legal troubles resolve themselves in superior court.

Current Number of SF Cop-Involved Shootings' Investigations?

Last week, I filed a public records request with police chief Greg Suhr for deets about San Francisco police officer involved shootings and today the department's legal department sent me dozens of responsive records.

An October 6th memo from internal affairs to the risk management commanding officer, states there are fifteen open officer-involved shootings.

Thirteen cases are under investigation by former SFPD chief and current district attorney George Gascon, one case is being handled by the San Mateo DA's office and another case is a joint investigation between the two DA offices.

I don't believe Gascon will bring charges in any of the shootings or fatalities, but if he does I'll be among the first to applaud such a move.

The SFPD needs until December 17 to provide me with the names and demographic info on all civilians killed by local cops in 2014 and so far for this year. Once I have that info, I'll share it.

If you know of any organization keeping tabs on these shootings and investigations, please lemme know because I want to learn all there is to know how these investigations are conducted and if accountability and justice are well-served.

Btw, 24-pages were provided to me and there isn't a single name of any officer under investigation included. Just one more example of police privilege whereby they're accused of misdeeds and crimes, yet are guaranteed many protections keeping their names confidential.

That confidentiality undermines San Francisco's community policing practices.

$1400 for 'Sanitized' FBI File on Peter Seeger?

After legendary folk singer and leftist political peacenik Pete Seeger died in in 2014, I filed a FOIA request for his FBI file and it was routed through the National Archives and Records Administration. It was projected that federal review of Seeger's file would take 24 months before some of the records might be released.

This week, NARA contacted me to say a "sanitized copy" of several thousand pages was available for public inspection at no-cost at their facility in Maryland or a disc of those records, for a few, could be mailed to me.

I replied asking for an estimate of the fee, since I was across the country and unable to visit Maryland, and received this info:

(Click to enlarge.)

Rather than pay $1,400 to view this sanitized version of Seeger's FBI file, I'm pushing NARA to make it available online for the great number of people who are interested in reading any documents the government kept on Seeger.

Let's hope NARA does the right thing and publishes whatever it has ready for public inspection on Seeger to the web, by the end of January if not sooner. Here's the entirety of the response yesterday:

Dear Mr. Petrelis,

I just wanted to give you an update on your FOIA request RD 42423 for FBI Headquarters case file 100-HQ-200845 on Pete Seeger. We are currently awaiting instructions from other government agencies regarding their release determinations pertaining to classified documents found in the file. We cannot proceed further with processing until we receive these responses. Unfortunately, whenever we are in a "consultation" phase of our FOIA processing, we are at the mercy of outside agency queues and timetables. I would love to give you an estimate as to when we will hear back from the agencies, but the truth is there is just no way to tell. As soon as we receive all agency responses, we will release as much as we can based on agency guidance and finish our processing of your FOIA request.

Until that time, we have a sanitized copy of file 100-HQ-200845 with all classified documents withdrawn that is available for free if you or a designated representative visit our facility at College Park, Maryland. If you plan to visit, please notify me at either mark.murphy@nara.gov or at (301) 837-1999 at least a week in advance of your arrival. If I do not acknowledge your notification of arrival within 48 hours, then contact our office at either specialaccess_foia@nara.gov or at (301) 837-3190. A digital copy of the file will be loaned to you on DVD in our 4th floor research room (room 4000) where you will have the option to either burn a copy to your own DVD, download a copy to a flash drive, upload a copy as an attachment to an e-mail, or download a copy to your laptop if it has a CD/DVD-ROM drive.

There is also the option of having us mail you an electronic copy on CD or DVD, but standard reproduction charges will apply and you will be charged $0.80 per page. The 2,500 pages initially cited to you was a good faith estimate based on the maximum number of pages designated to be in one of our standard record center boxes. The actual page count is 1,761 pages. If you would like to receive a copy of the file in the mail, just contact me, and I will send you an official price quote for reproductions.

At some point in 2016, we plan to have a copy of the current version of file 100-HQ-200845 made available to view for free on the internet. I do not have an estimated time when it will be placed online as there is a backlog of digital files waiting to be uploaded to our servers. In the future after we receive all agency consultation responses, which will presumably allow us to release more information, an updated final version of 100-HQ-200845 will replace the obsolete one online.

A line-by-line review was completed of file 100-HQ-200845 and information exempted from disclosure under the terms of the Freedom of Information Act (5 USC 552) has been redacted. For your information, 321 pages have been sanitized and 92 pages have been withdrawn in full. The redactions have been applied under the following exemptions and reasons:

(b)(1)-To prevent the disclosure of classified information

(b)(3)-To prevent disclosure of information exempted by statute; the specific statutes for this case are 50 USC 3024(i)(1)/50 USC 403-1(i)(1) which protect intelligence sources and methods.

(b)(6) and (b)(7)(C)-To prevent an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy

(b)(7)(D)-To prevent the disclosure of the identity of a confidential source or informant

(b)(7)(E)-To protect techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations

You have the right to appeal our decision to restrict access, either in whole or in part, to any document over which this agency has release authority within 60 calendar days of receipt of this e-mail. Your appeal can either be submitted in writing and addressed to the Deputy Archivist of the United States, National Archives and Records Administration, 8601 Adelphi Road, Room 4200, College Park, MD 20740-6001, or sent by e-mail to foia@nara.gov.  Depending on how your appeal is filed, please cite case number RD 42423 and “Freedom of Information Act Appeal” on either the envelope or in the subject line of the e-mail.

Feel free to contact me if you have any questions pertaining to the processing of your FOIA request. You will hear from us again once we receive all agency returns and complete the processing of your case.

Sincerely,

Mark Murphy

Special Access/FOIA Staff

National Archives and Records Administration