Local Blogs

The Observer

By Roz Rogoff

E-mail Roz Rogoff

About this blog: In January 2002 I started writing my own online "newspaper" titled "The San Ramon Observer." I reported on City Council meetings and other happenings in San Ramon. I tried to be objective in my coverage of meetings and events, and...  (More)

View all posts from Roz Rogoff

Entity Refused to Provide This Data

Uploaded: Apr 28, 2011
San Ramon is mentioned in Thomas Peele's April 24 article on Public Employees' Salaries as providing only partial data to their database. Indeed in the 2010 Public Employee's Salary Database San Ramon's data shows a lot of DNP. According to the legend, DNP = "Entity refused to provide this data to us despite repeated requests."

Wow! That sounds serious. The story implies that any City with DNP's in the Mercury News database must be hiding something. After all, the lawyer for the Newspaper, and famous Brown Act Attorney Karl Olson, both said Public Agencies are REQUIRED to provide this information according to California State Law. Well, yes and no.

I met with Eva Phelps, Director of Finance, Candace Daniels, Accounting Manager, and Cheryl Wade, Director of Public Information for San Ramon to get the facts on what the newspaper requested and what they provided and why.

Phelps explained that the City has been using an accounting software from SunGard since 1999. This software is used to provide annual Salary and W2 information to the State in the format required by the State.

The newspaper sent a request for the information on January 6, 2011, which was six days after the end of 2010. The Accounting Department had not closed out the year, which requires a reconciliation or balancing of all records prior to preparing the W2 forms for employees by that date, and it was necessary to do that before providing any information to the paper. After the year was closed, an employee spent three weeks putting together the data requested by the newspaper.

The City provided the data in the same format they provided it to the State Controller for 2010. This is also posted on the City's website in PDF format. However, the 2010 data requested by the CC Times included eight additional fields that were not in the 2009 data that the City provided last year.

In order to add this data to the newspaper's requested format, the City would either have to pay for custom programming to extract the data, or have an employee rekey in all of the data into an Excel Spreadsheet in the format requested by the paper.

In 2009 there was one error in 582 records submitted to the paper, which made it appear as if a Lifeguard received a gross salary of $137,452.52. In fact several comments were posted in the blogs regarding this exorbitant salary. The Lifeguard actually received $13,745.52. You can see that 52 was entered twice, before and after the decimal point. That was a keying error.

The City caught the error after the data had been sent to the paper and asked them to correct it. They did not. Instead they said the City was being "inconsistent."

To ensure that no errors would be made by manually rekeying the 577 records requested by the newspaper for 2010, the City advised the newspaper of an estimated fee for the City's financial accounting software provider to extract the data.

Accounting Manager, Candace Daniels, estimated the cost for custom programming to extract the data from the SunGard system would be $80 an hour or $2000, but the Times refused to pay any costs for getting the data in their requested format.

"Some entities want money for data because they want to be reimbursed for the cost of producing it. The Alameda Health Care District demanded $5,000 to detail the medical insurance costs of its employees. Eleven school districts in San Joaquin County demanded $366 each to provide data. The city of Santa Rosa asked for $965; Half Moon Bay wanted $503 and Benicia sought $5,000 for the information.

So who paid? Who covered the cost of these agencies for providing free information to a commercial enterprise for its profit at the public's expense? Thomas Peele boasted in his article, "Bay Area News Group did not pay for any of the information."

Yet according to City Attorney, Sheryl Schaffner, Government Code section 6253.9 (b), says "the requester shall bear the cost of producing a copy of the record, including the cost to construct a record, and the cost of programming and computer services necessary to produce a copy of the record when . . . . The request would require data compilation, extraction, or programming to produce the record."

Schaffner was also concerned that some of the medical payments made by the city might reveal information which could be in violation of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). The City offers a Private Benefit Health Plan, which makes it a Covered Entity under HIPAA.

HIPAA establishes regulations for disclosure of Protected Health Information (PHI), which includes payment for health care that can be linked to an individual. So if the medical costs paid by the City to one employee are unusually high, that could indicate the employee or a family member is being treated for a medical condition, even if the exact condition isn't revealed.

San Ramon is hardly alone in not conforming to the Times' request for data from public agencies. "Other government entities have released only partial data, including Oakland, Berkeley, San Francisco, San Ramon, Walnut Creek, Fairfield and Palo Alto."

I emailed Times reporter Thomas Peele and Database editor, Daniel Willis about the absence of data on another agency. Willis answered my email, "We've sent out 510 requests so far, a list of who didn't answer wouldn't fit on the page. However we have a Request Status database that lets you track our progress."

On April 25 I emailed Willis to inform him that "I plan to write a commentary about this on Thursday for the San Ramon Express. I shall include your response if you choose to send one." I also left phone messages for Willis and Peele about my blog. So far I have not received a reply.

Comments

Posted by Dave Hudson, a resident of San Ramon,
on Apr 29, 2011 at 8:20 am

Very informative Roz. Thank you for taking the time to get the facts and not just the opinions. I can't believe we are paying a lifeguard more than a councilmember. The value of your reporting is worth more than you are receiving from the Express. Keep up the good work even if it means ripping me. You have to have some fun along the way.


Posted by Roz Rogoff, the San Ramon Observer,
on Apr 29, 2011 at 9:40 am

Roz Rogoff is a registered user.

Dave,

Everyone has fun ripping you, oh except you of course.

I hope the reporters will get back to me because I want to know why they refused to pay to get the data in the format they are using and believe that they don't have to. I might even call Karl Olson and ask him.

I contacted Olson in 2003 when I was preparing the Pleading to file a Brown Act complaint against the City Council. He was very helpful on the phone but wanted a $1000 retainer to prepare the Pleading and admitted that wouldn't go very far. So I decided to fill it out myself with some coaching from a Law Professor on the format.

As you know the case was dropped after the Council members who violated the Brown Act were not re-elected.

Roz


Posted by Dave Hudson, a resident of San Ramon,
on Apr 29, 2011 at 10:15 am

I know. I was there. Except they didn't run for re-election so, I guess you can't say they weren't re-elected.

I'm looking forward to the BAAQMD meeting on Wednesday. Item #12 is a presentation. "Legal framework for the Air District-How do we clean the air?" Never hurts to review the basics.


Posted by mloliver, a resident of San Ramon,
on Apr 29, 2011 at 5:25 pm

Roz, you have done a very thorough and careful analysis of the "facts" in the news report. I'm glad you were able to expose the bias and misleading information in the article. Good job!

Mary Lou


Posted by Al P., a resident of San Ramon,
on May 1, 2011 at 8:42 pm

Wow 2 grand. You have got to be kidding. A drop in the San Ramon budget!
These guys spend this for lunch.
I think you have it wrong. The Times is the peoples link to what the city is doing with public funds. Another way to withhold info from the taxpayers is to charge us for our own info. San Ramon's ways are not far behind the rest of the States financial woes that are not sustainable and it wont be long.


Posted by Woody, a resident of San Ramon,
on May 2, 2011 at 8:13 am

Thanks for following up on my e-mail to you about this article! I knew you would get facts for me and other interested San Ramon citizens.

Thanks again and keep up your great reporting!


Posted by Roz Rogoff, the San Ramon Observer,
on May 5, 2011 at 11:53 am

Roz Rogoff is a registered user.

Woody,

You posed a good question about it, and I wanted to follow up on the story because it was so misleading. I also wanted to post the letter that City Attorney Sheryl Schaffner sent to Thomas Peele in March with all of the data he requested cross-referenced to the financial reports he was sent. There was no DNP except for medical payments, which are required by law to be kept private.

I figured out how to post the PDF to Google Docs, so here's [Web Link the link to Schaffner's letter] so everyone can see the City was hiding nothing.


Roz


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: *

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

‘Much Ado’ or is it Adios for ObamaCare?
By Tom Cushing | 33 comments | 1,102 views

Political posturing about water
By Tim Hunt | 4 comments | 787 views

Backpacked with care is back
By Roz Rogoff | 2 comments | 489 views