Hi Lou - My guess is that Mr. Max C-O figures no one sees these posts, and most other news outlets are also ignored. He's a small fish, and he's not feeling much heat.
If the Mayor cannot just replace him, then I'm guessing the Commission is not upset enough to take any strong action against him. Welcome to San Francisco where disfunction rules supreme.
From Barberini’s reporting over the past year, it seems more and more of a certainty that MCO, in fact, illegally leaked confidential information about an investigation of Officer Kosta. Was the leak a mere coincidence that MCO had been assigned as the Police Commissioner to oversee the Kosta matter, and those files may have been in MCO’s possession? It seems no coincidence.
It’s shocking that MCO is currently serving as Vice President of the Commission and is thought to be behind the leak of Commission confidential records.
At the time Mayor Breed appointed MCO to the Police Commission in November 2021 and the Board of Supervisors approved the appointment, then-president of the Police Commission, Malia Cohen, was quoted in a press release from the Mayor’s Office as having said:
“It is so refreshing to have a Police Commissioner who has technical knowledge of how the system works and the lived experience of an African American who grew up in San Francisco. I know Mr. Oberstone will be an asset as we create policies that better serve all San Franciscans.”
I marvel at the potential irony of MCO’s “lived experience” vs. the leak in the Kosta matter. Cohen apparently expected that MCO would also know how the “Police Commission system” itself worked, and that part of how the Commission works likely prohibits leaking of the Commission’s confidential and internal “work product” records. It appears that may have been lost on MCO.
It seems clear to me that Breed should invoke her appointing-authority discretion under “§4.109, Police Commission,” in the City Charter, which states, in part, “The Mayor, with the consent of the Board of Supervisors, may remove a member the Mayor has nominated.”
It should be a political embarrassment to Breed that as her appointee, MCO is suspected via a preponderance of circumstantial evidence of having been the source of the leak. There’s clearly a disconnect between Breed’s appointment of MCO and her current efforts to support recruitment of Police Officers. She can’t have things both ways. If Breed had any sense, she would move to immediately remove MCO from the Police Commission before this scandal worsens — and harms Police Acadmy recruiting. After all, her re-election campaign may depend on taking such pre-emptive action to squash further political embarrassment.
Barberini’s footnote needs clarification. San Francisco’s Sunshine Ordinance Task Force (SOTF) — which “adjudicates” citizen’s public records requests and access disputes — has taken the position that public records and all electronic communications on both a City employee’s, or City officials’, official City equipment and accounts (including MCO’s) are subject to the Sunshine Ordinance — and must be searched for responsive records being requested under a public records request.
SOTF has taken that position following a ruling by a California Supreme Court, or a Court of Appeals, ruling in the “Smith vs. San Jose” case around 2019 that government business conducted on either a government employee’s personal devices or personal accounts (including social media accounts) must be searched for responsive records in response to public records requests.
A potential hiccup (limitation) is that the search of a personal device is done by the owner of the device, not by the agency the employee or official is attached to. So, if there is reasonable cause or suspicion an employee or official (MCO) didn’t release and fully disclose records stored on their personal devices or personal accounts, the records requestor may have to file a Court action or lawsuit to compel release of the communications stored on the personal devices that were withheld.
Sounds to me like Kosta’s lawyers should seek access to MCO’s “X” (formerly Twitter) account and MCO’s cell phone for records exchanged between MCO and reporters for the “San Francisco Standard.”
After all, Kosta now has a “lived experience” that confidential records involving his employment were leaked from inside the Police Commission, most likely by MCO. Kosta deserves better policies that serve and safeguard his employment, as Malia Cohen alluded to.
It’s clear as day that if the Police Commission doesn’t already have an internal process to recommend to the Mayor that a Police Commissioner be removed for cause, then the Commission should develop such a policy immediately requiring that known leakers on the Commission of its internal confidential investigative records involving officer conduct is grounds for the Mayor to independently and immediately remove such a Commissioner.
Otherwise — or perhaps in addition — San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors should rapidly introduce such a Charter Change to Charter “§4.109 (along with the other Charter changes the Board is currently working on placing) on San Francisco’s March 5, 2023 municipal ballot).
Patrick - Thanks. Though I agree with the need for integrity, and the benefit to getting rid of a bad apple like Mr. MCO asap, getting rid of London Breed is an even higher priority for me.
Hey Lou, you have pointed out that at least one police commissioner is supposed to be a retired judge or an attorney with trial experience, and that MCO does not have trial experience (nor do the others). It would seem this would be a good pathway to get some change in the police commission - but maybe this just hasn't worked? Any update on this?
Hi Lou - My guess is that Mr. Max C-O figures no one sees these posts, and most other news outlets are also ignored. He's a small fish, and he's not feeling much heat.
If the Mayor cannot just replace him, then I'm guessing the Commission is not upset enough to take any strong action against him. Welcome to San Francisco where disfunction rules supreme.
Keep the pressure on these people Lou!
From Barberini’s reporting over the past year, it seems more and more of a certainty that MCO, in fact, illegally leaked confidential information about an investigation of Officer Kosta. Was the leak a mere coincidence that MCO had been assigned as the Police Commissioner to oversee the Kosta matter, and those files may have been in MCO’s possession? It seems no coincidence.
It’s shocking that MCO is currently serving as Vice President of the Commission and is thought to be behind the leak of Commission confidential records.
At the time Mayor Breed appointed MCO to the Police Commission in November 2021 and the Board of Supervisors approved the appointment, then-president of the Police Commission, Malia Cohen, was quoted in a press release from the Mayor’s Office as having said:
“It is so refreshing to have a Police Commissioner who has technical knowledge of how the system works and the lived experience of an African American who grew up in San Francisco. I know Mr. Oberstone will be an asset as we create policies that better serve all San Franciscans.”
I marvel at the potential irony of MCO’s “lived experience” vs. the leak in the Kosta matter. Cohen apparently expected that MCO would also know how the “Police Commission system” itself worked, and that part of how the Commission works likely prohibits leaking of the Commission’s confidential and internal “work product” records. It appears that may have been lost on MCO.
It seems clear to me that Breed should invoke her appointing-authority discretion under “§4.109, Police Commission,” in the City Charter, which states, in part, “The Mayor, with the consent of the Board of Supervisors, may remove a member the Mayor has nominated.”
It should be a political embarrassment to Breed that as her appointee, MCO is suspected via a preponderance of circumstantial evidence of having been the source of the leak. There’s clearly a disconnect between Breed’s appointment of MCO and her current efforts to support recruitment of Police Officers. She can’t have things both ways. If Breed had any sense, she would move to immediately remove MCO from the Police Commission before this scandal worsens — and harms Police Acadmy recruiting. After all, her re-election campaign may depend on taking such pre-emptive action to squash further political embarrassment.
Barberini’s footnote needs clarification. San Francisco’s Sunshine Ordinance Task Force (SOTF) — which “adjudicates” citizen’s public records requests and access disputes — has taken the position that public records and all electronic communications on both a City employee’s, or City officials’, official City equipment and accounts (including MCO’s) are subject to the Sunshine Ordinance — and must be searched for responsive records being requested under a public records request.
SOTF has taken that position following a ruling by a California Supreme Court, or a Court of Appeals, ruling in the “Smith vs. San Jose” case around 2019 that government business conducted on either a government employee’s personal devices or personal accounts (including social media accounts) must be searched for responsive records in response to public records requests.
A potential hiccup (limitation) is that the search of a personal device is done by the owner of the device, not by the agency the employee or official is attached to. So, if there is reasonable cause or suspicion an employee or official (MCO) didn’t release and fully disclose records stored on their personal devices or personal accounts, the records requestor may have to file a Court action or lawsuit to compel release of the communications stored on the personal devices that were withheld.
Sounds to me like Kosta’s lawyers should seek access to MCO’s “X” (formerly Twitter) account and MCO’s cell phone for records exchanged between MCO and reporters for the “San Francisco Standard.”
After all, Kosta now has a “lived experience” that confidential records involving his employment were leaked from inside the Police Commission, most likely by MCO. Kosta deserves better policies that serve and safeguard his employment, as Malia Cohen alluded to.
It’s clear as day that if the Police Commission doesn’t already have an internal process to recommend to the Mayor that a Police Commissioner be removed for cause, then the Commission should develop such a policy immediately requiring that known leakers on the Commission of its internal confidential investigative records involving officer conduct is grounds for the Mayor to independently and immediately remove such a Commissioner.
Otherwise — or perhaps in addition — San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors should rapidly introduce such a Charter Change to Charter “§4.109 (along with the other Charter changes the Board is currently working on placing) on San Francisco’s March 5, 2023 municipal ballot).
Keep it up Lou…facts just crush their unsubstantiated assertions.
Patrick - Thanks. Though I agree with the need for integrity, and the benefit to getting rid of a bad apple like Mr. MCO asap, getting rid of London Breed is an even higher priority for me.
Hey Lou, you have pointed out that at least one police commissioner is supposed to be a retired judge or an attorney with trial experience, and that MCO does not have trial experience (nor do the others). It would seem this would be a good pathway to get some change in the police commission - but maybe this just hasn't worked? Any update on this?
SF IS GONE …the demonrats 🐀 have obliterated a once beautiful city and state.
Elections have consequences stolen elections have brutal consequences .
https://redstate.com/tladuke/2023/10/23/is-the-end-for-san-francisco-nigh-mayor-orders-206-million-dollars-in-cuts-n2165439?utm_source=rsmorningbriefing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&bcid=762334c79a61dc10fb187998723b2df2