To: public_affairs@CalPERS.CA.GOV, Kayla_Gillan@CalPERS.CA.GOV
From: Jim McRitchie <jm@perswatch.net>
Subject: public records request
Cc: dwalters@sacbee.com, bendicott@sacbee.com, msaltzman@sacbee.com, sacletters@newsreview.com, sacramento@amcity.com, cweekly@capitolweekly.com, wsjca@news.wsj.com, Paul.Jacobs@latimes.com, letters@latimes.com, jekeltner@aol.com, TOM.HIGGINS@SENSMTP.CA.GOV, DAVID.FELDERSTEIN@SENSMTP.CA.GOV, KAREN.GREENE@ASMSMTP.CA.GOV
Dear Ms. Gillan:
Please consider this a public records request under section 6250 of the Government Code.
In his memo of July 20th concerning revisions to his candidate statement, Bill Crist thanks Jim Burton, Kayla Gillan, and Michael Koester for granting him an extension in order to revise his candidate statement. This implies he communicated to one or more of the above prior to his July 20th memo.
Please provide me with copies of all public records (letters, memos, e-mail, etc.) between Bill Crist and Burton, Gillan, Koester, Judy Daggao or Dana Bromby during the period 7/13 to 7/20 inclusive.
The October 9, 1998 article in the Sacramento Bee concerning the ballot statment quotes Mr. Crist as stating that he was sure he "didn't get special treatment" and that other candidates could have also asked for and been granted an extension. Of course all the candidates had been informed by way of Mr. Koester's July 13, 1998 memo that any errors or omissions should be directed to Judy Daggao "no later than noon, this Friday, July 17, 1998 firm. After that date, no further corrections will be made..." Given the certainty of this instruction, it seems unlikely that any candidate would assume that any request for changes after noon July 1998 would be considered.
Please provide me with copies of all written communications to the other candidates notifying them of the deadline extension. If no written communications were made, please provide any other evidence that any such attempts were made to communicate to other candidates by any other means, such as telephone bills indicating which candidates were called.
If there was such flexibility with the deadline as has been implied, I am curious as to how CalPERS handles such deadlines in other areas which I consider to be less important than board elections. Would CalPERS typically allow one bidder an extra day and a half (plus a weekend) without providing notice of the same extension to other bidders?
Please provide me with examples of where this has occurred. Provide me with examples of communications to bidders which cite specific hours on specific dates as "firm" deadlines and then are flexibly interpreted to allow extension. When such extensions have been given, please provide evidence that your efforts to contact the other bidders was comparable to your efforts to contact CalPERS Board candidates in the above mentioned situation. In addition, please send me any regulations, policies, or guidelines used by CalPERS when deadlines of requests for proposals (RFPs) are to be evaluated for extension when dealing with known bidders.
In your letter to me dated October 16th you mention an October 9th memo to the CalPERS Board concerning William Crist's candidate statement which you describe as a confidential attorney-client communication. I note that section 6254(b) of the Government Code exempts records pertaining to pending litigation from the public records act but I am unaware of any pending litigation in this case.
Please provide a copy of the October 16th memo or a citation which provides for its exemption.
In the same October 16th memo, you state that Mr. Koester's letter of July 13th was vague with regard to instructing candidates to correct only "errors or omissions." His letter says candidates are to check for "errors or omissions. No other changes will be made in the text." Please explain what you interpret this second sentence to mean. If candidates could change virtually their entire statement including moving from passive to active voice, reformating to bullet style, mentioning a specific union endorsement, mentioning policies authored, providing a new opening statement, etc. within the context of correcting "errors or omissions," then what would be the meaning of "no other changes will be made in the text"? Please provide me with an example of what would not have been allowed under your interpretation of Mr. Koester's direction.
Since I work at 400 P Street, please call me as the requested information is made individually available.
Sincerely,
Jim McRitchie
Candidate for the
CalPERS Board of Administration
e-mail: jm@PersWatch.net
internet: http://PersWatch.net
Contact: 
jm@perswatch.net