Though corruption on all levels of government is despicable, it’s especially disappointing to see in the legal profession. We should be able to trust those in the legal sphere to protect the integrity of the law, not mar it with partisan politics.
Unfortunately, corruption is inescapable for San Diego City Attorney Mara Elliott. Her latest scandal is nothing new given her history of attempting to shift blame onto others while utilizing her position for personal gain, but that doesn’t make the whole debacle any better. This time, Elliott’s chief of staff requested a state senator to delete emails sent during a 2019 push to weaken California’s public records law.
Transcripts of a deposition made by Chief of Staff Gerry Braun and Deputy City Attorney Bill Gersten confirm this request is no “fake news.” Previously, Elliott’s office asked a judge to keep said depositions under seal, but the request was denied on February 7. These transcripts provide vital details about Elliott’s failed efforts to restrict public access to government records.
This all began with a bill: SB 615. In early 2019, Elliott teamed up with State Senator Ben Hueso to limit the California Public Records Act (CPRA) under Senate Bill 615, effectively making it harder for government watchdogs to sue public agencies that fail to comply with the CPRA. SB 615 was so poorly conceived that intense criticism from government transparency advocates led to Hueso quickly withdrawing the legislation. One of the critics was attorney Cory Briggs, a representative of “San Diegans for Open Government.”
As legal actions regarding the 2019 emails progressed, Briggs interviewed Gersten and Braun about their efforts to promote the controversial bill, resulting in the aforementioned transcripts. Braun admitted that he asked a Hueso staffer to delete an email he had sent. The request was made after Briggs had employed a public records request to acquire copies of all legislative correspondence over SB 615 from Hueso’s office, leaving Braun’s deleted email in a grey area of accessibility.
Braun had asked Gersten if the email could be protected from public disclosure. Gersten advised Braun to ask the Hueso staffer if it was possible to “clawback” the email, functionally scratching it from the public record. Braun testified that he told the staffer to not share or read the email, and to destroy any copies of it.
Later, Elliott’s office asked Briggs to keep the testimony confidential. Briggs refused that request, and the issue was taken up with a judge. On February 9, Superior Court Judge John Meyer denied the request, stating that “there is nothing in the deposition testimony that involves confidential, private, proprietary or sensitive information that needs protection.”
All of this infuriated Elliott, leading her to release a statement targeting Briggs for having the audacity to reveal her corruption and subsequent attempts to cover it up:
https://twitter.com/CityAttorneySD/status/1228054238493720581?utm_source=Voice+of+San+Diego+Master+List&utm_campaign=163ebd06c0-Morning_Report&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_c2357fd0a3-163ebd06c0-84203401&goal=0_c2357fd0a3-163ebd06c0-84203401
It’s abundantly clear that Elliott’s office has consistently made efforts to prevent the public from obtaining records that ought to be rightfully accessible, given not only this recent spectacle but her actions in 2017, when she demanded staffers to be fired for an alleged “leak” of information to the public. At least San Diegans can rest assured that people such as Briggs are willing to hold corrupt politicians, like Mara Elliott, accountable.
