Sam Adams unblocks me on his Twitter account
The question remains, how did I get blocked in the first place? Angry reaction to something I wrote? Oh, no, the Mayor will tell you, it's all some sort of technical mistake. You'll know he's lying -- Twitter doesn't randomly block one person -- but you'll let it pass, because it's so petty. You won't even ask him to explain it.
Imagine his life, in which he does that, and gets away with it, all day long.
Meanwhile, WW asks, are his Tweets a public record? WW couldn't get a straight answer out of anyone at City Hall, or the county DA, either, but of course they are. If he does city business on any account, that business is a public record, even if he foolishly decides to intermingle personal matters on the same account.
| Posted at 3:12 PM | Permalink |
|
Comments (15)
So we end up with more evidence of sociopathy and professional disfunction from Sam "Mayor Creepy" Adams:
a. petulant blocking of you because he hated that "kaleidoscope eyes" .gif so much, I'd guess;
b. 24 hours of silence while his staff run about, hand a-flailing, figuring out how to clean up his mess;
c. all wrapped up in a bow with a nice, tidy lie.
Go by falsehood!
Posted by Leo | January 5, 2011 3:36 PM
I don't call him creepy for nothing.
Posted by Jack Bog | January 5, 2011 3:38 PM
His sociopathic tendencies are illustrated by the staff with which he surrounds himself. A median age of 26 (if that) and real world experience of zero. But they fawn all over him.
Posted by Robert Collins | January 5, 2011 3:55 PM
Maybe more than fawn.
Posted by Jack Bog | January 5, 2011 4:10 PM
With all due respect, shouldn't instead the question that remain not be of "how did I get blocked in the first place?", but rather, based on the content delivered, "Why do I bother to follow anyway"?
Posted by Clayman | January 5, 2011 4:13 PM
Congratulations!!! ...er, my condolences.
Posted by the other Steve | January 5, 2011 4:14 PM
With all due respect, the city attorney's office would be the right place to ask whether the mayor's tweets are public record or not. The DA's office is charged with prosecuting crimes and probably is not that grounded in civil matters.
Posted by LucsAdvo | January 5, 2011 5:05 PM
The DA's office is charged with prosecuting crimes and probably is not that grounded in civil matters.
No, state law puts the county DA in charge of enforcing the public records law. Although IIRC, you can go straight to court if the public records beef is with an elected official.
Posted by Jack Bog | January 5, 2011 7:04 PM
Actually, I don't think it's correct to say "If he does city business on any account, that business is a public record, even if he foolishly decides to intermingle personal matters on the same account."
I brought this up with Ron Bersin at the GEC, regarding OUS chair Paul Kelly's use of his law firm account for official OUS business.
He refused to share the DOJ's opinion on this with me - how's that for transparent - but I was later told by John Kroger that I could only get emails from that account with a subpoena - not with a public records request.
So I'm glsd WW is pursuing this - it will be good to put him on the spot and get a formal PRO opinion.
Posted by UO Matters | January 5, 2011 7:08 PM
I know one Portland City Commissioner who believes that her private E mail account is a part of the public records system in so far as it ever has discussions of any public business, and says that she copies that account to the auditor.
Posted by Nonny Mouse | January 5, 2011 8:20 PM
Hmmm, back in the early 90s, I got referred to the city attorney's office, regarding a potential inquiry for public records.
Posted by LucsAdvo | January 5, 2011 9:12 PM
"I know one Portland City Commissioner who believes that her private E mail account is a part of the public records system in so far as it ever has discussions of any public business..."
===
That is the counsel that I have received as well from the public records lawyers. It appears that there is a difference of opinion here (or maybe the law applies differently to different people).
Posted by Harry | January 5, 2011 9:37 PM
What?! The Mayor blocked someone who might have posted something on his site he disagreed with? Golly....that would never happen here.
Posted by butch | January 6, 2011 12:41 AM
Actually, it wouldn't. I don't deny people access -- even trolls like you. I just cut them off from posting their drivel. See you in a few months.
Posted by Jack Bog | January 6, 2011 1:09 AM
Public records are the responsibility of the City Auditor. Two years ago WW and several other media asked for the texts sent by Sam from a personal cell phone that he used for work purposes. Compared to email, those records were easy to pull. As you may remember, Adams sat on those records for six months even though they were determined public by the Secretary of State, which Adams attorney disagreed with. They were eventually released through the Attorney General's investigation when made public.
The law states that an entity has a "reasonable" amount of time which means generally 2-3 weeks depending on the difficulty of retrieval. Deleted emails are most difficult and costly to the requested but if you have specific dates- much easier. Any person can request these records.
Posted by Mary | January 6, 2011 7:28 AM