My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Correspondence - #52
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2023
>
06/06/2023 Regular & HA
>
Correspondence - #52
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/12/2023 4:19:01 PM
Creation date
6/5/2023 11:38:34 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Date
6/6/2023
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
75
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Two months into the search, with 3 PRAs blocked and tackled by OCCR, a path <br />towards bite data remained hidden. <br />PRA 23-1421 <br />Submitted 3/29/2023, fulfilled 4/20/2023, a full 3 weeks later, exceeding PRA deadlines and <br />OCCR's normal turnaround time. <br />A messy table was provided. There are obvious extraneous data. There are obvious <br />duplications. That made it likely that there were also omissions. <br />Therefore, without corroborating data, no meticulous researcher would treat this table as a <br />reliable source. We will not go through this table in detail, but the numbers derived from it, <br />though inaccurate, are in the ballpark of the ones presented as our best estimate. <br />PRA 23-2244 <br />Submitted 5/11/2023, and restating the substance of 23-1283. In response to this a complete <br />(as far as we can tell) list of PRAs was finally supplied, and within this list there was PRA <br />23-296 which sought and obtained a database of bites for the whole county. (Gratitude is <br />owed to the unknown author of that request.) <br />This is a much larger database, unwieldy for anybody without a professional background in <br />data analysis. But an experienced researcher applying some smart filtering, can use this <br />database to extract the bites that occurred at the shelter. <br />This is the most reliable source. Note that 3.5 months elapsed since the first request. <br />PRA 23-2265 <br />Submitted 5/12/2023 and restating the request of 23-589 in a more argumentative fashion. At <br />this point, OCAC is already under public scrutiny and receiving data requests from the press. <br />A database was supplied, but we deem the larger database described above more reliable. <br />End result <br />After months of delay and an apparent effort to derail the search, a total of 3 databases <br />resulted from all this. Two were supposed to be specific to bites occurring in the shelter, yet <br />they are the least reliable. One was the master database of all bites in the county, from the <br />coincidental PRA 23-296. It, too, has its problems but is likely the most trustworthy of the <br />three. It just requires extra effort to extract the data. <br />On something so central to the OCAC/OCCR narrative, why did it take so much pressure, <br />and a bit of luck, to get to the facts? Was OCCR trying to hide the truth? <br />Bites - Page 8 of 8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.