Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ethics Training Noncompliance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ethics Commission Tables Stipulated Settlement for Ex-Human Rights Commissioner Over Missed Trainings
Summary
The commission tabled action on a proposed stipulation with former Human Rights Commissioner Mark Kelleher after questions about the length of noncompliance and penalty size; staff said Kelleher participated in 24 meetings while disqualified and the matter carries a proposed $2,500 fine
The San Francisco Ethics Commission on April 11 voted to table consideration of a proposed stipulation with respondent Mark Kelleher after commissioners raised questions about the length of the noncompliance and comparability of penalties.
Enforcement staff presented a settlement proposal that would resolve two counts alleging failure to complete required annual ethics and sunshine trainings for 2022, 2023 and 2024. Senior investigator Eric Willett said the enforcement division’s records show Kelleher received pre-filing and non-filer notices and that the failure to complete the trainings disqualified him from participating in matters before his commission. Willett reported that Kelleher attended at least 24 meetings of the Human Rights Commission while disqualified; those meetings included participation in matters that approved grants totaling approximately $1,780,000. Willett added that the record does not allege Kelleher voted on matters that created a financial conflict of interest for him personally.
Staff proposed resolving the case under two counts with a total monetary penalty of $2,500. Commissioners questioned whether a settlement that aggregates three years of training violations into one count produced a proportional penalty and whether the enforcement division had acted promptly when earlier non-filer notices were issued. B.C. Matthews, Director of Enforcement, and Pat Ford, Executive Director, explained the office’s compliance-first approach and said the enforcement division prioritizes matters that show a pattern of noncompliance.
Public comment included attorneys and commissioners' advocates who said volunteer commissioners sometimes miss trainings for administrative or practical reasons and urged the commission to consider the administrative burden and to provide clearer notice mechanisms. Jim Sutton of the law firm Rotan & Tucker and others urged the commission to pause enforcement or reconsider penalties for volunteer commissioners.
After discussion the commission voted to table the proposed stipulation; the motion passed with three votes in favor and one opposed. Commissioners asked staff to return with revised penalty recommendations and further clarification about outreach to commission secretaries and notification procedures.
