Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Enforcement Settlement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ethics Commission approves $4,500 settlement in Mecke campaign‑consultant case over objections to higher fine
Summary
The San Francisco Ethics Commission voted 4–1 to approve a stipulation resolving allegations that Quintin Mechke failed to register as a campaign consultant and failed to report consultant activity. Staff recommended $4,500 after reviewing the respondent—s recent tax returns and bank statements; some commissioners sought a larger penalty.
The San Francisco Ethics Commission voted 4–1 to approve a stipulated settlement resolving allegations that Quintin Mechke engaged in unreported campaign‑consultant activity in 2014 and 2015.
Staff described the settlement as "severe and enough to promote a deterrent effect," saying the penalty was informed by three years of the respondent—s tax returns and six months of bank statements provided to investigators. "This penalty amount is especially severe given that the respondent has demonstrated a financial inability to pay pursuant to our enforcement regulation section 9 d 7," a staff presenter told commissioners.
The settlement packet included unsigned copies of two personal service contract templates and staff said committee filings showed roughly $25,000 in consulting fees paid to the respondent. Commissioners pressed staff for executed contracts; a commissioner said the file did not include signed versions and asked whether they could be obtained.
Public comment was split. Charlie Marsteller said the record raised public‑interest questions about ability to pay and potentially older financial records; he urged caution about installment expectations. "I don't know if that's old or current data," he said, urging clarity on the financial timeframe. The respondent, Quintin Mechke, addressed the Commission and said he had "acted in good faith" and provided the requested documents; he said a larger fine would be a financial hardship. "I work for a nonprofit in San Francisco. I struggle to make a living here," Mechke said.
Some commissioners argued for a higher penalty. One commissioner cited past cases and suggested $12,500 given the respondent—s campaign experience and the charter's higher potential maximums, while staff recommended the lower amount based on the inability‑to‑pay analysis. After debate, the motion to approve the settlement as presented by staff carried 4 to 1.
Votes at a glance: the motion to approve this settlement passed 4–1. Earlier routine votes at the meeting included unanimous approval of the draft minutes and unanimous approval of the commission—s proposed conflict‑of‑interest code update.
The Commission recorded the settlement and moved on to other agenda items; no further enforcement action was announced at the meeting.
