Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sunshine Disclosure Closed Session topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fire Commission votes to hold two closed sessions after public calls to release Sunshine Task Force record
Summary
After public commenters urged release of a Sunshine Task Force record tied to former engineer Mark LaCroix, the San Francisco Fire Commission voted to assert attorney–client privilege and conduct two closed‑session items under Administrative Code §67.1(d); commissioners rescinded and re‑voted to ensure public comment was considered.
The San Francisco Fire Commission voted Thursday to assert attorney–client privilege and proceed into two closed sessions to receive legal advice on pending litigation, after multiple members of the public urged the panel to disclose a record that the Sunshine Task Force had ordered made public.
Public commenters calling during the meeting urged commissioners to decline closed session and to disclose a recording related to former senior marine engineer Mark LaCroix. "The Sunshine Task Force determined there were violations of the Sunshine Ordinance and ordered the record to be made public," LaCroix said during public comment. Other callers said withholding the record would be improper and urged transparency.
Deputy City Attorney Paul Zarevsky advised the commission that, because additional public comment came after an initial vote, the cleanest course would be to rescind that vote and redo it. Commissioners rescinded an earlier motion and then re‑voted. On the final roll calls for item 7 (attorney–client privilege and closed session), President Armee Morgan and other commissioners voted to assert privilege and hold the session; Commissioner Catherine Feinstein recorded "Aye" on the record during the final vote. The commission then separately voted to hold item 8 in closed session under the same legal authority.
The votes followed multiple public comments alleging the commission had previously discussed member separations before hearings and that the Sunshine Ordinance had been violated. The commissioners did not publicly disclose the litigation details or other records during the open meeting; the motions and votes to proceed to closed session were recorded in the public minutes.
What happens next: the commission will meet in closed session to receive legal advice on the identified items and then return to open session for remaining business. The meeting minutes show the votes authorizing nondisclosure and closed‑session discussion under San Francisco Administrative Code §67.1(d). The public hearing ended with the commission taking additional required votes under §67.12(a) about whether to disclose parts of the closed‑session discussions. The meeting adjourned at 12:47 p.m.
