Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Ethics Enforcement topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Ethics Commission moves to consider forfeiture and litigation over alleged $193,000 campaign donation tied to Supervisor Farrell

San Francisco Ethics Commission · April 25, 2016
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The commission debated a referral to the Bureau of Delinquent Revenue and voted to meet in closed session to discuss anticipated litigation concerning an alleged $193,000 improper contribution connected to Supervisor Mark Farrell; after closed session the Commission voted not to disclose the discussion and the chair said litigation is going forward.

The Ethics Commission considered a referral to the Bureau of Delinquent Revenue and whether to pursue forfeiture related to allegations involving Supervisor Mark Farrell.

Commissioner Keane outlined material in the packet alleging that $193,000 was improperly raised and used by an affiliated third‑party committee and that, under the law, those funds should be forfeited to the city. Keane urged the Commission to pursue collection and enforcement, saying the matter involved questions of responsibility for campaign conduct and possible laundering through related committees.

Public commenters and advocacy representatives debated procedure, timing and the appropriate forum for the question; some said the matter was not properly agendized for a public decision and urged the Commission to refer the question to the State Legislation Committee or to be careful about process. The Commission voted to go into closed session to consult with counsel about anticipated litigation as plaintiff and subsequently returned to public session.

After closed session, the Commission voted not to disclose the closed‑session discussion and the chair announced no action was taken in closed session; he also stated that the question of proceeding with litigation against Supervisor Farrell is going forward.

Why it matters: The matter raises possible forfeiture and enforcement against an elected official and involves questions about whether liability rests with a candidate’s committee or third‑party entities. Commissioners and public speakers debated legal thresholds, statute of limitations claims raised by the supervisor’s attorney and the need for a clear procedural record.

Outcome: The Commission authorized a closed‑session consultation with counsel, voted not to disclose the closed‑session discussion, and the chair indicated litigation would proceed; specific enforcement filings or amounts were not disclosed in public session.

Representative quote: "This has to do with Supervisor Mark Farrell taking an illegal $193,000 campaign contribution and laundering it ... the $193,000 by law must be forfeited to the city," Commissioner Keane said, summarizing materials in the Commission packet.

Procedural note: Commissioners who raised concerns about notice and process urged careful public explanation; staff and counsel noted the Commission’s options include referral to the Bureau of Delinquent Revenue and litigation as appropriate.