Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
San Francisco Ethics Commission accepts many civil grand jury recommendations, agrees more study and new enforcement steps
Summary
At a special meeting, the San Francisco Ethics Commission revised its draft responses to the 2013–14 civil grand jury report, agreeing the commission lacks sufficient resources, approving an independent‑audit recommendation for certain campaign contribution issues, directing staff to seek language access and searchable filings, and voting to recommend discipline for Form 700 non‑filers.
The San Francisco Ethics Commission on Aug. 26 held a special session to consider responses to the 2013–14 civil grand jury report on ethics in city government, and approved a series of amendments that commissioners said were intended to increase transparency and enforcement.
Commissioners opened by taking public comment from several watchdog groups and grand jury members, who described the report as comprehensive and urged the Commission to accept its key findings. Elena Schmidt, foreperson of the 2013–14 civil grand jury, told the panel that the jury had found responsibility for ethics enforcement dispersed among multiple offices — creating gaps in accountability — and recommended clearer roles and stronger coordination among the Ethics Commission, the mayor, the city attorney and the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.
The Commission voted unanimously to revise its response to the jury’s Finding 1A to say it "agrees" that the Ethics Commission lacks sufficient resources to carry out its work, including major enforcement cases. Commissioners framed the change as both a…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
