Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Evidence Rulings topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ethics commission rules on parts of Lopez declaration, limits public recording and schedules continuation of testimony
Summary
Commissioners debated and ruled on several evidentiary objections to the Lopez declaration, discussed restricting public recording near counsel, and scheduled continued testimony from Eliana Lopez for the next evening with an estimate of about two hours.
The San Francisco Ethics Commission spent a portion of its continued special meeting addressing contested portions of the Eliana Lopez declaration and related evidentiary objections raised by the parties.
Counsel for the sheriff and counsel for the mayor argued over the admissibility and foundation for paragraphs in the Lopez declaration (the parties identified specific disputed passages during argument). Commissioners weighed whether contested sentences were relevant to the mayor’s claim that witnesses were being dissuaded, and the chair ruled that several objections would be overruled for background context while others were sustained or narrowed. Commissioners repeatedly noted foundation concerns and limited some testimony where it risked proving facts outside the witness’s personal knowledge.
The chair also addressed concerns about a member of the public using a small recording device in proximity to counsel. The commission instructed members of the public not to record proceedings in ways that might capture attorney–client communications or privileged conferences and asked staff to reseat anyone creating that issue.
The commission considered the mayor’s request to call Inspector Becker as a rebuttal witness. Commissioners debated whether his testimony would be redundant with an incident report and with other declarations. The chair asked whether there was a dissenting view; after discussion the commission declined to grant the requested additional rebuttal testimony as framed, and counsel were told to proceed with the witnesses already scheduled.
Finally, the commission swore an interpreter and Eliana Lopez and set a continuation of Lopez’s testimony for the following evening; the city attorney estimated roughly two hours would be required to complete direct examination given the ground already covered. The commission asked counsel to be mindful of time and to focus on material matters given the calendar and witness availability.
The commission adjourned and set the next hearing date; it asked parties to prepare for further evidentiary argument over the Flores testimony and other remaining objections the following day.
