Rules Committee hears ordinance to require campaign disclosures in health and retirement board elections; item continued

The San Francisco County Board of Supervisors Rules Committee on June 11, 2018, reviewed an ordinance to amend the Administrative Code so that candidates and third parties in elections for the retirement board, health service board and the retiree health care trust fund board must disclose campaign activity and comply with filing rules similar to citywide elections.

Sofia Kittler, a legislative aide to Supervisor Malia Cohen, told the committee that Supervisor Cohen introduced the legislation about a year ago "with the simple intent of increasing transparency in health and retirement board elections" and circulated amendments developed with ethics commission staff and the Department of Elections to align the process with citywide practice.

Deputy City Attorney Andrew Schein summarized the substantive changes: candidates would be required to file campaign statements "that you would normally see of typical candidates," campaign communications would include disclaimers, and late-filing fees and penalties would mirror city practice. Schein said aligning the disclosure regime with the ethics commission's electronic filing system would make information "more readily accessible to the public." He also told the committee that under current law there are no campaign finance disclosure requirements for these specific seats beyond initial candidate qualification statements; the proposed ordinance would create a more robust scheme.

Committee members pressed for specifics about voter eligibility and election administration. Schein said these elections differ from citywide contests because "only city employees and retirees can participate," and that the Department of Elections coordinates with human resources and the retirement system to identify eligible voters, though contracting out the administration remains a statutory option.

Members noted past outside spending in retirement board contests; Kittler and others said a union had spent heavily in a prior race, raising the visibility of these elections. After discussion and with no speakers from the public, a committee member moved to accept the proposed substantive amendments and continue the item "to the call of the chair" because the amendments are substantive; the committee approved the continuance without objection.

The committee did not take a final vote on the ordinance; the item will return for further consideration after the chair schedules it.