San Francisco County Grand Jury • 2013-2014

Cgj Year Report Title Recommendation Department Required to Respond 2014 Responses (implementation) 2014 Response Text

Published: July 01, 2014 18 pages
View Original PDF

Note: Missing finding numbers detected: F6, F17, F21, F24, F25, F28

Findings and Recommendations 22 findings

F2 Page 1
In some instances, improper campaign contributions were Board of Supervisors Disagree The Board of Supervisors has not formally received information about specific instances but believes the Ethics Commission should follow up on Promise, Practice or Pretense returned to the contributor rather than forfeited to the City as required specific allegations; further, the Board of Supervisors notes that candidates are subject to regular auditing as part of their election campaigns by City law. The Jury found no record of the Commission acting to waive or reduce the forfeiture. 2013-14 Ethics in the City:
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
Page 1
The Board of Supervisors should request an independent audit by Board of Supervisors
F3 Page 1
A broader citizen’s right of action to enforce ethics laws will Ethics Commission Agree NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PROVIDED. Promise, Practice or Pretense provide assurance to the public that the laws will be enforced. 2013-14 Ethics in the City:
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
Page 1
The Jury recommends that the Ethics Ethics Commission Will be implemented The Ethics Commission will investigate to determine whether an enhancement to a Citizens Right of Action would accomplish the further assurance to the Promise, Practice or Pretense Commission and the Board of Supervisors act to enhance the public that the laws would enforce. Citizen’s Right of Action to enforce all of the City’s ethics laws, with an award of attorney fees and a share of any penalties going to the City for a successful filer, as was provided by Proposition J. 2013-14 Ethics in the City: R3: The Jury recommends that the Ethics Commission and the Board City Attorney Policy mater for the Ethics R3 is a policy matter for the Ethics Commission, The BOS and the Mayor. If requested, the City Attorney's Office will assist the Ethics Commission, the BOS and Promise, Practice or Pretense of Supervisors act to enhance the Citizen’s Right of Action to enforce Commission, BOS and Mayor the Mayor with implementing this recommendation. all of the City’s ethics laws, with an award of attorney fees and a share of any penalties going to the City for a successful filer, as was provided by Proposition J. 2013-14 Ethics in the City: R3: The Jury recommends that the Ethics Commission and the Board Board of Supervisors will not be implemented The Board of Supervisors is not convinced that the existing private right of action needs to be broadened. Promise, Practice or Pretense of Supervisors act to enhance the Citizen’s Right of Action to enforce all of the City’s ethics laws, with an award of attorney fees and a share of any penalties going to the City for a successful filer, as was provided by Proposition J. 2013-14 Ethics in the City: R4: That contract approval forms be converted to a format which Ethics Commission Partially implemented/partially will not Converting each type of form into such a format requires expensive development of software platforms. This particular recommendation would be extremely Promise, Practice or Pretense allows searches by the name of the official, by the name of the be implemented. expensive. Over time, the Commission plans to develop such platforms for most if not all filings it administers. Lack of funding for development means that the contractor, the value of contracts and the date the contract was addition of the various forms will be done as recourses are made available. It should be noted, for example, that 2014 is the first time ever that all Form 700 signed. Behested payments information should be filed electronically financial disclosure filed with the Ethics Commission had to be submitted electronically. This was an important, but technically difficult step. Since there is no in a format that allows for searches and data aggregation. Form 700s specified state electronic schema for these forms, creating a searchable database would be risky as it might not conform to state standards when they are should be formatted to allow data to be searched on income sources, eventually promulgated. But it is a desirable goal and will be accomplished eventually. Absent the proper software, data would have to be entered manually. outside employment, gift sources and travel. This is unrealistic as the cost would be higher in terms of staff time and attendant issues would arise such as transfer error. The Commission has already made great progress in moving its many filings into electronic databases, and there should be no doubt that this will continue. SF is ahead of the majority of jurisdictions in this areas. For example, The New York Times recently noted that the Federal Elections Commission takes weeks and in some cases more than a month to process campaign finance filings of federal candidates, whereas in SF this information is processed in matter of minutes. (Note: this recommendation includes Behested Payment Forms, which are not filed with the Ethics Commission.) 2013-14 Ethics in the City: R4: That contract approval forms be converted to a format which Ethics Commission Executive Director Will be implemented partially Converting each type of form into such a format requires expensive development of software platforms. This particular recommendation would be extremely Promise, Practice or Pretense allows searches by the name of the official, by the name of the expensive. Over time, the Commission plans to develop such platforms for most if not all filings it administers. Lack of funding for development means that the contractor, the value of contracts and the date the contract was addition of various forms will be done as resources are made available. It should be noted, for example, that 2014 is the first time ever that all Form 700 signed. Behested payments information should be filed electronically financial disclosures field with the Ethics Commission had to be submitted electronically. This was an important, bit technically difficult step. Since there is no in a format that allows for searches and data aggregation. Form 700s specified state electronic schema for these forms, creating a searchable database would be risky as it might not confirm to state standers wen they are should be formatted to allow data to be searched on income sources, eventually promulgated. But it is a desirable goal and will be accomplished eventually. Absent the proper software, data would have to be entered manually. outside employment, gift sources and travel. This is unrealistic as the cost would be higher in terms of staff time and attendant issues. The Commission has already made great progress un moving its many filings into electronic database, as there should be no doubt that this will continue. SF is ahead of the majority of jurisdictions in this area. For example, the New York Times recently noted that the Federal Elections Commission takes weeks and in some cases more than a month to process campaign finance filings of federal candidates, whereas in SF this information is processes in a matter of minutes. (Note: Behested payment forms are not filed with the Ethics Commission) ETHICS RECOMMENDATIONS AND
F4 Page 1
Some information currently reported and posted is not put Ethics Commission Partially Agree There is some information filed with the Ethics Commission not currently in searchable electronic format. Promise, Practice or Pretense into the standard searchable electronic format. The Jury specifically finds that contract approval forms, Form 700 forms, behested payments forms, and Lobbyists On Behalf Of The City forms can be converted to a searchable format before they are posted. 2013-14 Ethics in the City:
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
Page 1
That contract approval forms be converted to a format which
F5 Page 1
Required filings are treated independently and cannot easily Ethics Commission Disagree partially This assertion is not completely accurate. The Commission compiles all campaign and lobbyist filings on DataSF so that the information may be searched and Promise, Practice or Pretense be cross searched electronically using common data reference fields like aggregated. In fact, the Commission uses the campaign and lobbyist data on DataSF to aggregate and visualize the data on the Commissions web dashboards. A name and organization to access and aggregate information types, such recent report by the Mayor's Office describes "how the SF Ethics Commission uses DataSF to increase transparency by summarizing and creating visualizations as dollar amounts, that cross between filings. related to ethics data and reports." Further, the report states "Our top referred is the Ethics Commission, see Figure 12, which has made extensive use of DataSF not only as a publishing platform but as a means to create dashboard and visualizations on it's own site. See Figure 13 on the next page for a screenshot showing how the Ethics Commission creates visualization using the DataSF platform and them embeds the visualization into a web page. This makes them the top embedders, i.e. the top data visualizations that have been viewed within and external website" Further, according to "Governing" magazine, the US Open Data Census in March o this year rates SF as the "best city for open data" in the country. The study involved gives both our lobbyist reporting system and our campaign finance system perfect scores. 2013-14 Ethics in the City:
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
Page 1
The Ethics Commission work to develop a common format
F7 Page 1
The Ethics Commission provides written information only in Ethics Commission Executive Director Agree This is correct for the time being. Promise, Practice or Pretense English although San Francisco has strong political participation from communities and officials whose first language is not English and who require guides and educational materials relevant to their needs. 2013-14 Ethics in the City:
Related Recommendations (1)
R7
Page 1
The Ethics Commission should make guides and educational
F8 Page 1
The current definition of “lobbyist” and “contacts” does not Ethics Commission Partially Agree The ordinance was recently amended and updated at the Board of Supervisors (changes not in effect at time Finding was written) Promise, Practice or Pretense provide the public with sufficient information to understand who and how City Hall decisions are influenced despite the intent of the law. 2013-14 Ethics in the City:
Related Recommendations (1)
R8
Page 1
The lobbyist ordinance should be reviewed and amended to
F9 Page 1
The effort to influence City Hall decisions is not limited to Ethics Commission Agree Under the change, which was part of a successful simplification of the lobbyist registration process, Expenditure Lobbyist would still have to register paid lobbyist Promise, Practice or Pretense contacts with City officials but also includes outreach to community, the expenditures made to influence public opinion were no longer captured when the changes went into effect. Prior to the change, only five organizations had political and nonprofit organizations as well as to the general public ever reported expenditure lobbying: In 2007, the California Urban Issues Project reported expenditures of $46,400 and the Small Property Owners of SF reported through television ads, mailers, robocalls, polling and other strategies. spending $1000. In 2009, the California Urban Issues Project reported $1702,the SF Common Sense Coalition reported $58110 and the SF Firefighters Local 798 In 2010 the Ethics Commission proposal was approved by the Board to reported $367350. Because the actual number of such reported expenditures were so few, it as not a controversial decision to drop this requirement due to the eliminate reporting on these expenditures limited benefit provided; at the time, no public objection was made. 2013-14 Ethics in the City:
Related Recommendations (1)
R9
Page 1
The requirement for disclosure of all expenditures aimed at
F10 Page 1
People holding themselves out as "strategic advisors" Ethics Commission Unable to agree This finding is not adequately explained in the report making it difficult to respond. Promise, Practice or Pretense provide advice on ways to influence City decision-making. 2013-14 Ethics in the City:
Related Recommendations (1)
R10
Page 1
Work of "strategic advisors" that provide guidance on winning Ethics Commission
F11 Page 1
The role of e-mail and text messages in governmental City Attorney Disagree The City Attorney's Office has provided guidance on the issues addressed in this finding. The Office's Good Government Guide has provided guidance on these Promise, Practice or Pretense decision-making has not been fully discussed and explored. Rules on issues for several years. The most recently released update of the Guide, published online on August 18, 2014 provides guidance regarding record retention preservation of e-mails in public records are very hazy and some requirements and email (on page 116): "E-mail and other electronic records are subject to the records retention laws. As with paper records, some electronic departmental officials told the Jury they routinely delete e-mail. records fit the definition of "records" in the retention context. But most do not. Guidance from the City Attorney on preservation of e-mail is non- The vast majority of public records in the City's possession do not fall under the definition of "records" within the meaning of records retention law. Therefore, specific. There is no guidance regarding text messages. There is no the City may destroy these records at any time. For example, as a general rule, employees may immediately dispose of phone message slips, notes of meetings, policy that applies to private e-mails and text messages that further research notes prepared for the personal use of the employee creating them, and the large majority of e-mail communications .." The Good Government Guide public decision-making. also provides the following guidance regarding text messages and emails, including those on personal electronic devices (on pages 88-89):The first element of the definition of public record-that it is a "writing"-is immensely expansive. It encompasses any handwriting, typewriting, printing, photostating, photographing, photocopying, transmission by e-mail or fax, and every other means of recording on any tangible thing any form of communication or representation, including letters, words, pictures, sounds, or symbols. Cal. Govt. Code § 6252(g). This concept of a writing goes beyond the traditional written form. It may consist of communications in any medium that contains encoded information, such as a computer tape, video recording, cassette recording, voicemail, text message, photograph, or movie. E-mails including attachments are writings within the meaning of the Public Records Act. Yet, while it is clear that electronic records are "writings" under the Act, many principles developed under the Act preceded the current era of electronic communications, and those principles and others are in some respects still evolving to catch up with this sweeping technological change.* * * The third element of the definition-that a public record is "prepared, owned, used, or retained by a state or local agency"-is expansive, too. In particular, there may be instances where the City does not own a record that is nonetheless considered a public record. For example, while courts have not definitively resolved the issue, City officials and employees, in an abundance of caution, should assume that work they perform for the City on personal computers or other personal communications devices may be subject to disclosure under the public records laws. Such a record meets the first two elements of the definition of public record; the remaining question is whether, under the circumstances, the law would consider the record prepared or used by the City. Lastly, the Good Government Guide also provides the following additional guidance on text messages (on page 141): Neither the Brown Act nor Sunshine Ordinance addresses text messaging during meetings, and there is no definitive case law on the subject. The City Attorney's Office strongly discourages the practice. Text messaging or use of other personal electronic communications devices during meetings is especially problematic when the policy body is holding an adjudicative hearing, such as a hearing to grant or suspend a permit, that will affect individual private interests. Text messaging during such a hearing could enable a member to surreptitiously communicate with one of the parties, or receive evidence or direction as to how to vote, from an outside party, that other members of the body and the parties do not see. These circumstances may undermine the integrity of the proceeding and raise due process concerns. Even outside the adjudicative context, text messaging or use of other personal electronic communications devices during any meeting of a policy body presents serious problems. The Brown Act and Sunshine Ordinance presume that public input d ll b " h d" d bl h h d f h b f h bl ll b h 2013-14 Ethics in the City:
Related Recommendations (1)
R11
Page 1
The Ethics Commission in conjunction with the City Attorney should develop a policy to ensure preservation of e-mails and text messages consistent with preservation of other public records. The policy, along with policies on preservation of public records, should be made available for public comment. Once it is completed and published it should be made available on City Attorney and Ethics Commission web pages that lists each Department, its policy, and how to obtain documents. Department Required to Respond Sunshine Ordinance Task Force 2014
F12 Page 1
Many departments have failed to post their sources of Ethics Commission Executive Director Cannot agree/disagree due to lack of The Commission does not have enough information to response to this finding so it cannot yet agree. Promise, Practice or Pretense outside funding as required by the Sunshine Ordinance. information 2013-14 Ethics in the City:
Related Recommendations (1)
R12
Page 1
The Jury recommends that the Ethics Commission and the
F13 Page 1
When violations of the standards in a departmental Ethics Commission Executive Director Agree Normally, departments are required to keep employee disciplinary measures confidential. In accordance with the Civil Service Commission's "Citywide Employee Promise, Practice or Pretense Statements of Incompatible Activities are enforced departmentally as a Personnel Records Guidelines" all employee personnel records-including records of completed/resolved/sustained disciplinary actions-must be maintained only in disciplinary matter, the Ethics Commission is not notified and the the employee's Official Employee Personnel File ("OEPF"). How long a disciplinary action remains in the OEPF and what is removed from an OEPF will vary discipline is not disclosed to the public. depending on departmental policy and the applicable collective bargaining agreement. Employees' OEPFs are maintained in their departments; The Ethics Commission does not have access to those files. Thus, only the department head would have information regarding disciplinary matters. Moreover, even if the Ethics Commission did have that information, the right of privacy in the California Constitution protects employees from unwarranted disclosure of confidential information. CA Constitution, Article I, Section 1. Accordingly, as information regarding disciplinary actions taken against an employee is considered a confidential personnel matter/confidential personnel information is not normally disclosable. In addition, there are a number of other state laws protecting employee privacy not mentioned here. 2013-14 Ethics in the City:
Related Recommendations (1)
R13
Page 1
All violations of departmental Statements of Incompatible
F14 Page 1
The Ethics Commission has increased compliance by Ethics Commission Executive Director Agree NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PROVIDED. Promise, Practice or Pretense notifying any employee who fails to file Form 700 within 30 days after the deadline that he or she must file or face potential penalties. 2013-14 Ethics in the City:
Related Recommendations (4)
R14a
Page 1
The Ethics Commission should continue to routinely notify all
R14b
Page 1
The Ethics Commission should recommend dismissal for any
R14c
Page 1
The Ethics Commission should recommend dismissal for any officer or employee who files a Statement of Economic Interest that is inaccurate and relevant to the position they hold. Department Required to Respond Ethics Commission Executive Director 2014
R14d
Page 1
Now that all Form 700 filers file electronically, the Ethics
F15 Page 1
The disclosures in Form 700 filings also may reveal violations Ethics Commission Agree NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PROVIDED. Promise, Practice or Pretense of San Francisco laws that are enforced locally. This includes compensated advocacy before other commissions and arrangements that violate the locally adopted and enacted Statements of Incompatible Activities for each department. 2013-14 Ethics in the City:
Related Recommendations (1)
R15
Page 1
The Ethics Commission should audit and act on violations
F16 Page 1
City officials travel expenses can be covered by gifts made Ethics Commission Agree Gifts of travel are governed by a myriad of state and local rules; additional disclosure may be advisable. Promise, Practice or Pretense by individuals, lobbyists, business associations, corporations or any other source, including those with financial interests in matters to be decided by the official. The public disclosure is limited to a list of donors or donor organizations contributing $500 or more, but without specifying the total amount of the gift. Additionally, a significant amount of travel expenses are paid through organizations that do not disclose the names of the original donors. 2013-14 Ethics in the City:
Related Recommendations (1)
R16
Page 1
The Ethics Commission should require full disclosure of
F18 Page 1
The Board of Supervisors is not subject to this calendar Board of Supervisors Agree While the requirement does not officially apply to the Board of Supervisors, most if not all Supervisors regularly respond to public records requests for their Promise, Practice or Pretense requirement. Many members did provide their calendars upon request, calendars. and the information in their calendars will be helpful for public understanding of their work. 2013-14 Ethics in the City:
Related Recommendations (1)
R18
Page 1
The Board of Supervisors should adopt a rule subjecting
F19 Page 1
The public record will be better served if post-public Ethics Commission Agree with first sentence of finding While in agreement with the first sentence of this finding, the Ethics Commission did not misinterpret the standard and disagrees with that part of the statement. Promise, Practice or Pretense employment restriction waivers are granted by Commission resolutions that indicate the specific grounds for granting the waiver. In at least one instance, the Ethics Commission inappropriately interpreted the "extreme hardship" standard to grant a post-public employment restriction waiver. 2013-14 Ethics in the City:
Related Recommendations (1)
R19
Page 1
The Commission should grant or deny post-public employment Ethics Commission
F20 Page 1
Both the Ethics Commission and the Sunshine Ordinance Sunshine Ordinance Task Force Disagree partially The SOTF refers to very few matters to the Ethics Commission for enforcement. Although this reflects in part a view that not all Sunshine Ordinance violations Promise, Practice or Pretense Task Force act in good faith. They are authorized to come to similar merit referral for enforcement, it has also not fostered a greater agreement or understanding as to the appropriate burden to show or enforce a violation, willful ends – transparency in government. However, there are legal and or not. As illustrated by earlier SOFT responses, there remains ample terrain for collaboration and coordination between these separate but overlapping bodies. procedural differences between their process and their legal requirements. Therefore, the results of their work are not in harmony with each other. 2013-14 Ethics in the City:
Related Recommendations (2)
R20a
Page 1
The Mayor's Office should establish a blue-ribbon committee
R20b
Page 1
For now, arrangements should be made jointly by the Ethics Commission and the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force to have complaints heard by an independent hearing officer who would develop a consistent legally sufficient record of the case for the decision of each body. This would allow the meetings of the Task Force and the Commission to focus on broader policy issues. Department Required to Respond Mayor 2014
F22 Page 1
While the Commission's Bylaws authorize committees, no Ethics Commission Partially agree Some Commission deliberations have extended for months but not for years, notwithstanding one case of extended delay created at the request of and as a Promise, Practice or Pretense committees have been established or meet. One result is that all courtesy to the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force. matters requiring deliberation by the Commission are heard only once a month, in a process that can extend for many months and sometimes for years. If the Commission acts through its committee structure, issues can be explored and brought to the full commission in a more developed state, thus providing a better basis for the Commission’s actions. 2013-14 Ethics in the City:
Related Recommendations (1)
R22
Page 1
The Commissioners should use their committee structure to
F23 Page 1
While the Charter mandates the City Attorney represent the Ethics Commission Mostly disagree The Ethics Commission has obtained outside counsel only three times. Promise, Practice or Pretense Ethics Commission, conflicts have arisen repeatedly, and the Ethics Commission has had to obtain outside counsel. We find these instances of conflict are likely to continue, and that the Commission is best represented by a consistent set of lawyers who are not City employees. 2013-14 Ethics in the City:
Related Recommendations (1)
R23
Page 1
That the Ethics Commission apply to the City Attorney for
F26 Page 1
The Ethics Commission, though its staff, can catalog Ethics Commission Disagree The concept is too broad to understand appreciably. Promise, Practice or Pretense information reported elsewhere that is relevant for supplemental understanding of information currently reported locally. Links to this information would be a logical addition to the Ethics Commission web site. 2013-14 Ethics in the City:
Related Recommendations (1)
R26
Page 1
The Ethics Commission should determine information reported Ethics Commission
F27 Page 1
The Charter requires that proposals to amend campaign Ethics Commission Disagree There is no basis for this finding. Promise, Practice or Pretense finance and ethics laws explain how the change will assist in furthering the purpose of the law. The Ethics Commission proposals have not included any statements showing that its proposals will further the purposes of the law. 2013-14 Ethics in the City:
Related Recommendations (1)
R27
Page 1
When a bill is proposed or passed to amend campaign finance Ethics Commission
F29 Page 1
The Findings and Declarations of Proposition J (2000) clearly Ethics Commission Disagree The intents and purposes of Prop J were redrafted, clarified and expanded by Prop E in 2003, in apparent response to concerns that existing law was outdated, Promise, Practice or Pretense articulate many public concerns with role of money in politics and inadequate and confusing. The BOS unanimously voted to place the measure on the ballot by vote of 10-0, and all eleven supported the measure (Ammiano, should be re-adopted, perhaps adapted to be part of the general Daly, Dufty, Gonzalez, Hall, Maxwell, McGoldrick, Newsom, Perkin, Sandovol and Ma. Ma was not present for the vote). This measure was also supported by conflict of interest law - Chapter 2 of Article III of the C&GCC. Common Cause. The measure was also supported unanimously at the Ethics Commission by Commissioners Melbostad, Planthold Garcia and McCoy. Prop E was adopted with support from 62% of the voters. 2013-14 Ethics in the City:
Related Recommendations (1)
R29
Page 1
That the Ethics Commission hold a hearing on "Proposition J

Additional Recommendations 9

These recommendations are not explicitly linked to specific findings.