San Diego County Grand Jury • 2015-2016

Campaign Law Enforcement & Training City and County of San Diego

Published: June 23, 2016 10 pages
View Original PDF

Findings 6 findings

F01
Changes to the appointment process for SDEC commissioners could promote civic confidence in the SDEC and its effectiveness. Fact: SDEC, though legally enshrined in the City Charter, can be dissolved by vote of the City Council.
F02
Revising the City Charter to remove the City Council’s authority over the SDEC’s existence would preserve SDEC as an independent body. Fact: SDEC commissioners serve a four-year term with the opportunity for re- appointment to a second term. Fact: Becoming familiar with campaign laws requires a significant investment of time and energy.
F03
Lengthening the term of commissioners could improve the commission’s effectiveness. Fact: The name San Diego Ethics Commission, which can imply a person is being investigated for unspecified unethical behavior, does not properly reflect the limited scope of the commission’s work.
F04
Changing the name would more accurately reflect the commission’s duties and responsibilities and avoid ambiguity. Fact: SDEC subpoena power is limited to administrative hearings. Fact: The City Council has the capability to grant additional subpoena powers to SDEC. Fact: Witnesses have no protection from retaliation under Charter §26.0445.
F05
Allowing subpoena power would enhance the investigative process and could shorten investigations. /2016 FINAL REPORT (June 23, 2016) County of San Diego Fact: There is no commission dedicated to the training and enforcement of county campaign laws.
F06
Elected county officials, lobbyists and candidates would benefit from additional training and enforcement of campaign laws.

Recommendations 6

No Responses Found 2

Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.

San Diego City
San Diego County Board of Supervisors Elected County Office