Ethics Commission
City and County of San Francisco

Minutes – March 24, 2014

Minutes of the Regular Meeting of
The San Francisco Ethics Commission
March 24, 2014
Room 400, City Hall
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
San Francisco, CA 94102

I. Call to order and roll call.

Chairperson Hur called the meeting to order at 5:30 PM. Executive Director St. Croix welcomed the new Deputy Executive Director, Jesse Mainardi. Chairperson Hur stated that the Commission looked forward to working with him.

[Prior to the meeting being called to order, a member of the public delivered a letter from Juliet Ellis.]

COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Benedict Y. Hur, Chairperson; Paul Renne, Vice-Chairperson; Brett Andrews, Commissioner; Beverly Hayon, Commissioner; Peter Keane, Commissioner.

STAFF PRESENT: John St. Croix, Executive Director; Jesse Mainardi, Deputy Executive Director; Shaista Shaikh, Assistant Deputy Executive Director; Catherine Argumedo, Investigator/Legal Analyst.

OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: Josh White, Deputy City Attorney (DCA).

OTHERS PRESENT: Harlan Kelly, General Manager, San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SF PUC); Supervisor John Avalos; Francisco Da Costa; Dr. Espanola Jackson; Phaedra Ellis-Lamkins; Amos Brown, President of San Francisco NAACP; Charlie Walker; Jessie Cassella; Eric Larson; Venesia Thompson; Bob Harris; Francesca Vietor, member of the SF PUC; Joe Brooks; Bellamy Brooks; Orson Aguilar; Fred Blackwell, City Administrator, City of Oakland; Rev. Arnold Townsend; Van Jones; Judith Bell; Derecka Mehrens; Aretha Robinson; Vivian Chang; Lisa Gray; Dwayne Jones; Danielle Mahones; Angelo King; Dion-Jay Brookter; Julia Butterfly Hill; Elizabeth; Lisa Spinali; Ed Donaldson; Robert Woods; Teresa Goins; Dr. Caesar Churchwell; John; Christian Forzina; Carol Tatum; Shawn Richard; Larry Edmond; Dr. Derek Kerr; and unidentified members of the public.

MATERIALS DISTRIBUTED:
– Staff Memorandum re: Show Cause Hearing – Ethics Complaint No. 04-140303, dated March 20, 2014, and supporting documents;
– Ethics Commission Regulations for Handling Violations of the Sunshine Ordinance;
– Section 67 of the San Francisco Administrative Code, Sunshine Ordinance;
– Staff Memorandum re: Audit Selection of Year 2013 Committees, dated March 18, 2014;
– Draft Resolution proposed by Commissioner Keane regarding the recent settlement agreement with Juliet Ellis of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission;
– Approved Stipulation re: Complaint No. 11-130606 and Joint Exhibit with the Fair Political Practices Commission, approved January 27, 2014;
– Letter from the Executive Director to Harlan Kelly, General Manager of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, dated January 29, 2014;
– Letter from Juliet Ellis, dated March 24, 2014;
– Draft minutes of the Commission’s Regular Meeting of February 24, 2014;
– Executive Director’s Report.

II. Public comment on matters appearing or not appearing on the agenda that are within the jurisdiction of the Ethics Commission.

Harlan Kelly, General Manager of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, stated that, due to personnel and confidential rules, he is not able to talk about any specific disciplinary actions that were taken. He stated that the PUC conducted an independent investigation and that there was no new or contradictory information in either the Ethics Commission’s or FPPC’s investigation. He stated that appropriate actions were taken and the matter is concluded. He stated that it was time to move on.

Supervisor John Avalos stated that the Ethics Commission already made a determination in the matter being discussed today and that he has concerns that it is coming up again. He stated that he has worked with Ms. Ellis for a number of years and that she has worked diligently for the community. He stated that she has great values and that she is doing good work and reaching out to communities of color in San Francisco. He stated that she should continue working in the City.

Francisco Da Costa stated that the constituents created the Ethics Commission to adjudicate all matters in the proper manner. He stated that the work of the Commission should be about morals, ethics and standards, not about selling out the community and values.

Dr. Espanola Jackson stated that she lives in Bayview Hunters Point and that local funds have been diverted to Oakland. She stated that she has concerns that some people do not know the facts and are saying that someone is great. She stated that her community did not need Ms. Ellis there and that they are getting sick and dying every day because of the sewage plant and shipyard.

Pheadra Ellis-Lamkins stated that she was offended that the Commission would consider this item. She stated that Ms. Ellis identified the conflict before anyone else did. She stated that Ms. Ellis took leadership of Green for All while she was on maternity leave. She stated that the hypocrisy of the Ethics Commission is outrageous and unconscionable.

Amos Brown, President of San Francisco NAACP, stated that the Commission has gone through a democratic process, had an investigation and a majority vote. He stated that this action is excessive and a red herring. He suggested that the Commission consider moving on with what it should be doing and walk honorably.

Charlie Walker stated that this is a black-white issue. He stated that slavery has not left us and that San Francisco needs some policy changes. He stated that there is no reason to come down here to talk about something that has already been decided. He stated that he fought for 31 months so that the Commissioners could sit on this board in peace.

Jessie Cassella stated that she has interacted with Ms. Ellis on a regular basis and urged the Commission to reject the proposed resolution. She stated that passing this resolution would be contrary to the Code of Ethics of this Commission. She stated that Ms. Ellis has been a mentor and that few people could do the job that she is doing. She stated that removing Ms. Ellis from her position would be extraordinarily punitive and unnecessary. She questioned the objectivity of the Commission.

Eric Larson, Juliet Ellis’ husband, stated that he has known Ms. Ellis for over 20 years. He stated that she is one of the most honest people he knows and that this whole situation has been painful for her and her family. He stated that some people have orchestrated events to smear her good name and that Ms. Ellis has mostly suffered in silence. He thanked her supporters.

Venesia Thompson stated that she had previously worked with Ms. Ellis and that she is passionate about her work. She considered Ms. Ellis a mentor and a friend. She stated that her employment with the city should not be terminated.

Bob Harris spoke about morals and ethics. He stated that a series of events had happened to him that were demoralizing. He said it was time to stop.

Francesca Vietor, member of SF PUC, stated that a settlement had been reached in this case and that Ms. Ellis has paid fines and the matter has been put to rest. She stated that a contract had been signed by both the Commission and Ms. Ellis. She stated that she is proud of the programs Ms. Ellis has initiated and the work she has done and urged the Commission to reject the resolution.

Joe Brooks stated that he has known Ms. Ellis for over 16 years. He stated that he was absolutely floored upon hearing what the Commission was to consider during the meeting. He stated that she had paid her dues and that this action was a witch hunt. He stated that the Commission wasting money and undermining the reputation of a qualified individual.

Bellamy Brooks stated that she met Ms. Ellis years ago and was impressed immediately by her passion and commitment and caring for the community. She stated that Ms. Ellis is currently in Portland addressing a university regarding her work at SF PUC and was invited to Cornell University last week to speak. She stated that this was a disgrace and urged the Commission to reject the resolution. She stated that she was concerned about lawyers who do not understand contract law.

Orson Aguilar stated that he has worked alongside Ms. Ellis for many years and that he cannot think of a better public servant. He asked that the Commission vote against the proposed resolution.

Fred Blackwell, City Administrator for Oakland, stated that he was sad and disappointed to be at the meeting. He stated that Ms. Ellis is hard-working, dedicated, and committed to issues regarding low-income communities and those of color and that he would hire her in a heartbeat. He asked the Commission to reject the proposed resolution.

Rev. Arnold Townsend stated that he was at the meeting about racism, unfairness, and justice. He stated that what the members of the Commission were doing in a suit and tie is no different than what the good old boys did down South when they did not wait for the justice system – another black lynching. He asked the Commission to respect the rights of the judicial system.

Van Jones stated that the Commission was ill-advised and that he felt sorry for the Commissioners. He stated that sometimes people make mistakes and it is easier to admit it early on. He stated that Ms. Ellis made a mistake, came forward, made amends and is trying to move forward. He stated that if she has to follow the rules, then the Commission has to follow the rules. He stated that the state bar looks unkindly on people who have law degrees and abuse their authority and that the state bar will be hearing about the Commission’s actions tonight no matter what the outcome.

Judith Bell, of PolicyLink, stated that she has known Ms. Ellis for many years and that she has helped put the SF PUC on the map at a national level. She stated that she cannot understand why this issue has reemerged and that it is outrageous. She urged the Commission to reject the resolution.

Derecka Mehrens stated that she has known Ms. Ellis for over 10 years and has known her to be a person of strong values and convictions. She stated that this action is a witch hunt of outrageous proportions. She stated that the Commission is charged with upholding the common good and that the Commission should take no further action.

Aretha Robinson stated that she did not understand why the Commission is here attacking Ms. Ellis’ character after coming to an agreement with her in January. She stated that too many City staff members have been accused of more troubling things and still have their jobs.

Vivian Chang stated that she worked with Juliet Ellis. She stated that the people speaking on behalf of Ms. Ellis are only a fraction of people who believe in Ms. Ellis and what she is trying to do in this city.

Lisa Gray, a professor at Mills College, echoed Rev. Townsend’s comments. She stated that Ms. Ellis is being held to undue scrutiny. She urged the Commission to reconsider and reject the proposed resolution. She suggested that the Commission not move forward as it would call into question the Commission’s ethics as the action seems to overly penalize African Americans.

Dwayne Jones stated that this is embarrassing and ridiculous. He stated that when this issue first came up, everyone wanted to come before the Commission, but that they were asked to stand down. He stated that they respected the process and now the Commission disrespects them. He stated that the Commission voted and made a decision. He urged the Commission to reject the proposed resolution.

Danielle Mahones stated that she has known Ms. Ellis for over 10 years and she has known her to be a person of honesty, integrity, and passionate and devoted to the community. She stated that everyone makes mistake and that there had been no malicious intent. She stated that Ms. Ellis took responsibility and the matter should have ended there. She stated that it was unclear what the Commission’s message was trying to be. She stated that Ms. Ellis is competent and ready to do more. She urged the Commission to reject the proposed resolution.

Angelo King stated that he has known Ms. Ellis for about 15 years. He stated that the decision was made and the Commission should not try to re-open it. He stated that many people have not lost jobs for doing a lot of other things. He stated that the City cannot ask for the best and brightest and then do this to its best and brightest. He urged the Commission not to be used by whoever is pressing for the resolution and to reject the proposed resolution.

Dion-Jay Brookter, Deputy Director of Young Community Developers, stated that the Commission signed a binding agreement in January with Ms. Ellis. He stated that the Commission has broken the agreement just so it could attack a woman of color and that the Commission’s investigation found no intent in the violations. He stated that he did not understand why the Commission would bring this up again and that it is a waste of City tax dollars. He urged the Commission to reject the resolution.

Julia Butterfly Hill stated that she lived over two years without touching the ground. She stated that Ms. Ellis took risks to improve the world for others. She stated that Ms. Ellis is a person of integrity and urged the Commission to reject the resolution and move forward.

Elizabeth stated that she has known Ms. Ellis for over 20 years. She stated that she felt compelled to speak on Ms. Ellis’ behalf because the attack on her character are unjust. She stated that she does not understand the hidden agenda in this action and that it is shameful and disgraceful. She stated that Ms. Ellis cares about her work.

Lisa Spinali stated that she has worked with Ms. Ellis for many years. She stated that the matter was heard and closed and that the Commission’s actions sadden her and are an embarrassment to San Francisco. She urged the Commission not to consider the resolution and to permit Ms. Ellis continue her work.

Ed Donaldson, Chairperson of San Francisco Chapter of the Alliance for Californians for Community Empowerment, stated that Ms. Ellis has inspired many people and created something out of nothing, as she is an extraordinary woman. He asked the Commission to dismiss the resolution and allow Ms. Ellis to go on with her life.

Robert Woods, of the San Francisco Black Human Rights Leadership Council, stated that the people of Bayview Hunters Point are living with a solid waste facility and he came to ask for help to talk to Ms. Ellis about the community’s needs.

Teresa Goins, founder of the Old Skool Café, stated that Ms. Ellis has been great friend to her organization and the youth. She urged the Commission to stop the resolution and to apologize to Ms. Ellis. She stated that this action is a waste of everyone’s time and is beyond unfortunate. She asked the Commission to move on.

Dr. Caesar Churchwell, Vice-President of San Francisco African American Chamber of Commerce, stated that he was unsure whether the Commission understood what a closed case means. He stated that he did not understand why the Commission was reopening the matter. He stated that it is a witch hunt and should have been resolved a long time ago. He asked the Commission to do the ethical thing.

John echoed the statements of many earlier speakers. He stated that Ms. Ellis has advanced a number of programs through SF PUC and that this matter was concluded a couple months ago. He stated that the Commission should change the resolution to an apology to Ms. Ellis. He urged the Commission to stop this politically-motivated action.

Christian Forzina stated that punishment is a learning tool and Ms. Ellis has learned from her mistake. He asked the Commission to move forward as it probably has better things do with your time. He stated that people that push on things like this are trying to hide something themselves. He asked the Commission to let her do her job.

Carol Tatum stated that she has lived in San Francisco since 1955 and has seen how the city treats African Americans. She stated that she heard about the situation yesterday and does not know Ms. Ellis. She stated that there must be some ulterior motive and asked the Commission to stop the mistreatment of African Americans in this City.

Shawn Richard, Executive Director of Brothers Against Guns, stated that Ms. Ellis helped his organization and asked why not reopen the Trayvon Martin case. He stated that everyone should move on.

Larry Edmond, former candidate for Mayor, stated that ethics should be a part of all of our lives. He stated that he was not surprised that this is happening. He stated that African Americans make this city what it is.

Chairperson Hur thanked all of the speakers.

Commissioner Keane asked to be recognized by the Chair. He stated that he never knew Ms. Ellis and did not know her race. He gave a brief history of the matter, stating that Ms. Ellis admitted violations and that the Commission prosecuted her for those ethical violations. He stated that the Commission entered into a stipulation with her and Ms. Ellis accepted certain punishments. He stated that the Commission’s job was over in regards to Ms. Ellis. He stated that the specific violations were a fairly egregious ethical breach and he thought that this person has admitted that she engaged in corrupt conduct and would likely be fired. Commissioner Keane stated that he heard SF PUC had not terminated Ms. Ellis and he introduced the resolution. He stated that he has listened to her supporters’ messages and that he agrees that terminating Ms. Ellis would be sending a terrible message to San Francisco, in particular to minority individuals who want to participate in government. Commissioner Keane stated that there has been no hidden agenda or racism and asked to withdraw his proposed resolution.

None of the other Commissioners objected to the withdrawal of the proposed resolution to be considered in Agenda Item V. Chairperson Hur stated that the policy discussion from that agenda item would remain on the agenda so that the Commission would not have this discussion again.

III. Discussion and possible action on matters submitted under Chapter Two of the Ethics Commission’s Regulations for Violations of the Sunshine Ordinance.

a) Ethics Complaint No. 04-140303 (referred from the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force on March 3, 2014)
Complainant: Ray Hartz
Respondent: Luis Herrera, City Librarian

[Complainant Ray Hartz was not present.]

Mr. Herrera, City Librarian, stated that after Mr. Hartz had requested the use of audio-visual equipment, the Library explored various options and that the cheapest option would require the Library to spend at least $40,000. He stated that while the matter was before the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force (Task Force), he brought the issue to the Library Commission in August 2013 for its consideration, as the Library Commission determines the expenditures of the Library’s funds. He stated that the Library’s DCA advised the Library Commission that making audio-visual requirement available to members of the public is a policy decision, as neither the Brown Act nor the Sunshine Ordinance require agencies to make that equipment available. He stated that the Library Commission agreed not to allow audio-visual equipment for public comment. The Library Commission determined that any member of the public could bring printed copies of any presentation and make them available on the table with the rest of the documents provided by the Library Commission for its meeting. Mr. Herrera stated that the Library did not violate the Sunshine Ordinance.

Commissioner Keane expressed that the Library was discriminating on content, as it was allowing certain groups with certain content to have the use of these facilities and not permitting other members of the public to use the same facilities. He stated that the Library was violating the First Amendment and that it had to allow for people with opposing viewpoints. Mr. Herrera stated that members of the public are not prohibited from making public comment.

Commissioner Andrews asked Mr. Herrera about what alternatives were explored. Mr. Herrera stated that reconfiguring the public’s podium to allow for a laptop would require some ADA accommodations and re-cabling. He stated that any presentations from any member of the public could be printed, copied, and made available during the meeting.

Chairperson Hur stated that the Ethics Commission frequently has presenters that speak much longer than three minutes allocated for public comment. He stated that if a member of the public was able to use the equipment during public comment, then all members of the public should be able to use it during public comment.

Vice-Chairperson Renne noted that the equipment is built into the podiums in City Hall, but that the Library meets in a different building. Commissioner Hayon stated that if the Commission requires the Library to make special arrangements, then the Ethics Commission would be requiring all boards and commissions to do the same. Mr. Herrera noted that various boards and commissions meet outside City Hall and do not have audio-visual equipment available for the public.

Commissioner Andrews suggested that the Library revisit the idea of providing audio-visual equipment to the public. Roberto Lombardi, the Library’s Facilities Director, stated that Koret Auditorium was built before the ADA was adopted and that any project would be under the scrutiny of the Mayor’s Office of Disability and the podium itself may have to be changed and could possibly require moving seats around the auditorium.

Vice-Chairperson Renne stated that the Task Force initially held the Library in violation and then had a new hearing and charged Mr. Herrera. He stated that the Order of Determination found Mr. Herrera in violation of the Sunshine Ordinance. Commissioner Keane stated that proceeding against the Library is one thing, but proceeding against Mr. Herrera is a different situation. He stated that the Library was not in compliance with the Order, but that he was troubled by putting it on Mr. Herrera. Chairperson Hur agreed. He stated that the Library took action and the party before the Commission does not appear to be the appropriate party. Commissioner Hayon suggested that handing out copies of presentations is sufficient and makes the most sense. Commissioner Hur agreed.

Public Comment:
Dr. Derek Kerr stated that he was uncomfortable that the assumption that members of the public are somehow inferior to people who present to commissions. He stated that there should be some structure, but the public should not be made inferior to architects or experts.

Francisco Da Costa stated that there should be an understanding about three individuals – Ray Hartz, Peter Warfield, and James Chaffee. He stated they were well-versed in audio-visual media and that the City is depriving advocates from making public comment. He stated that he sees Mr. Herrera wasting everyone’s time.

Commissioner Hayon stated that the Commission is not holding the public inferior. She asked about the feasibility of a wireless laptop. Mr. Lombardi stated that it may be feasible, but that hardwire is more reliable. Commissioner Hayon noted that the Ethics Commission repeatedly sees the Library.

Chairperson Hur asked DCA White whether the Commission could find a violation by the Library, but not Mr. Herrera. DCA White stated that it was beyond the scope to find the Library Commission has committed a violation. DCA White noted that this matter came from a complaint that named the Librarian in his capacity as Librarian.

Commissioner Hayon requested to be recused from this matter, as she is a former Library Commissioner. Executive Director St. Croix stated that Commissioner Hayon should have requested it prior to discussion of the matter. DCA White stated that the Commission should vote on the recusal.

Motion 14-03-24-1 (Keane/Renne) Moved, seconded, and passed (5-0) that Commissioner Hayon be recused from this matter.

Motion 14-03-24-2 (Renne/Hur) Moved, seconded, and passed (3-1; Keane dissented, Hayon recused) that Mr. Herrera has sustained his burden of proof and that the Commission finds no violation of the Sunshine Ordinance.

Public comment:
Ms. Jackson stated that a Chair cannot make a motion or second a motion.

Chairperson Hur asked whether that was accurate. DCA White stated that was incorrect.

Vice-Chairperson Renne stated that a visual presentation is more persuasive, as opposed to a handout. Chairperson Hur urged the Library to allow public speakers to use something to show the Library Commission and other members of the public to reinforce their argument.

IV. Discussion and possible action on the selection of random audits of 2013 committees.

Executive Director St. Croix stated that staff has the resources to perform five audits of 2013 committees during the coming year. He proposed that the Commission perform one audit from activity level one (level of financial activity between $10,000 and $50,000), one from activity level two (level of financial activity between $50,001 and $100,000), and three audits from activity level three (level of financial activity above $100,000). He stated that staff has prepared a box to draw the names and asked for a volunteer to assist with the selection.

Public Comment:
Dr. Derek Kerr asked how the public is to know that every committee has a name in the box.

Executive Director St. Croix stated that the names are read as the names are placed in the selection box and asked whether Dr. Kerr would volunteer to assist. Dr. Kerr agreed and he and Espanola Jackson assisted in the selection of committees to be audited.

Activity Level One
There are 18 committees in this activity level and one committee was selected for audit: Latino Democratic Club: San Francisco (ID# 1342652).

Activity Level Two
There are five committees in this activity level and one committee was selected for audit: San Francisco Apartment Association Political Action Committee (ID# 840002).

Activity Level Three
There are nine committees in this activity level and three committees were selected for audit: SAN FRANCISCANS FOR PARKS, JOBS AND HOUSING, YES ON B & C, WITH MAJOR SUPPORT FROM PACIFIC WATERFRONT PARTNERS, LLC, CAHILL CONTRACTORS, INC., BUILDING AND LABOR (ID# 1356686); No Wall on the Northeast Waterfront, No on B & C, supported by local property owners, tenants, neighbors, and environmentalists. Top contributors include Richard and Barbara Stewart (ID# 1348226); and Protect Our Benefits (ID# 990028).

V. Discussion and possible action where the Commission will conduct a discussion regarding its ability to take further action on settlement agreements approved under the Commission’s enforcement process and will specifically consider a resolution proposed by Commissioner Keane to take further action on the recent settlement agreement with Juliet Ellis of the Public Utilities Commission.

[Commissioner Keane withdrew his resolution from consideration during Agenda Item II of this meeting.]

Chairperson Hur stated that the Commission should have a brief discussion on the policy matter. Executive Director St. Croix stated that, as a matter of policy, this possible action has given staff a great deal of discomfort. He stated that it contradicts the purpose of a settlement agreement, as the agreement itself contains language saying that it will be the final disposition of the matter. He stated that if the Commission were to do this in the future, it would be difficult to negotiate agreements in the future.

Commissioner Keane stated that he did not see this possible action as reopening the matter. He stated that the Commission had done its job and, based on the findings, the particular agency was under the obligation to do something. He stated that the Commission would have been taking up a separate matter relating to the ethical failure of another City agency to do its job. He stated that he did not see the Commission from being precluded from saying another agency had an obligation and they did not do it.

Commissioner Andrews stated that there could be something more clearly outlined within the stipulation regarding disciplinary action. DCA White stated that if the Commission was considering a stipulation and the Commissioners did not agree with its terms, then one course is to reject it or propose an amendment. He stated that any proposed amendment to the agreement would later have to be approved by the Respondent(s). Chairperson Hur stated that the Commission could probably not mandate any disciplinary action by a department head, as the agreement is solely between the Respondent and the Commission. DCA White stated that it would be best to include everything in one agreement and to make it clear that the agreement is the final disposition of the matter and that it would preclude any subsequent consideration of anything related to that matter. Chairperson Hur stated that if the Commission decides something as a body, then it should be included in the settlement agreement, so that everyone is on notice. DCA White stated that if there is no such recommendation included in the settlement agreement, then there would not be any subsequent recommendation.

Deputy Executive Director Mainardi noted that, although the Charter permits the Commission to recommend to the appointing officer that an officer be removed from office, it is unclear whether this applies to City employees and is permitted by the Commission’s Enforcement Regulations.

Vice-Chairperson Renne stated that, when considering Ms. Ellis’ settlement agreement, he did not believe he was in the position to make the determination that Ms. Ellis should be fired. He stated that if the Commission is to make recommendations about what an agency is to do regarding future employment of a Respondent, then the Commission would need more information from staff’s investigation. He noted that Mr. Kelly stated earlier during public comment that he thought he took appropriate action and that she has been a wonderful employee and a community leader. He stated that he did not feel inclined to tell the SF PUC to fire Ms. Ellis.

Commissioner Keane stated that the violations were serious and it seemed appropriate that she should not continue in her current position. Vice-Chairperson Renne stated that Ms. Ellis’ conduct was open and cooperative and noted that she is paying a fine. Commissioner Andrews stated that it is a Human Resources issue and the Commission will never know what action, if any, was taken. He stated that, if appropriate, disciplinary action should be taken by the agency.

Chairperson Hur stated that, if the Commission had wanted to provide a recommendation regarding discipline, then the procedure would be to reject the settlement and go back to Ms. Ellis and discuss additional language to the agreement.

Public Comment:
Francisco Da Costa stated that the Commission was slow in adjudicating this case and that there are over 30 cases of the PUC having employees infringe on ethics, morals and standards. He stated that Ms. Ellis employed the wife of the Director of Green for All. He stated that the Commission failed miserably.

Espanola Jackson stated that she would attend the PUC’s meeting tomorrow and objected to the sewage plant in Bayview-Hunters Point. She suggested that the Chair should check the rules about seconding a motion.

Dr. Derek Kerr stated that Ms. Ellis had reported her error to the Ethics Commission and the FPPC. He stated that typically these types of matters come from whistleblowers. He expressed concern of Ms. Ellis’ return to her position if this case came from a whistleblower, as it could be a risk to the whistleblower.

VI. Discussion and possible action on the minutes of the Commission’s meeting of February 24, 2014.

Chairperson Hur stated that he did not second a vote after the Commission returned to open session during that meeting, which was erroneously noted on page 4.

Public Comment:
None.

Motion 14-03-24-3 (Renne/Keane) Moved, seconded, and passed (5-0) that the Commission approve the minutes, as amended.

Public Comment:
None.

VII. Discussion of Executive Director’s Report.

Executive Director St. Croix addressed an attachment at the end of his report. He stated that, thanks to the Information Technology Officer, Steven Massey, the Ethics Commission is first in availability of data on San Francisco’s public information website: data.sfgov.org

Public Comment:
None.

VIII. Items for future meetings.

Public Comment:
None.

IX. Public comment on matters appearing or not appearing on the agenda that are within the jurisdiction of the Ethics Commission.

None.

X. Adjournment.

Motion 14-03-24-4 (Hayon/Keane) Moved, seconded, and passed (5-0) that the Commission adjourn.

The meeting adjourned at 8:50 PM.

Was this page helpful?

:

*Required fields

Scan with a QR reader to access page:
QR Code to Access Page
https://sfethics.org/ethics/2014/04/minutes-march-24-2014.html