CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
Campaign Finance Audit Report
Dr. Emily Murase for District 7 Supervisor 2020
FPPC ID #: 1426211
January 1, 2020 – December 31, 2020
Introduction
Public disclosure of election campaign activity is essential to voters making informed decisions. The Political Reform Act (California Government Code [CA Gov Code) Section [Sec.]81000 et seq) and supporting regulations, and the San Francisco Campaign Finance Reform Ordinance (San Francisco Campaign & Government Conduct Code [SFC&GCC] Sec. 1.100 et. seq.) and supporting regulations, were established to impose reasonable disclosure requirements to reveal information about election campaign activity. By requiring proper and timely disclosure of campaign activity pertaining to contributions, loans, expenditures, and accrued expenditures, the laws and regulations are designed to inform voters and deter improper practices.
To promote campaign compliance with laws and regulations, the San Francisco Ethics Commission (hereinafter the “Commission”) engaged Macias Gini & O’Connell LLP (MGO) to assist in assessing election committees’ compliance with applicable requirements. This report summarizes the audit results on the Dr. Emily Murase for District 7 Supervisor 2020 #1426211 committee (hereinafter the “Committee”) covering the period January 1, 2020 through December 31, 2020.
Authority
The Commission has a duty and responsibility under San Francisco Charter Sec. C3.699-11(4) to audit campaign statements and other relevant documents that are filed with the Commission to ensure compliance with applicable state and campaign finance laws and regulations. Under SFC&GCC Sec. 1.150(a), all candidate committees whose candidates have received public financing must be audited and committee that have not received public financing may be randomly selected for audit at the discretion of the Executive Director of the Commission.
Objectives and Scope
The objective of the audit was to reasonably determine whether the Committee substantially complied with requirements of the Political Reform Act Sec. 81000 et. Seq. and supporting regulations, and the San Franscico Campaign Finance Reform Ordinance Sec 1.100 et. Seq. and supporting regulations. The audit was performed based on a review of the Committee’s filing and records covered by the audit period to determine, among other things:
- Compliance with campaign activity disclosure and recordkeeping requirements, and.
- Compliance with applicable campaign activity limits, restrictions, and prohibitions.
As a recipient of public financing, the Committee was subject to mandatory audit.
Nothing in this report shall be interpreted to prevent an enforcement action by the Commission or another appropriate agency for conduct in violation of the law, whether or not that conduct is covered in this report.
The report will be forwarded to the Commission’s Enforcement Division for review to determine whether any further action may be warranted.
Committee Information
Background
The Committee’s primary purpose was to support the election of Emily Murase to the Board of Supervisors, District 7, for the City and County of San Francisco (“City”) in the November 3, 2020 election. During the period covered by the audit, the Committee’s Treasurer was James Sutton. The Committee was established on March 28, 2020, and terminated effective on December 31, 2022.
Committee Reported Activity
| Total Funds Raised | Total Expenditures Made | |
| Private Contributions | $99,108 | $310,539 |
| Public Funds Received | $244,064 |
The committee activity totals were taken from disclosure statements filed with the Commission covering the period January 1, 2020 through December 31, 2020.
Audit Respondent
The audit respondent identified below was the primary audit contact during the audit and responded to audit inquiries and requests on behalf of the Committee.
James Sutton
The Sutton Law Firm
150 Post Street, Suite 405
San Francisco, CA 94108
Audit Findings
The CA Gov. Code Sec. 81000 et. Seq and supporting regulations, and SFC&GCC Sec. 1.100 et. Sec and supporting regulations, require campaign committees to timely disclose information about election campaign activity and adhere to applicable campaign activity limits, restrictions, and prohibitions.
The following findings were noted during the audit:
Monetary Contributions
- Under CA Gov. Code Sec. 84211(a), committees are required to report the total amount of contributions received from all persons during a reporting period. CA Gov. Code Sec. 84211(f) further states that if the cumulative amount received from any one source is $100 or more, committees must also disclose, in addition to the date and amount, the full name, street address, and occupation/employer information of the contributor.
A $100 monetary contribution received on March 26, 2020, from marchpartners was disclosed as received from Paula March Romanovsky.
Mr. Sutton stated that “the campaign had received information from Ms. Romanovsky that the contribution came from her personally and that “marchpartners” was really just a d/b/a for her consulting business, and because several other campaigns had reported contributions from Ms. Romanovsky this way.”
Rebuttal to Audit Respondent’s Statement.
Committees are required to disclose as the contributor the true source of the contribution. The name of the payee on the contribution check was marchpartners, not Paula March Romanovsky.
- Under CA Gov. Code Sec. 84211(a), committees are required to report the total amount of contributions received from all persons during a reporting period. CA Gov. Code Sec. 84211(f) further states that if the cumulative amount received from any one source is $100 or more, committees must also disclose, in addition to the date and amount, the full name, street address, and occupation/employer information of the contributor.
Out of 65 contributions examined, 4 contributions totaling $400 were disclosed late.
| Contributor | Amount | Transaction Date | Reported Period |
| Susan Swan | $100 | 9/12/2020 | 9/20/2020 – 10/17/2020 |
| Stephen Bigham | $150 | 9/13/2020 | 9/20/2020 – 10/17/2020 |
| Linda Kurtz | *$50 | 9/18/2020 | 9/20/2020 – 10/17/2020 |
| Mark Izu | $100 | 9/19/2020 | 9/20/2020 – 10/17/2020 |
*A $100 contribution had been previously received on 05/08/20 from this contributor.
Mr. Sutton stated that the reported contributions were disclosed late “because we inadvertently used the date which the funds reached the campaign’s bank account rather than the date which the contributors inputted the contributions into the campaign’s credit card processing service.” Mr. Sutton added that “the contributions were relatively small, all were reported as being made only nine or ten days later than when the contributors made the contributions, and all of them were disclosed to the public before the election.”
Expenditures
- Under CA Gov. Code Sec. 84211(b), committees are required to report the total amount of expenditures to all persons during a reporting period. CA Gov. Code Sec. 84211(k) further states that if the cumulative amount expended to any one source is $100 or more, committees must also disclose that person’s full name, street address, amount of each expenditure, and brief description of the consideration.
Out of 8 expenditures examined, 2 expenditures totaling $9,145.06 were disclosed late.
| Payee | Amount | Transaction Date | Reported Period |
| Cornerstone Printing | $3,575.11 | 10/15/2020 | 10/18/2020 – 10/28/2020 |
| Proverb Strategy Advisors | $5,569.95 | 10/27/2020 | 10/29/2020 – 12/31/2020 |
Mr. Sutton stated that the reported expenditures were late “because it inadvertently used the date which it wrote the check to the vendors rather than the date on the invoices.” Mr. Sutton added that “The campaign had previously made payments to both vendors (a printer and a political consultant) so the public was aware that the campaign was using these vendors, and both were reported as being made only eight days after the date of the invoice.”
Conclusion
Except as indicated in the Audit Findings section above, and in our opinion, the Committee substantially complied with the requirements of the Political Reform Act Sec. 81000 et seq. and supporting regulations, and the San Francisco Campaign Finance Reform Ordinance Sec. 1.100 et seq. and supporting regulations.