San Francisco Ethics Commission moves to closed session on executive director appointment, sets preliminary‑matter process in enforcement case

SAN FRANCISCO — The San Francisco Ethics Commission on May 5 moved into a closed session to discuss the appointment of an executive director and, after reconvening in public, set a schedule and process for preliminary matters in a campaign‑finance enforcement case.

Chair Lee opened the special meeting at City Hall and outlined procedures for remote public comment. After hearing multiple callers, including Ellen Li Zhao who alleged retaliation by the commission following a 2018–19 mayoral campaign, the commission adopted its consent calendar (items 3–9) by roll call, with three votes in favor and one opposed.

The commission then considered agenda item 10, a proposed closed session to discuss a public employee appointment. The chair cited California Government Code Section 54957.6 and the City Sunshine Ordinance and the commission voted to meet in closed session. The chair announced the commission would reconvene later in the afternoon.

Back in open session, commissioners moved to “not disclose the substance of the closed session,” a motion the panel approved by unanimous consent. The commission then took up agenda item 11, an enforcement matter involving Paul Allen Taylor (Case No. 20‑2431920‑031). Senior investigator Zack DeMarco summarized a probable‑cause finding that alleges Taylor coordinated between a committee and a political action committee to convert a $10,000 expenditure into an excessive contribution and described eight counts, including excessive contribution, filing failures, a failure to register as a campaign consultant, and withholding information during the investigation.

Taylor joined remotely and said he had not yet had an opportunity to review the staff presentation because of technical difficulties. Commissioners discussed options for handling preliminary matters: appoint a commissioner to preside, hire an outside hearing officer, or have the full commission decide. After deliberation, the commission adopted a set of four procedural items: appoint Commissioner Finlaf to preside over preliminary matters, set a deadline for filing motions (the body discussed a 30‑day window and referenced June 5 as a target date), establish procedures for submitting motions and subpoenas, and adopt a review process that mirrors the commission’s review of executive director probable‑cause determinations. Commissioners moved all four items as an omnibus action and approved them by unanimous consent following public comment.

The record shows staff told commissioners it had attempted multiple contacts and in‑person service of subpoenas and the probable‑cause report. Taylor maintained he denies wrongdoing and said he could not comment on the substance until he reviewed the materials.

The commission also considered two stipulation decisions on the regular calendar (item 12, the matter of Michael Coprino, and item 13 involving Bear Star Strategies); staff characterized item 12 as a stipulation executed shortly before the meeting and commissioners voted to approve both items. Public commenters reiterated complaints about commission processes during the meeting’s public‑comment periods.

Next steps: Under the procedural schedule adopted by the commission, parties are to file motions addressing preliminary matters by the deadline set by the assigned commissioner; the commission retains the authority to review determinations made by the assigned commissioner under the same process used to review executive‑director probable‑cause determinations.

Authorities cited at the meeting included California Government Code Section 54957.6 (public‑employee appointments), the Brown Act generally, and the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance (section references were discussed during the meeting).