Ethics Commission adopts "behest" payments regs; nonprofits urge narrower language

The San Francisco Ethics Commission adopted new regulations implementing the city's rules on "behest" or vested payments after a lengthy discussion and public testimony about the impact on nonprofit-affiliated commissioners.

Staff presented revised draft regulations that tightened the definition of "at the request of" and clarified evidentiary examples—email copies and other written communications—as possible proof that a payment was solicited. Staff said the revisions responded to prior commissioner feedback and included clarifying language about exceptions for competitively awarded grants and purely factual responses to philanthropic partners.

Nonprofit representatives, including Debbie Lerman of the San Francisco Human Services Network, urged the commission to ensure the rules would not unduly restrict commissioners who are nonprofit executives and who must engage in routine fundraising. "The proposed regulation has language about soliciting donations from a group of parties that may contain an interested party. That's overly broad and vague," Lerman said, asking staff to consult nonprofit commissioners before finalizing language.

Representatives from the mayor's office and other stakeholders said the revisions are considerably narrowed and include helpful presumptions for small-value solicitations; the mayor's office suggested time-stamping or other documentary evidence would usually resolve ambiguity about a payment's value.

Commissioner Bush raised concerns about potential loopholes involving unpaid board members or conduit organizations that could receive payments benefiting officials' relatives or associates. After discussion, the commission voted to approve the regulations by roll call (3–1) with Commissioner Bush in dissent. Staff noted that, even if approved, the regulations will be submitted to the Board of Supervisors, which has 60 days to act on them.

The regulations take effect only after the statutory transmission period; staff said the commission could amend the rules later if implementation reveals gaps. The commission asked staff to consider additional clarifying language around documentary proof and the scope of exceptions raised by nonprofit stakeholders.

Next steps: the adopted rules will be transmitted to the Board of Supervisors for the statutorily required review period; staff will solicit further input from nonprofit commissioners and stakeholders for potential refinements.