City of Sacramento
City Council - 5PM Report
915 I Street Sacramento, CA 95814
www.cityofsacramento.org
File ID: 2025-00411 2/4/2025 Consent Item 4.
City of Sacramento Ethics Commission 2023-2024 Annual Report and 2025 Workplan File ID: 2025-00411
Location: Citywide
Recommendation: Receive and file.
Contact: Mindy Cuppy, City Clerk, (916) 808-5442, [email protected], Office of the City Clerk
Presenter: None
Attachments:
1-Description/Analysis
2-2023-2024 Annual Report and 2025 Workplan
Description/Analysis
Issue Detail: Advisory bodies of the City are required to provide an annual report and workplan for review by the Personnel and Public Employees (P&PE) Committee as outlined in the City Council Rules of Procedure, Chapter 17. The P&PE Committee shall review advisory body annual reports and give staff direction on those reports’ stated projects, priorities, and recommendations. Before forwarding the report to the City Council, the Committee may request supplemental information from staff or the advisory body.
The P&PE Committee has reviewed the attached City of Sacramento Ethics Commission 2023-2024 Annual Report and 2025 Workplan on January 7, 2025 and passed a motion forwarding it to the City Council.
Policy Considerations: Chapter 17 of the Council Rules of Procedure outlines the Advisory Body reporting process.
Economic Impacts: Not Applicable.
Environmental Considerations:
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): This action is not a project that is subject to
File ID: 2025-00411 2/4/2025 Consent Item 4.
CEQA because it is an organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. (CEQA Guidelines §15378(b)(5)).
Sustainability: Not Applicable.
Commission/Committee Action: On January 7, 2025, the P&PE Committee reviewed the Annual Report and Workplan and passed a motion forwarding it to the City Council.
Rationale for Recommendation: Annual Reports by city advisory bodies ensures they effectively incorporate their important role, voice, and work and provide thoughtful community recommendations to the City Council on a consistent basis.
Financial Considerations: Not Applicable.
Local Business Enterprise (LBE): Not Applicable.
915 I Street, Sacramento, CA 95814 • [email protected] • (916) 808-7200
City of Sacramento Ethics
Commission Annual Report
January 2023 through December 2024
City of Sacramento Ethics Commission Annual Report Page 2 of 10 Table of Contents
Introduction: Establishment, Commissioners, and Staff ........................................................................... 3 Purpose, Powers and Duties of the City of Sacramento Ethics Commission..................................... 4 Message from the City of Sacramento Ethic Commission Chair ........................................................... 6 Key Accomplishments ..................................................................................................................................... 7 A. Hearings ............................................................................................................................................. 7 B. Community Engagement................................................................................................................. 7 C. Procedures Update .......................................................................................................................... 7 D. Lobbyist Registration and Reporting Code Modernization .................................................... 7 E. Commissioners ................................................................................................................................. 7 Commission Resources Expended ............................................................................................................... 8 Recommended Workplan for Upcoming Year .......................................................................................... 9 A. Community Outreach ..................................................................................................................... 9 B. Ethics Training................................................................................................................................... 9 Appendices ...................................................................................................................................................... 10 A. Outreach Material: PowerPoint Presentation ........................................................................ 10 B. Outreach Material: 3-Fold Brochure ........................................................................................ 10 C. Outreach Material: Postcard ...................................................................................................... 10 D. Ethics Commission Procedures ................................................................................................. 10
City of Sacramento Ethics Commission Annual Report Page 3 of 10 Introduction: Establishment, Commissioners, and Staff
The City of Sacramento Ethics Commission was established in 2017 by ordinance 2017-0026 and is codified in Sacramento City Code Section 2.112.
The commission consists of 5 members which are nominated by the Personnel and Public Employees Committee and appointed by the mayor with the concurrence of a majority of the city council.
Current City of Sacramento Ethics Commissioners
The following commissioners are currently serving on the commission.
• Linda Ng, Chair
• Alan LoFaso, Vice Chair
• Deanna Adams
• Annette Emery
• Nicole Velasquez
2023 Commissioners
The following commissioners served on the commission prior to 2024:
• Liz Gomez (2020-2023)
• Susan Underwood (2018-2023)
City of Sacramento Ethics Commission Staff
The commission is supported primarily by the following staff members.
• Mindy Cuppy, City Clerk, Office of the City Clerk
• Jacob Bredberg, Administrative Analyst, Office of the City Clerk • Gary P. Lindsey, Deputy City Attorney, Office of the City Attorney
City of Sacramento Ethics Commission Staff Contact Information
City of Sacramento – Office of the City Clerk
915 I Street – Sacramento, CA 95814
[email protected]
(916) 808-7200
https://boards.cityofsacramento.org/board/2948
City of Sacramento Ethics Commission Annual Report Page 4 of 10 Purpose, Powers and Duties of the City of Sacramento Ethics Commission
Purpose of the City of Sacramento Ethics Commission
The commission is established for the purpose of reviewing and considering complaints against elected and appointed city officials, as further described in section 2.112.030, to ensure those city officials are conforming their conduct to the city’s laws and policies.
Powers and Duties of the City of Sacramento Ethics Commission
A. Subject to subsections B and C below, the commission has the power and duty to do the following:
1. Review, investigate, and consider complaints alleging violations of:
a) Section 35 of the Sacramento City Charter (“Limitation on future employment”); b) Chapter 1.20 (“Fair Campaign Practices”);
c) Chapter 2.13 (“Campaign Contribution Limitations”) and chapter 2.14 (“Campaign Spending Limits and Public Campaign Financing”), if the city has not contracted with the Fair Political Practices Commission for enforcement of those chapters; d) Chapter 2.15 (“Lobbyist Registration and Reporting Code”); e) Chapter 2.16 (“Conflict of Interest”);
f) Chapter 4.02 (“Code of Ethics”)
g) Chapter 4.04 (“Transparent Government and Public Engagement”); and h) Chapter 3 (“Conduct of Members”) and Rule 6.E (“Closed Sessions”) of the Council Rules of Procedure.
2. Enforce administrative penalties for violations of provisions covered in subsection A.1 above, in accordance with the policy adopted pursuant to section 2.112.030.C.6. Penalties for each violation may not exceed the greater of (i) $5000, or (ii) in the case of campaign contributions, three times the amount that the violator failed to report properly or unlawfully contributed or accepted.
3. At least annually, report to the city council regarding the activities of the commission, with recommendations, if any, regarding the subjects of its purview as described in subsection A.1.
4. Every two years, review any contract the city has with the Fair Political Practices Commission, for the purpose of reporting to the council on the contract’s efficacy. The commission may also make recommendations regarding renewal of the contract.
5. Provide annual input to the city attorney on the list of law firms used by the city attorney to conduct investigations of sexual harassment claims against city officials.
6. Provide input on the initial selection of an evaluator under subsection C.4; make recommendations for subsequent contracts with an evaluator; and make recommendations regarding the retention or replacement of an evaluator.
City of Sacramento Ethics Commission Annual Report Page 5 of 10
7. Act as the screening panel for selection of independent redistricting commission candidates, as provided in article XII of the Sacramento City Charter.
B. The commission’s authority under subsection A extends only to city elected officials, candidates for city elected office, independent expenditure committees, members of boards and commissions, the city manager, the city clerk, the city attorney, the city t reasurer, the city auditor, the director of the office of public safety accountability, and lobbyists as defined in chapter 2.15.
C. Complaint, Investigation, and Hearing Procedure.
1. In consultation with the city attorney, the commission shall adopt regulations and procedures for investigations and hearings to be conducted by the commission.
2. The commission’s review, investigation, and consideration of complaints shall be in accordance with its adopted regulations and procedures.
3. A complaint filed with the commission may be investigated only if the complaint identifies the specific alleged violation which forms the basis for the complaint and contains sufficient facts to warrant a formal investigation.
4. The council shall cause to be retained an independent and neutral evaluator to review and investigate complaints and to make recommendations to the commission.
5. Notwithstanding anything else in this code, complaints, investigative files, and information contained therein shall be considered confidential to the maximum extent under the law and shall not be disclosed to any person other than a respondent or responde nt’s representative, the city attorney or district attorney, a court, a law enforcement agency, designees of the foregoing, or otherwise as necessary to the conduct of an investigation.
6. The commission shall adopt a policy setting forth its standards for imposing penalties and exercising enforcement discretion. The evaluator shall follow that policy when making recommendations to the commission.
City of Sacramento Ethics Commission Annual Report Page 6 of 10 Message from the City of Sacramento Ethic Commission Chair
I was appointed as one of the inaugural commissioners in 2017, and I am pleased to serve as Chair of the Ethics Commission in 2024. Allow me this opportunity to recognize the hard work and strength of the past and current commissioners as I reflect on our achievements for the current year.
Since 2017, much has been accomplished to ensure the Commission is well positioned to uphold its mission. This includes the development of Administrative and Complaint Procedures. Further in 2020, t he Commission worked vigorously to select a pool of well qualified individuals for the Sacramento Independent Redistricting Commission to establish city council district boundaries in a process that is free from special interests and political influence.
Later, at the suggestion of good governance groups, including California Common Cause and the League of Women Voters of Sacramento County, the Commission worked on a proposed amendment to the Lobbyist Registration and Reporting Ordinance in order to provide the same level of “sunshine” over lobbying activities as our peer jurisdictions, and to reflect government transparency as a core value of our City Ordinance. We are extremely proud that this proposed amendment was adopted by the City Council July 2024. The next steps for the Commission to consider are how this amendment will be implemented and how to best educate lobbyists on the new rules.
We continue to work on the community outreach and engagement materials from our 2023 priorities . The work is now complete and will help us promote the Commission as we engage with the city boards and commissions, neighborhood associations or local good governance groups.
The Commission is making significant progress and value that our work is impactful to our constituents. We look to build upon the work that the Commission has accomplished, to strengthen and create a more dynamic Ethics Commission that will be better equipped to handle more complex issues and cases that may arise in the future.
Linda Ng
2024 Chair
City of Sacramento Ethics Commission
City of Sacramento Ethics Commission Annual Report Page 7 of 10 Key Accomplishments
Below are key accomplishments made by the Sacramento Ethics Commission for the period January 2023 through December 2024.
A. Hearings
The commission conducted the following hearings:
Complaint against Dr. Flojaune Cofer, Flojaune Cofer for Mayor 2024 alleging a violation of campaign contribution limits.
Status: Dismissed October 23, 2023 by Resolution 2023-0001.
Fees for Independent Evaluator Investigation: $36,200.
Complaint against Councilmember Katie Valenzuela alleging a violation of campaign contribution limits and campaign spending limits.
Status: Dismissed November 20, 2023 by Resolution 2023-0002.
Fees for Independent Evaluator Investigation: $23,930.
Complaint against Mayor Darrell Steinberg alleging a violation of Chapter 3 (Conduct of Members) and Rule 6.E (closed Session) of the Council Rules of Procedure.
Status: Dismissed June 24, 2024 by Resolution 2024-0001.
Fees for Independent Evaluator Investigation: $14,036.
B. Community Engagement
The commission had a goal of expanding community engagement and outreach in their 2022 annual report. During this period, the commission created a PowerPoint presentation that is intended to be given to community groups, a 3- fold brochure, and postcard that sh are commissions scope. It is the intent of commissioners to begin presentations in 2025.
C. Procedures Update
The commission reviewed and approved a staff- initiated update of their Procedures document on September 24, 2024.
D. Lobbyist Registration and Reporting Code Modernization The commission recommended to the City Council, and they subsequently approved the Lobbyist Registration and Reporting Code update on July 30, 2024.
E. Commissioners
The commission welcomed two new members in 2024 – Annette Emery and Alan LoFaso.
City of Sacramento Ethics Commission Annual Report Page 8 of 10 Commission Resources Expended
The estimated cost to support the City of Sacramento Ethics Commission meetings in 2023 and 2024 was $37,965.
In 2023 we held 7 meetings and in 2024 we held 4 meetings. Below is a breakdown of expenditures made to support commission meetings during this review period.
The estimated cost per meeting is as follows:
Meetings Hours Rate Total
Staff report creation and review – department staff 11 4 $117 $5,148 Staff report review – city attorney staff 11 3 $216 $7,128 Agenda review, preparation, and publishing – city clerk 11 10 $35 $3,850 Meeting presentation preparation 11 2 $117 $2,574
Meeting attendance – department staff 11 4 $117 $5,148
Meeting attendance – city attorney staff 11 2 $216 $4,752 Meeting attendance – city clerk staff 11 4 $58 $2,552
Meeting attendance – IT staff 11 4 $53 $2,332
Meeting attendance – building security 11 4 $33 $1,452
Post meeting tasks: minutes, legislative document processing, attendance tracking
11 5 $35 $1,925
Commissioner stipend processing (quarterly) 12/year $42 $504 Commissioner stipends (5 commissioners) 11 5 $50 $600
Total Meetings Cost $37,965
Additional Expenditures (2023-2024):
Independent Evaluator: Hanson Bridgett LLP $61,018
Independent Evaluator: Devaney Pate Morris & Cameron, LLP $14,036 Whitney Barazoto, Consultant $6,413
Total $81,467
Staff time was also expended to prepare commissioner outreach documents , annual report, Procedure document update, and Independent Evaluator RFQ process.
City of Sacramento Ethics Commission Annual Report Page 9 of 10 Recommended Workplan for Upcoming Year
A. Community Outreach
1. Commissioners will outreach to the community and offer to present regarding the scope and activities of the Sacramento Ethics Commission.
2. Cost: Negligible, commissioners to attend meetings, cost to print materials and likely to be done in house.
B. Ethics Training
1. In furtherance of the city’s ethics program goal of clear guidelines on expectations of city officials in the conduct of city business, the commission will review existing ethics training that is provided by the city and make recommendations regarding additional training as appropriate.
2. To ensure best practices in commission hearings, the commission will review and make recommendations about additional training to be provided to Ethics Commissioners.
3. Cost: Staff time to provide report to commission. Commission to develop recommendations which will include cost estimation for additional training if suggested.
City of Sacramento Ethics Commission Annual Report Page 10 of 10 Appendices
A. Outreach Material: PowerPoint Presentation
B. Outreach Material: 3-Fold Brochure
C. Outreach Material: Postcard
D. Ethics Commission Procedures
Sacramento
Ethics
Commission
Rev. 08-23-2024
Good Afternoon. I am ___________________ and have served as a Sacramento Ethics Commissioner since
_______________________.
The Sacramento Ethics Commission was established in 2017. 1 2
Purpose of the Commission
The commission was established for the purpose of
reviewing and considering complaints against elected and appointed city officials and to ensure those city officials are conforming their conduct to the city’s laws and
policies.
Read slide.
The commission does not initiate investigations or enforcement actions.
2 3
Powers and Duties
The commission has the power and duty to review, investigate, and consider complaints alleging violations of:
• The City Charter prohibition regarding employment of the mayor or a councilmember within one year after their term of office. • The City’s Fair Campaign Practices.
• The City’s campaign contribution and spending limitations for city elections. • The City’s lobbyist registration and reporting requirements. • The City’s Conflict of Interest code.
• The City’s Code of Ethics.
• The City’s Transparent Government and Public Engagement code. • The City Council Rules of Procedure regarding member conduct and closed sessions.
Read slide.
The remainder of this presentation will explain what aspects of these city policies are within the Commission’s powers and duties. 3 4
Powers and Duties, continued
The commission can enforce administrative penalties for violations.
The commission acts as the screening panel for selection of independent redistricting commission candidates, as provided in article XII of the Sacramento City Charter.
The commission’s authority extends only to city elected officials, candidates for city elected office, independent expenditure committees, members of boards and
commissions, the city manager, the city clerk, the city attorney, the city treasurer, the city auditor, the director of the office of public safety accountability, and lobbyists.
The commission’s authority only extends to five types of individuals:
• City elected officials (mayor and councilmembers
• Candidates for elected office
• Independent expenditure committees (which act independently from candidates but participate in campaigns (e.g. mailers, press releases)
• Members of city boards, commissions, and committees (e.g.
Active Transportation Commission, Disabilities Advisory Commission)
• City appointive officers (charter officers and appointees that report directly to the city council)
• City Manager
• City Clerk
• City Attorney
• City Treasurer
• City Auditor
• Director of the Office of Public Safety Accountability • Lobbyists
The commission’s authority does not cover other city employees (e.g. Assistant City Managers, department heads)
4 5
How to File a Complaint
Any person may file a complaint alleging violations of Ethics Law. • Online on the City’s Website (see QR code)
• Email to [email protected]
• Mail to City Hall
• Via phone to (916) 808-7200
Timeline
• Within 14 days the City Clerk shall complete an initial review and dismisses or refer complaint (to Evaluator or another city department). • Within 30 days of receipt the Independent Evaluator determines if sufficient cause exists to conduct a full investigation:
• Within 45 days – no-cause report OR
• Within 60 days – Independent Evaluator’s Report.
• Hearing before Commission at next meeting.
If the complaint is within the commission’s jurisdiction, based on the complexity of the allegation, it could take up to 130 days before the complaint is heard before the commission.
5 6
Complaint
Flow
Chart
Review timeline.
6 7
Section 35 of the Sacramento City
Charter – Limitation on Future
Employment
No member of the council during the term for which
such person shall have been elected or appointed or for one year after such person ceases to hold office, shall be eligible for any appointive office or position in the city, carrying compensation, and created by this Charter, by
ordinance or by resolution. An elective office which has been filled by appointment by reason of a vacancy in that office shall not be considered an appointive office under this section.
Basically, the mayor or a city councilmember cannot hold any employment with the city or any paid position (commissioner) while in office and for one year after leaving office.
7 8
Chapter 1.20 – Code of Fair Campaign
Practices
The Code of Fair Campaign Practices states that there are basic principles of decency, honesty, and fairness which every candidate for public office in the city of Sacramento has an ethical obligation to observe and uphold, in order that, after vigorously contested, but fairly conducted campaigns, the integrity of the electoral process has been preserved.
This only applies if all candidates for election to that public office sign the code.
Read slide.
A potential violation could apply to a candidate, who could also be a mayor or councilmember running for re-election or election to another office.
8 9
Code of Fair Campaign Practices, continued
Candidates who sign the Code of Fair Campaign Practices make these nine pledges:
1. T o campaign openly and publicly, presenting a candidate’s record and policies with frankness, and only making merit-based criticisms of an opponent’s record or policies.
2. Not to use personal or defamatory attacks against a candidate or their family members
3. Not to appeal to prejudices based on race, sex, religion, national origin, physical health, status, or age.
4. Not to undermine the American system of free elections or prevent individuals voting rights.
5. T o notify opponents at least eight days in advance of campaign messages that name the opponent.
6. Not to coerce employees to make campaign contributions.
7. T o publicly repudiate any personal, defamatory, or prejudicial about the campaign from other individuals or groups.
8. T o defend every eligible voter’s right to full and equal participation.
9. T o clearly identify my campaign on any election materials.
OF NOTE: This only applies if ALL candidates for election to that public office sign the code.
If one candidate does not sign the code, it is not applicable to any candidate in that race (each district and mayor are separate races/elections).
1. I SHALL CONDUCT my campaign openly and pub licly, discussing the issues as I see them, presenting my record and policies with sincerity and frankness, and criticizing without fear or favor the record and policies of my opponents which merit such criticism.
2. I SHALL NOT USE OR PERMIT the use of charac ter defamation, whispering campaigns, libel, slander, or scurrilous attacks on any candidate or her or his personal or family life.
3. I SHALL NOT USE OR PERMIT any appeal to ne gative prejudice based on race, sex, religion, national origin, physical health, status or age.
4. I SHALL NOT USE OR PERMIT any dishonest or unethical practices which tend to corrupt or undermine our American system of free elections, or which hamper or prevent the full and free expression of the will of the voters, including acts intended to hinder or prevent any eligible person from registering to vote or voting.
5. I SHALL provide to my opponents, at the addre sses on their Code of Fair Campaign Practices form, and to the city clerk for public inspection, any campaign advertising or communication which directly names or refers to any of my opponents at least eight days prior to dissemination of the advertising or communication by me or my controlled committee.
6. I SHALL NOT COERCE or permit coercion of my employees to make monetary or non- monetary campaign contributions to me or any other candidate.
7. I SHALL IMMEDIATELY AND PUBLICLY REPUDIATE any support from any individual or group which resorts, on behalf or my candidacy or in opposition to any opponent, to the methods and tactics which I condemn. I shall promptly redress and accept responsibility for a violation of any provision of this Code or the laws governing elections by any subordinate or by my controlled committee.
8. I SHALL DEFEND AND UPHOLD the right of every qualified voter to full and equal participation in the electoral process.
9. I SHALL clearly identify myself or my cont rolled committee as the sender of any and all campaign advertising to be mailed.
9 10
Chapter 2.13 - Campaign Contribution
Limitations
Chapter 2.14 - Campaign Spending Limits
and Public Campaign Financing
These chapters are intended to accomplish the following purposes:
• T o encourage public trust in the electoral and decision-making processes of the city, and to ensure that individuals and interest groups have a fair and equal opportunity to participate in the elective and legislative process; • T o reduce the potential for influence by large contributors with a specific financial stake in matters before the city, thus countering the perception that decisions of municipal officials are influenced more by the size of contributions than by the merits of proposals and what is in the best interest of the residents of the city;
T o encourage smaller contributions;
• T o allow municipal officials and elected candidates to spend a smaller portion of their time on fundraising and a greater proportion of their time working on and discussing important city issues;
• T o help restore public trust in the city’s legislative and electoral institutions; and
• T o limit the use of loans and credit in the financing of political campaigns for municipal elective office.
There are different contribution limits for persons or large political committees and for mayor and councilmember races.
There are different expenditure/spending limits for mayor and councilmember races. 10 11
Campaign Finance Disclosures & Filings
California state law requires the filing of campaign disclosure statements by local candidates for elective office, elected officeholders, and committees supporting or opposing local candidates or ballot measures.
City of Sacramento Campaign Finance Disclosure filings can be found here:
https://public.netfile.com/pub2/?aid=SAC
Read slide.
Y ou can view all campaign disclosure filings on the city’s website.
T o assist filers in meeting this obligation, the Office of the City Clerk provides, free of charge, an Internet based electronic campaign disclosure statement filing system. The system is fully searchable for use by the public.
11 12
Chapter 2.15 - Lobbyist Registration and
Reporting Code
The purpose of this chapter is to maintain a fair and open decision-making process in city government and to ensure that the public and city officials have full knowledge of lobbying activities that have been brought to bear on any legislative or administrative action.
Lobbyists may be required to register their lobbying activities with the City of Sacramento.
The purpose of the Lobbyist Registration and Reporting Code is two-fold: 1) T o ensure the public has full knowledge of who is attempting to influence the decisions that affect City policy; and 2) T o ensure that elected City officials are informed of what interests each lobbyist represents.
Completed, filed statements can be viewed using the Public Portal.
https://netfile.com/lobbyistpub/#/sac
12 13
Chapter 2.16 - Conflict of Interest
Article I. City Employee—Interests in Contract
Article II. Former Officers and Employees—Disqualification Article III. City Council and City Boards and Commissions Article IV. City Employees
13 Article I (one) prohibits city employees from engaging in contracts with the city.
Article II (two) prohibits city employees from lobbying the city for a year after they leave their jobs in areas related to their prior employment.
Article III (three) governs recusal requirements from voting at public meetings or other involvement for city council members and commissioners on matters where they have financial conflicts of interest.
Article IV governs Statement of Economic Interest filing requirements (Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) Form 700) for designated city employees to disclose financial conflicts.
Y ou can view all Conflict of Interest Filings on the City’s website:
https://www.cityofsacramento.gov/clerk/good-governance-and- compliance/conflict-of-interest-filings
14 Chapter 4.02 – Code of Ethics
City employees shall treat their office or position as a public trust.
The city’s powers and resources shall be used for the benefit of the public rather than any city employee’s personal benefit. • Nepotism policy
• Whistleblower protection policy
• Mandatory ethics training
• Mandatory sexual harassment training
• Political Reform Act and regulations
City employee means any elected official, appointee to a board or commission, employee, or citizen volunteer authorized to act on behalf of the city. (employees, citizen volunteers not under jurisdiction of Ethics Commission).
Nepotism policy – employees must comply with the citywide nepotism policy adopted by the city council.
Whistleblower protection policy – employees must comply with the citywide whistleblower protection policy adopted by the city council.
Mandatory ethics training – within 30 days of taking office and every 2 years.
Mandatory sexual harassment training – within 30 days of taking office and every 2 years.
Political Reform Act and regulations – all city employees shall follow the Political Reform Act and Fair Political Practices Commission regulations.
Candidates for city elective office shall not solicit personal funds from city employees for their campaigns or committees. All filings are published to 14 the city’s website.
14 15
Chapter 4.04 – Sunshine Ordinance
• Minimum posting of council agenda materials – 120 hours. • Records of city council actions.
• Ad hoc committees are legislative bodies subject to the Ralph M.
Brown Act.
• Public records access.
• Website publication of city information.
• Policy training for records management policy, retention schedule, and social media.
• Reporting of behests.
• Use of city resources for conducting city business.
Read slide.
15 16
Council Rules of Procedure
Chapter 3 – Conduct of Members
Rule 6.E – Closed Sessions
Annually, or as needed, the City Council adopts their Rules of Procedure. These Rules govern the order and conduct of business of the city council, legislative bodies that meet concurrently with the council, council committees, and council-established boards, commissions, and committees
Chapter 3 – Conduct of Members covers the following:
• Norms and expectations
• General conduct
• Conduct with members, city manager and staff, the public, other agencies, boards and commissions, the media
• Ethical conduct
Rule 6.E – Closed Sessions covers the following:
• Closed sessions generally shall be special meetings held immediately prior to regular meetings.
• In accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act, the public may speak regarding any closed session item prior to the closed session.
• All closed session information, verbal or written, is privileged and confidential and shall not be shared with any person not at the closed session. Any member sharing information in violation of this rule may be subject to censure by the council consistent with the council’s confidentiality policy then in effect. • The city attorney shall report out in public session any reportable actions that were taken by council and the vote on such actions in accordance with the Brown Act.
Council Rules of Procedure can be found here:
https://www.cityofsacramento.gov/content/dam/portal/city-government/policies- procedures/Council_Rules_of_Procedure_Adopted_04092024.pdf 16 Thank You!
ethics@
cityofsacramento.gov
This concludes the presentation, and I am available for any questions. 17 OVERVIEW
Commissioners collaborate
with the Office of the City Clerk
to review the City’s ethics laws
and policies, and make
recommendations to the City
Council to enhance ethics
policies, trainings, and laws in the
City of Sacramento.
The Ethics Commission may
enforce administrative fines of
the laws within its jurisdiction.
Sacramento City Code
Chapter 2.112 further defines
the purpose, powers, and
duties of the commission.
CONNECT
Any person may file a complaint
alleging a violation of ethics laws
online, by email, mail, or
telephone.
For more information
or to file a complaint:
Office of the City Clerk
Sacramento City Hall
915 I Street, 5th Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814
[email protected]
(916) 808-7200
Would you like a commissioner
to present to your community
group? Contact us at
[email protected].
Rev. 09-26-2024
The City of Sacramento Ethics
Commission was established
in 2017 for the purpose of
reviewing and considering
complaints against elected and
appointed city officials and to
ensure those city officials
comply with certain city
laws and policies.
Sacramento
Ethics Commission
COMMISSION
MEMBERS
The Commission consists of 5
city residents nominated by the
City Council Personnel and
Public Employees Committee
and then appointed by the
Mayor with the concurrence of
the City Council.
Commission meetings are
generally held the 4th Monday of
each month in City Council
Chambers at 5:30 p.m.
Public Participation
is Welcomed.
Links to upcoming meetings,
commissioner vacancies, and
more information can be found
here:
ETHICS LAWS
Limitation on Future
Employment
City Charter § 35
Fair Campaign Practices
City Code Chapter 1.20
Campaign Contribution Limits
City Code Chapter 2.13
Campaign Spending Limits and
Public Campaign Financing
City Code Chapter 2.14
Lobbyist Registration and
Reporting Code
City Code Chapter 2.15
Conflict of Interest
City Code Chapter 2.16
Code of Ethics
City Code Chapter 4.02
Transparent Government and
Public Engagement
City Code Chapter 4.04
Conduct of Members
and Closed Sessions
Council Rules of Procedure
ACTIVITIES
Commissioners generally meet
monthly to conduct business,
which may include any of the
following duties:
• Review, investigate and
consider complaints against
City officials; Enforce
administrative penalties for
violations.
• Report to City Council with
recommendations regarding
the subjects of its purview.
• Review any contract the city
may have with the Fair
Political Practices
Commission.
• Provide input on law firms
used by City Attorney for
sexual harassment
investigations.
• Make recommendations on
selection of an Independent
Evaluator for complaint
review.
• Serve as screening panel for
Sacramento Independent
Redistricting Commission
candidates.
The Sacramento Ethics Commission was established for the pur- pose of reviewing and considering complaints against elected and appointed city officials to ensure those city officials are conforming their conduct to the city’s laws and policies.
Sacramento City Code Chapter 2.112 further defines the
purpose, powers, and duties of the commission.
commissions.cityofsacramento.org
[email protected]
(916) 808-7200
The Sacramento Ethics Commission has the power and duty to review, investigate, and consider complaints alleging violations of:
• Section 35 of the Sacramento City Charter (“Limitation on Future Employment”)
• Sacramento City Code Chapter 1.20 (“Fair Campaign
Practices”)
• Sacramento City Code Chapter 2.13 (“Campaign Contribution Limitations”) and chapter 2.14 (“Campaign Spending Limits and Public Campaign Financing”)
• Sacramento City Code Chapter 2.15 (“Lobbyist Registration and Reporting Code”)
• Sacramento City Code Chapter 2.16 (“Conflict of Interest”) • Sacramento City Code Chapter 4.02 (“Code of Ethics”)
• Sacramento City Code Chapter 4.04 (“Transparent Government and Public Engagement”)
• Council Rules of Procedure Chapter 3 (“Conduct of Members”) and Rule 6.E (“Closed Sessions”)
Rev. 08-12-2024
FRONT:
BACK:
Office of the City Clerk
915 I Street, Sacramento, CA 95814 • [email protected] • (916) 808-7200
Sacramento Ethics Commission
Procedures
Effective September 23, 2024
Sacramento Ethics Commission Procedures Page 2 of 16
The Sacramento City Council established the Sacramento Ethics Commission to review and consider complaints against elected and appointed City officials and to ensure that those officials are conforming their conduct to the City’s laws and policies. The Commission’s organization, powers, and duties are set forth in chapter 2.112 of the Sacramento City Code.
Chapter 2.112 requires, among other things, that the Commission adopt (a) rules and procedures for the conduct of its business, (b) regulations and procedures for investigations and hearings it conducts, and (c) a policy setting forth its standards for imposing penalties and exercising enforcement discretion. To implement these requirements, the Commission has adopted the procedures set out below (collectively, these “Procedures”), which are intended to establish fair and transparent standards for investigating and determining matters before the Commission, thereby ensuring the fair, just, and timely resolution of complaints presented to the Commission with the end of promoting fairness, openness, honesty, and integrity in City government and City elections.
1. Definitions.
“Brown Act” means the Ralph M. Brown Act, codified as California Government Code section 54950 et seq.
“City” means the City of Sacramento.
“City Attorney” means the Sacramento City Attorney and the Sacramento City Attorney’s designee.
“City Charter” means the City of Sacramento Charter.
“City Clerk” means the Sacramento City Clerk and the Sacramento City Clerk’s designee. “City Code” means the Sacramento City Code.
“City Staff” means the City officers and employees who support the Commission, including the City Clerk and the City Attorney and their respective assistants and deputies. “Commission” means the Sacramento Ethics Commission.
“Commissioner” means a member of the Sacramento Ethics Commission. “Complainant” means a person who files a complaint with the Commission in accordance with these Procedures.
“Confidential Materials” means (a) information and documents that federal, or state law prohibits the Commission or the City from disclosing to the public and (b) each complaint that is filed in accordance with these Procedures plus all related investigatory materials until the complaint is disposed of in accordance with these Procedures. “Confidential Materials” does not include information and documents generally available to the public or, except as provided by section 4.1 below, previously disclosed to members of the public. “Day” means calendar day unless otherwise stated.
Sacramento Ethics Commission Procedures Page 3 of 16
“Ethics Law” means those provisions of the City Charter, the City Code, or the Council Rules of Procedure listed in City Code section 2.112.030.A.
“Independent Evaluator’s Report” means the report described in section 5(B) below. “FPPC” means the California Fair Political Practices Commission. “Hearing” means a hearing before the Commission, conducted in accordance with these Procedures, to consider a complaint filed with the Commission. “Include” and its variants are terms of enlargement rather than of limitation. For example, “includes” means “includes but not limited to,” and “including” means “including but not limited to.”
“Independent Evaluator” means the neutral and independent party retained by the City on the Commission’s behalf to review and investigate complaints and to give recommendations to the Commission regarding them.
“Respondent” means a person alleged in a complaint to have violated the Ethics Law. “Sunshine Ordinance” means the Sacramento Sunshine Ordinance, codified as City Code chapter 4.04.
2. Commission Structure and Support. The Commission’s structure is set forth in City Code chapter 2.112, as supplemented by the following:
2.1. Chairperson and Vice Chairperson. The Commission annually elects a Chairperson and a Vice Chairperson. (City Code § 2.112.070.)
(A) The Chairperson (1) presides over all Commission meetings; (2) forms committees and appoints Commissioners to committees as appropriate; (3) may consult with the City Clerk and the City Attorney regarding the Commission’s business; (4) may consult with the City Attorney and the Independent Evaluator on procedural matters but shall not otherwise discuss active complaints with either of them; and (5) is the Commission’s spokesperson for communicating with the City Council, the public, and the media.
(B) The Vice Chairperson performs the Chairperson’s duties when the Chairperson is unable to do so or is absent.
2.2. The City Attorney’s Role. The City Attorney advises the Commission on legal matters such as interpretation of the Ethics Law or of relevant state or federal law. The City Attorney does not participate in investigations, but the Chairperson, the City Clerk, and the Independent Evaluator may consult with the City Attorney about procedure or about the interpretation of the Ethics Law or other relevant state or federal law so long as they do not seek advice about how the law applies to the facts that are the subject of a pending complaint.
Sacramento Ethics Commission Procedures Page 4 of 16
2.3. The City Clerk’s Role. The City Clerk supports the Commission’s work and is responsible for, among other things, (1) establishing and accomplishing the Commission’s priorities in consultation with the Chairperson and consistent with policy direction by the Commission, (2) scheduling meetings and Hearings and providing notice of meetings and Hearings as required by law, (3) and keeping records of meetings and Hearings (e.g., video recordings, written minutes). The City Clerk may make procedural determinations including scheduling of Hearings, extensions of time, and presentation of witnesses.
2.4. The Independent Evaluator’s Role. The Independent Evaluator is the neutral and independent party retained by the City on the Commission’s behalf to review and investigate complaints and to give recommendations to the Commission regarding them.
(A) If, at any time during the review or investigation of a complaint, the retained Independent Evaluator determines the existence or potential existence of a disqualifying conflict of interest involving themselves and the subject of the complaint, any Complainant, or any Respondent, the Independent Evaluator must immediately disclose the disqualifying conflict of interest or potential disqualifying conflict of interest to the City Clerk and the City Attorney. The Independent Evaluator will recuse themselves from further participation in the processing of the investigation if the conflict of interest is found by the City Clerk and City Attorney to be disqualifying. The City Clerk must inform the Chairperson of the recusal. The City Clerk must retain an alternate Independent Evaluator to conduct a preliminary investigation in accordance with section 5.2. The Alternate Independent Evaluator may request an extension of time in accordance with section 5.3(C) if they are unable to complete a review and/or investigation based on the original timeframes established in accordance with these Procedures.
2.5. Media inquiries. Except for routine administrative matters within their individual areas of responsibility, the City Clerk, City Attorney, and the Independent Evaluator shall refer all media inquiries to the Chairperson or, if the Chairperson is unavailable, to the Vice Chairperson.
3. Commission Meetings.
3.1. Time and Place. The Commission shall establish a regular meeting schedule for itself, with at least two regular meetings scheduled each year; the Commission may also call and hold special meetings in accordance with the Brown Act. (City Code §
2.112.080.)The City Council adopts the commission’s calendar prior to the beginning of each calendar year or as needed. The City Clerk shall post the regular meeting schedule on the Commission’s website and provide notice of each regular meeting as required by the Brown Act and the Sunshine Ordinance. Regular meetings will be held at Sacramento City Hall, 915 I Street, Sacramento, California.
Sacramento Ethics Commission Procedures Page 5 of 16
3.2. Parliamentary Procedures. The Commission shall conduct its business in compliance with the Brown Act and the Sunshine Ordinance and, to the extent practicable, shall conduct its meetings in accordance with Rosenberg’s Rules of Order: Simple Parliamentary Procedures for the 21st Century. Hearings must be conducted in accordance with these Procedures.
4. Confidentiality.
4.1. Confidential Materials must not be disclosed to any person, except that the Independent Evaluator and City Staff may disclose Confidential Materials to the extent needed for the investigation of a pending complaint so long as disclosure does not violate federal or state law.
4.2. At least 10 days before any Hearing to consider the Independent Evaluator’s Report, the complaint and the Independent Evaluator’s Report must be made publicly available as required by the Brown Act, the Sunshine Ordinance, or other applicable law, with all Confidential Materials redacted.
4.3. The City Clerk, the Independent Evaluator, the Commissioners, and City Staff shall not make public statements about pending complaints before the Hearing, except as follows: if a pending complaint or information concerning a pending complaint is released to the public before the Hearing, the City Clerk may acknowledge receipt of the complaint and issue a statement that (A) the complaint represents unsubstantiated allegations pending the results of an investigation and Hearing and (B) might or might not fall within the Commission’s jurisdiction.
4.4. Confidential Materials must not be used, directly or indirectly, for any purpose other than the Commission’s official business, and the Commissioners shall take reasonable steps to protect and safeguard Confidential Materials.
(A) Upon discovering an unauthorized disclosure or misuse (potential or actual) of Confidential Materials, the Independent Evaluator, a Commissioner, or a member of City Staff shall immediately notify the City Clerk. (B) Upon receiving a request, subpoena, or court order for disclosure of Confidential Materials, the Independent Evaluator, a Commissioner, or a member of City Staff shall notify the City Clerk and wait for direction before disclosing the Confidential Materials.
4.4. A Commissioner remains bound by this section 4 after leaving office.
Sacramento Ethics Commission Procedures Page 6 of 16
5. Complaints.
5.1. Complaint Intake.
Any person may file a complaint alleging violations of the Ethics Law. (1) A complaint should be on the form prepared by the City Clerk, which is available on the City Clerk’s website, although the City Clerk shall accept a complaint that is not filed on the form if the complaint includes enough information to allow the City Clerk to conduct the initial review required in Section 5.1(B).
(2) A complaint must provide as much detail as possible, including, if known, each provision of the Ethics Law alleged to have been violated, the facts constituting each alleged violation, the name and address of each respondent, and the name and address of each potential witness. (3) A complaint should identify the Complainant, although the City Clerk Shall accept an anonymous complaint if the complainant includes enough information to allow the City Clerk to conduct the initial review required in Section 2.1(B).
(a) When a complaint alleges misconduct by the City Clerk, the following shall apply:
(i) The City Clerk shall delegate to the City Clerk’s designee all further participation in the processing of the complaint and any report related to the complaint.
(ii) The City Clerk shall recuse themselves from further participation in the processing of the complaint and any report related to the complaint.
(iii) The City Clerk and the City Clerk’s designee must refuse any attempt to divulge and confirm the identity of an anonymous Complainant.
Sacramento Ethics Commission Procedures Page 7 of 16
(4) A complaint should be filed with the City Clerk as follows:
By U.S. Mail: Sacramento City Clerk
915 I Street
New City Hall, Fifth Floor
Sacramento, California 95814
By personal delivery
during business hours:
Sacramento City Clerk
915 I Street
New City Hall, Fifth Floor
Sacramento, California
By E-Mail: [email protected]
(a) The City Clerk shall accept complaints received through other City services and communication channels, including the City’s Whistleblower Hotline Program.
(5) The City Clerk shall maintain a complaint log and shall enter in the log the date and time each complaint is filed.
Within 14 days after a complaint is filed, the City Clerk shall complete an initial review of the complaint; and, based on the initial review, do one of the following:
(1) Refer the complaint to the Independent Evaluator for a preliminary evaluation in accordance with section 5.2 and notify the Commission of the referral.
(2) Refer the complaint to another City department or to the FPPC or another governmental agency with jurisdiction over the subject matter of the complaint if the City Clerk determines that the department, the FPPC, or the agency may more appropriately resolve the allegations in the complaint or enforce the applicable provisions of law and notify the complainant of the referral.
Sacramento Ethics Commission Procedures Page 8 of 16
(3) Dismiss the complaint for lack of jurisdiction and notify the Complainant of the dismissal and refer the complaint to the relevant agency, if known. A complaint is outside the Commission’s jurisdiction if (a) it alleges violations that occurred more than three years before it was filed, or, for violations subject to a different limitations period, it was filed after the limitations period expired; (b) it alleges facts that are not subject to any provision of the Ethics Law; or (c) the respondent is not a person listed in City Code section 2.112.030.B.
Upon complying with section 5.1(B), the City Clerk shall enter in the complaint log the action taken after the initial review. In addition, at the Commission’s next regular meeting, the City Clerk shall notify the Commission of the action taken after the initial review but shall not identify the Complainant and the Respondent(s).
5.2. The Independent Evaluator’s Preliminary Evaluation of a Complaint. (A) Upon receiving a complaint from the City Clerk, the Independent Evaluator shall promptly provide the Respondent with a complete copy of the complaint and a copy of these Procedures.
(B) Within 30 days after receiving the complaint, the Independent Evaluator shall complete a preliminary evaluation to determine whether sufficient cause exists to conduct a full investigation. The Independent Evaluator shall limit the preliminary evaluation to the allegations in the complaint and shall not consider extrinsic evidence. Sufficient cause does not exist, and the Independent Evaluator shall not conduct a full investigation, if any of the following applies:
(1) The complaint does not allege specific facts demonstrating a potential violation.
(2) The facts alleged, if proven, would not violate any provision of the Ethics Law.
(3) Substantially similar allegations involving the same facts as those alleged in a previous complaint have already been addressed in a prior investigation or were otherwise decided on the merits by a court or by the FPPC or another governmental agency with jurisdiction.
(C) If, based on the preliminary evaluation, the Independent Evaluator determines that sufficient cause to warrant a full investigation of a complaint exists, then the Independent Evaluator and the Commission shall proceed in accordance with sections 5.3 and 5.4. If, however, the Independent Evaluator determines that sufficient cause does not exist, then the Evaluator and the Commission shall proceed as follows:
Sacramento Ethics Commission Procedures Page 9 of 16
(1) The Independent Evaluator shall prepare a no-cause report explaining why sufficient cause does not exist and recommending that the Commission not hear the matter. The no-cause report may also recommend that the Commission refer the complaint to the FPPC or to another governmental agency if the Independent Evaluator determines that the FPPC or the agency may more appropriately resolve the allegations in the complaint or enforce the applicable provisions of law.
(2) The Independent Evaluator shall file the no-cause report with the City Clerk within 45 days after the Independent Evaluator receives the complaint. The City Clerk shall place the matter on the agenda of the Commission’s next available regular meeting.
(3) The Commission may adopt the no-cause report and dismiss the complaint. Alternatively, if the Commission decides that contrary to the no-cause report, sufficient cause exists to warrant an investigation, the Commission may direct the Independent Evaluator to conduct an investigation.
(4) The Commission may refer the complaint to a city department or to the FPPC or another governmental agency that may more appropriately resolve the allegations in the complaint or enforce the applicable provisions of law. If the Commission so determines, it will direct the City Clerk or City Attorney to send a copy of all relevant information to the department, the FPPC, or the agency along with the referral.
5.3. Conduct of Investigation by the Independent Evaluator. (A) The Independent Evaluator shall conduct an investigation of the allegations in a complaint when the Independent Evaluator determines that sufficient cause exists or when the Commission directs the Independent Evaluator to conduct an investigation. The investigation must include an interview with each Respondent unless the Respondent refuses to cooperate. The Independent Evaluator may, in the Independent Evaluator’s sole discretion, also interview the Complainant and other witnesses and may review documents and other evidence.
(B) Although scheduling is difficult to predict in advance, timeliness is important to the Commission so that its goals of transparency and responsiveness to the community may be furthered. To that end, the Independent Evaluator shall complete the investigation as promptly as possible under the circumstances and, unless an extension is granted in accordance with section 5.3(C), shall, within 60 days after receiving the complaint, submit to the City Clerk, with a copy to the City Attorney, a written report that is addressed to the Commission includes the following (the “Independent Evaluator’s Report”):
Sacramento Ethics Commission Procedures Page 10 of 16
(1) A narrative summary of the evidence gathered through the investigation, including any exculpatory and mitigating evidence. The Independent Evaluator may consider any relevant evidence, including hearsay evidence, and may include in the Independent Evaluator’s Report facts bearing on the weight given to the evidence considered, such as the Independent Evaluator’s determination of witness credibility.
(2) For each provision of Ethics Law that is alleged to be violated, a determination that the Respondent or Respondents did or did not violate the provision, with supporting evidence.
(3) At the Independent Evaluator’s discretion, a recommendation of action the Commission should take or a recommendation that the Independent Evaluator conduct further investigation and report back to the Commission.
(4) At the Independent Evaluator’s discretion, a recommendation that the Commission refer the complaint to the FPPC or another governmental agency if the Independent Evaluator believes that the FPPC or agency may more appropriately resolve the allegations in the complaint or enforce the applicable provisions of the Ethics Law or any other law. (C) The Independent Evaluator may request an extension of time by filing a written request with the City Clerk, specifying the extension requested and the reasons for the request. The City Clerk, in consultation with the Chairperson and the City Attorney, may grant the request upon the Independent Evaluator’s showing of good cause. The City Clerk’s decision on a request must be in writing. If the request is granted, the decision must specify the additional time that has been granted, and the Independent Evaluator shall provide the City Clerk with a progress report on the status of the investigation every 30 days or as otherwise set forth in the decision. If the request is denied, the Independent Evaluator shall submit to the City Clerk, within three days after the decision, a written summary of the evidence gathered through the investigation up to that point. (D) If the Independent Evaluator discovers facts during an investigation that indicate possible additional violations by named Respondent or Respondents or possible violations by one or more persons or entities who are not named as a Respondent, then the Independent Evaluator shall notify the City Clerk of this discovery and consult with the City Clerk on how to conduct a fair and thorough investigation of the newly discovered facts that provides adequate due process.
(1) The City Clerk may either file an amended complaint against the new or existing Respondent or Respondents using the complaint form established for such purpose or may schedule a Hearing to consider whether the City Clerk should file an amended complaint.
Sacramento Ethics Commission Procedures Page 11 of 16
(2) If the City Clerk files an amended Complaint, the Independent Evaluator shall notify each new Respondent as well as the Complainant and each original respondent(s) of the new allegations. The Independent Evaluator shall also provide all Respondents with copies of the amended complaint and these Procedures.
(E) Individual Commissioners shall not conduct independent investigations of complaints or discuss pending complaints with anyone except during a Hearing.
But the Chairperson may discuss procedural matters with the Independent Evaluator, the City Attorney, or the City Clerk.
5.4. Commission Hearings.
(A) Upon receiving the Independent Evaluator’s Report, the City Clerk will advise the Chairperson and the City Attorney and will set a Hearing at the earliest practicable date.
(B) At least 10 days before the Hearing, the City Clerk shall notify the Complainant and each Respondent of the date and time of the Hearing. (C) At least 10 days before the Hearing, the City Clerk shall deliver the Independent Evaluator’s Report to the Commission, the Complainant, each Respondent, and all interested parties who have requested a copy. (D) The Independent Evaluator’s Report must be made available to the public in accordance with the Brown Act and the Sunshine Ordinance. (E) Each Respondent may submit a written response to the Independent Evaluator’s Report. The response may contain legal arguments, a summary of evidence, and any mitigating or exculpatory information. A Respondent who chooses to submit a response must deliver it to the City Clerk at least 72 hours before the time of the Hearing, and the Commission may but need not consider a response that is not timely submitted. The City Clerk shall distribute any responses received to the Commission and the Independent Evaluator as soon as is practicable and shall make the responses available to the public in accordance with the Brown Act, the Sunshine Ordinance, or other applicable law, with all Confidential Materials redacted.
(F) If anyone other than a Respondent submits a brief or any written argument to the Commission before the Hearing, the City Clerk shall provide, as soon as practicable, a copy of the brief or written argument to each Respondent, the Commission, and the Independent Evaluator. The City Clerk shall also make the brief or written argument available to the public in accordance with the Brown Act, the Sunshine Ordinance, or other applicable law, with all Confidential Materials redacted.
Sacramento Ethics Commission Procedures Page 12 of 16
(G) If a Commissioner is the Complainant or Respondent that Commissioner shall not participate in any way in the Hearing, including deliberations about, or a vote on, the complaint or any matter concerning the complaint. (H) The Hearing must be open to the public, but witnesses, except the Complainant, may be excluded at the Commission’s discretion with the concurrence of the City Attorney.
(I) The City Clerk shall record the Hearing.
(J) Each Respondent may personally appear at the Hearing or be represented by counsel or any other person.
(K) The Complainant must be treated like any other witness who provides evidence.
(L) The Respondent and Complainant will have sufficient time to present to the commission.
(M) The California Evidence Code does not apply to the Hearing, and the Commission may consider any relevant evidence, including hearsay. (N) All testimony presented to the Commission must be under oath or affirmation. (O) Commissioners may ask questions of the Complainant, each Respondent, the witnesses, and the Independent Evaluator when recognized by the Chairperson. (P) The Commission may ask the City Council to issue a subpoena compelling witnesses to appear at the Hearing and provide testimony or a subpoena duces tecum compelling witnesses to produce documents.
(Q) No later than 10 days following the conclusion of a Hearing, the City Clerk shall notify the complainant, if possible, and each respondent of any action taken by the Commission.
5.5. Commission Action.
(A) At the conclusion of a Hearing, the Commission may take one or more of the following actions:
(1) Pass a motion directing the Independent Evaluator to conduct further investigation and report back to the Commission.
(2) Adopt a resolution finding that sufficient evidence exists to establish that a violation occurred and including one or more of the actions authorized by section 5.6(A). This finding must be based on a preponderance of the evidence from the entire record of the proceedings.
Sacramento Ethics Commission Procedures Page 13 of 16
(3) Adopt resolution finding that sufficient evidence does not exist to establish that a violation occurred and ordering that the complaint be dismissed. (4) Pass a motion referring the complaint to the FPPC or to another governmental agency that may more appropriately resolve the allegations in the complaint or enforce the applicable provisions of law and directing the City Clerk or City Attorney to send a copy of all relevant information to the FPPC or the agency along with the referral.
(B) The votes of at least three Commissioners are required to find under section
5.5(A)(2) that a violation occurred, and each Commissioner voting on the finding shall certify on the record that the Commissioner (1) heard the testimony at the Hearing (either in person or by listening to a recording) or read the transcript of the testimony; and (2) reviewed and considered all the evidence in the record.
(C) The City Clerk shall provide a copy of any resolution adopted under section
5.5(A)(2) or 5.5(A)(3) to the Complainant and each Respondent and shall post a copy of the resolution on the City’s website.
(D) The Commission’s action under section 5.5(A)(2) or 5.5(A)(3) is a final administrative determination on the complaint that is subject to judicial review in accordance with City Code section 1.24.110(A) and California Code of Civil Procedure sections 1094.5 and 1094.6.
5.6. Remedies.
(A) If the Commission adopts a resolution under section 5.5(A)(2), thereby finding that a violation occurred, then the Commission shall include in the resolution one or more of the following:
(1) A finding that mitigating circumstances exist and that no further action is warranted.
(2) A reprimand of the responsible Respondent or Respondents. (3) An order that the responsible Respondent or Respondents take corrective action by a specific date.
(4) An order issuing a warning letter that sets conditions for the potential imposition of penalties depending on the future conduct of the responsible Respondent or Respondents.
(5) An order imposing an administrative penalty in accordance with City Code section 2.112.030.A.2.
Sacramento Ethics Commission Procedures Page 14 of 16
(B) The Commission shall not impose an administrative penalty on a Respondent if clear and convincing evidence establishes that all of the following occurred before the violation:
(1) The Respondent requested and obtained a written opinion from the City Attorney or the FPPC regarding the propriety of the actions constituting the violation.
(2) The Respondent, in requesting the opinion, truthfully disclosed all the relevant and material facts.
(3) The Respondent committed the violation in good-faith reliance upon the written opinion of the City Attorney or the FPPC.
(C) The votes of at least three Commissioners are required to impose an administrative penalty under section 5.6(A)(5), and each Commissioner voting to impose any penalty shall certify on the record that the Commissioner (1) heard (either in person or by listening to a recording) or read the transcript of the testimony; and (2) reviewed and considered all the evidence in the record. (D) In determining whether administrative penalties should be imposed and the amount of the penalties, the Commission shall consider all the relevant facts.
The following list of relevant facts is neither exhaustive nor mandatory, and the Commission may assign greater or lesser importance to each fact as the Commission considers appropriate under the circumstances:
(1) The severity of the violation.
(2) The presence or absence of any intention to conceal, deceive, or mislead. (3) Whether the violation was deliberate, negligent or inadvertent. (4) Whether the violation was an isolated incident or pervasive enough to indicate a pattern of disregard.
(5) Whether the Respondent has a record of violations.
(6) The Respondent’s experience and sophistication.
(7) Whether the Respondent had, or should have had, knowledge of the provision of the Ethics Law that was violated.
(8) The extent to which the Respondent cooperated with the investigation. (9) The extent to which, when given notice of the Complaint, the Respondent took corrective action to cure the violation.
Sacramento Ethics Commission Procedures Page 15 of 16
5.7. Payment and Collection of the Administrative Penalty. (A) A Respondent upon whom an administrative penalty has been imposed shall pay the penalty within 25 days after receiving a copy of the resolution adopted under section 5.5(A)(2).
(B) An administrative penalty not paid within 25 days is delinquent and, beginning on the 26th day after the Respondent receives a copy of the resolution adopted under section 5.5(A)(2), will accrue interest at the same annual rate that applies to any civil judgment.
(C) The City may file and prosecute a civil action in superior court to collect a delinquent administrative penalty and will be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys’ fees and all costs associated with collection of the penalty, including but not limited to the cost of City Staff time to collect the penalty and costs set forth in California Code of Civil Procedure section 1033.5. The City may also take such actions as are authorized for enforcement of money judgments under the Enforcement of Judgments Law, California Code of Civil Procedure section 680.010 et seq.
Revision History:
• September 23, 2024
• September 26, 2022
• February 22, 2021
Sacramento Ethics Commission Procedures Page 16 of 16