San Diego voters will get a chance Nov. 5 to increase the independence and power of the city’s Ethics Commission, which oversees lobbying rules and regulations governing elections and campaign contributions.

The City Council voted unanimously Monday to put on the ballot a measure that would prevent elected leaders from eliminating the commission and require them to adequately fund it.

The measure would also change who appoints the commission’s executive director. Instead of being chosen by elected leaders, the executive director would be chosen by members of the commission.

The proposed reforms comes in response to criticism that the commission, while a well-intentioned watchdog, has not lived up to the expectations of supporters when it was created in 2001.

“Despite the city’s intent, the commission is not truly independent of the officials it is tasked with overseeing,” said City Attorney Mara Elliott, who is leading the reform effort.

The ballot measure stops short of a key goal Elliott had when she began pursuing the ballot measure: changing who appoints the seven-member commission.

The mayor now selects all members from a pool of nominees submitted by the city council and city attorney, and anyone the mayor selects must then be confirmed by the council.

Critics say that may be the commission’s greatest weakness — that it is appointed by the people it oversees, investigates, fines and disciplines for wrongdoing.

Elliott had proposed creating a three-judge panel to appoint members, but the council’s rules committee rejected that proposal and some related proposals.

Elliott recently decided to leave this change out of action entirely. But she said Monday she is hopeful the council will come separately change the way the commission is appointed after the election.

Councilman Joe LaCava praised the ballot measure, which needs the support of a simple majority of city voters for approval.

“This measure is good management,” he said, describing it as a series of changes spurred by years of experience and problems. “I think voters will also see the value in asserting greater independence of the ethics commission.”

LaCava said Monday he plans to write the ballot argument in favor of the measure.

The measure, which would achieve its goals by amending the city charter, would also make members of the commission responsible for setting commission rules and policies for who is investigated and how they are investigated.

Under the current setup, the Commission must get the Council’s approval to change its rules and policies.

The ballot measure would also commit the city to providing the commission with adequate resources, including money for independent legal counsel, to carry out its responsibilities.

The commission has the authority to investigate and take administrative enforcement action against current and former elected city officials and all candidates for city elections.

The commission also oversees certain city employees, consultants and members of city boards and commissions who are required to file conflict of interest disclosure forms.

In addition, the commission oversees all persons required to register as city lobbyists.

The voting measure is one of several reform measures Elliott proposed last year to culminate her eight years as city attorney, which will end in December due to term limits.

Another proposed reform, greater protections for whistleblowers, was forwarded by the Rules Committee last week to the council for possible approval this fall.

Originally published: 30 July 2024 at 05.00