Rules committee sends misconduct charges against sheriff oversight commissioner to the full board

The Board of Supervisors Rules Committee voted unanimously on Sept. 28 to send the full board a motion suspending Commissioner William Palmer from the Sheriff's Department's Oversight Board and approving charges of official misconduct against him under Charter Section 15.105.

The committee took up two substantive items at the meeting: the motion against the oversight commissioner, and appointments to the Animal Advisory Council. Both cleared the committee without a dissenting vote. No other substantive business came before the committee.

The motion went to the full board as a committee report. That means the Board of Supervisors, not the committee, decides whether the suspension and the charges are approved. Under the motion, the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors is directed to transmit the motion and the charges to the Ethics Commission, and the City Attorney is directed to serve the charges on the commissioner.

The motion proceeds under a charter provision that allows the board to suspend an appointed official and approve charges of official misconduct against them. Commissioner Palmer serves on the oversight board, which oversees the Sheriff's Department. The charges concern his conduct while he served as president of that board, and the motion puts two separate decisions in front of the full board: whether to suspend him, and whether to approve the charges against him.

Members said the Inspector General's Office had produced clear evidence of multiple instances of official misconduct by the commissioner while he was president of the oversight board. Members argued that an appointed official who abuses power and breaks public trust should not continue serving while an ethics investigation proceeds. They also credited the inspector general's office and the city attorney for their work on the matter, and noted earlier efforts to seek the official's resignation.

No members of the public spoke on the item during public comment, and no member of the committee voted against it. Nothing the committee did changes who sits on the oversight board today. The suspension would take effect if the full board approves it, and the charges go to the Ethics Commission under the motion.

The Rules Committee reviews appointments to city boards and commissions, along with other matters, before they reach the full Board of Supervisors. Appointments the committee recommends still require a vote of the full board. The clerk told the committee at the start of the meeting that items taken up are expected to appear before the full board on Oct. 6, so both matters will come back for a board vote.

The committee filled four seats on the Animal Advisory Council, appointing one member to a term ending April 30, 2027 and three members to terms ending April 30, 2028. The terms are staggered, with one seat ending a year sooner than the other three. A member moved the slate of four, and it passed without objection.

More applicants applied than there were seats to fill. Each of the applicants who attended presented on their experience, which ranged across animal welfare, shelter operations, wildlife rehabilitation, law and public health. The committee's discussion centered on how difficult it was to choose among a surplus of qualified applicants rather than on any disagreement about who should be selected.

The council's current chair spoke during public comment and urged the committee to reappoint one sitting member. The chair thanked the applicants and said another seat on the council will open next April. One applicant did not attend the meeting but had expressed continued interest in serving.

The misconduct motion was the only item on the agenda that accused anyone of wrongdoing, and it moved through the committee without a public speaker or a dissenting vote. The appointments, by contrast, drew support from a sitting member of the council that will gain the new members.