SEC. 67.17. PUBLIC COMMENT BY MEMBERS OF POLICY BODIES.
§ 67.17
Members of government policy bodies retain full constitutional rights to comment publicly on government actions and the positions of their own policy bodies, and cannot be punished for expressing their opinions or noting perceived legal violations. However, disclosing information that State or Federal law protects as confidential—such as attorney-client privileged communications—may result in court action or misconduct complaints.
If you serve on a city board or commission, you have the same free-speech rights as any citizen. You can publicly say what you think about government decisions, including decisions by your own board, without the board punishing you for it. You can also speak up if you think something your board is doing breaks state or federal law, or San Francisco rules. But you cannot publicly share information that the law says must stay secret, like confidential conversations between government lawyers and officials. If you leak protected confidential information, the city or a private party can sue you or file a misconduct complaint against you.
- Complex:The section uses multiple legal references and conditional clauses that make it harder to parse, particularly the exception regarding confidential information and the multiple remedies available (injunctive relief, declaratory relief, misconduct complaints).
- Controversial:The balance between whistleblowing protections and restrictions on releasing confidential information is a subject where reasonable people may disagree about where the line should be drawn.
AI-generated · claude-haiku-4-5 · informational only, not legal advice.
Official text
Every member of a policy body retains the full constitutional rights of a citizen to comment publicly on the wisdom or propriety of government actions, including those of the policy body of which he or she is a member. Policy bodies shall not sanction, reprove or deprive members of their rights as elected or appointed officials for expressing their judgments or opinions, including those which deal with the perceived inconsistency of non-public discussions, communications or actions with the requirements of State or Federal law or of this ordinance. The release of specific factual information made confidential by State or Federal law including, but not limited to, the privilege for confidential attorney-client communications, may be the basis for a request for injunctive or declaratory relief, of a complaint to the Mayor seeking an accusation of misconduct, or both.
(Added by Ord. 265-93, App. 8/18/93; amended by Proposition G, 11/2/99)