Panel Opposes Prosecutor for Ethics Cases : City Charter: Legislation would have activated an amendment approved by L.A. voters. But opposition by the city and district attorneys kills it.

Bowing to opposition from Los Angeles’ top two prosecutors, an Assembly committee Tuesday refused to allow the establishment of an independent special prosecutor to crack down on violations of campaign finance, lobbying and ethics laws.

The legislation by Assemblywoman Barbara Friedman (D-Los Angeles) would have set in motion a provision of Charter Amendment H, the voter-approved ethics measure to establish a special prosecutor to pursue misdemeanor political corruption violations.

Friedman said she was disappointed “that the will of the people of the city of Los Angeles” was thwarted by the action of the Assembly Public Safety Committee, which deadlocked 2-2, shelving the legislation.

The measure was opposed by both the Los Angeles County district attorney and the Los Angeles city attorney. Representatives of Dist. Atty. Gil Garcetti testified that the legislation was unnecessary because if a conflict arises among local prosecutors, the attorney general’s office can pursue violations. And in a letter dated Monday to committee members, City Atty. James K. Hahn predicted the Friedman bill would “lead to duplication (and) confusion and sets a dangerous precedent.”

Friedman said she believes the legislation will remain shelved for this year, but she expects to revive it in next year’s session.

“We have a crisis in public confidence,” Friedman told the committee.

“The public said, ‘We want a special prosecutor.’ We need to be accountable to voters of Los Angeles,” she said. She noted that a similar measure was approved last year by the Assembly, but stalled in the Senate.

Under the charter amendment, the Los Angeles City Ethics Commission was authorized to set up a special prosecutor if the city attorney faced a conflict of interest. However, a change in state law is required before the special prosecutor provision can take effect, according to a legislative analysis of the measure.

“The purpose of the bill is to uphold the integrity of the Los Angeles ethics law,” maintained Ruth Holton, a lobbyist for Common Cause. It was also supported by the Los Angeles City Council’s staff lobbyists.

The battle over the bill is the latest chapter in a dispute between Hahn and the commission.

Hahn was the target of a commission investigation into allegations that his office had illegally become a center for political activity, with employees on the public payroll using city supplies to support candidates. The commission found evidence backing up many of the accusations. Hahn denied the allegations, and he was supported by the district attorney’s office.

One of the central figures in the Ethics Commission probe was Hahn’s former chief administrative officer, Charles Fuentes, who has denied any wrongdoing.

In an unusual twist, Fuentes, who is now chief of staff to Assemblywoman Grace Napolitano (D-Norwalk), acknowledged that he had briefly chatted with two Public Safety Committee members--Democratic Assemblymen John Burton of San Francisco and Tom Umberg of Garden Grove--about his concerns that the Friedman bill was unneeded.

Saying they had questions about the proposal, both Burton and Umberg abstained from voting on the Friedman bill.

However, Fuentes would not take credit for stopping the measure. He said he had merely told lawmakers in passing that it was “another city of Los Angeles cockamamie idea.”