Campaign Finance Delays Vex Ethics Chief

The head of the Los Angeles Ethics Commission voiced alarm Wednesday at what she described as the City Council’s efforts to water down campaign finance reform proposals and its decision Wednesday to once again delay action on the issue.

Commission President Miriam Krinsky noted that the panel had submitted a package of 60 rule changes to the City Council seven months ago, and that key elements of the proposal have not been acted on.

The council endorsed some of the new rules Wednesday after altering them to be less stringent, but for the third time put off a vote on the heart of the commission proposal.

“It’s now many, many months that we have had these matters before council, and we have yet to reach the guts of the proposal,” Krinsky said. “It is certainly disappointing it’s taken this long for closure.”

Council members cited the complexity of the rule changes to explain the delay, noting that the council spent more than three hours debating several measures Wednesday.

While delaying key changes until Tuesday, the council rejected an Ethics Commission proposal to shorten the fund-raising period before an election, from 24 months to 18 months before the vote for citywide races, and from 18 months to 12 months before the vote in City Council contests.

Council members said the current longer fund-raising periods help challengers in less affluent communities.

“It takes a little more time and more effort and smaller events, smaller amounts of money,” Councilman Bernard C. Parks said.

However, commission representatives said a longer fund-raising period benefits incumbents, who begin raising money before challengers in two out of three contests, according to city records.

Krinsky also expressed alarm that council members are proposing to increase contribution limits and appoint a panel of retired judges to adjudicate disputes over ethics enforcement actions now handled by the Ethics Commission staff.

“The motions pending in council that would fundamentally weaken our proposals are grave cause for concern to our commission,” Krinsky said. “They are not simply a step backward from what we recommended

The Ethics Commission recommended campaign finance reforms in response to the 2001 city election, in which unions, political parties, gaming interests and others spent a record $3.2 million in independent campaigns in addition to money contributed directly to candidates.

The commission has proposed that when one candidate benefits from significant independent expenditures, spending limits would be raised for all other candidates in the race and that they would receive city matching funds at a higher rate.

City Council President Alex Padilla has cited legal concerns by the city attorney and his own sense of fairness in proposing that in such cases spending limits and contribution limits be raised for all candidates, including the one who benefits from the independent expenditure.

The council delayed action on the issue until Tuesday. It also sent to committee a motion by Councilman Nate Holden and six other council members to create a panel of three retired judges to adjudicate disputes when an elected official challenges an enforcement action.

Holden said the current system, in which Ethics Commission Executive Director LeeAnn Pelham makes recommendations to the panel, creates a conflict of interest because Pelham plays a role in writing the rules.

Holden is involved in a dispute with the Ethics Commission over a campaign finance issue. Krinsky said the proposal goes against what voters approved a decade ago in creating an independent Ethics Commission to enforce law.

“It’s really an attempt to do an end run around the Ethics Commission,” Krinsky said.