Report Assails Former AIDS Program Chief

Los Angeles County’s former AIDS program director violated state law and “created the appearance or concern of bias” when he asked county employees and contractors to give money to Antonio Villaraigosa’s mayoral campaign, according to a confidential report obtained Wednesday by The Times.

Charles L. “Chuck” Henry solicited contributions from five county employees as well as from officials with at least five AIDS-treatment community groups while he ran the office that helps pick which vendors receive lucrative county treatment contracts, the report said.

State law prohibits local government employees from asking colleagues for campaign money.

Henry, who ran Villaraigosa’s Westside campaign office, “exercised poor judgment” by continuing to solicit from contractors even after a supervisor expressed concern about the activities, according to the report by county Department of Health Services auditors.

Auditors recommended discipline for Henry and two other AIDS office employees they accused of lying during the fundraising probe.

Henry’s lawyer denied that Henry had asked county employees for contributions and said his client’s fundraising requests to county contractors were proper.

“He did not attempt to strong-arm any vendors, nor did he put any unnecessary pressure on county employees to participate,” Winston Kevin McKesson said. “All he did was exercise his 1st Amendment rights ... and he did it on his own time.”

The May 9 report offered no suggestion that the mayor-elect knew about Henry’s alleged wrongdoing, but it lays out for the first time the reasons behind Henry’s removal three weeks ago as director of the county’s Office of AIDS Programs and Policy.

For seven years, Henry oversaw the county’s $82.5-million agency that writes contract proposals for HIV and AIDS education and treatment programs while also recommending contract recipients, mostly local community groups.

The report noted that much of Henry’s fundraising was done while at home on leave from his county job and that many of the contractor representatives he solicited told auditors they did not feel pressured to contribute.

But one unidentified contractor representative told auditors that several officials with other county vendors had expressed concern about the effect the solicitations might have on their county funding.

Several other managers and AIDS office employees took part in Villaraigosa campaign events. Only one said he felt obligated to contribute. That unidentified person said he was asked by Lela Hung, an office manager, to attend a fundraising event although he did not support the mayoral candidate.

“He stated he felt it was in his best interest to participate because of ‘office politics’ and his need to remain on good terms with management,” the report said.

Hung initially told auditors that she was unaware of any employees engaging in non-work activities. But when shown a copy of a flier for the November fundraiser naming her as a sponsor, the report said, she told them she would not discuss what employees did on their own time.

The report recommended discipline for Hung and for another employee, Lukito Harianto, a manager on the office’s computer help desk, whom auditors accused of giving “false and misleading information.”

During the investigation into Henry’s activities, Harianto insisted that Henry did not have a county computer at his home. But the report said auditors discovered that was untrue and found e-mails from Harianto to Henry acknowledging that the director did have a computer at home.

Hung and Harianto declined to comment. Disciplinary actions are typically not public record.