Holden Agrees to Pay Record Campaign Fine

Los Angeles City Councilman Nate Holden has agreed to pay the largest fine ever levied by the city Ethics Commission for violating campaign finance laws during his 1995 reelection race.

The $27,500 fine is part of a settlement approved by the commission Wednesday.

Holden said he agreed to the settlement to avoid the public release of the commission staff’s findings before the June 8 runoff election, which he won handily.

“Even though these [reported violations] are weak, they could be misinterpreted,” Holden said.

Although he acknowledged 48 violations of election laws, Holden alleged that the commission held him to a higher standard than other council members.

But two commissioners said they regretted that they were unable to fine Holden a larger amount or force him to pay the sum personally. Commissioner Paul Krekorian called Holden’s campaign violations “breathtaking in scope,” and said they were “so negligent if not reckless, if not intentional, that extra punishment could have been in order.”

Krekorian said that in a case with as many violations as Holden’s, “a candidate should not be able to pass the buck to a treasurer or campaign.” Holden said he plans to start a legal defense fund to pay the fine.

Commissioner Miriam Krinsky said that, compared with the cases of other council members penalized for ethics violations, Holden’s case “jumped out at me” because of the “sheer volume of mishaps.” Krinsky said she would like the commission in the future to impose heavier fines on candidates with numerous violations.

Krinsky said, however, that Holden’s fine “makes it clear the Ethics Commission is serious. Now the message is out there.”

Holden’s fines stemmed mainly from commission staff findings that he took multiple donations from individuals in excess of the city’s $500 limit.

Going through the list of improper contributions, Holden said the commission was mistaken on many of them. He said that two donations from the owner of a large health club and discotheque in his district were actually from different people.

The first donation, he said, was from the original owner of the club, who was shot and killed there by an employee. The second donation was made by the late owner’s wife, who took over the business, he said.

“I’m a target,” Holden said. “These are not clear-cut violations. I don’t think they held anyone else to this standard.”

Holden was the only council member still facing Ethics Commission penalties from the 1995 election, because he appealed the commission’s audit of his campaign. Earlier this year, City Council President John Ferraro paid $3,000 in fines and Councilman Mark Ridley-Thomas paid $4,200. Commission auditors found no potential violations in Michael Feuer’s campaign.

Luis Lavin, the commission’s enforcement director, said the commission staff notified Holden on May 26 that it had found sufficient evidence of violations to warrant a hearing before the commission.

The timing of that notice, Holden said, forced him to settle his case. “It would have hurt me,” Holden said of the prospect that his ethics case would move ahead just before the election.

Holden said that the Ethics Commission cannot truly be impartial because council members vote on matters such as the commission’s budget. He said that he may have antagonized the commissioners by voting against measures that they supported before the council. “They’re human beings. They’ve got their favorites on the council. I’m not saying there’s collusion, but they carry their mail.”

Lee Ann Pelham, the commission’s deputy director, said, “The commission treated each campaign consistently. These are mandatory audits under the City Charter.”

Holden “just happened to have more violations than the others,” Lavin said.