Padilla Again Fined for Late Asset Disclosure

For the second time in three years, Los Angeles City Councilman Alex Padilla was fined Friday for failing to disclose on time his personal assets, including thousands of dollars in political consulting fees.

The latest, a $500 fine, was approved Friday by the state Fair Political Practices Commission. It was levied after Padilla, despite repeated warnings, was nearly a year late in filing his economic interest statement for 1998, when he was an aide to Assemblyman Tony Cardenas (D-Sylmar).

“In order to avoid conflicts of interest . . . the assets and income of public officials which may be materially affected by their official actions should be disclosed,” according to the FPPC’s enforcement agreement approved Friday.

In 1998, also while working for Cardenas, Padilla was fined $100 for filing his 1997 economic interest statement 97 days late.

Padilla said the delay in filing this time was unintentional and pointed out that all the information it contained was included in other documents he had filed with the city. A Pacoima resident, Padilla was elected to the City Council, representing the northeast San Fernando Valley, last June.

*

Delays in disclosing economic interests deprive the public of the information needed to decide whether a government official should be disqualified from acting on a matter, said Mark Soble, senior counsel for the state agency.

In the latest case, Padilla waited 11 months past the deadline to disclose to the FPPC that he received thousands of dollars in consultant fees.

The fees were for work he did in 1998 on the successful political campaign of state Senate candidate Richard Alarcon of Sylmar and on Cardenas’ bid for Assembly, in addition to work as a Southern California political field director of the California Democratic Party.

For each of the three positions, Padilla checked a box indicating income between $1,000 and $10,000.

Padilla, who stipulated to the latest violation, blamed confusion about duplicative filing requirements for different agencies and said he had received bad advice from an unnamed FPPC consultant.

*

Padilla said he was not only a district director for Cardenas through 1998, but also had been serving on the city Building and Safety Commission and was a candidate for City Council.

“I was filing reports left and right,” Padilla said. “I filed as a commissioner. I filed as a candidate. My assumption based on one piece of advice was that I was covered because it was the same form.

“Technically, you have to file the form separately for each of the different positions,” Padilla added. “I wasn’t trying to avoid reporting.”

The information on his personal assets was available in his city filings, he noted.

But the stipulation signed by the councilman says Padilla was repeatedly warned that he was in violation of the state reporting requirement.

The statement disclosing his assets was supposed to be filed with the FPPC by April 1, 1999.

The state agency sent letters to Padilla on May 28 and Aug. 19, 1999, advising him of the requirement. On Jan. 18 of this year an FPPC investigator called Padilla and told him about the requirement.

Finally, on March 17, Soble sent a letter to Padilla advising him of the requirement a fourth time. Padilla filed the statement March 24, nearly a year after it was due.

The previous violation and the repeated warnings were listed in the stipulated agreement as “aggravating factors” used to determine the amount of the fine.