Sorting out Weiss’ donations

The race for Los Angeles city attorney has involved an increasingly bitter exchange of charges between the two candidates.

City Councilman Jack Weiss has hammered at his opponent, defense lawyer Carmen “Nuch” Trutanich, for refusing to disclose the names of his law firm’s clients. Trutanich has fired back by repeatedly questioning Weiss’ ethics.

During a recent debate, Trutanich accused Weiss of receiving “tens of thousands of political dollars of laundered campaign contributions, plus matching funds.” The charge involves contributions Weiss received that the city Ethics Commission determined were improper. Trutanich has charged that Weiss’ failure to return the contributions “is illegal and a crime.”

The facts are complex. Here’s a look at the issues involved:

--

How did the improper contributions come about?

During the 2001 election, the vice president of a Southern California real estate developer, Casden Properties, and more than a dozen of the firm’s subcontractors funneled tens of thousands of dollars in improper campaign contributions to four city candidates.

After a joint investigation by Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley and the Ethics Commission, a grand jury in 2003 indicted the Casden officials and the subcontractors. The indictment said the contributions were intended to “improperly influence” future city business decisions in favor of Casden Properties. The defendants pleaded no contest in 2004 to misdemeanor charges of laundering contributions.

The indictment did not make accusations against any of the four candidates who received contributions: council candidates Weiss, Wendy Greuel, then-city attorney candidate Rocky Delgadillo and mayoral candidate Kathleen Connell.

--

What did Weiss say after the indictment?

Weiss announced he would oppose a then-controversial Casden project to build a $100-million residential and commercial development in Westwood. Weiss said he was concerned there had not been enough outreach to the community by the developer and said it would be “bad public policy for the city to continue consideration of the project in light of the indictment of an official of the development firm.” Weiss’ office worked with residents and the developer to reach a compromise on the project, which was ultimately approved by the council.

--

When did Weiss learn the contributions were improper?

The councilman “learned of these issues when the matters were resolved and generally reported in 2005 and 2006,” Weiss’ lawyer said in an October 2007 letter to the Ethics Commission and the state Fair Political Practices Commission.

--

How much money did Weiss receive?

According to the Ethics Commission, Weiss received $11,000.

--

Where is Trutanich getting his “tens of thousands” charge?

Trutanich contends the Ethics Commission failed to investigate other contributors to the city candidates who he says had ties to the laundering scheme.

--

Who asked Weiss to return the money?

The executive director of the FPPC sent Weiss a letter in October 2007 saying that state law required that improper contributions be turned over to the state’s general fund. The letter asked Weiss to divert the money voluntarily.

--

Was the matter resolved?

No. Because the 2001 campaign was over -- and the money spent -- two years before the indictments, Weiss asked the FPPC and the Ethics Commission how he should proceed. LeeAnn Pelham, the Ethics Commission executive director, responded that Weiss faced “timing and fundraising restrictions.” She said his 2001 primary campaign committee had been closed nearly five years -- meaning that he could no longer legally solicit contributions to repay the tainted money. He was also not permitted to tap his council officeholder account or his 2009 city attorney campaign account. The FPPC’s executive director, Roman Porter, said in an interview that because of the Ethics Commission’s advice to Weiss and other city candidates, there was still “a question” of what the “appropriate manner” is for candidates to return laundered money.

--

Trutanich has said that Weiss should have written the state a personal check. Could he?

Councilman Bernard C. Parks, who received $4,000 in laundered contributions related to the Casden case, used personal funds to repay the state with a cashier’s check, according documents provided by his office. Porter said there was nothing barring an official from sending a personal check to the state, “but if that check is a payment related to campaign expenses, the commission’s current policy is that it should go through the campaign account.” The “one bank account” rule, Porter said, is intended to help reduce fraud and the ability of officeholders to use campaign funds for personal benefit.

--

What other city candidates received laundered money in the Casden cases?

Twelve candidates or elected officials received contributions related to the Casden investigation, according to the city Ethics Commission. Other council members include Tony Cardenas ($4,000), Wendy Greuel ($5,500), Janice Hahn ($500), Tom LaBonge ($2,000), Parks ($4,000) and Greig Smith ($500). Delgadillo received $8,000. Antonio Villaraigosa received $2,000, and Connell received $60,973 in laundered contributions.

--

Who else returned money?

Connell sent $22,000 to the state general fund, Parks sent the state the $4,000 cashier’s check, and Villaraigosa paid back $2,000. Like Weiss, Delgadillo, Greuel, Hahn, LaBonge and Smith paid nothing because they were advised they did not have an eligible campaign account to tap.

--

Trutanich has mentioned that Weiss was fined for 32 ethics violations -- is that true?

In an unrelated matter, the Ethics Commission found that Weiss failed to disclose copies of campaign mailings to the panel during the April and June 2001 elections. The rules require candidates to file original copies of mailers with the commission at the time they are distributed to allow the public to review them. Weiss’ aides told the Ethics Commission that the violations resulted from “an unintentional and inadvertent oversight.” Weiss was fined $4,800.

--

maeve.reston@latimes.com