Group tied to DWP employee union sues L.A. Ethics Commission to block fundraising limit [Updated]

A nonprofit group closely tied to the Department of Water and Power employee union has filed a federal lawsuit against the City’s Ethics Commission, saying a city campaign fundraising law is unfairly limiting its ability to advocate on behalf of City Council candidate Christine Essel.
 
The case comes during a two-week period when outside groups have poured more than $280,000 into independent expenditures to boost Essel’s bid to replace former City Councilwoman Wendy Greuel, who is now city controller. Among those groups is the political arm of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Local 18, which has spent more than $93,000 in support of Essel’s campaign. The union is headed by Brian D’Arcy.

Working Californians, the group suing the city, is co-chaired by D’Arcy and Marvin Kropke, the business manager of IBEW Local 11. The group devised the solar energy proposal known as Measure B on the March ballot, which was supported by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa but was defeated by voters. And D’Arcy showed his political clout last month when he negotiated a five-year package of raises for DWP employees at a time when the police union agreed to forgo pay increases for two years because of the city’s budget crisis.
 
The legal challenge is to a 1985 city law that bars political committees from accepting contributions of more than $500 if the group plans to use that money to make an independent expenditure for a city candidate.
 
In practice, the law prevents outside groups or individuals from contributing to each other to pay for independent expenditures that support city candidates. Contributions that are not earmarked for a specific city campaign are not subject to that $500 limit. (If violations are suspected, the City Ethics Commission’s enforcement division determines whether a contribution was for an independent expenditure).
 
In a court hearing Thursday, Working Californians plans to ask a judge to immediately bar the Ethics Commission from enforcing what it characterizes as an unconstitutional violation of their free speech rights. If they are successful, it could open the door for a flood of outside contributions, not only in the Dec. 8 contest between Essel and Assemblyman Paul Krekorian, but in future city elections.
 

Stephen J. Kaufman, a lawyer for Working Californians, said identical laws were recently struck down in California and around the country and that he hoped the court would act in time to allow the group to aide Essel before the runoff.
 
“Working Californians has always played by the rules in the past and wants to play by the rules in this upcoming election, and it has filed this lawsuit to ask the court to clarify the rules once and for all,” Kaufman said.

[Updated at 6 p.m.: In a statement, LeeAnn Pelham, executive director of the Los Angeles City Ethics Commission, said the law is intended to prevent "the actual or perceived indebtedness of city candidates to major monied interests. These can occur with large contributions to committees that make independent expenditures to influence city elections."

"It's no state secret that these concerns exist, and the city's longstanding contribution limits are tailored to limit corruption and the appearance of corruption so that voters can have faith in the electoral process," Pelham said.]

Because Los Angeles City Atty. Carmen Trutanich recently endorsed Essel, Krekorian drafted a letter Wednesday asking city lawyers to recuse themselves and hire outside counsel to handle the case.
 
During a debate at Woodbury University on Wednesday, Krekorian criticized the outside spending for Essel, singling out the IBEW’s work on her behalf. “Over $200,000 in independent expenditures from public employee unions this week alone have gone to buy this election for Chris Essel; it’s an outrage,” he said. Essel noted she had no role in the IBEW’s decision to support her campaign.
 
When asked about the Working Californians lawsuit in an interview, Krekorian said “this kind of conduct makes a mockery of the ethics laws that the people of Los Angeles expect candidates to respect.”
 
Essel said she did not know anything about the Working Californians lawsuit and that she had not spoken to D’Arcy or Kropke since the early days of her candidacy.
 
Later in a statement she accused Krekorian of relying on contributions from lobbyists and oil companies to finance his campaign. “Real reform starts with holding politicians accountable for violating our ethics laws,” she said. “I am the only candidate who has offered voters a series of tough new ethics rules that will, among other things, force politicians to pay fines out of their own pockets and stop Sacramento politicians from skirting city rules by using their state political accounts to secretly fund campaigns.”

-- Maeve Reston at L.A. City Hall

Comments

[kent]

Everyone who thought Carmen Trutanich was a breath of fresh air in LA politics can now smell that he is no different than any other politician.

Essel is completely in the pocket of the IBEW. And Trutanich's endorsement puts him in that pocket as well.

Coming soon: Measure C---the same as Measure B.

[Just facts]

Christine Essel AND Trutanich AND Steve Cooley are all clients of the same campaign manager: John Shallman, who took L A politics to a new low with his campaign of lies and smears against Jack Weiss.

We know that Trutanich is nothing more than Cooley's puppet - especially on the medical pot issue, after he lied to the pro-medical cannabis community to get them to support him, same as he lied to and is now at war with Laura Chick.

And a bad puppet at that -- the City Council has totally brushed aside his counsel after he threatened to jail or sue some of them and many other elected and appointed officials who don't kow-tow to him. Even the Trutanich-Cooley handmaiden Zine opposed their reactionary mis-interpretation of state law. BAD company for Essel to be keeping.

[Charlie Baker]

Christine Essel's statement that “I am the only candidate who has offered voters a series of tough new ethics rules" can be a little disingenuous - You can offer all you want during the campaign, what really matters is what have you delivered?

[Astonished]

Can you say collusion? hummmm?

[James Andrews]

Why would anyone support any candidate backed by the public employees union. That is a guarantee your money is going to them and not to services that are being cut daily. Did anyone notice we are out of money?

[Peter]

I live in the City of LA. Like everyone, my LADWP bills have significantly risen over the past few years. D'Arcy has major political influence over city politicians because he's given thousands of dollars to their campaigns. Now he wants to give even more money so that Essel (and potentially other endorsed candidates) can get their messages out through mail and commercials and thereby win campaigns. This will give IBEW considerably more influence over elected officials who ultimately vote to increase costs to DWP consumers.

Who will be left to speak up for rate payers? Elected officials whose campaigns D'Arcy supported and who seek reelection or higher office? This sounds like a public statement that Chris Essel is bought and paid for by LADWP's union - the same people who benefit from higher rates to DWP consumers. I say absolutely not! NO WAY CHRIS ESSEL. NO MORE BUYING POLITICIANS AT THE EXPENSE OF HARD WORKING PEOPLE!!!