Steven Presberg
for City Council
Third District

Ethics Commission

Statement by Steven E. Presberg
Ethics Commission, City of Los Angeles

Thursday, August 9, 2012


Honorable Members of the City Ethics Commission:

I am a candidate for City Council in the Third District.  I am here today to call upon you to take swift action, and prevent a complete fraud from being perpetrated upon our local election system here in Los Angeles – specifically, in the Third Council District.  

The person committing the fraud is Bob Blumenfield, a State Assemblyman running for re-election, and who last week filed with your Department to run at the very same time for City Council in the Third District.  This raises some very serious questions and issues for your honorable Board and staff to consider, if open and honest campaigns are to prevail in the City of Los Angeles, and if Mr. Blumenfield is to be prevented from making a complete mockery of the well considered rules adopted by your Board, especially relating to campaign contribution and expenditure limits.

According to state campaign financial reports, Mr. Blumenfield’s opponent in the June 2012 Assembly Primary Election spent exactly 0 dollars.  Yet, Mr. Blumenfield has apparently spent nearly $400,000 – so far - in a non-competitive race, in a district that is almost completely subsumed within the Third Council District.  

I am urging this honorable Board to take the following actions:

•    First, in the cause of good government, adopt a rule that would apply immediately and retroactively to candidates in the 2013 election, to reject any person’s filing for an elected City office, if he or she is at the same time a candidate for another elective office.

•    If Mr. Blumenfield is to continue as a City Council candidate, individuals and organizations that have already contributed $700 or more to Mr. Blumenfield’s Assembly Campaign Committee must be barred from any further contributions to his City Council campaign.

•    Mr. Blumenthal must be deemed to have violated the City’s contribution limits, unless he immediately refunds all contributions that exceed the $700 limit.  Note that the contribution limit in his Assembly Campaign is $3,900.

•    The Ethics Commission must deem the overwhelming majority of his expenditures to-date in his Assembly Campaign to count towards the City expenditure limit in the City Council election, inasmuch as he has had no real Assembly opposition, and virtually all of his expenditures have been made with a plan to run for City Council all along.

•    With an opponent spending no money, Mr. Blumenfield nevertheless spent over $250,000 on campaign consultants in the current election cycle.  Has he simply pre-paid these people for work to be done in his City Council campaign?  There certainly doesn’t appear to have been a lot for him to “consult” about with an opponent spending no money against him.  These consultants should be barred from performing any work – paid or volunteer – in Mr. Blumenfield’s City Council campaign.  To allow otherwise would be to allow these individuals to have participated in perpetrating this fraud, and then to profit by it.

•    At least two of Mr. Blumenfield’s Assembly Campaign expenditures are illegal under the City’s rules.  These include his campaign’s contribution of $32,500 to the California Democratic Party, and his campaign’s contribution of $1,000 to a foundation run by his wife.  These expenditures – or more appropriately, gifts, are obviously not in compliance with the Ethics Commission’s rule that all expenditures must be clearly related to a campaign purpose – not the spreading of largess supplied by other contributors.  Your rules also prohibit the making of contributions from a City Campaign account to another political committee, in our non-partisan system.  

As recently as Tuesday of this week, on Mr. Blumenfield’s Assembly campaign website, he stated how “excited” he was to be “seeking re-election in the newly drawn 45th Assembly District.”  He further stated that he looked “forward to (his) final term in the Assembly.”

It is now apparent that this was a ruse.  Mr. Blumenfield knew all along that he was going to run for City Council, where the term limits applicable to state offices would not affect him.  Hence, he chose to raise and spend almost the entire Council race spending limit, before even formally getting into the race.  We have now seen the obvious deception that has been perpetrated.  

I call upon you to immediately initiate a detailed audit of Mr. Blumenfield’s Assembly campaign financial reports, to determine the benefit that should apply to his Council race.  I urge you to continue to scrutinize Mr. Blumenfield’s Assembly campaign contributions and expenditures, as that committee could be used to evade the rules set forth by your honorable Board.  I call upon you to subpoena, and require testimony under oath, of Mr. Blumenfield, and his campaign Treasurer and consultants, to determine what has in fact been arranged and/or promised in return for payments already made.  

I trust you will act swiftly and strongly in order that a fair election campaign may be had, with a level playing field in the Third District and throughout the city in campaigns under your jurisdiction.

Thank you.