Jewelry, wine, clothing and sports tickets: DA collects more than $10000 worth of gifts – Los Angeles Times
Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Jackie Lacey has accepted more than $10,000 worth of gifts over the last four years from criminal defense attorneys, police unions, business owners, prosecutors in her office and others who could have an interest in influencing her decisions as one of the most powerful law enforcement officials in the county, according to state records.
The gifts include necklaces and a pearl box, sporting event tickets, bottles of wine, clothing and a glass rose dipped in 24-carat gold, the records show.
A Los Angeles Times review of state disclosure records found that Lacey’s gift taking exceeded the amount disclosed over the same time period by the district attorneys of other large California jurisdictions, including Orange County, San Diego, Riverside and San Bernardino. San Francisco Dist. Atty. George Gascón disclosed more than $18,000 worth of gifts, but about $17,000 was for travel payments from mostly nonprofit organizations for speaking and panel events.
The state’s political ethics law allows public officials to accept gifts totaling $460 from any single source in a calendar year, but requires officials to disclose the gifts on public forms known as statements of economic interest. In Lacey’s case, the forms reveal dozens of gifts over the last three years.
Still, some experts in government and legal ethics say Lacey’s gift taking creates potential conflict-of-interest issues and could give the appearance that her office might be unduly influenced on prosecutions and promotions.
Bruce Green, director of the Louis Stein Center for Law and Ethics at Fordham Law School, said district attorneys should avoid accepting gifts from employees, defense attorneys and business executives within their jurisdictions.
“Public officials are supposed to be disinterested, but prosecutors in particular are supposed to be disinterested,” Green said. “They have extraordinary power to destroy people’s lives. And you want them to act in a disinterested way, not with an eye toward profiting.”
Lacey declined a request to be interviewed. But the district attorney’s office emailed a statement emphasizing her commitment to government transparency. It also pointed out that the vast majority of prosecutors who received promotions had not given her any gifts. Gifts such as chocolates and edible food arrangements were distributed to employees, according to a spokeswoman.
“I have complied with the law and will continue to comply with the law,” Lacey said in the statement.
Lacey disclosed nearly $2,000 worth of gifts in 2012, the year she successfully ran for office. She then accepted gifts valued at $4,000 in 2013, her first year on the job. She reported taking more than $2,000 worth of gifts in 2014, and last year.
Lacey isn’t the first district attorney, or even the first high-ranking elected official, to draw attention for accepting pricey gifts. A Times review of disclosure forms filed by county department heads dating to 2010 found that top law enforcement officials — specifically Lacey, former Sheriff Lee Baca and former Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley — had reported more gifts than any other county department head.
Interested in the stories shaping California? Sign up for the free Essential California newsletter »
The Times in 2011 found that Baca had accepted more than $120,000 worth of gifts between 1998 and 2010. The gifts included rounds of golf, free meals, liquor, and tickets to sporting events. His benefactors included actor Michael Douglas, the government of Saudi Arabia, and at least two felons. A real estate magnate gave Baca wine and liquor, and the former sheriff launched a criminal investigation on his behalf that was referred to by deputies as a “Sheriff Baca Special Request.”
Former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa agreed to pay $42,000 in state fines under an agreement with the state Fair Political Practices Commission and the city Ethics Commission after it was found that he had not disclosed free tickets to 34 events, including the Academy Awards, Lakers basketball games and the music reality TV show “American Idol.” Villaraigosa argued that he was performing ceremonial duties at these events and didn’t know that he had to disclose the tickets.
Cooley, Lacey’s predecessor and political benefactor, was criticized for accepting gifts during his unsuccessful 2010 run for state attorney general. Like Lacey, he had taken clothing, sporting event tickets and wine — but also cigars, tequila and cologne — from an array of prominent people around town.
Cooley dismissed criticism of his acceptance of gifts as a non-story conjured up by his “unworthy opponent” in the attorney general’s race, Kamala Harris, who went on to defeat him in the election. He said as long as it’s disclosed and under the legal limit, there’s nothing wrong with a district attorney accepting gifts, regardless of the source. He defended Lacey as someone whom he admires for “her ethics and her integrity.” And he was also critical of ethics experts who say district attorneys should avoid accepting gifts.
“A lot of these people are armchair academics who have never been in the game,” Cooley said. “They just have opinions. And quite frankly, a lot of them can’t be relied upon.”
According to state records, Lacey has accepted gifts from foreign dignitaries, a Los Angeles Times executive, and the head of a local translation services company. The president of Victoria Caro Associates Inc. gave Lacey a $100 broach and a “gift set” worth $173. The company provides translation services to the district attorney’s office, a spokeswoman said.
Green said that accepting gifts from companies and their executives could compromise her office.
“What’s going to happen when they call up and say one of our employees embezzled or did something wrong? Are they going to get more favorable treatment than other companies?” Green asked.
Experts also point out that Lacey’s acceptance of gifts from defense attorneys can create perception issues.