Former Los Angeles City Councilmember Kevin de León is now subject to an ethics fine totaling $18,750 due to violations concerning financial conflicts of interest and income disclosure. An investigation by the enforcement arm of the L.A. City Ethics Commission has uncovered serious misconduct during De León’s time in office.

Details of the Violations

De León has acknowledged responsibility for four counts related to making decisions affecting entities from which he received financial compensation, along with a single count of failing to report income. In particular, the investigation focused on actions taken during his term from 2020 to 2021.

Among these violations, De León voted favorably on three measures benefiting the AIDS Healthcare Foundation and one concerning USC (University of Southern California), all within a year after receiving over $500 in income from each entity, contravening state law which mandates disclosure of such financial relationships.

Specific Instances of Misconduct

According to the ethics report:

• De León cast votes on November 25, 2020, and April 22, 2021, for city leases concerning properties owned by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation.
• He participated in a vote on May 4, 2021, related to the same foundation.
• In June 2021, he approved a proposed budget that included a million-dollar allocation to USC, less than a year after receiving $155,000 from the university as an independent contractor.

The ethics commission noted that he failed to disclose $109,231 earned from the AIDS Healthcare Foundation prior to assuming office.

Failure to Disclose Financial Ties

After beginning his term in October 2020, De León did not disclose the financial ties to the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, nor did he amend his disclosures adequately even after being prompted to do so. His consulting agreement dictated he provide insights and strategic guidance for the foundation, raising further ethical concerns regarding potential conflicts of interest.

A spokesperson for De León indicated that the situation is centered on a matter of disclosure rather than personal gain, emphasizing the council’s unanimous decisions that aimed at addressing homelessness and health services during the pandemic. The spokesperson asserted that had De León been advised to recuse himself, he would have complied without hesitation and that the outcomes of the votes would have remained unchanged.

Context and Historical Precedence

Prior to his term, De León was involved in organizing discussions between city officials and the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, which was entangled in legal disputes with the city concerning funding for affordable housing projects. This background contributes to apprehensions about the propriety of his actions and the implications these violations could have on public trust.

Influence of Past Activities

Political ethics experts have weighed in on the situation, cautioning that De León’s lack of transparency regarding his financial ties could lead to confusion amongst city staff regarding his intentions, whether to benefit the city or his employer. This ambiguity poses significant ethical dilemmas in governance.