Sought by D.A. : Ethics Panel Won’t Take Up Wright Inquiry
The state Joint Legislative Ethics Committee decided Thursday not to investigate whether Assemblywoman Cathie Wright (R-Simi Valley) violated ethics rules by intervening with authorities to avoid penalties for traffic offenses for herself and her daughter, a committee member said.
The bipartisan panel followed the advice of Legislative Counsel Bion M. Gregory, said the member, who requested anonymity. Gregory’s office advised members that Wright’s actions did not come under the committee’s narrowly defined purview to probe alleged conflicts of interest under the Legislature’s Code of Ethics.
The six-member committee, which met privately, is expected to announce its decision today. Thursday’s meeting was the committee’s first in nearly four years.
The matter was referred to the committee earlier this month by Ventura County Dist. Atty. Michael D. Bradbury after his office concluded an investigation of Wright.
Bradbury’s 97-page report found that Wright “demonstrated a clear pattern of attempting to obtain special treatment for herself and her daughter with the police, the courts and the Department of Motor Vehicles,†but had committed “no clear-cut criminal violation.â€
The district attorney sent the report to the Ethics Committee because the Legislature’s Code of Ethics states that a lawmaker shall not “engage in any business or transaction or professional activity, or incur any obligation of any nature, which is in substantial conflict with the proper discharge of his duties in the public interest. . . .â€
Bradbury’s report said Wright’s efforts to keep her daughter Victoria from being fined for traffic violations--or losing her license, which would make it impossible or costly to get to her job--may have given Cathie Wright a personal financial interest that conflicted with her duties.
Counsel’s Advice
But state Sen. Robert Presley (D-Riverside), Ethics Committee vice chairman, said Wednesday that Gregory had told the committee that Wright’s alleged actions did not fall under the conflict-of-interest provision, even if she had done everything that Bradbury alleged.
“That’s usually what we follow,†Presley said of the legislative counsel’s advice.
He said the committee had nevertheless decided to meet because one member, whom he did not identify, “wants to discuss it further.†Presley could not be reached Thursday.
Wright, who also could not be reached, has called Bradbury’s report shameful and politically motivated.
The Ethics Committee, which can initiate an inquiry itself or as the result of a formal complaint, has few resources. In its 23 years of existence, its three Senate and three Assembly members have dealt with only a handful of cases, never recommending substantive disciplinary action.
Walter Zelman, executive director of California Common Cause, a nonpartisan watchdog organization, said he believed that Bradbury’s attempt to define Wright’s action as a conflict of interest “is stretching a little.†Rather, “the issue is misuse of government authority,†he said.
Even Bradbury, when he released the Wright report, acknowledged: “I don’t have high hopes for the Joint Committee on Ethics doing anything.â€
Sign up for Essential California
The most important California stories and recommendations in your inbox every morning.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
