Donations to Holden Exceed Legal Limits : Politics: Mayoral candidate blames violation on a change in treasurers and says money will be returned.

Los Angeles Councilman and mayoral candidate Nate Holden has accepted a series of contributions in excess of the city’s legal limits, records show.

Holden’s campaign treasurer, Kevin Song, acknowledged Thursday that several donations, totaling as much as $3,000, appeared to violate city regulations. He said the excess donations will be refunded.

The move to return the donations, prompted by inquiries from The Times, marked the second time in two days that a mayoral candidate apparently has run afoul of some of the city’s most basic fund-raising rules.

On Wednesday, Councilman Michael Woo scrambled to return a series of apparently improper cash donations after similar inquiries. By late Thursday, Woo campaign officials notified the city Ethics Commission that they were refunding nearly $9,000 in contributions.

Holden blamed his problems on confusion created when he changed campaign treasurers two months ago.

“If there was any overpayment, we will return the money,” he said. Generally, fines or other penalties are meted out in such cases only when there is evidence that the errors were willful or part of a pattern of ignoring the law, city Ethics Commission officials said.

The excess donations apparently came in as a result of multiple donations to Holden that exceeded the city’s $1,000-contribution limit in the mayor’s race. Among donors exceeding the limit were Dynamic Builders, a Los Angeles construction contractor; Ivie & McNeill, a Los Angeles law firm; YOC International, an Orange County development firm; L.A. Koreana, which operates Koreatown’s Wilshire Koreana Hotel, and the Koreatown Assn. of Los Angeles, a business group.

Holden, who represents Koreatown, has collected tens of thousands of dollars in mayoral contributions from the Korean-American community.

The contributions being returned by Woo’s campaign included nearly $6,000 in cash donations, ranging from $40 to $1,000, collected at fund-raisers. The cash was converted to cashier’s checks at a Chinatown bank with close ties to Woo’s family. All the donations appeared to violate a strict, $25 city cap on cash contributions.

Campaign officials also said they were returning nearly $3,000 in other donations that, while apparently legal, could raise suspicion because they were made by supporters via money orders and cashier’s checks.

The city Ethics Commission is launching an investigation of the cash donations. Violation can lead to fines, depending on the circumstances.

Woo, who has campaigned as a champion of City Hall ethics reform, sought to downplay the violations at a campaign appearance Thursday. “It was a technical error committed by my staff,” he said. “We have taken care of it. . . . I’m taking steps to ensure this problem does not happen again.”

Campaign officials noted that cash donors were identified in Woo’s public disclosure reports.

On another front, Woo continued to come under criticism from rivals who say he made extensive use of a special political account to gear up his mayoral campaign before officially entering the race. City law prohibits use of such “officeholder” accounts for campaign purposes.

Woo has denied any impropriety. The Ethics Commission is reviewing several so-called officeholder accounts maintained by council members, including Woo.

Peter Taylor, campaign manager for mayoral candidate and state Assemblyman Richard Katz, said Thursday that Woo’s mayoral campaign got a “sweetheart deal” on computer equipment, software and contributor lists bought and developed in 1991 and early 1992 by Woo’s officeholder committee.

Records show Woo’s officeholder committee paid nearly $14,000 for the computer equipment and software in 1991. Most of the equipment and software has been transferred to the mayoral committee, Woo campaign manager Vicky Rideout said. She said the mayoral campaign is making payments and will purchase the computer equipment and software for about $8,000--about a 40% discount--because it is used.

In addition, Rideout said, the mayoral campaign used contributor lists developed through the officeholder committee to raise funds for several months before paying for them.

She said she ordered a payment of $1,725 for the lists last month after someone--she could not recall who--suggested Woo’s mayoral campaign compensate for the value of the lists.

“It did not occur to me that Mike Woo should pay Mike Woo for lists of contributors,” Rideout said.

Still, Holden and spokesmen for Katz and Councilman Joel Wachs, another mayoral candidate, said they had to scramble to buy and assemble lists of donors after entering the race. Woo, they said, had an unfair--and legally questionable--head start.