An administrative law judge concluded Friday that Los Angeles City Councilman John Lee accepted gifts that violated the city’s ethics rules during 2016 and 2017, including freebies tied to a Las Vegas trip and several downtown meals, and recommended a $43,730 penalty. The 59-page proposed decision sided with ethics investigators on five counts while rejecting several others. The case now heads to the City Ethics Commission this week, putting Lee’s conduct back under a very bright public spotlight.
According to the Los Angeles Times, Administrative Law Judge Ji-Lan Zang found Lee committed two counts of accepting gifts in excess of the allowed amount and three counts of failing to disclose those gifts. Zang recommended the $43,730 penalty after a multi-day hearing and detailed gifts that investigators say included hotel rooms, meals, transportation, and $1,000 in gambling chips.
The judge’s proposed decision, posted by the City Ethics Commission, lays out itemized bills from a 2017 Aria hotel stay and a night at Hakkasan, where multiple rounds of bottle service and a nearly $2,500 group dinner at the hotel restaurant were picked up by outside parties. Those details are summarized in the City Ethics Commission filing, which the commission will consider alongside enforcement recommendations.
Judge’s Findings And Evidence
Zang wrote that Lee’s denials, including claims that he paid his own way or did not consume certain meals, were “not credible,” calling his testimony “evasive and self contradictory” and pointing to contradictions with FBI interviews and witness statements, as reported by the Los Angeles Times. The decision describes lavish group spending and notes that it “strains credulity” to believe Lee did not partake of the food and drink investigators attribute to him. Despite those findings, Lee won reelection in 2024 and has remained in office while contesting the accusations.
Lee’s Defense And Legal Pushback
Lee has denied wrongdoing, and his lawyers argue he made good-faith attempts to reimburse certain charges, including a $300 cash payment to one of the businessmen, and that investigators overstated the value of shared bottles and meals. His attorneys have also argued that some counts should be barred by the statute of limitations, points outlined in filings and the City Ethics Commission filing…