(May 8, 2008) -- City Attorney Robert Shannon is filing a civil lawsuit charging that two individuals and an entity ["CA Ass'n Against Bad Teachers"] allegedly violated LB's voter-enacted Campaign Reform Act (Prop M) by, among other things, accepting campaign contributions "grossly in excess" the LB law's limits for the purpose of making an independent expenditure in the April 2008 6th district City Council race.

Unstated in the complaint (legally irrelevant but newsworthy for readers): the alleged wrongful acts involved materials opposing the reelection of Councilman Dee Andrews. The complaint doesn't charge that opposition candidate Ahmed Saafir or his campaign were involved in the alleged wrongful conduct.

In addition to alleging acceptance of independent [non-candidate] campaign contributions exceeding Prop M's limits, the complaint alleges that the defendants failed to comply with both Prop M & CA law (Politcal Reform Act) requiring those making independent expenditures beyond a certain amount to notify candidates in the race. The complaint also alleges failure to file required organizational forms, properly designate a treasurer, file financial statements with City Clerk and comply with certain mass mailing requirements.

City Attorney Shannon said that in the course of the litigation, other names may be brought out through the formal discovery process, which includes taking depositions and issuing subpoenas for documents.

"We have a number of things still to determine but I'm confident that during the course of this action we will be able to find out and expose the full cast of characters behind these mailers, pinpoint the full range of their [civilly] unlawful conduct and see that they pay damages accordingly," City Attorney Shannon said.

He said that in his view, the conduct alleged is "the most blatant abuse of local election law that I've seen in the last ten years."

As a civil (non-criminal) Superior Court action, the plaintiff has the burden of proving the allegations by a preponderance of the evidence...and the plaintiff is "City of Long Beach...by and through Long Beach City Attorney Robert E. Shannon." That verbal formulation gives the City Attorney -- not the City Council as in more routine cases -- decisionmaking authority in pursuing the case City Attorney Shannon said...and reflects the quasi-prosecutorial (enforcement) role of his office.

In April 2002, City Attorney Shannon filed a Prop M civil enforcement action against "CA Citizens for Neighborhood Empowerment" [CCNE] alleging that the entity (registered as an independent political committee) accepted contributions in excess of Prop M's limits in independent (non-candidate) activities supporting then-Mayoral candidate Dan Baker. (Neither Baker nor his campaign were alleged to have been involved.)

In that case, City Attorney Shannon pursued the litigation through the CA Court of Appeal, arguing personally before a three-judge panel and winning a decision -- that the CA Supreme Court let stand as statewide precedent -- holding independent (non-candidate run) committees legally accountable under LB's Prop M.

Now almost exactly six years later, City Attorney Shannon says he's upholding these legal principles again.

"There's a fundamental point that I can't emphasize too much. What often happens is that wrongful conduct occurs and the election takes place, and some people may have the notion that the wrongful conduct goes away because the election is over. That's not the case. That wasn't the case with CCNE and it's not the case here. We're going to stick with this until we find out who's behind these activities."