JUDGE SAYS BB EFFORT ILLEGAL.

Byline: Peter Hartlaub Daily News Staff Writer

A Superior Court judge ruled Wednesday that Los Angeles school officials violated state law when they spent $198,000 in taxpayer money on a one-sided TV advertising campaign in support of the $2.4 billion Proposition BB bond issue last year.

Lawyers who filed the taxpayer lawsuit claimed Los Angeles Unified School District officials were supposed to be neutral during the campaign, but acted like a sophisticated political machine instead.

After a seven-day trial, Superior Court Judge Sherman W. Smith Jr. found that two television ads airing near the April 8, 1997, election - including one hosted by ``Chicago Hope'' actor Adam Arkin - violated the state Education Code.

``I think it was something ill-advised or done in a rush,'' Smith said as he rejected holding individual LAUSD officials personally liable.

The plaintiff, Libertarian party activist Neal Donner, plans to appeal.

A lawyer said LAUSD officials may re-evaluate their practices.

The lawsuit attacked the entire output of the LAUSD's $1.5 million ``Bond Information Office,'' from the pamphlets it distributed to the decision to hire an opinion research firm to poll Los Angeles voters.

Smith found that most of the plaintiff's complaints were unfounded, ruling that only the TV ads crossed the line between ``information'' and ``advocacy.''

Donner wanted administrators in charge of the office to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars out of their own pockets back to the district.

But Smith refused to find the defendants - including former Superintendent Sidney Thompson and Facility Services Manager Beth Louargand - personally liable. He also declined to sign a court order restricting their behavior in the future.

Left open is whether the district has to pay Donner's lawyer, Manuel Klausner, tens of thousands of dollars in attorney fees.

LAUSD attorney Howard Friedman, who maintained throughout the case that the action of district employees did not break the law, said LAUSD officials may be willing to ``step back and look'' at their actions.

``I think that the district's staff was confronted with a major task and tried to complete it in good faith,'' Friedman said.

Klausner plans to pursue an even bigger victory.

``We will appeal because we think this is a case of very broad public significance and it's important to establish guidelines to make sure this kind of misconduct does not occur again,'' he said.

Two TV ads

Attorneys said both advertisements were produced by the LAUSD, which paid two consulting firms $99,000 to place them.

The advertisement starring Arkin - which aired during the ``Today'' show and ``Meet the Press'' among other programs - showed pictures of a crumbling sidewalk and broken toilet before the actor appeared.

``Proposition BB will provide money to help our schools and at a cost of less than 15 cents per day,'' Arkin declares during the 30-second spot.

The other advertisement, a cartoon that ran on a Spanish-language station, showed a school floor opening up and sucking in a boy as horror movie organ music plays in the background.

``Our school is broken,'' the ad proclaims, ending with the crayon message: ``No School? No Education!?''

No lobbying allowed

According to the state Education Code: ``No school district or community college district funds, services, supplies or equipment shall be used for the purpose of urging the support or defeat of any ballot measure.''

But the code also allows for an information office, as long as it provides a fair presentation of relevant facts ``to aid the electorate in reaching an informed judgment.''

The District Attorney's Office already looked into Donner's accusations last year, and declined to file charges, Friedman said.

In closing arguments, Klausner called the $99,000 contracts ``smoking guns'' that proved the district's misconduct.

LAUSD contracts of $100,000 or more are subject to board review. Attorneys for Donner contended that numerous Bond Information Office contracts were set at $99,000 to ensure ``secrecy'' and avoid media scrutiny.

Friedman defended the advertisements, claiming they accurately depicted the situation in the LAUSD.

``We have schools that one might expect in a Third World country,'' Friedman said. ``The bottom line is voters saw that and gave us the money.''

Taxpayer complaint

The lawsuit started out as a taxpayer's complaint, asking for a court order to remove banners placed on school grounds on the day of the Proposition BB bond measure election.

Donner, a frequent Libertarian Party candidate, sued on Election Day last year, before the bond passed. He accused individual principals of organizing on-campus ``information'' sessions that were little more than Proposition BB support rallies. Smith ruled that those gatherings were within the law.

Two weeks ago, Louargand testified that she was personally in favor of the bond measure, but didn't break the Education Code.

Evidence gathered by Donner's lawyers included a memo from Louargand that asked principals, among other things, to use the LAUSD's automatic-dial telephones to remind parents the day before the election ``to vote on'' Proposition BB.

Thompson didn't testify during the trial.