Investigate Lawndale’s Code Enforcement and Waste of Taxpayer Money
The City of Lawndale spent years prosecuting LA Investment, LLC and Peter Starflinger in Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 20TRCV00065.

Then, shortly before trial, the City dismissed its own case without proving a code violation.

The court subsequently determined LA Investment and Starflinger were the prevailing parties. On August 5, 2026, Judge David K. Reinert awarded them $293,491.50 in attorney fees, in addition to approximately $13,299.69 in previously awarded costs.

Combined with approximately $292,225 in the City’s own legal spending, the case represents approximately $599,016.19 in City legal expenditures and court-ordered fees and costs.

The court also rejected efforts to broadly seal attorney billing-related records. On August 27, 2026, the court ordered additional records unsealed or refiled publicly with only limited permitted redactions.

Lawndale residents deserve to know how a municipal code-enforcement case reached this point, why it continued for years, who authorized its continued prosecution and escalating expense, and what safeguards exist to prevent it from happening again.

We call for an independent investigation and public accounting of the LA Investment litigation, Lawndale’s code-enforcement practices, City Attorney expenditures and authorizations, and related closed-session actions. We also call for reform of Lawndale’s Residential Property Report and code-enforcement procedures so that selling a home does not become the starting point for unnecessary or unsupported enforcement.

Statement of Purpose
This petition is good-faith speech and petitioning activity concerning matters of public interest and government conduct. It is based on court records, City records, public-record disclosures, municipal records, and other publicly available information. It does not accuse any person of criminal guilt or state that disputed misconduct has been judicially established.

The petitioners expressly invoke their rights of speech and petition under the First Amendment, Article I, Section 2 of the California Constitution, and California Code of Civil Procedure § 425.16, California’s anti-SLAPP statute. Its purpose is public discussion, government accountability, and a request for independent investigation, not harassment or defamation.