An Orange County Superior Court judge has issued a proposed decision finding that Orange County Board of Education Trustee Mari Barke recklessly violated California’s Political Reform Act by failing to disclose millions of dollars in income and assets on required financial disclosure forms over multiple years.

In a Proposed Statement of Decision issued July 15, Judge H. Shaina Colover found that Barke failed to properly disclose significant financial interests on her Statements of Economic Interests (Form 700) covering 2018 through 2021. The court concluded that the omissions were not merely technical but involved reportable financial interests and community-property assets exceeding $1 million annually.

The judge ordered Barke to pay $81,800 in civil penalties and ruled that she is also liable for the plaintiff’s reasonable attorneys’ fees and litigation costs. The court further ordered Barke to correct her 2018 disclosure statement and comply with future disclosure requirements under the Political Reform Act.

The lawsuit was brought by retired U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Lynne Riddle under the Political Reform Act’s provisions that allow private citizens to pursue civil enforcement after giving prosecutors an opportunity to act. “When elected officials flout their disclosure obligations like this, it undermines the public’s right to honest and ethical government,” said Riddle. “The Court’s decision vindicates the public’s right to know what their elected officials are doing.”

According to the court’s findings, Barke’s original filings reported only nominal financial information despite substantial reportable income and assets. Judge Colover wrote that the undisclosed interests “would have been plainly material to members of the public evaluating potential conflicts of interest and transparency obligations of an elected official.”

The court rejected Barke’s argument that she relied on advice from her then-husband regarding what needed to be disclosed. The decision states that such reliance was “objectively unreasonable,” adding that public officials are required to disclose economic interests in advance so the public can evaluate potential conflicts of interest.

Judge Colover also found that Barke acted with at least reckless disregard of her disclosure obligations. The proposed decision notes that she did not read the Form 700 instructions, seek guidance from the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC), or otherwise exercise reasonable diligence before filing the disclosure forms. The court found that amended filings submitted after the lawsuit began did not fully correct the deficiencies.

Before the civil trial, Barke had entered into a separate administrative settlement with the FPPC in 2024, agreeing to pay $3,200 to resolve 16 disclosure violations. The court ruled that the administrative settlement did not preclude the civil action, although it credited the previously paid amount against the new penalty.

The court assessed $5,000 for each of 16 disclosure violations, less credit for the FPPC settlement, plus an additional $5,000 for failing to correct her 2018 assuming-office disclosure statement, resulting in total civil penalties of $81,800.

The ruling is not yet final. The July 15 order adopts a Proposed Statement of Decision, and under California court rules, the parties have 15 days to file objections before the court enters a final judgment. We reached out to Attorney Mark Rosen, who represented Mari Barke in the case. He couldn’t comment as he had not had the opportunity to consult with his client. We will update the story when Barke makes a public statement.