Ferguson Admits Segerstrom Fee of More Than $10,000

Assemblyman Gil Ferguson failed to disclose on mandatory financial-interest statements filed earlier this year that he had received more than $10,000 in 1986 from a major Orange County developer for consulting work, The Times has learned.

The Newport Beach Republican, an avid property-rights advocate, confirmed in an interview Tuesday that he had received the income from C.J. Segerstrom & Sons Co. of Costa Mesa. He said he had reported the money as income to him from the public relations firm he owns and was unaware that he was required by law to disclose its source.

On the annual statement of economic interests that Ferguson filed March 2 with the Fair Political Practices Commission, he listed income from Corporate Communications, of which he is the sole owner, of more than $10,000. But he failed to specify whether payments from any clients of Corporate Communications had amounted to more than $10,000.

The provisions of the California Political Reform Act that require an elected official to report sources of income of more than $10,000 are applicable even if the money is paid to the official’s private firm rather than to him personally, said commission spokeswoman Sandy Michioku.

“I never heard of that, and they’ve never said that to me,” Ferguson said. “This is my company. This isn’t me. I’ve never seen that interpretation of the law.”

But after checking with the administrative assistant who filled out the disclosure statement, Ferguson added: “We’re going to immediately file an amended report. I’m sorry as hell, and we’re going to amend the report.”

Michioku said the disclosure required by the Political Reform Act “details major business activities and allows the public to see the sources of significant income which could become the basis of a conflict of interest.”

Legislators who fail to disclose such payments are subject to civil fines.

Ferguson is not required to reveal the exact amount of the payment from Segerstrom. He said it was less than $100,000.

Ferguson said Segerstrom hired his firm from December, 1985, until June, 1986, to help establish an identity for South Coast Metro, the name developers have given to the office, restaurant and hotel complexes springing up around the South Coast Plaza shopping center.

He said he recommended several public relations measures to Segerstrom, including the establishment of a community newsletter to “create a better understanding and appreciation for what Segerstrom and South Coast Metro were doing for the whole city.”

After Ferguson completed the public relations job for Segerstrom and was paid, he provided political consulting services valued at more than $6,800 to pro-growth Citizens for a Better Costa Mesa, a political action committee, according to campaign reports filed by the committee.

The committee worked in support of City Council candidates Peter Buffa and Orville Amburgey, who were elected to the council in November. Both voted earlier this month in favor of a scaled-down version of a Segerstrom plan for an office complex near South Coast Plaza that the council had rejected a year before. The committee had not paid Ferguson’s firm any of the $6,800 fee at the time of its last campaign statement in January.

In a complaint filed with the Orange County district attorney in March, a Newport Beach slow-growth advocate alleged that Segerstrom had made payments to Ferguson that resulted in free or subsidized consulting services for two pro-growth candidates for the Costa Mesa City Council. The complaint, filed by John Gardner, alleged that Segerstrom hired Ferguson after seeking proposals from political consultants for a pro-growth political action campaign.

The complaint was forwarded by the district attorney to the Fair Political Practices Commission, which has the matter “under review,” according to commission spokeswoman Michioku.

On Tuesday, Ferguson dismissed the suggestion that the unreported Segerstrom payment was intended to subsidize his later work for Buffa and Amburgey.

‘Consultant Work’

“Segerstrom didn’t give me any money like that,” Ferguson said. “I was paid from Segerstrom for communications consultant work. It had nothing to do with campaigns.”

Tom Santley, director of governmental affairs and public relations for Segerstrom, said the firm retained Ferguson to assess the company’s public relations efforts at the time that its major project, 1 South Coast Place, was in the planning stages.

Ferguson, Santley said, reported to Segerstrom on how the company was perceived in the community, what it was doing well and what it was not doing well.

“He made a number of recommendations on how we could do a better job of improving our image. . . ,” Santley said. “One could say we have been successful.”

Ferguson denied that the Segerstrom contract in any way influenced his decision to introduce legislation in 1986 that would have nullified any local growth-control ordinance unless it was shown to be “necessary to achieve a vital and pressing governmental interest.” The bill died in an Assembly committee.

‘Authority on Growth’

“I am an authority on growth and economics,” said Ferguson, who founded and ran Californians for Environment, Employment, Economy and Development, a coalition to promote private-property rights. “I at one time headed the largest pro-growth coalition in America. I’m known as one of the most prominent property-rights advocates in America.

“The idea that after heading the largest coalition in America, that all of a sudden I’m carrying on my advocacy because of contributions from Segerstrom or anyone is patently ridiculous.”

Ferguson, who as an assemblyman makes $37,500 a year plus $75 a day for expenses when the Legislature is in session, said he did not think anyone other than Segerstrom paid his firm more than $10,000 during 1986. He said he would check his records to make sure.