Planning Commission Appointee Draws Fire Over Wife’s Consulting : Development: San Juan Capistrano council’s choice of attorney angers slow-growth advocates. They threaten legal action on alleged conflict-of-interest grounds.

SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO--A recent City Council decision to appoint a prominent attorney to the Planning Commission is being criticized by local slow-growth advocates, who are threatening legal action because of an alleged conflict of interest.

James E. Erickson, a four-year city resident, was chosen Nov. 21 to fill a vacancy left by the resignation of former commission chairman Roy Nunn.

Erickson is a senior partner in a statewide law firm. His 30-year career in land-use law has included stints as city attorney for Irvine, Yorba Linda, Cypress, Lynwood and Rancho Palos Verdes, plus time as legal counsel to 128 California cities.

He has served as legal counsel to the Transportation Corridor Agency, which is overseeing construction of two South Orange County tollways, and represents several development-related public bodies--the Orange County Water District, the California Coastal Commission, South Coast Air Quality Management District and a host of other state and federal agencies.

The conflict-of-interest allegations are based on the employment status of Erickson’s wife, Nancy, who is being paid by the Community Redevelopment Agency as a private consultant to a six-acre downtown project known as the Historic Town Center, said city resident Russell Burkett.

Nancy Erickson resigned during the summer from her city position as chief liaison to the Community Redevelopment Agency, and has since been paid at least $250 by the city for consulting, which Burkett said makes it illegal for her husband to be appointed to a city commission.

“There is a portion of the law involving spousal conflict,” Burkett said. “If you influence a government decision and it has an effect on your household income, there are grounds for legal action.”

City Atty. John R. Shaw said there is no law that bans Erickson’s participation on the commission based on his wife’s employment. But he said that Erickson could be found in conflict if he or his wife profited from his commission vote.

“The conflict would be based on the decision and the agenda item,” Shaw said, noting that most redevelopment agency projects do not go before the Planning Commission.

Erickson, who during his career has helped the attorney general’s office draft state conflict-of-interest laws, said he would abstain from any decision involving one of his clients.

“Technically there may not be a conflict, but I would abstain in any event if it was a company my firm was representing,” Erickson said. “I’m well in tune to the laws.”

Other local activists criticized the appointment because Erickson’s name was not on a list of 25 applicants for the job--a list that included names of those with longtime community involvement on lower-level commissions.

“They passed over some very, very good candidates,” said Mark Clancey, who said that Erickson’s handwritten application seemed like a hurried afterthought compared to the typewritten applications of other hopefuls.

The move to add Erickson to the commission also surprised Councilman Anthony L. Bland, who abstained from the 3-0 vote, saying he hadn’t seen Erickson’s application and didn’t know who he was.

Mayor Gary L. Hausdorfer said Erickson’s name was accidentally left off the list in a staff report because his application was received only five days before the Nov. 21 council meeting. “This is a lot of knee-jerk reaction to a man who has done nothing wrong,” Hausdorfer said. “I think it’s nice to have this kind of experience and background on our side.”

Councilman Phillip R. Schwartze, a land planning consultant, agreed.

“Nobody is going to pull any fast ones on him,” Schwartze said. “He’s seen and heard it all.”