2 O.C. Planning Officials Face Inquiry Over Conflict

When Orange County planning commissioners voted last fall to scuttle a proposed road that would have cut through Trabuco Canyon and exposed hundreds of pristine acres to development, environmentalists hailed it as the dawn of a new sensitivity.

Commissioner Stephen A. Nordeck led the fight to block construction of Rose Canyon Road, and he won that battle with the aid of a swing vote from Commissioner Roger D. Slates, once characterized as “a well-known anti-environmentalist.”

But now, some environmentalists aren’t sure what to think.

The Orange County district attorney has been asked to investigate whether Nordeck and Slates violated conflict-of-interest law by hosting a dinner for an Assembly candidate to reportedly solicit contributions from developers who have projects before the commission.

Nordeck vehemently denies any impropriety, while Slates declines to comment.

“I did not have any fund-raiser and I don’t think any further comment is needed,” Nordeck said in an interview Saturday. “I’m sure if the district attorney intends to look at it, both Mr. Slates and myself will be vindicated of any impropriety.”

For Slates, the conflict-of-interest allegation marks the third time in a year that he has been accused of being too close to the industry he is sworn to regulate.

“It fits the pattern,” said Peter J. Shaw, a civic activist in Coto de Caza. “I am very concerned about the objectivity of not only the commission but the Board of Supervisors. . . . It didn’t surprise me that there was a dinner going on. What offended my senses more than anything else was the denial. I could just picture them shrugging their shoulders and saying: ‘Who, me?’. . .

“When you get caught with your hand in the cookie jar and you deny that you’re out for a snack. . . . That’s the incredible part.”

Shaw also has become skeptical of Nordeck’s motive in voting to block Rose Canyon Road. Shaw says the road could have ruined the pastoral backdrop for, among other things, a restaurant that Nordeck owns.

“If you were the owner of something called the Trabuco Oaks Steak House, with oak trees growing through the restaurant, what position would you take?” Shaw asked rhetorically. “I hardly think I’d want to knock down oak trees in the canyon.”

Nordeck countered that his long-established and popular restaurant was already “a success story” when he bought it two years ago and that the proposed road was “not anywhere near my restaurant.” He opposed the road, he said, solely because of his concern for the canyon.

“You can look at it two ways. More traffic could help or hurt the business. . . , “ Nordeck said. “I think it would completely destroy the rural atmosphere of the canyon regardless of whether I have a restaurant there.”

Nordeck’s restaurant also served as the site three weeks ago of the dinner with developers.

Several of the roughly 15 people who attended say Nordeck and Slates spoke on behalf of 58th Assembly District candidate Peter von Elten, suggesting that the guests contribute to his campaign. Among those present were representatives of at least two South County development firms that have projects pending before the Planning Commission.

State conflict-of-interest law prohibits appointed board members from soliciting any campaign funds of more than $250 from individuals who have matters before them.

Nordeck says he did not solicit contributions, however, and was present off and on during the dinner only in his capacity as owner of the restaurant.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Wallace J. Wade, head of the political corruption unit, said Friday that investigators have begun a preliminary inquiry into the matter. But he declined to elaborate.

Slates, 61, served on the commission from 1972 to 1975 before being reappointed by Supervisor Harriett M. Wieder last fall. In between, he served on the Huntington Beach Planning Commission, where two other conflict complaints were lodged. Slates, reached again last week, refused to comment.

In one instance, a Huntington Beach resident complained that Slates and a host of other city officials had compromised their objectivity in matters affecting the city’s largest developer by accepting free VIP memberships to the Seacliff Country Club. The swank club is owned by the Huntington Beach Co.

After a review by her office, City Atty. Gail C. Hutton announced that the memberships were worth less than the $250 required to trigger the conflict-of-interest law.

In a financial disclosure statement that Slates filed this spring as a member of the county Planning Commission, however, he valued the Seacliff membership at $360. When asked recently about the discrepancy, Slates hung up the telephone on a Times reporter.

The California Fair Political Practices Commission is reviewing a separate allegation raised against Slates a little more than a year ago involving a series of votes he cast that allegedly benefited the Huntington National Bank.

As part of a Huntington Beach redevelopment project, both the City Council and the city Planning Commission approved construction of a $9-million parking garage that, according to the complaint, was to be financed in part by Huntington National.

Slates, a semiretired real estate consultant, was paid more than $10,000 last year as a director of Huntington National. He also holds more than $100,000 in bank stock and has an unsecured loan from the bank of more than $10,000, according to his financial disclosure statement.

“I have watched him over the years as a city planning commissioner and an alternate member of the Coastal Commission,” said former Huntington Beach Environmental Board member Dean Albright, who filed the complaint. “He’s definitely pro-development. He’s a developer himself.”

Albright, a slow-growth activist frequently at odds with city officials, also filed complaints against City Attorney Hutton and City Councilmen John Erskine and Don MacAllister, alleging various conflicts from their involvement in downtown redevelopment.

Both Erskine and MacAllister are longtime friends of Slates and accompanied him to the dinner at Nordeck’s restaurant, arriving in a chauffeured limousine. Both councilmen said that Slates and Nordeck encouraged guests to contribute to the Assembly candidate.

In a terse letter to Slates shortly after the dinner was disclosed in The Times, Supervisor Weider asked him to provide a written explanation, declaring, “It was totally inappropriate and poor judgment for you to have been involved in such a political activity.”

Shirley Grindle, a former Planning Commission member who served with Slates in the 1970s and was a frequent adversary, said last week that Wieder “shouldn’t be asking for a written explanation; she should be asking for his written resignation.”

But Slates surprised and pleased many environmentalists when he cast the swing vote last November that removed Rose Canyon Road from the county’s master plan. Construction of the roadway was a key element in a proposal to build 1,800 homes in the Foothill-Trabuco area.

“This is the first time I can remember leaving this chamber with a smile,” Bruce Conn, a Trabuco Canyon resident, was quoted as saying after the Planning Commission’s vote.

In a recent interview, Ray J. Shandos, secretary of the Rural Canyons Conservation Fund, applauded Slates for his willingness to listen to the concerns of canyon residents.

Shandos reserved his strongest praise, however, for Nordeck, 48, noting that his stand on Rose Canyon Road was but one of several environmentally sensitive positions he has assumed as a commissioner.

“For the first time that we’ve seen on the Planning Commission, (we have) someone who cares about the area he represents,” Shandos said. “He’s stood up to developers and his fellow commissioners.”

Shandos said he was concerned but “didn’t know what to make” of Nordeck’s reported role in the disputed dinner.

“I know the developers in the area are not too happy with his actions,” Shandos said. “The allegations did concern me, but I just hope it wasn’t a setup.”

Other environmentalists view Nordeck’s performance less favorably and dismiss the suggestion that he has made enemies in the building industry.

William Radovich, who served with Nordeck on a citizens advisory panel set up to review expansion plans for Coto de Caza, where both men live, said, “He was on the side more often of ‘Let the developer do what the developer wants.’ ”

Still, Radovich said he was surprised by a vote Nordeck cast after he resigned from the citizens advisory group upon his appointment to the commission last year. The advisory group had been divided on whether to recommend approval of a plan to build 63 tract houses on terraces to be carved from a scenic hillside. Radovich said he had thought Nordeck strongly opposed the proposal. But when it reached the Planning Commission, Nordeck voted in favor of the proposal, which passed and is now the focus of a lawsuit filed by neighboring homeowners.

“On numerous occasions he said, ‘We have to stop this,’ ” Radovich recalled. “He told me face to face he was dead set against it and then on the Planning Commission when he voted for it he just totally amazed us.”

Nordeck responds that he sympathizes with the homeowners but was bound by an earlier agreement between the county and the developer that authorized construction of up to 165 housing units in the area.

“You can’t change the rules midway down the stream,” Nordeck said.

Residents contend that the same agreement places strict limits on grading and thus forbids the type of hillside construction now proposed.

Environmental activist Sherry Meddick, past president of the Rural Canyon Residents Assn., said the dinner at Nordeck’s restaurant--regardless of whether it violated any law--puts developers and commissioners “too close for me to be comfortable.”

“These guys rub elbows all the time,” Meddick said. “The developers have a constant forum. The public has only one chance at the hearing. It’s no wonder things are skewed.

“You develop friends. You develop alliances. You develop favors. I don’t think it’s healthy.”

Indeed, financial disclosure statements for 1989 show that several members of the commission received gifts from developers who are required to win their approval before proceeding with multimillion-dollar projects.

Commissioner A. Earl Wooden, a representative of the Painters and Drywall Finishers Union, accepted 16 golf games, a golf shirt, tickets to five sporting events, three free meals, a basket of food and a $50 food coupon from various developers, disclosure statements show.

Commissioner C. Douglas Leavenworth, a retired aerospace engineer, reported that developers and consultants treated him to eight meals, seven golf games, a baseball game, a wine gift pack and tickets to the theater.

Developers or their representatives, meanwhile, treated Nordeck to lunch or dinner 14 times and picked up his $100 fee for a Building Industry Assn. golf tournament, disclosure statements show.

Slates, who was appointed to the commission four months into the year, reported receiving only his membership at Seacliff Country Club.

Commissioner Thomas W. Moody, a high school government teacher long considered the most environmentally sensitive member, reported receiving just one gift--a $50 certificate for a baked ham from Hon Development.

GIFTS TO PLANNING COMMISSIONERS

State law requires public officials to annually declare if they have received gifts worth $50 or more from firms or individuals who have business before them. Here are the gifts reported by Orange County Planning Commissioners on financial disclosure statements for 1989:

COMMISSIONER C. DOUGLAS LEAVENWORTH

Donor Value Description Mission Viejo Co., developer $35 golf 60 golf and dinner 15 lunch 90 theater/reception 25 lunch Smith Public Affairs, consultant $45 golf and lunch 45 golf and lunch 45 golf and lunch S&S; Construction Co., developer $85 wine gift pack The Irvine Co., developer $25 baseball/snacks 60 golf and lunch 45 golf 15 lunch Hon Development Co., developer $50 gift certificate

COMMISSIONER THOMAS W. MOODY

Donor Value Description Hon Development Co., developer $50 gift certificate for ham

COMMISSIONER STEPHEN A. NORDECK

Donor Value Description Mission Viejo Co., developer $50-75 2 lunches, 1 dinner Irvine Co., developer 50-65 5 lunches Irwin Schatzman, lobbyist 50-75 1 dinner, 3 lunches S&S; Industries, developer 50-60 1 lunch gift basket Hon Development Co., developer 50 gift certificate InterAmerican Builders Corp., 100 golf tournament developer Costain Homes Inc., developer 100 annual dinner

COMMISSIONER ROGER D. SLATES

Donor Value Description Seacliff Country Club $360 VIP membership

COMMISSIONER A. EARL WOODEN

Donor Value Description Coastal Community Builders, $9 ballgame ticket developer 9 ballgame ticket 40 golf fee 50 golf fee and lunch Coto de Caza Co., developer $25 golf fee 33 golf fee 33 golf fee S&S; Construction Co., $60 basket of food and beverage developer $60 game ticket Hon Development Co., developer $50 coupon for food Stein-Brief Group Inc., $45 golf fee developer 45 golf fee Mission Viejo Co., developer $25 golf fee 25 golf fee 25 golf fee 25 golf fee Santa Margarita Co., developer $12 meal 18 game ticket 30 game ticket and meal Hemmeter Corp., developer $50 golf fee 35 golf fee 35 golf fee 50 golf fee Dove Canyon, developer $60 golf fee 25 golf shirt

Source: 1989/90 Statements of Economic Interest