Monahan May Have Violated Disclosure Law : Financial reporting: The Ventura councilman failed to list $40,000 received by his construction company in 1988 for work at an ill-fated RV park.

Ventura City Councilman James Monahan apparently violated state law by not publicly disclosing about $40,000 his company received for helping build the riverside park where 10 to 15 motor homes were swept away Wednesday.

Monahan, who championed the RV project in 1985, should have reported the income he received for installing a fire-hydrant system and two flagpoles since the payment exceeded $10,000, according to state guidelines.

Monahan could not be reached for comment Friday, but he said in a previous interview that he did not think his business relationships with RV park owner Arnold Hubbard had violated any state conflict-of-interest laws or filing requirements.

State law generally requires that council members report sources of income greater than $250 each year.

Monahan said the money was paid to his construction company and not directly to him, so no disclosure was necessary.

However, a spokeswoman for the state Fair Political Practices Commission said Friday that corporate income of $10,000 or more must be reported by public officials.

Monahan and former partner Wade Mabry each owned half of the construction company paid about $40,000 in 1988 for work at the Ventura Beach RV Resort, Mabry said.

Monahan should have reported his $20,000 share of the income, the guidelines say.

The councilman is subject to a $2,000 fine if he does not amend his statement, said commission spokeswoman Carol Thorp.

Monahan, a councilman since 1977, has never listed corporate income on his statements, city records show.

Meanwhile, Ventura City Councilman Gary Tuttle said Friday that--given Monahan’s reported relationship with Hubbard--the councilman should disclose whether he wants to help build part of a $140-million water pipeline the council will debate later this year.

“I just want to make sure that it’s debated fairly and not with any other motives,” Tuttle said. “He is in the pipeline business, and I’m asking what will his intentions be when it comes to building this pipeline.”

Tuttle, who operates a Ventura sports shoe store, said he would abstain if a shoe contract came before the council.

“If we had a $100-million shoe contract come before us, I would bow out immediately because it is a conflict of interest,” Tuttle said.

Monahan said Thursday that he had no illegal conflict of interest when he voted on the RV project in 1985.

He said that, despite this week’s devastating flash flood, he supports the reopening of the park because it has been good for Ventura.

Monahan has done several small jobs for park owner Hubbard over the years, both men said.

But Monahan said he did not remember whether he worked for Hubbard in the year before his 1985 park vote, a relationship that would have required him to abstain.

Hubbard, owner of Hubbard Development, said Friday that he has known Monahan personally only since his RV project first came to the City Council in 1983.

“I know Jim and I like him,” Hubbard said. “But I don’t know how good of friends we were (in the early 1980s).”

Monahan did some work for Hubbard as early as 1978, erecting a flagpole at the Village Green Office Park, the developer said.

But their relationship was strictly business, Hubbard said.

Monahan said he had no idea he would help build the riverside RV park when he voted to approve it in 1983 and 1985.

Hubbard supported that contention Friday, saying that Monahan got the contract through competitive bidding.

“I haven’t thrown him a lot of business over the years,” Hubbard said.

The primary RV park contract with Monahan Construction Co. was for $37,740 and called for installation of five fire hydrants and a waterline to them, Hubbard said.

Monahan’s company also erected two flagpoles for $2,000 to $3,000, Hubbard said.

Candidates involved in Monahan’s 1985 reelection campaign--shortly after the council’s vote on the RV park--said they recall that Hubbard participated in the race.

Mabry, Monahan’s former partner, said Hubbard helped Monahan. “I would say so, yes,” Mabry said. “I remember the campaign. . . . I’d say they were friends.”

But Hubbard said his only involvement was a $99 contribution.

County Supervisor John K. Flynn, on whose 1988 campaign Hubbard worked, said he knew little of the developer’s business relationship with Monahan but that “they have been friends for a long time.”

Former Ventura City Councilman Donald Villeneuve, a political opponent of Monahan, said he does not see anything sinister in Monahan working on a project he strongly supported when it was before the City Council.

“They’re part of the old-boy network. It’s longstanding and continuing,” Villeneuve said. “There are a number of business people who have been doing this for a long time.

“But there’s no conspiracy here,” he added. “It’s just that this was not a very large town for a long time and inevitably, if you’re in the same sort of business, you’re going to work with each other.”

MAIN RAIN STORIES: A1