Roth Didn’t Report Loan, 3 Island Trips : Filing: Supervisor’s failure to disclose deferred $8,500 in rent, Catalina getaways appears to violate state law.

In an apparent violation of state law, Orange County Supervisor Don R. Roth failed to disclose in a recent government filing that he received what amounted to an $8,500 interest-free loan and three trips to Santa Catalina Island from a family of political supporters.

The loan came through an unusual agreement that Roth said he struck when he moved into an Anaheim trailer park in August, 1990, after breaking up with his wife. The deal allowed him to defer his rent without penalty until after he moved out.

Three months ago, shortly after he moved out, the supervisor paid the $8,500 in back rent. Political finance experts say the arrangement constituted a substantial loan that should by law have been reported on Roth’s annual statement of economic interest.

In addition, one of the trailer park owners has hosted Roth three times since late 1990 for weekend getaways at a Catalina condominium--yet none of these trips were reported on Roth’s disclosure statements, filed April 1 with the county.

The two-term supervisor from Anaheim acknowledged the trips and the rental agreement Friday, but denied any improprieties in his dealings with the Dougher family, which owns more than 10 mobile home parks throughout Orange County.

“I wasn’t trying to hide anything,” Roth said in an interview. “There was no intent to circumvent the law. . . . To try to paint me as a dishonest guy, to me that is ridiculous.”

Roth aide Dan Wooldridge said later: “We are certainly assessing the legality of the (disclosure) issue and we plan to talk to our attorneys. . . . If something is wrong, we want to promptly comply with the law.”

Meanwhile, an FBI official in Santa Ana confirmed the agency opened an inquiry last month into allegations surrounding the Doughers’ mobile home park network. Sources who have been interviewed as part of that probe said some of the FBI’s questions focused on Roth’s financial and political connections to the Doughers’ Laguna Beach-based business.

Political finance experts said that Roth’s failure to report either the trailer park arrangement or the Catalina trips appears to violate state regulations that require elected officials to disclose gifts, loans, meals and other gifts above set amounts.

“The public has a right to know--and the law says it--what gifts public officials are receiving, so the public knows who is trying to influence their vote,” said Robert M. Stern, co-author of the state’s Political Reform Act.

The act was passed overwhelmingly in 1974 by voters who appeared increasingly distrustful of government in the wake of Watergate. Among other provisions, it requires detailed disclosure of political finances, with the intent of putting on record an elected leader’s fiscal allegiances.

Roth led all five county supervisors in gifts reported during 1991, with a total of $2,880.50, according to the most recent economic disclosure statements. That surpassed Supervisor Thomas F. Riley, in second place, by $324 and was nearly six times the amount reported by Gaddi H. Vasquez in fifth place.

Roth listed on his disclosure statement 100 gifts from local corporations and constituents--including food baskets, champagne, Disneyland passes, golf games, Rams tickets, several dozen lunches and other freebies.

For instance, Roth listed on Valentine’s Day, 1991, a $20 lunch courtesy of Ampco Parking in Los Angeles, a company that has had at least three agreements with the Orange County Board of Supervisors since 1990 on parking and shuttle projects.

Sources said the lunch bill at the Lafayette Cafe in Garden Grove came to a total of about $520 for seven people, averaging about $74 per person.

Present were Roth, four of his clerical assistants, lobbyist Frank Michelena, who is a frequent lunch partner of Roth’s, and Ampco executive Thomas D. Barnett of Los Angeles. Barnett said he picked up the full bill.

“We do a lot of business in the county,” Barnett said in explaining the lunch. He described himself as a “staunch Republican” who tries to support party causes.

The lunch did not show up on disclosure statements filed by the members of Roth’s office who attended. Despite the large bill, Roth said he believed he had reported his fair share, saying that he only had “a bowl of soup.”

“Everybody else was still eating when I left,” he said.

Roth also defended his unusual rental arrangement at the Ponderosa Travel Trailer Park in Anaheim, owned by members of the Dougher family.

Brothers Donald J. and Gerald J. Dougher are now suing each other over management of the family park network, trading charges of embezzlement and fraud in a protracted and bitter court battle.

Roth said he has been particularly close with Gerald Dougher, who the supervisor said offered help during some tough times following Roth’s breakup with his wife, Jackie, in July, 1990.

Shortly after the breakup, Roth moved into a trailer coach and, a few months later, into a small apartment at the park that the owners had cleaned up for him. It had not been in use for some time.

Because of financial problems connected to the breakup of his marriage, however, Roth asked “would it be OK if he just paid at the end,” Donald Dougher recalled. “We said fine.”

Gerald Dougher denied that there was anything unusual about Roth’s arrangement. “He paid his way like everybody else,” he said.

When asked whether anyone else at the Doughers’ parks was able to defer rent for 17 months, Gerald Dougher said: “I don’t want to answer any more of your questions. You’re obviously trying to hurt Don Roth.”

According to an agreement dated Aug. 15, 1990, a copy of which Roth gave to The Times, the supervisor agreed to pay the park management $500 per month--due when he moved out. No interest was charged on the debt.

Roth moved out of the park at the end of 1991 and began renting a home in Anaheim. He then gave the Ponderosa park a check for $8,500, which was cashed Jan. 23, according to a copy of the check.

At the time, Roth said, he was paying $3,000 a month for the house in which his then-estranged wife continued to live. The Doughers, he said, “are friends and they were concerned about the financial (burden) that I was carrying.”

Roth said he saw no need to report the arrangement because the Doughers have had no direct business before the Board of Supervisors in recent years.

However, Roth has been an outspoken critic of rent control since his days on the Anaheim City Council in the 1970s. That issue came to a head in March, 1991, when Anaheim voters defeated an initiative to impose rent control on mobile parks. The mobile-home industry lobbied heavily against the measure.

Roth also maintained that he did not believe the trailer-park living arrangement had to be disclosed in his economic interest statements.

Officials with the state’s Fair Political Practices Commission in Sacramento, which regulates political finances, said they could not comment on the case. However, two political finance experts contacted by The Times--Stern and Lisa Foster, executive director of California Common Cause in Los Angeles--each said the rental agreement represented an $8,500 loan that Roth had to report.

Lapses in state reporting requirements for public officials can result in fines or administrative disciplining by the FPPC. Violations can also be prosecuted as misdemeanors, although that happens only rarely, officials said.

Under state codes, Foster said, “a loan is income, and what we’re talking about here is a substantial benefit to the supervisor . . . from someone that had an ongoing relationship with Roth. That should have been reported.”

The Doughers’ relationship with Roth dates back to the early 1980s when he was a member of the Anaheim City Council. Since Roth became a county supervisor in 1986, Dougher-owned corporations have made four donations and a loan totaling $6,350 to Roth, along with dozens of other contributions to other supervisors, campaign finance records show.

However, Donald Dougher said there may have been still more donations that did not show up on campaign finance reports.

Candidates are required to report the names of donors only when they contribute more than $100. And Donald Dougher said: “We usually give $99 contributions to various political people.” Asked why the $99 figure, he replied, “Because you’re allowed.”

Several sources who have been interviewed by the FBI in recent weeks said they have been asked about these $99 donations. They said they were also asked about Roth’s rental arrangement at the Ponderosa park.

When asked about the agency’s inquiry into the Dougher matters, James M. Donckels, agent in charge of the FBI’s Santa Ana office, said: “About the only thing I can say . . . is we have a case under investigation, but the case is brand new and I can’t say anything more about it.”

Donckels added that in general, “We would not conduct a preliminary investigation into any public corruption case without clearance from Washington.”

Both Donald Dougher and Roth, through a spokesman, said they were unaware of the FBI investigation.

During the time that he was living in the Doughers’ park, Roth also was hosted by Gerald Dougher and his wife, Dorothy, on three trips to Catalina Island beginning in the fall of 1990.

Roth said he went once alone with the Doughers and the two other times with his fiancee. The couples stayed at a condominium that was loaned to them without charge by an executive who worked for the Doughers and co-owned the Catalina unit.

Roth said that the Doughers’ paid his way for the ferry ride out to the island and that he never reimbursed them for staying at the Hamilton Cove condominium--although units in the same complex reportedly went for up to $250 per night.

But Roth said he had hosted the Doughers often as well. In recent years, Roth said, he and Jackie Roth had the couple over to their home in Anaheim “many, many times” and also hosted them on Palm Springs trips.

“It was a reciprocal type thing,” Roth said in explaining why none of the Catalina trips showed up on his economic disclosure statements. “That’s the way I look at it.”

Roth’s explanation was challenged on both factual and legal grounds.

Contacted at her Anaheim home, Jackie Roth said that while she and Roth were still married, the Doughers were over to their home just one time. And the Doughers picked up the tabs for meals on several trips that the two couples took together to Palm Springs as well.

Stern said that even if Roth had treated the Doughers in the past, it makes little difference under the law. “It’s reportable whether it’s reciprocal or not,” he said.

Times staff writer Mark Landsbaum contributed to this report.