Proposal for Ethics Reform on Coastal Panel Rejected : Politics: Assembly committee turns down Hayden bill that would curb the ability of commissioners to accept funds from those with business before the body.

Saying the state Coastal Commission has been tarnished by the criminal indictment of former Commissioner Mark L. Nathanson, Assemblyman Tom Hayden (D-Santa Monica) on Tuesday called for new ethics requirements for appointees to the state panel.

But no sooner had he made his plea than the Assembly Elections and Reapportionment Committee rejected Hayden’s bill aimed at curbing the ability of Coastal Commissioners to raise campaign funds or accept income from people with matters pending before the panel.

The measure, which needed five votes for approval, received only three, all from Republicans.

Hayden called the action “shortsighted,” but said he was not surprised because the measure would have undercut the ability of legislative leaders to appoint political fund-raisers to the commission and could have served as a precedent for targeting other panels for similar action.

Speaking at a commission meeting in Marina del Rey, Hayden argued that reforms were needed to improve the group’s tainted image.

Nathanson, 52, a Beverly Hills real estate broker, faces an eight-count indictment for abuses of public office, including extortion, racketeering, obstruction of justice and tax evasion.

A grand jury last week alleged that he attempted to extort payments from some of the most powerful figures in Hollywood--including actor Sylvester Stallone and “Rocky” producer Irwin Winkler--in connection with permits to make improvements to their Malibu homes.

Assembly Speaker Willie Brown (D-San Francisco), who appointed Republican Nathanson to the coastal panel in 1986, disclosed Nathanson’s resignation on Monday.

Hayden’s measure would have prohibited members of the panel--which regulates development along California’s 1,100-mile coastline--from soliciting, accepting or donating campaign contributions for the benefit of those who appointed them. It would also have prevented them from receiving any income, or accepting or soliciting campaign contributions from anyone who has had an application before the commission within a three-year period.

As Speaker, Brown appoints four of the 12 members to the panel, the governor names four, and the Senate Rules Committee names four.

In Sacramento, a combative Brown defended his choice of Nathanson to serve on the coastal panel, saying that he had no regrets about appointing him, despite the federal indictment.

At one point, Brown told reporters at a Capitol press conference, “I have no evidence he (Nathanson) voted his wallet, nor that anyone else on the commission has voted his wallet. There are accusations about people on the commission, but I don’t have any evidence of that and until I do, I won’t have any different view.”

Hayden’s ideas drew a chilly response from the Coastal Commission in the morning, prompting the lawmaker to say that the majority of the panel “just (does not) understand the loss of confidence in the commission on the part of the public.”

David Malcolm of Chula Vista, a Brown appointee, complained that the bill would violate members’ rights to engage in political activities, and told Hayden, “Why are you trying to burden us? Why don’t you start by cleaning up your own house?”

Chairman Thomas W. Gwyn of San Francisco, another Brown appointee, angrily accused the assemblyman of opportunism. “I resent the impugning of the entire group of 12. . . . I think you’re taking advantage of the situation,” he said.

However, several commissioners said they would welcome reforms.

“We’ve got to understand what’s going on here and how we’re being looked at right now,” said Gary Giacomini, a Marin County supervisor appointed to the panel by the Senate Rules Committee. “We shouldn’t take the posture of resisting attempts to clean up our act.”

In an impromptu news conference after meeting with the commissioners, Hayden slammed Brown’s appointment of Diana Doo, a Beverly Hills real estate agent, to replace Nathanson, as “an insult to the environmental community.”

“She has no experience whatsoever in environmental or coastal policy,” he said. “Instead of learning the lesson of Nathanson and appointing a proven environmentalist, what we get is another Realtor.”

Doo, 40, who works for Unlimited Real Estate Services of Beverly Hills, was picked by Nathanson in 1990 to serve as his alternate on the commission. On Tuesday, she both praised Nathanson and tried to distance herself from him, while avoiding comment on Hayden’s remarks.

“Actually, the Nathanson I know is quite nice,” she said. “But then again, I don’t know him that well. I mean, personally. Therefore, I really can’t say. He seems to be a nice person as far as I can see, but of course other people have their own opinions.”

Asked about records she was required to file with the state that do not show her as having earned any money last year, she said that she had earned “almost nothing.”

“It was a bad year for me in real estate,” she said. “I didn’t do any deals. Some years are like that, but it all averages out.”

Doo said that although she and Nathanson had known each other for many years, she had “no idea” why he chose her as his alternate.

“I can only guess that it was because he knows I’m concerned with the environment, because sometimes we talk about building and things like that,” she said.

Times staff writer Paul Jacobs contributed to this story.