Ex-Wife Vows to Fully Aid Roth Inquiry : Investigation: She is outraged by the supervisor’s ‘lies’ in response to latest conflict-of-interest allegations, Jackie Roth says.

Outraged by his defense to new conflict-of-interest allegations, County Supervisor Don R. Roth’s ex-wife said Friday that she now plans to rebut his “lies” by cooperating fully with authorities investigating him.

Roth’s attorney said Thursday, in response to an investigation by The Times, that the supervisor had little to do with thousands of dollars in free or undervalued additions the couple received at their Anaheim Hills home in 1990 because the upgrades had been requested by Jackie Roth, the supervisor’s wife at the time.

But Jackie Roth said in an interview Friday that for Don Roth “to act oblivious to this is nonsense.” She said he was directly involved in talking to the home builder--Presley Co. of Southern California--about enlarging their family room at the time of construction, among other improvements.

“I am not the one that handled it. I am not the one that was out playing golf with (Presley President) Bob Albertson. Don handled it,” she said.

Jackie Roth said she has spoken with the district attorney about her ex-husband only reluctantly in recent months, declining to discuss some issues, but she changed her position Friday after the jabs made by the supervisor’s attorney, Dana W. Reed.

“Why should I try to save his neck?” she asked. She added that she called her ex-husband Friday morning to voice her anger, telling him that “this time you have gone too far.” She said she then hung up before he could respond.

District attorney officials declined to discuss the issue Friday. Don Roth also refused comment, saying: “See my attorney.”

Asked about Jackie Roth’s comments, Reed said: “We’d rather see this whole thing go away obviously. . . . But I think it would be helpful to get all of the information under oath. I don’t think Supervisor Roth has anything to hide, and if Jackie Roth wants to testify under oath, that’s fine.”

The district attorney’s office has been investigating allegations of influence peddling against the 71-year-old supervisor since April and is known to have focused in recent weeks on the couple’s $348,669 home in an upscale community in Anaheim Hills.

The Times disclosed Friday that the Roths paid $3,700 for a series of expansions and upgrades at the new home that remodeling experts said was likely worth more than $15,000. Several of the changes were made after the house was virtually completed, requiring workers to knock down walls in both the family room and the dining room.

Several neighbors, including one who offered to pay for similar work, said such changes were not available to them.

Officials said the improvements could cause more legal problems for Don Roth because the work was not reported to the state as a gift. In addition, he voted on matters involving Presley four times in the one-year period after the couple moved into their new home.

Under the state’s Political Reform Act, local officials are banned from voting on matters affecting anyone who has given them gifts worth more than $250 during the preceding 12-month period.

Roth and the future of his powerful seat on the Board of Supervisors have been the subject of widespread speculation in recent months, as new allegations have surfaced about trips, stock, an $8,500 loan and other gifts he has received from local business people with interests before the county.

Several officials said Friday that speculation will only intensify following the disclosure of the upgrades from the Presley Co.

“If it’s true, it’s serious,” said Howard Adler, chairman of the Orange County Democratic Party. “It deserves to be investigated, and obviously it is.” Adler said that if Don Roth, a Republican, got a favorable deal from Presley because of his position, “that’s an obvious conflict of interest.”

But the supervisor’s supporters said the public should await the findings of the district attorney’s investigation before reaching judgment.

Supervisor Thomas F. Riley said the most unfortunate aspect of the issue was the public rift and verbal feuding between the Roths. The couple separated in mid-1990 and then were engaged in a bitter court battle over the divorce agreement, which became final in November, 1991.

“I’m just disappointed because Don’s a good friend of mine, and it’s sad that people who take the vows then would do something like this,” Riley said.

Jackie Roth maintained in an interview that Reed, her ex-husband’s attorney, fired the first salvo when he told The Times in an article published Friday that the upgrades were “all Jackie’s deal.”

Reed, when asked whether it would have been in Don Roth’s best interest to abstain from voting on Presley matters after moving into his new home in May, 1990, said: “It appears as if it would have been in Don’s best interest to divorce Jackie earlier than he did.”

Over the summer, officials from the district attorney’s office had twice called Jackie Roth into their office for interviews about trips and gifts that her ex-husband may not have reported to the state. Jackie Roth, who was not subpoenaed, said she went to the interviews reluctantly and declined to discuss some issues under inquiry.

Jackie Roth said that as a result of Reed’s comments, she spoke with her attorney Friday and decided that she would now cooperate more willingly with authorities than she has in the past.

“I will hold Don responsible for his attorney’s comments,” she said.