Official of Honig Firm Was on State Payroll

A key prosecution witness testified in the conflict-of-interest trial of state public schools chief Bill Honig that she worked directly for a private consulting firm run by Honig’s wife even though she was on the state Department of Education’s payroll.

Linda Page, a former elementary school principal, also said she received no supervision from state officials. But she acknowledged under strenuous cross-examination in Superior Court that she reported the progress of her work for Nancy Honig’s nonprofit Quality Education Project to the Education Department.

The prosecution is charging that the superintendent of public instruction committed felony conflict of interest when he authorized $337,509 in state contracts to pay local educators to work as consultants on school parent-involvement programs run by QEP.

Prosecutors argue that the four educators paid by the state enabled QEP to grow and prosper to the point that Nancy Honig could pay herself more than $100,000 a year by 1990 and that the Honigs rented office space to QEP in their San Francisco home.

The defense maintains that the consultants worked for the state in conjunction with QEP--not as QEP’s direct employees--and that the organization’s growth came about through private fund-raising efforts by Nancy Honig.

Page testified under direct examination that she worked directly for QEP as a consultant and became the organization’s executive director in 1987. She said she was responsible for hiring the other three educators who were paid by the Department of Education.

Chief Assistant Atty. Gen. George H. Williamson showed Page copies of QEP consultant contracts signed by other educators who were paid by the state Department of Education.

“On the bottom line,” Williamson asked, “who do you work for when you sign this document?”

“QEP,” Page answered.

Under cross-examination, chief defense attorney Patrick Hallinan presented a copy of a resume written by Page that indicated her relationship with QEP was not a standard employee-employer arrangement. In it Page described herself as a “consultant (with a) grant from the California Department of Education . . . in a joint effort with the Quality Education Program.”

Earlier in her testimony, Page dropped a surprise when she admitted, out of the jury’s presence, that she had prepared for her court appearance by reading a copy of her grand jury transcript furnished to her by Fred Boeger, a persistent and militantly anti-Honig crusader.

Judge James L. Long said he would decide later in the trial whether the information should be presented to the jury.

Honig, who is regularly at odds with conservatives over a variety of issues, has contended that the conflict charges are politically motivated. The attorney general’s office has denied the accusation.