Honig Found Guilty, Suspended From Job : Education: State schools chief convicted on all counts of helping wife’s firm. He faces up to five years in prison.

In a stunningly quick decision after three weeks of testimony, a Superior Court jury found state public schools chief Bill Honig guilty Friday on all four felony counts in his conflict-of-interest trial.

Honig, who has built a national reputation as an educational reformer, faces up to five years in prison and loss of his office as superintendent of public instruction. He remains free on his own recognizance pending a sentencing hearing Feb. 26.

Honig said he would appeal the verdict.

By law, Honig is now suspended from office, according to the secretary of state’s office, and will be removed upon sentencing. Gov. Pete Wilson will appoint a successor, subject to legislative approval, to serve the remainder of Honig’s term through 1994.

But Patrick Hallinan, Honig’s chief defense attorney said the schools chief may wage a legal battle to keep the office he was first elected to in 1982, pending appeal.

Honig was found guilty of authorizing $337,509 in state contracts in the mid- to late-1980s that paid for local educators to set up parent involvement programs in schools in conjunction with a nonprofit organization run by his wife, Nancy.

In the courtroom, some of Honig’s supporters broke into sobs as court clerk Millie Jeffcoat read the guilty verdict on each of the four counts. Honig showed no emotion.

Nancy Honig was not in court, nor did she testify in the trial.

“He didn’t want to put her through it,” said defense attorney Hugh Levine.

Tall and gaunt and wearing a dark blue suit, gray sweater and gold-rimmed glasses, the seeming picture of an aging scholar, Honig remained unruffled as Judge James L. Long ordered him to report to the county probation office before noon Monday.

The prosecution charged that the work of the educators allowed the fledgling Quality Education Project to prosper so much that Nancy Honig, as its president, paid herself about $100,000 a year by 1989. Prosecutors also charged that the Honigs benefited by renting office space in their home to QEP.

In testimony during the trial and speaking afterward, Honig remained steadfast that the contracts were proper.

“I’m obviously very shocked by this whole thing,” he said, “because I still don’t think I did anything wrong and we’ll just have to deal with the next steps as they come.”

Hallinan said he was surprised not only by the sweeping guilty verdicts, but by how quickly the jury deliberated.

“I find it very, very difficult to believe that the jury reached that conclusion,” said the San Francisco attorney, “especially that quickly.”

The jury reached its decision in less than five hours after listening to three weeks of sometimes complex and tedious testimony regarding the history of the contracts.

Honig, a Democrat education reformer who has long been at odds with conservatives, has repeatedly said his prosecution was the result of a right-wing cabal.

But a majority of the jurors were Democrats. One of them, Robert Mitterholzer, 40, a customer service consultant for MCI, said in a phone interview Friday night that he was bothered by evidence showing Honig had not disclosed his wife’s salary for two years on state financial disclosure forms, as required by law.

“That kind of got to me,” he said.

Although the defense maintained the contracts had been Bill Honig’s idea to help troubled schools, Mitterholzer felt the schools chief was doing what Nancy Honig wanted.

“I just think he could have said, ‘No, Nancy, we shouldn’t do this. I’m the state superintendent,’ ” said the juror. “But he went ahead and let her proceed with it.”

Mitterholzer said reaching the verdict was difficult despite the speed with which it was rendered.

“It’s taken a lot of thought and a lot of sleepless nights really.”

Mitterholzer said about half the jurors were convinced of Honig’s guilt at the start of deliberations. Seven of the jurors were Democrats, three were Republicans and two identified themselves as independents.

Ranging in age from 27 to 63, the jury represented a wide range of occupations and included an insurance underwriter, a sales assistant, a military post exchange supervisor, a pharmacist, a registered nurse, an accounting officer, a retired car salesman, a customer service accountant, a civil engineer, a software engineer, a hospital administrator and a contracts analyst.

Chief Assistant Atty. Gen. George H. Williamson, the lead prosecutor on the case, declined to comment, but Cynthia Besemer, another state prosecutor on the case, allowed herself a short exultation.

“After being called part of a right-wing conspiracy,” she said, “I feel vindicated.”

Reaction to the verdict varied around the state.

Atty. Gen. Dan Lungren, a conservative Republican who was heavily criticized by Honig’s supporters for pursuing the prosecution, said in a written statement, “Some wanted us to try this case in the press. We refused. Some wanted us to engage in a political debate and respond to vicious attacks on my own integrity. We did not do that. We simply did our job and placed our faith in the jury system.”

Del Weber, president of the California Teachers Assn., remained convinced that Honig was the victim of conservative opponents.

“There is no question he irritated a whole lot of power players in this state by telling them like he thought it was,” Weber said.

Joseph Carrabino, former state school board member and a frequent conservative critic of Honig, saw vindication in the verdict.

“I’ve said all along when you have lots of money and loose controls, you have a fertile field for corruption,” Carrabino said.

Sen. Gary Hart (D-Santa Barbara), a likely candidate for superintendent in 1994, said: “It’s obviously a very sad day for public education because there’s a lot going on that we need to be focusing on. Bill (Honig) has made some important contributions in California and nationally.”

In conjunction with the Board of Education, the schools chief develops statewide frameworks for academic curriculum and approves the textbooks used in California schools. The superintendent disburses state funds to local school districts, has the power to order a takeover of financially troubled districts and mediates disputes among districts.

Under Honig, the office has become even more powerful as a bully pulpit on behalf of public schools. Although he ran as a critic and reformer, he became the schools’ biggest defender, a tireless advocate for the institution.

Honig’s decade in office produced a number of important reforms even as funding for schools grew tighter and classrooms bulged with thousands of new students each year, including many who were poor or spoke little English.

He pushed California to the forefront of the movement to overhaul American education in such areas as curriculum development, improved student assessment, and higher standards and better training for teachers.

An attorney and teacher before becoming a school superintendent in Marin County, Honig defeated then-Supt. Wilson Riles in 1982. Honig pushed through a longer school day and school year, implemented tougher standards for high school graduation requirements and attacked the state’s stubbornly high dropout rate. During his tenure, the little-noticed state testing program was revamped and given a visibility that added to the state’s national reputation and to public awareness of education reform.

But his notorious funding fights with two Republican governors and his battles with the religious right over such matters as evolution and sex education earned him bitter enemies among conservatives. His single-minded, often long-winded efforts to argue his causes sometimes irritated even his most ardent supporters.

Educators from throughout California said Honig leaves a lasting legacy.

“His is a powerful legacy, (one of) incredible energy, focus and determination to improve California education for all children,” said Tom Payzant, a nationally known reformer who became superintendent of San Diego schools a day before Honig first won election.

“Even though he sometimes got into trouble for his outspoken ways with the Legislature and several governors, I really believe he operated based on his convictions and principles, and that makes even more ironic the position he is in today,” Payzant said.

Allan Odden, a USC education professor and a co-director of Policy Analysis for California Education, praised Honig as “one of the country’s top education leaders: smart, forward thinking and reform oriented.”

Odden described the conviction as “a real tragedy” but predicted Honig-inspired reforms will outlive his tenure.

“The things he did are not just California’s reforms, they are the whole country’s reforms,” Odden said.

Hurst reported from Sacramento and Merl from Los Angeles. Times staff writers Virginia Ellis, Daniel M. Weintraub and Paul Jacobs in Sacramento and Sandy Banks in Los Angeles contributed to this report.