Groups Claim Lax Scrutiny of Ethics Charges

Investigators for a state watchdog commission were accused Wednesday of making a deal that--if approved--will enable former Agriculture Secretary Henry Voss to pay a reduced fine for violating political reform laws.

The accusation was filed with the Fair Political Practices Commission by Consumers Union and California Common Cause, which last year charged that Voss had a conflict of interest and had repeatedly failed to report income from the very farming interests he regulated.

Voss, a San Joaquin Valley peach and nut grower, resigned from his Cabinet-level post in Gov. Pete Wilson’s administration a year ago. At the time, Wilson was running for president and Voss was regarded as a liability.

Last month, Voss and the commission’s staff reached an agreement that calls for the former secretary to pay $21,000 for failing to report outside income from 1989 to 1993. The maximum fine for that offense is $28,000, but it was reduced because Voss cooperated with the commission and because there was “no evidence of intentional misconduct.”

The full commission, created to enforce the voter-approved Political Reform Act, is scheduled to review the agreement today. Usually, it endorses settlements reached by its staff.

But Harry Snyder, western regional co-director of Consumers Union, and Ruth Holton, executive director of California Common Cause, charged in a complaint Wednesday that the commission staff had “cut a deal” with Voss’ attorney to investigate only the “obvious” offenses of failure to disclose outside income.

“The staff neglected to address the central concern of our original complaint: Has Mr. Voss illegally participated in decisions that affect his hidden sources of income?” Snyder and Holton wrote.

They charged that the Voss case demonstrates the “need to investigate whether the California Department of Food and Agriculture has an institutionalized core problem: the use of public power for private gain.”

A panel spokesman said the FPPC would not comment on the issue in advance of today’s meeting. Efforts to reach Voss and his attorney, Ben Davidian, a former panel chairman, were unsuccessful.

As agriculture secretary, Voss was in a position to make decisions that affected major food processors and others with whom Voss did business as a private grower, including Blue Diamond Growers, Sunsweet, Del Monte and Tri-Valley growers. At the time, the agriculture industry was aggressively pursuing the expansion of exports from California.

“Did you find any evidence that Mr. Voss ever disqualified himself from these potential conflict-of-interest violations?” the letter asked of FPPC Chairman Ravi Mehta.

On the day he resigned his post last April, Voss amended his earlier filings of economic interest to report at least $420,000 in outside income from agribusiness sources from 1989 to 1993. But in their letter, Snyder and Holton said their own calculations have estimated the reportable sum at more than $2 million. A spokesman for Consumers Union said the estimate was based on the same figures used by the FPPC staff.

The letter also attacked the reduced fine, complaining that the FPPC staff “lumped together” 61 counts into the 14 that Voss stipulated to. The action, according to the letter, had the effect of diluting the possible maximum fine from $122,000 to $28,000.