Alatorre Admits to Aid From Investor

Although denying any wrongdoing, Los Angeles Councilman Richard Alatorre for the first time acknowledged Monday that a friend with city business helped him with a real estate transaction that sparked a federal corruption investigation.

The embattled lawmaker’s acknowledgment came during a rancorous Superior Court hearing about whether Alatorre and his wife should retain guardianship of their niece, who has lived with them for two years. The 10-year-old girl’s father, a political rival, is attempting to prove that Alatorre is an unfit caretaker because of alleged drug use and financial improprieties--accusations that he has denied.

A good portion of the testimony centered on a 1996 condominium lease that Alatorre submitted to a bank in the hopes of obtaining a loan for a new home. The man who signed the lease, Han Huskey, has called it a fake, intended to dupe bank officials into thinking that the money-losing condo was generating income, thus enhancing the councilman’s chances for a new loan.

Huskey said he entered into the agreement at the behest of real estate investor Samuel S. Mevorach, who had millions of dollars at stake in city business at the time and wanted Alatorre’s backing--help that city records show he consistently obtained. Mevorach, in the past, has denied doing anything improper.

On Monday, Alatorre provided his most detailed explanation of the events surrounding the lease and purchase of his $285,000 Eagle Rock home, which are among several matters under scrutiny by the FBI and Internal Revenue Service.

The councilman said Mevorach did bring Huskey into the condo deal but that there was no trickery involved. Alatorre said that Huskey signed a one-year lease with an option to buy the condo for his mother. Alatorre said Huskey wrote a $2,800 check for the first and last month’s rent, which Alatorre said he deposited in his bank account.

Alatorre’s clear recollection of Huskey on Monday contrasted sharply with his comments during an interview with The Times last year in which he said: “I don’t even know who Huskey is.”

At one point during Alatorre’s testimony, Judge Henry W. Shatford took over the questioning and appeared to grow frustrated by the councilman’s seeming reluctance to acknowledge the importance of the lease.

The judge repeatedly asked Alatorre whether it was a factor considered by the bank in granting him a new home mortgage. Alatorre responded with indirect answers, stressing that his main interest was selling the condo.

“You’re not answering my question,” Shatford said.

Finally, Alatorre conceded that the bank considered the lease income in deciding to approve the loan.

“Yes,” Alatorre said, “that’s correct.”

Alatorre told the judge that although the lease was bona fide when it was submitted, Huskey later backed out after the bank refused to reduce the condo’s mortgage.

Under questioning by attorney Ricardo A. Torres--who is representing the father of the girl at the center of the guardianship battle--Alatorre said he returned Huskey’s $2,800 through a friend. Torres asked if there was a record of the repayment and whether the funds had come from his checking or savings account.

“No it didn’t,” Alatorre said, adding he reimbursed Huskey with cash. “I had it in my house.”

Alatorre’s account of the lease deal contradicts Huskey’s version in several crucial respects.

Huskey told The Times last year that he had rejected the idea of buying the property even before he was drawn into the lease deal because he considered it a bad investment.

Huskey also said he was reimbursed in $100 bills by a Mevorach associate immediately after signing the lease--not, as Alatorre testified, at some later time.

Late Monday, Huskey stood by that account in a brief interview. “All I can say, I don’t know anything about that,” he said of Alatorre’s testimony. “I don’t know what Mevorach told the [councilman].”

Huskey has been served with a federal grand jury subpoena for records related to the Alatorre lease as part of a wide-ranging probe of the lawmaker’s personal finances and public actions. The FBI and IRS launched their investigations late last year after a Times article describing the assistance Alatorre received from several Mevorach associates in buying his home.

Attorneys in the guardianship hearing, which started Monday, are delving into some of these same issues to “show a pattern of financial impropriety” that would disqualify the Alatorres as guardians, said lawyer Frank Lozoya, who represents the girl’s father, Henry Lozano.

But on Monday, the Alatorres received an endorsement from the child’s court-appointed attorney, who told the judge that the girl should remain with the lawmaker and his wife, Angie. He also called the girl’s father an “honorable” person who should be allowed visitation rights to develop a relationship with his daughter, whose mother died in early 1996.

The Alatorres contend that Lozano never provided support for his daughter and only last year acknowledged that he was her father.

The Alatorre’s attorney, Neil Papiano, said Monday that Lozano’s allegations are politically motivated and that the councilman’s real estate transactions are irrelevant to the case.

“If that’s all these guys got,” Papiano said, “I’m deliriously happy.”