Santa Ana Office Tower Critics Call for Investigation

Critics of a proposed 37-story office building in Santa Ana have asked for an investigation of City Councilwoman Claudia Alvarez because she chose to vote on the project after receiving a campaign donation from the developer.

The critics, who sent letters Friday to the city attorney and Orange County district attorney, say Alvarez took a $3,200 donation from developer Michael Harrah and shouldn’t be able to vote on final approval for the tower at a council meeting today.

In March, Alvarez and other council members voted to require Harrah to provide proof that the tower be at least half leased before construction begins. Opponents of the office building say Alvarez should have recused herself.

The letters seeking an investigation came just days before the council’s vote on the proposed green glass office building at 10th Street and Broadway that could change the face of downtown Santa Ana, effectively moving its center north. Critics argue that the building, which would be Orange County’s tallest, is out of proportion to the surrounding low-slung neighborhood.

Nevertheless, the project is likely to be approved.

Only one member of the council, Alberta Christy, has publicly opposed the plan. Two other council members, Mayor Miguel Pulido and Brett Franklin, have decided to recuse themselves based on the appearance of a conflict.

Franklin accepted $1,000 from Harrah last year in an unsuccessful campaign for county supervisor.

“I have the legal right to vote,” Franklin said. “Given the long-term consequences of a project like this, I feel I have an ethical obligation to abstain.”

Pulido said a business partner was involved in the project, although Harrah had said the tower was his alone.

“I can’t understand for the life of me why he is not going to vote,” Harrah said. “Maybe he does not want to go through the headache of dealing with these people who say this is wrong when it’s not.”

Pulido and Alvarez didn’t return calls seeking comment.

Alvarez “should have recused herself and she would not be involved now,” said Kim Gerda, an opponent of the tower who has asked for an investigation. “Her vote of support means the project will go through. Without her, there might not be a project.”

Because only five council members will be voting and one is opposed, all four remaining votes are needed for passage.

Alvarez accepted Harrah’s donation on June 30, 2003, in her failed race for an Assembly seat. In addition, she held a fundraiser five days earlier at a building Harrah was converting into a restaurant.

City Atty. Joseph Fletcher said he told Alvarez and Franklin they could vote because their donations were not related to campaigns for city office. “We only have the right to regulate local municipal affairs. Nothing else,” Fletcher said.

But Santa Ana’s municipal code doesn’t specify that a campaign contribution must relate to a city office to disqualify a council member from voting on a matter relating to the donor. It states only that council members must wait a year before voting on such matters.

Because Alvarez is also an assistant district attorney, the letter to the district attorney’s office was forwarded to the state attorney general “to avoid any possible conflict of interest,” said Assistant Dist. Atty. Douglas Woodsmall.

Harrah said he supported Alvarez and Franklin because he thought they were great community leaders.

“I do back council members who will be an asset to the community, not just to me,” Harrah said. “I do have a bit to protect here as far as the future goes.”