Perkins has income ties to apartment complex owner
Lolita Harper
Council candidate and Planning Commissioner Bill Perkins derives
half his family income from an apartment owner who potentially stands
to lose a lot of money if a tougher rental housing program is enacted
by the city.
Though not an apparent conflict, according to a city attorney, the
tie is being questioned by one of Perkins’ council opponents.
Amber Perkins, Perkins’ wife, works as an administrative assistant
for the owner of Pine Creek Village apartments -- a 340-unit complex
on Adams Avenue.
It’s such a large complex that if the Planning Commission were to
succeed in passing a substandard rental housing program that mandated
a per-unit fee -- such as the $65 cost that surfaced in previous
Planning Commission brainstorming sessions -- Pine Creek Village
could lose thousands.
Perkins said he has already researched a possible conflict of
interest with the city attorney’s office and there is none. The
Planning Commissioner said he understands he would have to abstain
from any vote that would effect Pine Creek by more than $10,000.
Asst. City Atty. Tom Wood confirmed Perkins assertion, saying
generally a legal conflict depends on the financial details involved.
Wood said he would need specific numbers involved in a particular
vote to render an informed legal opinion.
Perkins’ involvement in the formation of a proposal for a rental
housing program does not necessarily constitute a legal conflict, in
and of itself, Wood said.
“Just because a Planning Commissioner or City Council member has a
strong opinion on something doesn’t make it a conflict,” Wood said.
Pine Creek Village apartments is also a member of the Apartment
Assn. of Orange County, which helped fund a 300-person phone poll to
gauge voters’ support for Planning Commission Chairwoman Katrina
Foley, Perkins’ opponent in the council race. Rental Housing
Independent, which is a subsidiary of the Apartment Assn. of Orange
County, sponsored the survey that aimed to tell traditionally
conservative voters that Foley was a registered Democrat and an
attorney.
The phone poll was unknowingly commissioned on behalf of Perkins
and Councilman Gary Monahan, who reported the survey results on
official campaign financial statements as in-kind contributions worth
$3,850.
Perkins and Monahan claimed they had nothing to do with the poll
and were unwilling recipients of the information. Monahan also
received a $5,000 donation from the rental housing group and gave
half the money to Perkins’ campaign.
Perkins denied Pine Creek Village’s connection to the phone poll,
when asked about it on Oct. 24.
“Her management company has nothing to do with it,” Perkins said.
He failed at that time to mention that he knew the complex was a
member of the Apartment Assn. of Orange County. When asked why
Friday, he said he forgot.
Foley said it is all too convenient and feels the negative phone
survey was done as a result of Amber Perkins’s affiliation with a
Costa Mesa apartment owner.
“I feel the reason that the apartment owners are targeting me is
because Bill’s wife works for them,” Foley said. “It’s all based on
misinformation anyway, because I am for targeted enforcement of slum
lords -- Pine Creek, to my knowledge, does not fall under that.”
Perkins again asserted the phone poll had nothing to do with his
wife and said the apartment association targeted Foley because she
was pushing a program that could be detrimental to its members.
“There is no conflict here, no conspiracy theory,” Perkins said.
“I know what the limits are and I won’t violate them.”
* LOLITA HARPER covers Costa Mesa. She may be reached at (949)
574-4275 or by e-mail at lolita.harper@latimes.com.
All the latest on Orange County from Orange County.
Get our free TimesOC newsletter.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Daily Pilot.