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.