Council Sifting Array of Options for Selection of New S.D. Mayor

After a week of intense back-room politicking by conservative forces who favored the appointment of Councilman Bill Cleator as mayor, a majority of the City Council now supports a public election to choose Roger Hedgecock’s successor.

On Monday afternoon, the council will meet to decide whether an election should be called and, if so, to consider a complicated array of options for the vote to determine who will serve out the ex-mayor’s term.

“The council finally came around to the point of view that we were dealing with the most significant, important elected office in the city,” said Councilman Mike Gotch, who is seriously considering running for mayor.

“But it was not for lack of trying that the select few downtown business interests abandoned the effort to see Cleator appointed,” Gotch said. “It basically came down to a situation in which nobody else on the council was willing to go out front and carry the baton on Bill’s behalf.”

Cleator, a councilman since 1979 who finished third in the 1983 mayoral primary behind Hedgecock and former Councilwoman Maureen O’Connor, saw the move to appoint him to the mayor’s post dissolve when acting Mayor Ed Struiksma came out in favor of a popular election late in the week, City Hall sources said. Struiksma, Cleator, O’Connor, Gotch and Police Chief Bill Kolender are widely regarded as potential mayoral candidates.

“Whether Ed ultimately is a candidate or not, there was no percentage in it for him to be the front man for Cleator,” Gotch said. “Bill couldn’t quite pull this off, but there are still those who believe it is not worth it for the council to spend the money for a special election. There would have been a great public outrage at first, but like any crisis, it would have passed.”

Councilman William Jones, who with Gotch is carrying the liberal banner on the council following Hedgecock’s resignation, said the last week was marked by “quite a bit of infighting. It’s time we get away from that and start focusing on the issues that are profoundly affecting every neighborhood in this city.

“If it had been a short period of time (Hedgecock’s term expires in December, 1988), there might have been some merit to an appointment,” Jones said. “But given the council’s recent history, and the fact that the mayor’s job is the most important political position in the city, I don’t think there was any way for us to agree on one individual to appoint.”

With the political maneuvering over the possible appointment of a mayor apparently behind them, council members will concentrate Monday on several public election options proposed by City Clerk Chuck Abdelnour. Those include:

- A primary on Feb. 25, at a cost of $500,000, to be followed by a June 3 runoff, to be held in conjunction with the statewide election, which would cost an additional $200,000. Gotch and Councilwomen Gloria McColl and Judy McCarty said Friday that they were leaning toward that option. Abdelnour said the primary would have to be held in February in order to qualify the finalists for the June vote because of the timetable for printing the statewide ballots.

- Consolidation of the primary and runoff with statewide elections, to be held June 3 and Nov. 4. This option would cost a total of $400,000, but council members said they were reluctant to leave the mayor’s office empty for such a long period. This option would force other potential mayoral candidates holding state and national offices--including Assemblywoman Lucy Killea (D-San Diego) and Rep. Jim Bates (D-San Diego)--to give up their seats to enter the race.

- Two special elections, at a total cost of $1.1 million, with the primary falling between Feb. 25 and March 18, and the runoff six weeks later, between April 15 and May 6. Council members were wary of this option because it was the most expensive.

- Two special mail-in elections, at a total cost of $700,000, with the primary to be held Feb. 25 and the runoff April 15, the earliest date that a new mayor could be elected by popular vote.

Late Friday, Jones was the first council member to publicly support a mail-in ballot for the mayoral primary and runoff. Councilwoman Abbe Wolfsheimer also said Friday that she was “seriously considering the mail-in option.”

“Recent events indicate a concern over the impact (the elections) would have on the taxpayers,” Jones said. “A substantial savings of $400,000 could be achieved through a mail-in ballot (compared with holding two special elections). I recommend that the City Council move forward immediately in support of a mail-in ballot.”

Struiksma, a conservative ally of Cleator, became acting mayor after Hedgecock resigned Tuesday, an hour before he was sentenced in Superior Court for perjury and conspiracy stemming from violations of campaign laws in the 1983 mayoral election. Struiksma was elected deputy mayor by the council two weeks ago.

“The people of San Diego deserve an opportunity to elect their next mayor,” Struiksma said Friday in a prepared statement. “Although there are merits to the appointment process, I believe the city will be best served by the election process.” Struiksma did not elaborate on the statement, and Cleator did not return telephone calls from a reporter. But earlier in the week, Cleator told The Times that “there were people out there that have been talking to me about the appointment process, but I’ve tried to discourage them because I just don’t think the system works that way. I think the job requires having an elected mayor sitting in the seat.”

Also contributing to the demise of the movement behind Cleator was the reluctance of McColl, McCarty and Wolfsheimer, all conservative Republicans who have been politically allied with Cleator, to support the appointment process, sources said.

“I certainly would not be part of any back-room conspiracy behind an appointment,” McCarty said. “People are sick and tired of politics as usual on the council, and we must restore their confidence in city government. I feel it’s crucially important at this point to fill the job with a special election.”

“There has been a lot of controversy surrounding this council lately,” McColl said. “I was contacted by a few people who thought it would be good for the city to immediately appoint someone, but it’s crucial that the voters be comfortable with our new mayor, and the only way to accomplish that is by letting them vote for their own candidate.”

“As I see it, almost everybody supports a special election now,” Wolfsheimer said. “It’s quite necessary to have a special election as soon as possible.”