San Diego : Cleator, O’Connor Trade Barbs on Money Interests

Saying that San Diegans “should be assured that their next mayor has no financial conflicts of interest,” City Councilman Bill Cleator on Wednesday pledged to make a full disclosure of his assets and called on his mayoral opponent, former Councilwoman Maureen O’Connor, to do the same.

“The people have a right to know what financial interests inside or outside the city may be influencing their mayor’s decision-making on important issues facing the city,” Cleator said. “Current city disclosure laws do not go nearly far enough towards painting a complete picture of the person who would be our mayor.”

However, O’Connor, noting that she is “abiding by the rules in place now,” rejected Cleator’s proposal, which she dismissed as “simply a ploy . . . to try to drag my husband into the town square and beat on him.”

“I’ve always over-disclosed rather than under-disclosed,” said O’Connor, the wife of multimillionaire businessman Robert O. Peterson, founder of the Jack in the Box fast-food chain. “This is just their way of trying to obscure the real issue, which is that Mr. Cleator is taking thousands of dollars in contributions from developers . . . who own City Hall. That’s where the real conflict of interest is.”

Cleator said that, within three weeks, he will release a complete list of the financial holdings that he and his wife, Marilyn, own. He also suggested that future mayoral and council candidates be required to “disclose in full the exact value and nature” of their financial holdings.

O’Connor responded that she would be “glad to go along” with such an ordinance “if and when it’s the law,” but questioned whether Cleator’s proposal “gives you anything you don’t already have.”

She pointed out that, as required by law, she filed a Statement of Economic Interest earlier this year that listed “all the pertinent assets within the City of San Diego” that she and Peterson own.

“And the law already says you can’t vote on anything that might affect your holdings or your family’s, so I don’t see how (Cleator’s) idea gives you any greater protection against conflicts of interest,” O’Connor added. “If he’s really concerned about conflicts of interest, he should return all of the contributions he’s getting from developers, because they’re the ones with the most to gain from a mayoral vote.”

O’Connor has refused to accept campaign contributions from developers, but has received several thousand dollars from “development interests” such as architects, mortgage bankers and real-estate officials. In contrast, Cleator, who argues that O’Connor’s policy “unfairly excludes” developers from the mayoral campaign, has received tens of thousands of dollars in donations from developers.