Cup Could Put Wind in Cleator’s Sail

A victory by Dennis Conner’s Stars & Stripes in the America’s Cup competition in Australia not only would return yachting’s most prestigious trophy to this country after a 3 1/2-year absence, but also could play a key role in extending the political career of San Diego City Councilman Bill Cleator.

Since the disappointment of his loss to Maureen O’Connor in last year’s special mayoral race--his second defeat in three years for the city’s top elective post--Cleator has been indecisive about whether to seek a third four-year council term this fall.

What could push the the 59-year-old Republican councilman off the fence and into the 2nd District race, many GOP leaders believe, is a victory by San Diego skipper Conner in the America’s Cup finals in Fremantle. If Conner regains the Cup, Cleator is expected to play a leading role in trying to bring the races to San Diego in the early 1990s.

“If Conner wins . . . Bill would have an issue to champion as his own for the next four years,” said one top party official. “He’d love to see that through.”

In anticipation of a possible Conner victory, Cleator is in Australia as part of a 10-member San Diego delegation studying the feasibility and expense of staging a 1990-1991 America’s Cup defense here. Conner leads the best-of-seven series against Australia’s Kookaburra III by a 3-0 margin and needs only one more win to avenge his 1983 loss to Australia--a defeat that snapped a 132-year American winning streak.

Cleator has proposed that the city donate $100,000 to Sail America, the fund-raising arm of Conner’s team, as a small step toward luring the America’s Cup competition--and its projected $1 billion in tourist revenues--to San Diego.

Before leaving for Australia, Cleator explained that his reelection decision would be based on “no single overriding personal or professional factor.” But one GOP leader described Cleator’s interest in the America’s Cup as “maybe the last little nudge for a guy who’s looking for a reason to run”--a characterization that even Cleator does not dispute.

“Talk about putting San Diego on the map--man, that would really do it!” Cleator gushed. “I think it’s great that the Super Bowl is going to be here next year, but that’s one day. The America’s Cup would keep San Diego in the spotlight for months. Helping to put that together would be very exciting for me.”

Jones Charts His Future

Another San Diego City Council member who has kept friends and foes guessing about his intentions this fall is William Jones, now in the final year of his first full term. However, Jones’ uncertainty appears to have less to do with what happens in the wind-swept waves off Fremantle than with the choppy political waters that he has encountered at City Hall over the past year.

While Jones, 31, says he will not announce his plans until this spring, even some of his close backers believe that he is leaning against running for reelection to the 4th District seat. One council colleague came away from a recent conversation with him convinced that Jones, after spending his entire adult life at City Hall--including 10 years as an aide to former Councilman and now County Supervisor Leon Williams--is “looking for a change” in either private business or a college fellowship.

Many political observers trace Jones’ doubts about remaining at City Hall to two events that occurred last October: his intense anger over the council’s dismissal of City Manager Sylvester Murray, the first black to hold that post, and finding himself embroiled in controversy when it was revealed that Jones had received an unusual no-down payment loan from a local bank to buy a small Southeast San Diego apartment complex whose residents received rent subsidies from the city. To avoid a potential conflict of interest, Jones later asked the city to end the subsidies.

Understating the obvious, Jones described last October as “not a particularly pleasant month,” but said his reelection decision would not turn on that alone.

“I’m not going to take one or two issues and blow them out of proportion,” Jones said. “Every job has its minuses. But I still enjoy this job as much today as when I took office.

“I’m just going through the kind of reevaluation process that people face from time to time in their lives. The question I’m trying to answer is how William Jones can make a bigger contribution to this city. Maybe that means staying on the City Council, or maybe it means doing something else.”

Campaign Reforms Face Rough Waters

San Diego Mayor Maureen O’Connor faces a very tough sell when she tries to persuade her colleagues later this week to go along with her campaign reform proposal to restrict political contributions.

The mayor’s plan, to be reviewed Wednesday by the council’s Rules Committee, would, among other things, prohibit a council member from voting on any issue involving businesses whose officers have cumulatively donated more than $1,000 to him in the past year. Under that proposal--aimed primarily at developers and others who frequently appear before the council--a council member who received donations from as few as three people who work together could be barred from voting on matters affecting their firm.

Council members who received more than $500 within a year from an applicant seeking council action also would be required to disclose that fact on the council’s docket. Another provision of O’Connor’s proposal would bar individuals who testify before the council on an item from contributing more than $500 to any council member for one year after the council’s decision.

O’Connor, who first suggested the reforms during last year’s special mayoral race, argues that her plan, patterned after Orange County election laws and California Coastal Commission rules, could ensure that the council’s decisions “are not unduly influenced by campaign contributions.” Violators of the ordinance could be prosecuted on misdemeanor charges.

Other council members, though, complain that O’Connor’s plan is unworkable, would dramatically expand paper work requirements and is, as one put it, based on the “ridiculous and insulting premise that anyone can be bought . . . for $1,000.” Some City Hall skeptics also accuse O’Connor of sanctimonious posturing, arguing that the plan would most benefit wealthy candidates such as herself, while candidates of modest means would be forced to spend more time on fund raising.

Critics also argue that the $1,000 disqualification threshold could lead to legislative gridlock by creating the potential for a majority of council members to be barred from voting on issues involving major local companies--thereby making it impossible for the council to act.

Based on the largely negative reaction to the mayor’s proposal, O’Connor’s staffers are steeling themselves for a grilling Wednesday.

“God knows what this thing is going to look like when we get out of there,” said Chris Crotty, O’Connor’s Rules Committee consultant.