Navarro Says Loan for Race Was Inherited : Politics: Mayoral candidate admits $300,000 was given to him by his mother, but all the money has been spent.

San Diego mayoral candidate Peter Navarro acknowledged for the first time Friday that he inherited $300,000 in the spring of 1991, claiming again that he has exhausted that money and other assets in his bid to capture the city’s top post.

The growth management advocate, who frequently derides a local economy “based on real estate speculation,” also revealed that he earned about $160,000 on the resale of three separate Massachusetts properties he owned in the 1970s and 1980s. Navarro’s accounting of the sales could not be independently verified Friday.

Navarro’s announcement Friday is the first full accounting of how he has been able to loan his campaign $219,000 on a family income of about $86,000 annually. Throughout the primary campaign, and as recently as a week ago, Navarro said that the money came from investments and savings, particularly sizable fees he earned for speaking engagements.

Navarro said he did not reveal the inheritance to protect his mother from intrusive investigations by political opponents seeking to dig up damaging information about him.

The secrecy gave Navarro a strategic advantage over opponents in the June 3 mayoral primary, who did not know how much personal money he had available for the six-way race.

Navarro’s disclosure is also an attempt to defuse rival Susan Golding’s efforts to raise questions about the source and legality of his personal funds. In recent weeks, Golding, a county supervisor, has stepped up pressure on Navarro to explain the source of his personal spending and formally asked City Atty. John Witt to investigate alleged campaign reporting irregularities.

Under city codes, Navarro is not required to detail the source of personal funds used in a political campaign. Each candidate is, however, required to file a statement of economic interests.

Asked about Navarro’s disclosure, Mikel Haas, an elections official in the city clerk’s office, said that “you can give as much money as you want to your own campaign. The bottom line is, it’s his money.”

Attempting to turn the issue against his opponent, Navarro challenged Golding to explain the source of $277,789 she borrowed from prominent financier Richard Silberman, whom she married in the midst of her bitter 1984 campaign for county supervisor. Silberman was convicted in 1990 for his role in laundering what he believed was $300,000 in drug money.

“This is a two-way street. Peter Navarro has shown he has nothing to hide,” Navarro press secretary Lori Dang said in a prepared statement. “Can the same be said about Politician Golding?”

Golding has not contributed any personal money to the more than $447,000, she has raised for the race so far, according to financial disclosure forms filed July 31. Navarro has raised $329,000, according to his documents.

Past disclosure forms have showed that Navarro’s mother, Evelyn Littlejohn, of Palm Beach, Fla., has helped bankroll Navarro’s growth management organization, Prevent Los Angelization Now!

In response to Navarro’s disclosure, Golding campaign manager Dan McAllister said that “it looks to us like he was caught red-handed, and he’s wiggling like a fish caught on a hook and being brought up to the boat.

“Why did it take so long for us to get to the point where he finally said, ‘Yes my money came from my out-of-town mom’?” McAllister asked.

In a prepared statement that included an affidavit signed by his mother’s attorney, Navarro said that he inherited $300,000 from his mother on April 5, 1991, months before he declared his intention to run in the mayor’s race. Navarro’s brother, Bradford, inherited the same amount.

The money was part of a much larger trust that Evelyn Littlejohn inherited from her husband, Harold DeWitt Littlejohn, who retired from his business of leasing and selling heavy equipment in Cincinnati, according to Gustave Broberg Jr., attorney for the Littlejohns. Harold Littlejohn died Nov. 9, 1990.

The first $600,000 of the estate is tax free under U.S. law, Broberg said in an interview, and Littlejohn decided to give the money to her sons rather than take a tax credit against her estate when she dies, Broberg said.

Navarro said he distributed the inheritance among his investments, and that interest from them appeared on his 1991 tax return, which he has previously disclosed. Golding officials have questioned why those tax returns do not reflect more interest and dividend income.

Navarro also revealed that he earned $100,000 on a Cambridge, Mass., three-family home that he purchased and later sold as three separate condominiums; $30,000 on a separate Cambridge condominium and $30,000 on a house he owned in Falmouth, Mass. He provided only approximate dates for the purchase and sale of the property.

He said he made his initial real estate purchase with money inherited from his godmother, Lyda Green.

Asked how his capital gains square with his stance against real estate speculation, Navarro said that his profits did not involve construction of new homes or the bulldozing of vacant land.

“The essence of real estate speculation in San Diego is to buy a piece of property zoned agricultural and . . . stacking it with high-density homes without schools,” Navarro said.

Navarro’s statement showed that he had $120,305 in assets before he received the inheritance. He said that he has spent all the money except about $23,000 left in an individual retirement account.

The spending includes the $219,000 loaned to the campaign, and the money spent to pay off the mortgage on his Del Mar Heights home. County land records show that he took out a $110,000 trust deed on the home, which he bought in 1986 for $250,000.

“It’s all gone,” Navarro said.

“I think it’s important to point out I could have used that money for anything--to be quite comfortable, maybe even semi-retire,” he added. “I’ve chosen not to do that because I believe deeply in what needs to be done for San Diego.”

Navarro questioned how Golding was able to win a broadened interpretation of Fair Political Practices Commission requirements that released her from reporting gifts from Silberman before the two were married.

The interpretation came during the time that Golding’s former personal attorney, Dan Stanford, was chairman of the FPPC. Now, Stanford is one of the attorneys who filed Golding’s complaint with the city attorney’s office about Navarro’s campaign finances.

Golding alleged Friday, before Navarro revealed the inheritance, that an accountant’s analysis raises “serious concerns that a previously undisclosed source of cash may have found its way into the coffers of the Peter Navarro ’92 committee.”

“The issue is hypocrisy,” Navarro said. “With her sordid past in terms of the ’84 campaign, and unanswered questions about sources of funding, it’s just beyond hypocrisy to raise those kinds of questions with me, much less ask the city attorney to investigate.”

Navarro and his attorney, Hal Rosner, declared Golding’s complaint groundless.

“I have no intention of personally attacking Susan Golding--I have not and I don’t intend to,” Navarro said. “However, if she wants to get tough with me personally, I will get tougher with her. If she wants to throw dirt at me, I’ll bury her with her own dirt.”