• Scam Diego alerts

As we reported last month, new Padres owner Jeff Moorad has yet to tell the city all the namesof his partners in the deal to buy the team from divorce-embattled John Moores.

Ex-city councilman Bruce Henderson warned that keeping the names secret was problematic and urged the city to enforce Charter Section 225, requiring a full disclosure of the names. "Council members, the mayor, city staff should know whose economic interests are before them in order to be certain there is no conflict of interest, and the public needs to know the same thing, so if there is a conflict of interest they can blow the whistle on it," he said . A day later, Moorad had a news conference in which he listed 10 names of what he said were 12 partners.

Now the sale is already creating conflict of interest issues for one member of the board of the Centre City Development Corporation. According to an advice letter issued late yesterday by Alison Adema, general counsel to the city’s Ethics Commission, CCDC board member Kim Kilkenny is an employee and officer of OPLP, doing business as The Otay Ranch Company, developer of the big Otay Ranch tract in eastern Chula Vista.

Brothers Al Baldwin and Jim Baldwin each own 50% of the shares of Otay Ranch. In light of the fact that Al Baldwin is among the new Padres partners so far identified, Kilkenny asked the ethics commission whether he had a conflict of interest when voting at CCDC on issues affecting downtown’s Petco Park and related development. The answer: It depends.

“The conflict of interest provisions in the Ethics Ordinance preclude you from participating in CCDC decisions that are substantially likely to have a material financial impact on your economic interests, which include OPLP and Al Baldwin. Although the Padres are not a source of income to you, and do not otherwise represent one of your economic interests, you should be aware that CCDC decisions involving the Padres could still raise disqualification concerns.

"More specifically, if it is reasonably foreseeable that a CCDC decision relating to the Padres (or to any other entity) will affect Al Baldwin’s income, investments, or other tangible or intangible assets or liabilities by $1,000 or more, you will be disqualified from participating in that decision.”

Concluded Adema: “The conflict of interest provisions in the Ethics Ordinance preclude you from participating in CCDC decisions that are substantially likely to have a material financial effect on your economic interests. Thus, if it is substantially likely that a CCDC decision relating to the Padres (or any other entity) will affect Al Baldwin’s income, investments, or other tangible or intangible assets or liabilities by $1,000 or more, you will be disqualified from participating in that decision."

Here's the full opinion.

  • Scam Diego alerts

Comments

Fred Williams April 22, 2009 @ 11:04 p.m.

Kilkenny should resign.

Every decision of importance at CCDC has an impact on the Padres. CCDC (actually, the City of San Diego) is paying the Padres ballpork bonds. That should be enough to disqualify Kilkenny from most votes.

Besides, after the fiascos, scandals, and shenanigans that Kilkenny has overseen in the last few years, he should never have been re-appointed in the first place.

If the Mayor and Council now claim to be interested in reforming CCDC and overseeing its work for a change, they ought to tell Kilkenny to go.

There've been too many scandals at CCDC already. Kilkenny can be found right in the middle of the stench.

Time to resign...or be removed by a new council majority that wants to see reform instead of business as usual downtown.

0

realnews April 23, 2009 @ 6:45 p.m.

I understand why Moores opted for private judging. I don't understand why Becky went along with it.

Former judges Bill Howatt, and Thomas Ashworth both are members of JAMS or a JAMS like mediation and so their Statements of Economic disclosure are no longer required.

Howatt was the judge the Court of Appeal overturned on the Broderick case. Turns out Betty was right, old Dan had been looting their property. Who was Dan's attorney? Tom Ashworth.

San Diego family court has always protected the wealthy. Faster if the wealth with attorneys. See www.FamilyLawCourts.com

I don't wonder why the U-T doesn't cover family court. Family Court is where the dirt is found and Sam Diego fat cats control that particular court.

0

bluenwhitegokart April 23, 2009 @ 11:47 p.m.

There's no conflict of interest in the minds of the San Diego City council members...you kick down some duckets, problem solved.

Frickin' who-ores. Sellin' out the citizens is not just a job, it's an avocation.

Besides, if Henderson is ag'in it, we must be for it.

0

Sign in to comment

Join our
newsletter list

Enter to win $25 at Broken Yolk Cafe

Each newsletter subscription
means another chance to win!

Close