Charter Voting Mixed; Picus, Stevenson Lead

Los Angeles voters reacted with mixed feelings Tuesday to proposed changes in city government, as they showed a strong inclination to approve campaign spending limitations and less enthusiasm in early voting for a measure that would expand the 15-member City Council by two seats.

Meanwhile, City Council members Peggy Stevenson and Joy Picus, engaged in the hottest council races, built early, but not insurmountable, leads in their efforts to avoid runoffs.

Stevenson, in particular, appeared headed for a struggle to secure the 50%-plus majority needed to win outright in her district surrounding Hollywood.

The six other council incumbents who are running for reelection this year won easily.

While Stevenson would not comment on her situation, Picus said she was “confident of victory.” Leading with 55 percent of the vote, with half the returns counted in her west San Fernando Valley district, she said, “I ran a positive campaign. My (five) opponents united to relentlessly attack me. I’m pleased my constituents could recognize what happened and affirm the work I’ve done over the past four years.”

Supporters of the campaign finance measure, Charter Amendment 1, were elated.

“It looks great,” said City Councilman Ernani Bernardi, the driving force behind the campaign finance measure.

Walter Zelman, executive director of Common Cause in California and a strong supporter of the measure, echoed Bernardi’s enthusiasm.

“This will be a good day for the city of Los Angeles,” Zelman said. “It’s going to decrease the clout of the largest contributors and force candidates to spread out their base.”

But supporters of City Council expansion were disheartened.

State Sen. Art Torres, who backed the measure known as Charter Amendment 2, said he suspected more people did not vote for it because of fears that it would raise city costs during a time of economic uncertainty.

City Council candidate Michael Woo, expected to provide Stevenson’s toughest competition, said he would be sure of his chances of forcing Stevenson into a runoff only if results showed him with about 35% of the vote.

“As soon as I get into the mid-30s, I’ll be happy, because that means she won’t reach 50%,” Woo said.

Woo, an aide to state Sen. David A. Roberti (D-Los Angeles), is making his second run at Stevenson. He lost to her decisively in the 1981 runoff after nearly besting her in that year’s primary.

In other council races, incumbents were leading comfortably in early returns. They included Howard Finn, who faced three opponents; Bernardi and Gilbert Lindsay, who were challenged by two each, and Joan Milke Flores, who faced one write-in candidate. Councilmen Marvin Braude and Zev Yaroslavsky were not opposed.

Supporters of the campaign finance “reform” measure said it is needed to curb the spiraling costs of local elections.

The measure calls for limits of $500 on individual loans and contributions to City Council candidates and for ceilings of $1,000 on loans and donations to candidates for mayor, city attorney and controller.

The amendment would also prevent stockpiling of funds by politicians by allowing them to keep only $5,000 for future city races.

Opponents charged that the measure, which would take effect July 1, would strengthen the advantage that incumbents already enjoy. Critics also noted that the city attorney has expressed legal reservations about some of the measure’s provisions.

Charter Amendment 2 would have resulted in the first council expansion in 60 years.

Supporters of the measure pushed it as a way to add more minority members to the council, which has had only one Latino member and no Asian-Americans, despite the burgeoning of those ethnic communities.

Opponents claimed that the expansion would not guarantee ethnic representation and would cost too much.

Remaining ballot measures attracted little attention and contained no ballot arguments in opposition. They included Charter Amendments 3, which would revise procedures governing recall of Board of Education members; 4, which would make minor changes in recall procedures for mayor, city attorney, city controller and City Council members, and 5, which would speed verification of signatures on initiative and recall petitions.

Charter Amendment 6 would raise the $500 maximum fine for misdemeanor violations of city laws by tying it to the maximum allowed under state law--currently $1,000.

Charter Amendment 7 would prevent city officials from levying benefit assessment taxes for the Metro Rail subway or other transit needs on residential properties in use or under construction before April 9, 1985.

In the most hotly contested City Council race, Stevenson enjoyed several advantages. As an incumbent, she raised more money--in excess of $300,000--than any of her five opponents and she received more endorsements. She enjoyed the support of a broad range of constituents, from real estate developers and entertainment industry executives to Hollywood merchants, homeowners’ groups and elderly renters.

Woo was able to raise more than $210,000. In addition, he gained several noteworthy endorsements, including those of Dist. Atty. Ira Reiner, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Los Angeles) and Secretary of State March Fong Eu.

The race shaped up quickly as a referendum on Stevenson.

The Woo campaign depicted Stevenson as a lightweight who spent time “posing with movie stars,” ignored crucial issues such as police pension reform, and gave the nod to controversial real estate projects after key developers had contributed to her campaign.

Stevenson began mending fences around the district well in advance of the 1985 campaign. She won back the support of Dan Garcia, president of the city Planning Commission, who supported Woo in 1981.

Woo’s campaign strove to picture him as a responsible local resident committed to making a better life for his neighbors. A homeowner with a graduate degree in city planning, Woo saw himself as the candidate of the district’s young professional class, whose ranks had been swollen by reapportionment following the last election.

But much of Woo’s campaign literature was directed at the older and poorer segments of the district. The literature contained homespun assurances that Woo would care about bread-and-butter issues, ranging from rent control to neighborhood security to community health services.

In the most active San Fernando Valley council race, Picus had to contend with an assault by five conservative opponents who claimed that she, as an outspoken feminist, was too liberal for a district that has backed conservative causes and candidates from Proposition 13 to President Reagan.