After an Early Redistricting Scare, Ferraro Looks Like an Easy Winner

John Ferraro last summer faced a nightmarish prospect for his reelection to the Los Angeles City Council. The second of what eventually would be three redistricting plans designed to increase Latino representation placed Ferraro and fellow incumbent Michael Woo in the same Wishire-Hollywood district. The two would have had to slug it out in next week’s election.

But then Councilman Howard Finn died. Taking advantage of that vacancy, a third and final plan divided up Finn’s San Fernando Valley territory, radically shifted other boundaries and gave Ferraro and Woo separate districts.

With the Woo threat gone, Ferraro now faces what his aides expect will be an easy contest in his 4th District against Sal Genovese, a Hollywood resident who owns a drug and alcohol rehabilitation counseling service and who, like Ferraro, unsuccessfully ran for mayor in 1985.

Genovese, however, says he is counting on lingering resentment over redistricting to help him, especially since about half of the voters in the reconfigured 4th District never had Ferraro as their councilman before September.

“I think it was pretty dirty politics and a very selfish approach,” Genovese said of the redistricting. The changes left Ferraro’s home base of Hancock Park and mid-Wilshire in the district and added Atwater, Los Feliz, Griffith Park, Toluca Lake and parts of North Hollywood and Studio City to it. The Fourth District is now a strange-looking creature on the map, a backwards C with a very narrow middle through Echo Park and Silver Lake.

In September, Ferraro joked that he had to buy a Thomas Brothers map book to help him find parts of his newly drawn district. But now, he and his aides say they have worked hard to win support in the new territory and are meeting constituents’ concerns on such matters as a new public library for Atwater and redevelopment in North Hollywood.

“I’ve never encountered any resentment over the redistricting. People seem pleased and happy that I’m there,” said Ferraro, who has been on the City Council for 20 years and was reelected in 1983 with 87% of the vote against two opponents.

Genovese, 41, is trying to portray Ferraro, 62, as a tired politician who pays more attention to developers than to residents. The challenger has been ringing doorbells and standing out in front of markets and post offices. His message: “I just think it’s time for a change.”

But history and money remain on Ferraro’s side.

Only twice in the past 15 years has a council member failed to win reelection. Peggy Stevenson lost to Michael Woo in 1985, and Donald Lorenzen was defeated by Joy Picus in 1977. Picus and Woo won on their second attempts. And each raised more than $100,000 in campaign funds. The incumbents also had angered large numbers of constituents.

The city’s campaign financing law also works against challenges. A loophole in the 1985 law allows council members this year to spend the hundreds of thousands of dollars they collected before the measure went into effect on July 1, 1985. Challengers must obey the $500-per-donor limit required by the law; for incumbents, the measure only applies to contributions received after the law became effective.

According to a campaign report filed last week, Ferraro has nearly $293,000 in his war chest after having spent $30,622 since January on political expenses. Ferraro said he expects to spend about $110,000 on the current campaign, concentrating on a last-minute mail blitz.

$10,000 Campaign Spending

In contrast, Genovese’s most recent campaign report shows that he is nearly $3,000 in debt after having spent about $5,000. Genovese said he will spend about $10,000 on the race.

Despite all that, Genovese contends that he can win.

“In 1985, John Ferraro said, ‘After three terms as mayor, a person tends to become complacent and isolated from the people,’ ” Genovese said. “What does he say about a councilman who has served for two decades?”

Genovese claims that the 1985 mayoral race shows that Ferraro is not popular. In that race, Tom Bradley garnered 68% of the vote; Ferraro received 30% and did not carry even the 4th District. Genovese, in his first bid for elected office, was among the eight lesser-known candidates who divided up the remaining 2%.

Ferraro said the mayoral race, if anything, boosted his name recognition in the new parts of his district and that no one could have beaten Bradley in the afterglow of the Olympics.

And what about his own statements about the isolation of a long-time mayor? “I think there’s a difference between being a chief executive of a city and being a legislator,” Ferraro responded.

Ferraro, a former All-American tackle at USC and then an insurance broker who became wealthy though shrewd investments in stocks and real estate, first was appointed to the council in 1966 to replace Harold A. Henry, who died.

Genovese was born in New York and raised in Los Angeles, graduating from Hollywood High School. He attended California State University, Los Angeles, but he went to work before earning a degree. His outpatient treatment service, called Professional Services Center, has offices in Glendale and Long Beach. He is divorced and the father of a teen-age girl.

His business gives him insights into the problems that may lead people to drugs, Genovese said. Those problems, such as unemployment and lack of recreation for youth, are causing a decline in parts of the district, he said.

Genovese points to two issues as support for his claim that Ferraro tilts in favor of developers.

Last May, Ferraro helped win council approval for a controversial $220,904 refund in fees to the developer of a mid-Wilshire apartment building in exchange for a slight lowering of some rents. The fees originally were designated to fund new parks.

Ferraro said his district needed lower rents more than it did new parks. He denied allegations by Genovese and several city council members that the refund was special interest legislation.

Ferraro also became embroiled in the fight by residents of several apartment buildings on Detroit Street north of Wilshire Boulevard’s Miracle Mile to stop a developer from replacing their homes with new, luxury apartments. Ferraro proposed a moratorium on demolitions in the area, but his proposal was turned down by a council committee and the Planning Commission.

Still under study are other controls on development in the neighborhood and a required increase in financial aid to renters who are evicted to make way for new projects.

Genovese said that Ferraro really did not want the moratorium and worked so halfheartedly for it that it was bound to fail. “Yet he went through all that energy to give back money to a multimillionaire,” he said, referring to the refund in parks fees.

In the midst of the Detroit Street controversy, Genovese joined a group of about 20 picketers outside Ferraro’s house. Ferraro said he personally resented that picketing because it prevented his wife, who is recovering from a stroke, from attending a therapy session.

Ferraro said he tried his best to delay demolition. And, he said he is very concerned about the possibility of overdevelopment. That’s why, he said, he helped win approval for a three-story height limit along the Park Mile section of Wilshire.

Ferraro and Genovese are both registered Democrats in a nonpartisan race. They both oppose Metro Rail and favor a mix of light rail and buses instead. Both support rent control. They both said that crime is the number one problem in the district.

Genovese contends that the city could put more police on the street by eliminating waste in city government. But he was unable to propose specific areas for budget cuts. He said that if elected, he would institute a commission to solicit private contributions to help pay for more police.

Genovese also said he wants to set up what he called a “Community Awareness Program” of neighborhood residents’ councils throughout the district to advise him on issues.