LOCAL ELECTIONS DISTRICT ATTORNEY : 2 Candidates Disagree on How to Run Office

Michael R. Capizzi and James G. Enright, candidates in the November race for district attorney and longtime adversaries within the office, showed voters more than just their cool attitudes toward each other in their first pair of debates last week.

They also made clear sharply contrasting viewpoints on how they would run the office.

Enright, chief deputy for 24 years, vowed he would show leadership to the deputies within the office by taking on courtroom cases himself.

“You can’t be an administrator if you haven’t been in that courtroom and are current,” Enright said. In fact, he said that if budget cuts are required, his first priority would be to cut down on administration to keep from losing any courtroom deputies.

“I would cut out some of the memo writers,” Enright said. “I would cut out some of the duplication that we may have in the area of administration.”

Capizzi, who was appointed district attorney by the Board of Supervisors in January to replace Cecil Hicks, who was appointed to a judgeship, insisted that with a $40-million budget and a total staff of more than 600, what the office needs at the top is a sharp, full-time administrator.

“The D.A. cannot immerse himself in a trial and isolate himself from the day-to-day operation of the office,” said Capizzi, who had been chief assistant under Hicks.

It was the first one-on-one confrontation between the two since the June primary, when Enright garnered enough second-place votes in a four-man race to force Capizzi into a runoff.

The first debate last Monday, sponsored by the League of Women Voters, will air on public-access cable stations before the Nov. 6 election. A second debate last Wednesday will air on KOCE (Channel 50) on Oct. 24.

Capizzi generally avoided appearing on the same programs as Enright during the primary. His campaign consisted mainly of countywide mailers to selected residences.

But Enright’s surprisingly strong showing may have been a factor in forcing several changes in Capizzi’s strategy. He has matched Enright in putting up street signs, which he refused to do before the June vote. And he has included in his campaign weekend precinct walking by volunteers from within the office. For the June primary, he would not permit help from any workers in the office.

The first debates reflected themes that each of the candidates emphasized in the June race.

Capizzi noted his endorsements: every police chief in the county, the association of deputy prosecutors and a handful of law enforcement associations. Twice in one debate he brought up that he was Hicks’ choice to replace him as district attorney. Capizzi is also proud that he was the unanimous choice of the Board of Supervisors in January.

Enright, as he did in June, tried to paint Capizzi as “the politicians’ candidate.”

“I am a professional prosecutor; I am not a politician,” Enright said. “I believe the district attorney must be independent from all sources of political power within the county.”

But their supporters believe the differing views on the district attorney’s role may be a reflection on their own careers.

Although Enright was chief deputy and Capizzi’s boss in the early years, Capizzi emerged as the leader in the office in the early 1970s. To everyone in the office, he was clearly Hicks’ choice as replacement.

Enright ended up attending fewer and fewer administrative meetings. Some of his supporters say he did not attend because his opinions were ignored anyway. Capizzi supporters say Enright simply lacked interest in the administrative details of running the office, which happened to be Capizzi’s strongest interest.

In last week’s debates, Enright acknowledged that the district attorney must be an administrator. But he stressed what he sees as two other important functions of the job: leading in the courtroom and working with community leaders to solve narcotics and gang-related crimes.

Capizzi’s emphasis was on working with budgets, dealing with the Board of Supervisors and making sure the office programs work.

“The D.A. must administer that office,” he said. “And to say otherwise is to suggest that fighter pilots should be operating the ships and dealing with the tank battalions.”

Enright has no shortage of issues to work with: He has criticized Hicks and Capizzi because they chose to continue their work with federal prosecutors in the Lincoln Savings & Loan scandal instead of joining the state investigation, where indictments have already been handed down. Enright has attacked Capizzi for placing what he calls unfair subtle pressure on deputies to work in his precinct-walking campaign. And during the debates, Enright questioned why Capizzi needed to wait for federal prosecutors before resolving the issue of whether Republican poll guards broke the law in intimidating some Latino voters in the last election.

During the debates, he also criticized Capizzi’s credentials as a prosecutor.

“As far as I know, you’ve never prosecuted a narcotics case,” Enright said. Not true, Capizzi answered.

“You’ve never done a homicide case,” Enright asserted. Again, Capizzi answered that the charge simply wasn’t true.

Capizzi countered that Enright was full of double talk. For example, he said, referring to the issue of deputy support, Enright has Assistant Dist. Atty. Edgar Freeman working in his campaign and was seen on television at a political news conference with Freeman and Deputy Dist. Atty. Tom Avdeef. Avdeef finished third and Freeman fourth in the June primary and have thrown their support to Enright.

“The real issue in this race is who is best qualified to administer and lead the office into the 21st Century,” Capizzi said.

DISTRICT ATTORNEY CANDIDATES

Michael R. Capizzi

Home: Fountain Valley

Age: 50

Occupation: Incumbent. He was appointed to the job by the Board of Supervisors in January when former Dist. Atty. Cecil Hicks joined the Superior Court bench. Capizzi joined the district attorney’s office in 1965 and became an assistant district attorney in charge of special operations in 1971. He was officially appointed chief assistant district attorney by Hicks in 1986 but had been functioning in that job for more than 10 years.

Political affiliation: Republican

Issues: Capizzi is emphasizing his role in recent years as the top administrator in the office. He has also chalked up most of the major endorsements, such as from the county police chiefs and the deputy prosecutors association. In addition, Hicks recommended that Capizzi replace him as district attorney.

Capizzi has made few comments critical of opponent James Enright but has warned that if Enright slings too much mud during the next few weeks, it could backfire on him. “People who live in glass houses should watch out,” Capizzi said.

James G. Enright

Home: Orange

Age: 63

Occupation: Chief deputy district attorney. He was appointed chief deputy in 1966 by Hicks and has remained in that job ever since. However, the role of chief deputy has dramatically changed. In the 1960s and early 1970s, Enright was second in command. But as Capizzi’s power within the office grew, Enright’s role became that of full-time overseer on courtroom cases, with homicide cases his specialty. After the June primary, Capizzi moved Enright out of the executive office suite.

Political affiliation: Enright is a lifelong Democrat who switched to the Republican Party earlier this year in protest of former Gov. Edmund G. Brown Jr.’s new control over the state’s Democratic Party.

Issues: Enright has attacked Capizzi for using deputies and investigators within the office to walk precincts for him on weekends. He has also tried to show voters that he has more courtroom experience than Capizzi in major cases. He has tried to brand Capizzi as the “politician’s candidate” because of his appointment by the Board of Supervisors as district attorney.