Changes in L.A. Marathon Pact Urged : City Council: The panel votes to extend the contract to the year 2000. Bureaucrats are warned to pay closer attention to ensure that the city gets a financial benefit.

A Los Angeles City Council committee on Tuesday voted to extend the contract for the Los Angeles Marathon through the year 2000, but recommended changes intended to ensure that the city gets a financial benefit from the highly successful race.

The contract, held for the last six years by entrepreneur William A. Burke, originally required that the city receive a percentage of the race’s gross receipts each year. But because of a contract change approved by the City Council, the city has received no payment since 1987.

The city had agreed to forgo its share of the marathon revenue in exchange for $300,000 in free advertising each year for the city to be arranged by the marathon. But the city has received none of the advertising, which was intended to help the financially strapped Los Angeles Zoo but could have been used by any city department.

Officials said that the zoo did not request the free advertising until several months ago.

John Duggan of the city’s administrative office said the city lost the opportunity to obtain at least $300,000 worth of advertising in 1990 alone.

Neither Duggan nor J. P. Ellman, an analyst in the chief legislative analyst’s office, could explain why the city did not make use of the free advertising.

“City administrators have been totally lax in administering this contract,” said Zev Yaroslavsky, chairman of the council’s Budget and Finance Committee.

Bureaucrats “were asleep at the switch,” Yaroslavsky said after the hearing. “Nobody was in charge. Bill Burke was in charge.”

Yaroslavsky voted along with council members Richard Alatorre and Joy Picus to extend the marathon contract but said city officials would be “put on notice to pay closer attention” to the contract in the future.

Burke’s current contract expires in 1993. Under the contract extension, which requires approval of the full City Council, Burke must pay the city a flat fee of $50,000 to $70,000 per year if he does not provide the advertising.

City officials said the length of the contract, with the extension, was unusual. Burke said the contract extension would help him acquire marathon sponsors and endorsements.

The zoo finally has arranged for the advertising through Patrick Media Group, which also does work for the marathon.

But the “free” advertising came at a price, the council committee was told in reports from the city administrative office and the office of the chief legislative analyst. The reports said that the zoo was asked by Patrick Media to pay $300,000 in order to get an additional $300,000 worth of advertising at no charge.

Patrick Media Group is not a party to the marathon’s contract with the city and is not bound by its terms.

Ed Dato, a spokesman for Patrick Media, said Monday that he would research the matter.

Burke said that he arranged for Patrick Media to provide the advertising but said he had no knowledge of any price negotiations between the zoo and Patrick Media. He added that he is not to blame for the city’s failure to take him up on the advertising offer, which he said was “a good deal” for the city.

Jerry Greenwalt, a zoo administrator, said zoo officials were aware that the advertising was available in 1990, but added, “There wasn’t someone at the zoo who had time to follow through on it.”

Regarding the recently negotiated matching payment arrangement with Patrick Media, Greenwalt said, “It was the best we could do.”

The City Council decided in 1985 to sanction an official city marathon and give the winning bidder the right to use the city’s name. In return, the city was able to retain tighter control over the event and, theoretically, would benefit financially as the marathon grew in popularity.

The winning bidder was Burke’s Los Angeles Marathon Inc.

Burke, the husband of former U.S. Rep. Yvonne Brathwaite Burke, was a moderately successful businessman with no background in marathons when he submitted his proposal. He had once owned two mortuaries and had worked as a City Council aide.

The first race in 1986 drew about 12,000 runners; more than 20,000 are expected to enter the 1991 marathon on March 3.

In 1987, the last time the city audited the marathon’s books, gross revenues totaled $1.99 million. The city’s share was $79,892.

The 1987 audit criticized the marathon’s bookkeeping, noted irregularities in the recording of cash receipts and pointed out that the marathon has been repeatedly late in paying bills for city services.

In one instance, officials asked Mayor Tom Bradley to intercede with Burke to get payment of $19,892 that was more than a year overdue, according to a memo. A spokesman for the mayor said Bradley did not intervene.

The bill was eventually paid, but officials say the marathon still owes the city more than $26,000 for services the city provided. Burke disputes that bill.

No other bidders were sought for the contract extension because, city officials said, Burke has done an outstanding job and open competition is not required by law.

Councilman Richard Alatorre, who is seeking the contract extension on Burke’s behalf, said Burke has “done a good job,” making it unnecessary to hear other proposals. “If they did a poor job, if the marathon was unsuccessful, then I could understand it, but that hasn’t been the case,” Alatorre said.

Councilman Robert Farrell, who made a similar motion on Burke’s behalf last June, also praised Burke’s performance.

“The Los Angeles Marathon has proved to be an event of international stature for the city of Los Angeles,” Farrell said, adding that Burke has done “an excellent job. . . . He is the Los Angeles Marathon.”