Shorter, Cheaper Campaigns Seen in Council Races : Politics: Expected victories in the Sept. 17 primary could eliminate need for a November runoff election. Four San Diego City Council seats are at stake.

San Diego’s four district-only City Council campaigns this year could be the briefest, least expensive races in recent political history.

Each of the four incumbents seeking reelection--Ron Roberts, Wes Pratt, Bruce Henderson and Bob Filner--faces only one major opponent in the Sept. 17 primary. Though a handful of long shots also might qualify for the ballot, political observers expect most--and possibly all--of the campaigns to be concluded in the primary with one candidate drawing the simple majority needed to avoid a November runoff.

If San Diego’s political season does, indeed, end in September, the brevity of the campaign not only will save the city about $450,000--the cost of ballots and polling places for November--but also probably will reduce candidates’ expenses.

With the candidates having less time to raise and spend money, the four campaigns’ combined price tag is likely to be less than $1 million--the amount typically spent within a single district in the recent past. That, in turn, will impose different dynamics on this summer’s races, with candidates eschewing the traditional strategy of holding back money and campaign fodder in the primary in anticipation of a runoff.

“It doesn’t do any good to wake up on September 18th with money in the bank and mailers you haven’t sent out if it’s all over on the 17th,” said 6th District Councilman Henderson. “Sure, you need a contingency plan in the event there is a runoff. But it’s dangerous to look past the primary, because this year, that may be the only race there is.”

Under the city’s staggered council election schedule, in which half of the seats are contested every other year, the council’s four even-numbered districts are on the ballot this year.

In each of the four races, incumbents are seeking their second four-year terms.

* 2nd District Councilman Roberts faces former City Hall aide Richard Grosch and Loch David Crane, a magician and frequent long shot candidate, in a race widely viewed as a prelude to Roberts’ expected 1992 mayoral bid.

* Pratt’s 4th District race involves a rematch with the candidate he defeated in 1987, the Rev. George Stevens. Political unknown Frances McCrary also has filed nominating petitions, which, like those of most other candidates, will be verified this week. However, because McCrary submitted only 200 voters’ signatures--the minimum required to qualify--a single invalid name on her petitions could disqualify her.

* 6th District Councilman Henderson faces only Pacific Beach activist Valerie Stallings, all but guaranteeing the race will conclude in September. Only a strong showing by a write-in candidate could force a runoff.

* Filner faces longtime San Ysidro community leader Andrea Skorepa and South Bay activist Lincoln Pickard in his 8th District contest.

Because of their limited name recognition and fund-raising capability, Crane, McCrary and Pickard are widely regarded as relatively minor players in their respective races--assuming that they even qualify by submitting sufficient signatures on candidacy petitions, something only Pickard has done to date.

Their mere presence on the ballot could prove to be both statistically and politically significant, because each could force a runoff by siphoning off enough votes from the front-runners to keep the primary victor below the 50% threshold.

“In a low-turnout election, even a couple hundred votes could be the difference between ending it in the primary or having to run again in November,” Filner said.

Most of the incumbents, as well as the more optimistic challengers, however, predict that October and November will be quiet months in San Diego politics this year. November runoffs were a certainty the last time the four incumbents ran--until San Diegans approved district-only races in 1988, citywide runoffs automatically followed district primaries.

“We’re not holding anything back,” Pratt said. “All our guns are blazing so that we can get this thing over in September.”

The possibility that the races could end in September stems from several factors, starting with the paucity of challengers--a marked contrast to the highly competitive, multicandidate fields seen in the 1987 election.

Though proponents of district-only elections predicted that their smaller scale and resulting lower cost would lure even more candidates into local politics, the small fields in this year’s council races contradict that projection.

While some argue the theory was flawed to begin with--”How you’re elected doesn’t change the qualifications you need,” Henderson says--others attribute the low number of candidates to other circumstances.

Four years ago, all four council seats at stake were vacant by virtue of incumbents’ retirement, producing political free-for-alls that drew between five and nine contenders in each district. This year, however, each race includes an incumbent whose name-recognition and fund-raising advantages deterred potential challengers.

Echoing another common line of thinking, Grosch consultant Bob Glaser argues that many would-be candidates decided to stay on the political sidelines this year while waiting for 1992, a year that he describes as “the bonanza of San Diego politics.”

As a result of reapportionment stemming from the 1990 census, San Diego is expected to gain several new Assembly seats and perhaps one new congressional seat next year. In addition to the normal full slate of state legislative and congressional elections, the local political calendar also will include races for mayor of San Diego and contests for one and possibly two open San Diego County supervisorial seats.

The City Council’s protracted redistricting battle, which was not resolved until last spring, also is widely cited as a factor that discouraged some candidates. Not knowing the precise boundaries of the districts they might run in, some contend, effectively kept some candidates out of the races by severely limiting the preparatory time so vital to challengers.

The candidates who overcame those obstacles confronted another daunting hurdle once they entered the race: fund-raising.

An always challenging task, fund-raising has been even more so this year, the candidates lament, because of the recession, which has caused many typical political donors to either keep their wallets shut or to write smaller checks than in the past. That is especially true in the politically potent development industry, which has been particularly hard hit by the nation’s economic downturn.

Donors’ tightfistedness, combined with the reduced amount of time to raise money--assuming that the races are concluded in September, not November--could prove more problematical to challengers than the incumbents, most campaign consultants agree. Some incumbents have consistently raised money throughout their terms, giving them a significant financial edge over challengers whose campaigns began only months ago.

“The problem is, incumbents not only have a head start, but there’s probably two less months for the rest of us to raise money,” Filner opponent Skorepa said.

Roberts consultant John Wainio added: “I think candidates are having to work harder to raise less than they did last time.”

With those changed political realities as a backdrop, the September primaries no longer loom as merely one step toward election, but instead increasingly are seen as perhaps the only step needed to reach City Hall.

“In the past, you could be content with just surviving and not embarrassing yourself in the primary,” said Stallings strategist Tom Shepard. “Now, you have to treat the primary like an all-or-nothing thing.”

Despite the challenges posed by that shift in perception, Grosch aide Glaser offers a theory about this year’s elections that few inside or outside City Hall dispute.

“I’m not sure that shorter, cheaper campaigns are such a bad thing, for candidates or the public,” Glaser said. “This could be a blessing in disguise.”