Perspectives on the Mayor’s Race : Whose Vision Equals Greater L.A.? : The two candidates must articulate specific, workable programs for the whole area if Los Angeles is to prosper.

Tuesday’s election results were hardly surprising for most Angelenos, despite rather lackluster campaigns by both Michael Woo and Richard Riordan. Now the real challenge begins, for each must capture the imagination of the voters to become the urban architect to lead us into the 21st Century. Unfortunately, the campaign rhetoric of both camps has been short on substance and long on emotional appeal.

Does Riordan really believe that his “tough” posture will lead to the economic revival of Los Angeles? Should we view the city as the petulant child that requires the forceful hand of the benevolent patriarch to ensure proper maturation? Will his appeal to the disaffected middle class unify a city torn by racial and ethnic strife? Can an economic strategy that promotes downsizing of government and increased reliance on the invisible hand of market forces promote economic development that is inclusive of all Angelenos?

Will Woo’s plea for inclusive politics go beyond the traditional Democratic pay-back mentality, where window dressing for diversity is substituted for true sharing of power? Can his suggestion of a business-loan program requiring $5 million in city funds to entice private lenders to provide $100 million of new business loans be targeted to minority small businesses to encourage the revitalization of the urban core? Or--as stated by many of his critics--do his ideas reflect extravagant promises proffered to garner the diverse liberal voting blocs needed for election?

What is not clear from either of the candidates is an economic blueprint for a city drowning in a deficit reaching to almost a quarter of its budget, staggering under the weight of a school system with a $400-million deficit and mired by increased division between the poor and the privileged.

As obvious as these problems are, they require each candidate to put aside the partisan rhetoric and imagery and present an economic plan that will truly engender a public dialogue.

For example, if Riordan perceives that a more user-friendly city hall will stimulate private investment and employment in the city, why not present his case illustrating the impacts of such a policy on specific segments of the city? The public should be able to discern who are the beneficiaries and whether his strategy will enhance the political and economic life of Los Angeles. Furthermore, his plan should include how his economic policies will provide the necessary tax revenue and budget reductions to ensure fiscal viability.

Similarly, Woo needs to clearly define his redevelopment strategy. As he has positioned himself as the champion of those who have been marginalized from the city’s economy and the broader public, he needs to articulate how areas such as South-Central--where almost 40% of the residents have annual incomes less than $15,000, more than 25% of the households are on public assistance and almost half the residents over 25 do not have a high school education--will benefit from his policies. As noble as it is to champion the causes of these individuals, there must be substantive policy to reverse the economic Balkanization of the city. Mobilizing the necessary public- and private-sector actors requires Woo to go beyond business as usual for liberal Democrats, which is mouthing piecemeal reform and pointing fingers. He must develop a comprehensive economic strategy and discuss redistribution policies that can garner taxpayers’ support.

Both candidates must look beyond the city boundaries to the broader Los Angeles economic landscape and coordinate city efforts with the growth of the more dynamic suburban areas where small manufacturing, minority entrepreneurship and service-sector employment is increasing. The greater Los Angeles area--which includes Gloria Molina’s 1st Supervisorial District--is rich with redevelopment projects that attract private capital and should not be ignored in employment strategies that target underemployed and unemployed youth. Partnerships with other cities in stimulating regional growth and employment should be part of the strategy for the urban core. According to a new study by Rudy Torres and Victor Valle on the changing economic landscape of Los Angeles, “there is a new political and economic space for communities historically disconnected from the urban core . . . . Cities must articulate their economic agendas at the local and international level.”

Neither Woo nor Riordan has tackled this issue, and it is incumbent that they do not myopically focus their economic policies within the city. We can no longer afford to pander to special interests that do not enhance the economic viability of the city and the region.