LOCAL ELECTIONS / L.A. MAYOR : Woo Attacks Riordan’s Business Ties to City Hall

Seeking to shatter Los Angeles mayoral candidate Richard Riordan’s image as a political outsider, rival Michael Woo on Monday accused him of “feeding at the public trough for years” through exorbitant legal fees and politically influenced business deals.

Woo released a list of cases in which Riordan’s law firm earned about $2.3 million in legal fees from the city and county in about five years. Woo also said Riordan profited from two business ventures involving government agencies.

Riordan’s campaign responded by accusing Woo of distortions and by launching a counterattack--coining “Woodoo-nomics” to describe the councilman’s record on economic development and city budget matters.

Woo’s broadside also indirectly highlighted another Riordan business tie that could generate more controversy: Riordan is a onetime officer and continuing shareholder in a company that could benefit from his proposal to lease Los Angeles International Airport.

Riordan holds an interest of $10,000 to $100,000 and was until last year a board member of Comarco Inc., a company interested in becoming the private manager of LAX, public records and interviews show.

Woo discussed Riordan’s connection to the company Monday to point out that the firm had won a lucrative contract to operate five county general aviation airports.

But another issue could arise because Riordan has proposed leasing Los Angeles International Airport as a centerpiece of his campaign for mayor--saying that the proceeds from the deal could be used to hire 3,000 more police officers.

At the same time, Comarco has been trying to position itself as one of the three major national players in the airport management and leasing business. A company official last week told The Times that the firm “surely” would be interested in a management contract for LAX.

Richard Loomis, a senior vice president with Comarco, acknowledged that there could be an appearance of a conflict of interest between Riordan’s promotion of a private lease of LAX and Comarco’s interest in the deal.

But Loomis said he has never discussed the LAX lease with Riordan and that he is sure Riordan would comply with all government ethics requirements.

Riordan’s campaign said he would ensure that if he is elected mayor, none of his business dealings conflict with his public duties.

“As I have said before, I intend to place all of my assets in a blind trust to avoid any potential conflicts of interest,” Riordan said in a prepared statement. “Furthermore, I will remove myself from situations where potential conflicts of interest may arise.”

With the June 8 election less than a month away, Woo opened the day of attack and counterattack with commentary on Riordan’s legal and financial dealings.

Standing on the steps of City Hall--beside an oversized $2.3-million check made out to Riordan from “John Q. Taxpayer”--Woo accused his rival of lying when he denied his close ties to city and county government.

Woo provided reporters with a list of six contracts between Los Angeles city and county and the the law firm of Riordan & McKinzie. It showed that the firm had charged up to $315 an hour to advise local officials on such issues as transit agencies mergers, lease negotiations with Marina del Rey property interests, and the development of city and county landfills.

The fees, totaling nearly $2.3 million, were paid to the firm between 1988 and September, 1992.

Woo belittled Riordan’s “sacrifice” last year in agreeing, like other county contract lawyers, to have his fee reduced. A report showed Riordan’s charge was cut from $315 to $239 an hour.

Actually, Woo’s figures appeared to be conservative. A Times review of public records showed that Riordan & McKinzie billed local governments for about $3.25 million.

Although saying the fees themselves were not improper, Woo slammed Riordan for depicting himself as a private businessman who has not benefited from government service.

Finally, Woo said Riordan had profited from two other deals with local governments. In one, the lawyer-businessman made $3.4 million by a quick purchase and sale of downtown properties to the Community Redevelopment Agency.

In the other, Comarco was awarded a $160-million contract to operate five general aviation airports for Los Angeles County. Woo pointed out that Riordan was a director and stockholder of the company and gave significant contributions to the conservative majority on the County Board of Supervisors, which awarded the contract.

Riordan was returning to Los Angeles on Monday after a Mother’s Day visit with his 101-year-old mother, Geraldine, in New York. He released a statement through his campaign office calling Woo’s allegations a “blatant attempt to distort my record.”

He said an old press report on the CRA property transaction was inaccurate when it suggested he had used political connections to consummate the lucrative deal.

Riordan, however, did not dispute the legal fees his firm had received from the city and county. He said only that the contracts had been won fairly through competitive bidding, or when his firm was deemed best to complete “highly specialized projects.”

As to allegations that he lied about his profits from business dealings with government, Riordan argued that despite his earnings, his work on behalf of the city and county had “saved the taxpayers money.”

Seeking to turn the focus back on Woo, the Riordan campaign coined the “Woodoo-nomics” term. In a prepared statement, Riordan said that Woo has failed, in eight years on the City Council, to develop plans for strengthening the local economy or city budget.

He said Woo’s only ideas are raising property taxes to pay for more police and hiring an economic “czar”--a move Riordan said would cost more money without accomplishing anything.

“When it comes to fiscal management or innovation, Woo doesn’t know where to go to help Los Angeles climb out of its fiscal crisis,” Riordan said.

Times staff writer Ted Rohrlich contributed to this story.