ELECTIONS / L.A. CITY COUNCIL 5TH DISTRICT : Campaign Turns Nastier Down Final Stretch

The race to fill the 5th District City Council seat left vacant by Zev Yaroslavsky began in a cordial manner almost five months ago with a field of seven hopefuls who rarely challenged each other, but instead concentrated on promoting their qualifications for the job.

But like a ballroom dance that turns into a barroom brawl, the campaign grew nastier, climaxing in the past week with the two finalists dropping almost all appearances of civility and launching into a series of stinging personal attacks.

The protagonists in this battle--Barbara Yaroslavsky, an activist and wife of county Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, and Mike Feuer, the former director of a legal services center--head into Tuesday’s runoff election in what appears to be a close race.

Feuer bested Yaroslavsky in the primary, drawing 39% of the vote, compared to 26% for Yaroslavsky. But Yaroslavsky appears to have gained momentum in recent weeks, in part by winning the endorsements of two former candidates who failed to make the runoff.

The race to represent a mostly affluent and politically active district that stretches from the San Fernando Valley to the Westside was always expected to be an expensive one, especially with the entry of Yaroslavsky, a candidate with top name recognition and influential friends throughout the county.

It has lived up to that prediction, with all seven candidates raising more than $1 million collectively in the primary and Yaroslavsky and Feuer raising an additional $480,000 in the runoff campaign.

Yaroslavsky has held the upper hand, raising $412,000 in the primary and another $230,000 during the runoff. Feuer raised $308,000 in the primary, including $100,000 in city matching funds, and $251,000 in the runoff, including $92,500 in matching funds. Yaroslavsky has declined to accept matching funds.

But in addition to being a spend-fest, the race has also been a slugfest, with both candidates closing the race in a flurry of charges. While the accusations first began to appear in campaign literature, they were soon repeated by the candidates themselves at heated community debates and other public forums.

Since the April 10 primary, Yaroslavsky has issued by far the greater number of “attack” mailers, in an attempt to characterize Feuer as a liberal extremist and “slick Harvard lawyer” who has misled voters to win votes--a portrayal Feuer vehemently disputes.

According to campaign consultants, the offensive tactics adopted by Yaroslavsky’s camp were necessary to overcome Feuer’s 13% lead in the primary.

“You have to do that. . . . You have to define the opponent,” said Victor Griego, a local consultant who has handled several City Council races. “There are not very many issues where the two are going to differentiate.”

But the tactics have not only raised the ire of Feuer but have also angered others, such as state Sen. Tom Hayden, who was mentioned in a Yaroslavsky mailer that accused Feuer of “supporting Tom Hayden’s proposal to limit homeowner property rights.”

Yaroslavsky said the “proposal” refers to a measure to extend rent control to single-family houses. But Hayden insists he has no such proposal and is angry that Yaroslavsky is using him to try to win votes. He has demanded an apology from Yaroslavsky, who has refused to oblige.

Most recently, Yaroslavsky attacked Feuer for a campaign letter he sent to voters, touting the endorsements he received from the president and chairman of Democrats for Israel, which, as a group, has adopted a policy of not endorsing candidates in nonpartisan races. Yaroslavsky charges that Feuer drafted the letter to appear as though he has won the endorsement of the entire organization, even though the group does not make endorsements.

Although Jonathan Friedman, the treasurer of the group, said the letter “misrepresented the position of Democrats for Israel,” Francine Hamberg and Howard Welinsky, the president and chairman of the club, respectively, said they stand by their endorsements.

Thursday, in the final debate of the campaign, Yaroslavsky defended her aggressive tactics, saying Feuer brought it upon himself by issuing two hard-hitting pieces during the primary, including one that attacks her for her ties to the “liberal” Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky.

“He started this negative campaign,” she said. “I didn’t.”

Feuer, while promising early in the runoff race not to exchange accusations with Yaroslavsky, changed his tact and fired back, calling Yaroslavsky’s campaign a “grand expensive hoax.”

During Thursday’s debate in Cheviot Hills, Feuer recited most of Yaroslavsky’s accusations and refuted them one at a time, calling the charges “lies” and “fabrications.” After the debate, Feuer said he decided to address Yaroslavsky’s charges because her allegations had gone too far.

“At some point someone has to say that the line has been drawn,” he said. “And she has crossed that line.”

On Thursday, Feuer also unveiled a new campaign mailer that contrasts himself with Yaroslavsky by reprinting quotes from newspaper articles and editorials criticizing Yaroslavsky alongside positive quotes about himself.

Amid all the accusations, both candidates have attempted to issue a message about their vision for the city and the role they each plan to play in realizing that vision.

Both have offered to increase the number of police officers on the streets. But Feuer has repeatedly suggested opening dozens of police substations that could be staffed by reserve officers and citizen volunteers. For her part, Yaroslavsky has said she wants the city also to provide children an alternative to crime by offering more educational and recreational programs at schools, parks and libraries.

As for qualifications, Feuer has pointed to his eight years as director of Bet Tzedek, the legal aid center that last year alone served 50,000 senior citizens, minorities and poor clients. Feuer said his experience at managing an organization with a $3-million annual budget qualifies him to cut the fat and improve efficiency at City Hall.

Yaroslavsky said her qualifications are her close ties to local lawmakers and government officials and her in-depth knowledge of the 5th District, developed during her 20 years as a volunteer in such organizations as the Los Angeles Free Clinic.

On Saturday, both candidates made their last rounds, walking the precincts and asking for support.

Their styles distinguished them as they shouted over and over again through screen doors and closed doors, over fences and through cracked-open windows.

Feuer met with campaign volunteers Saturday morning, and after sending them on their way headed out by himself to knock on Sherman Oaks homeowners’ doors, using a list of regular voters as his guide.

His style was low-key, and he sounded unrehearsed, despite what he says were thousands of such house calls during the campaign.

“Hi, I’m Mike Feuer, running to be your city councilman, going door-to-door,” he said to one.

Another asked what he was selling. “Me!” he responded. “I’m running for office.”

It seemed more an introduction than a stump speech--only occasionally did he remind residents that the election is Tuesday. Instead, he asked for questions, handed out flyers and thanked the many well-wishers and supporters along Otsego Street who promised their votes.

Yaroslavsky, who only went to houses her staff had identified as undecided, was preaching to more of the unconverted--although she came across a few supporters who had voted by absentee ballot.

With a volunteer, a local TV news team and a documentary filmmaker in tow, she used her time with the voters as a public service message.

“I’m Barbara Yaroslavsky, want to remind you that Tuesday is Election Day, want to urge you to get out there to vote,” she said over and over again. “Hopefully you’ll consider voting for me.”

At every door, she also urged voters to support Proposition 1, the police facilities bond measure, answering a few questions about the proposal. To those whose support she already had, she responded, “Call your friends, tell them to come out on Tuesday.”

In an effort to reduce the influence of money in government, both candidates have also promised to abstain from any decision that benefits a campaign contributor. Feuer said he would abstain for a period six months before and six months after the donation is made. Yaroslavsky said she would abstain during her entire tenure on the council or she would return the donation.

Although the messages may have been overshadowed by the personal attacks, Griego said there is no way to know if the hostile campaign benefited either candidate.

“The real question is: Will the voters get turned off?” he said.

Times staff writer Abigail Goldman contributed to this story.

* RELATED STORY: A1