Schiff Puts Heart, Soul and Feet Into Beating Boland on GOP Turf

Though he’s never won an election, 21st State Senate District candidate Adam Schiff was the unofficial poster boy at a state Democratic Party convention candidates’ workshop over the weekend.

The former federal prosecutor was cast in the roles of motivational speaker and object lesson on the value of being a hard-working candidate.

That’s what it will take to win in the Glendale-Burbank district, where Schiff faces Assemblywoman Paula Boland (R-Granada Hills), who is running in a new district but one that has long favored GOP candidates.

Schiff’s name came up frequently at the convention, both in casual conversation and at strategy sessions on reclaiming the Assembly and sustaining the Democratic majority in the California Senate.

The party bigwigs like Schiff because he leaves no stone unturned in pursuing his goal, which means he follows their advice. And Schiff told a roomful of fellow candidates from around the state to do the same.

For instance, Schiff is particularly high on the value of walking precincts, which he is already doing even though the election is seven months away.

That’s where the motivational part of his presentation came in. Just in case some fellow Dems were still shellshocked by the Republican takeover in 1994, Schiff was there to reassure them.

He said the mood is different today from when he last knocked on doors two years ago--when voters said they’d never again vote for a Democrat.

After a taste of Republican control, voters have reversed course. “Now they say they’ll never vote for a Republican again,” Schiff said.

No matter how much Schiff trudges through the streets of the district, he can’t match Boland’s ability to garner headlines that will gain recognition for her in a new district.

Most recently, Boland’s bill that could pave the way for the San Fernando Valley to secede from Los Angeles passed an Assembly committee and will soon move to the floor.

Some Democrats dismiss the move as an election-year ploy, while others privately wonder if the issue will help Boland get elected in a district that is composed mostly of independent cities.

No matter, says Assemblyman Bill Hoge (R-Pasadena), who’s running for reelection to the Assembly in the Pasadena half of the state Senate district.

“It’s a Republican area,” Hoge said.

“It always has been. They haven’t succeeded before and they won’t succeed this time.”

Hold Your Horses

Perhaps it was just bad timing but on April 15--a day of dread for most taxpayers--the city of Los Angeles decided to put residents on notice that it was imposing a new fee for a service that was previously free.

On that day, the city mailed 90,000 notices warning residents who have extra trash containers that as of July 1 the city will charge $5 per month per trash container and $2.50 per month for yard-trimming containers.

The city currently picks up the extra 30-gallon containers for free.

The fee was proposed by sanitation officials as a way to encourage people to recycle more and throw away less. But more to the point, it would also help pay for the increasing cost of trash disposal due to the closure in June of city-owned Lopez Canyon landfill.

So many calls came in to a Bureau of Sanitation hotline that it temporarily shut down. That was when residents began calling their elected officials.

Councilwoman Laura Chick’s office has received up to a dozen calls a day about the fee. The offices of Councilmen John Ferraro and Mike Feuer also got calls.

Residents were upset about the new fee or curious about how to return the extra containers so they could avoid the fee.

Some residents were angry that they had requested extra containers they never received and were now being told to pay the fee.

But the brunt of the calls may have been borne by the office of Councilman Joel Wachs, whose district stretches from Studio City to Sun Valley.

The reason? Wachs’ district includes many horse owners who need the extra containers to dispose of manure.

Job Action

Rich Sybert was furious when, in 1994, Rep. Anthony C. Beilenson (D-Woodland Hills) accused him of unethical behavior for continuing his private law practice while serving as an aide to Gov. Pete Wilson.

So angry was he that Sybert filed a libel suit against Beilenson. The matter was later settled by a mediator.

Now, it is Sybert casting stones.

With Beilenson retiring, Sybert is accusing his Democratic rival, Brad Sherman, of unethical behavior for continuing to serve on the state Board of Equalization while running for Congress.

“Brad Sherman should do the ethical and responsible thing,” Sybert said in a statement released this week. “He should immediately resign.”

Sybert considers his criticism of Sherman quite different from Beilenson’s criticism of him.

Sybert had approval from state officials to continue his private law practice while serving on the governor’s staff, he has said. That contrasted markedly with Beilenson’s campaign mailer, which proclaimed: “Rich Sybert Ripped Off California Taxpayers.”

As for his campaign, Sybert said the first thing he did when he decided to run for Congress in 1994 was to resign as director of the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research.

“I never thought taxpayers should be forced to pay for my political campaign,” he said. “As a tax collector, Brad Sherman knows better than anyone that taxpayers are already burdened enough without having to finance Sherman’s political and personal agenda.”

Sybert’s campaign director, John J. Theiss, explained that Sybert believes it is unfortunate that so many elected officials spend so much of their time campaigning for other posts.

Sherman said his situation is no different from that of any current officeholder who decides to run for another position.

If Sybert is calling for him to resign, Sherman wonders, is he also pushing for Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole of Kansas to resign his post?

Sherman called Sybert’s attack “crassly political and inconsistent.”

Mountain Man

Making his 16th and final plea, retiring Rep. Beilenson asked a House subcommittee this week for $10 million next year to expand the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area.

“In terms of serving the greatest number of people now and in the future, there is probably no better place to spend parkland acquisition funds than in the Santa Monicas,” said Beilenson, who wrote the legislation creating the park in 1978 and has been its most ardent supporter ever since.

In what has become an annual exercise, Beilenson appeared before the House Appropriations subcommittee on the interior to try to divert money to the Santa Monicas. This year, however, as he prepares to leave office, the financing situation is grimmer than ever before, with the Interior Department still operating without a budget for this fiscal year.

Beilenson said he will enter retirement with his dream for the park about two-thirds fulfilled. The National Park Service, which now owns about 21,000 acres of land in the Santa Monica Mountains, is still hoping to acquire another 15,000 acres to complete its original plan.

Two dozen parcels of land are surrounded on all sides by federal property but have yet to be purchased, Beilenson said.

“We are doing a great disservice to those lienholders if we do not provide the funding the National Park Service needs to purchase those properties,” he said.

Beilenson said the $10 million is desperately needed to buy land along the Backbone Trail, in Zuma and Trancas canyons, adjacent to Rancho Sierra Vista and other areas.

Barbara Ferry of States News Service contributed to this column.