With 4 in Race, Possibility of Runoff Looms

When election day draws to a close Tuesday, the race to fill the 11th City Council District seat may not be over.

Increasingly, political professionals who have watched the contest believe it will take a runoff to determine the winner.

And the leading contenders for a runoff are Cindy Miscikowski, a former aide to retiring 11th District Councilman Marvin Braude, and Georgia Mercer, who once worked for Mayor Richard Riordan. Also running are Van Nuys businessman Mark Isler and Doug Friedman of Brentwood.

Once considered a sure-fire winner, Miscikowski has faced tough competition from Mercer, leading observers to predict a runoff--a possibility that both candidates have acknowledged.

“Between Mercer and Miscikowski, the Mercer campaign has come on much stronger than many pundits and prognosticators had predicted,” said veteran political consultant Richard Lichtenstein.

“It’s going to be a closer race than initially thought, and possibly a runoff.”

The specter of a runoff looms in many minds because Miscikowski, of Brentwood, and Mercer, of Tarzana, share many of the same political traits: Both are Democrats, although the office is nonpartisan. Both have raised nearly $300,000, have backgrounds in City Hall and have won several endorsements. They share similar views on a number of subjects.

Miscikowski, 48, of Brentwood, strongly supports Riordan’s plan for increasing the number of police, backs community-based policing efforts and favors Proposition 8, the charter reform measure. If elected, she said, she would also promote more community involvement in public schools and oppose secession of the San Fernando Valley from the city of Los Angeles.

Miscikowski, who is married to influential land-use attorney and former lobbyist Doug Ring, dismisses charges that she is a political insider.

“Inasmuch as I’ve been working in city government trying to effect positive change at City Hall for the residents of the 11th District, then I am an insider,” Miscikowski said. “But I think being an insider typically has the appearance of behind closed doors and not getting involved with community activists . . . that definition doesn’t fit.”

Mercer said she too would work to beef up the Police Department and would focus on ways to prevent juvenile crime by creating programs that give children an alternative to joining gangs.

A longtime community activist and wife of a vitamin company owner, Mercer is a former teacher who supports improving public schools by turning them into community centers, which would provide before- and after-school programs as well as tutoring and mentoring.

Like Miscikowski, Mercer opposes Valley secession and plans to vote in favor of Proposition 8. Mercer is quick, however, to draw differences with her opponent.

“I do think there are significant differences in our life experiences, our visions of the city and our styles,” said Mercer, the 55-year-old mother of an adult son.

“I think the voters do have a choice because I see City Hall through the eyes of the community.”

Mercer has won support from the county Democratic Central Committee and several union organizations; Miscikowski has grabbed endorsements from numerous homeowners groups, three county supervisors and six Los Angeles City Council members.

In a surprise move, veteran City Councilman Joel Wachs on Thursday joined Miscikowski’s camp. Wachs said he intended to stay out of the contentious race because he knows both Mercer and Miscikowski and believes both “would make outstanding council members.”

But he changed his mind after seeing what he called negative campaign mailers Mercer is sending that paint Miscikowski as having an “‘open door” to lobbyists and developers.

“I had to disclaim this kind of character assassination,” Wachs said. “It is not only unfair, it’s untrue and I think it’s really a cruel thing to do to get a few votes.”

Neither Wachs nor Miscikowski disputed the facts in the pamphlet--which says Miscikowski has received campaign contributions from 47 developers and 115 lobbyists. Rather, they questioned the tone of the piece, which implies that Miscikowski will be beholden to developers and lobbyists.

Mercer also has sent out mailers accusing Miscikowski and her husband of using their City Hall connections to get a gate installed across a street leading to their affluent neighborhood.

Also competing in the 73-square-mile district, which includes Brentwood, Pacific Palisades, Woodland Hills, Tarzana and parts of Van Nuys and West Los Angeles, are Isler and Friedman.

A husband and the father of two young sons, Isler, 50, is a former teacher and the president of a food and beverage distribution company. Isler has loaned his campaign $20,000 and altogether has raised about $70,000.

He is running on a platform focused heavily on crime, which he would try to reduce by allowing police to arrest people suspected of being illegal immigrants.

He also favors opening city services to competitive bidding--a plan he contends would save the city enough money to add 1,600 police officers. Isler supports Valley secession, charter reform and the breakup of the Los Angeles Unified School District.

He said that competition from private, home and charter schools is the answer to improving the city’s public schools.

“Competition would make the schools better,” Isler said. “In every field of life it works, so why wouldn’t it work in the schools?”

Isler has won endorsements from numerous Republican organizations and party members, including Los Angeles County Supervisor Mike Antonovich and commentator and former U.S. Senate candidate Bruce Herschensohn.

Friedman has run his campaign on less than $100. Friedman, who grew up in Woodland Hills and now lives in Brentwood, has taught science and said he has worked for a number of nonprofit organizations.

Friedman, 39, said he would address crime by attacking it at its roots, by retaining jobs, providing low-cost housing and cleaning up graffiti. He opposes Valley secession and the breakup of the school district. He also said that charter reform is an issue strictly between the mayor and the City Council, which voters should not be asked to vote on.

“It’s a smoke screen to prevent any actual progress in the city,” Friedman said.

Times staff writer Jodi Wilgoren contributed to this story.