Giving ‘City Council Race’ New Meaning

“I’m not going to comment on my comment.”

That’s what Councilman Nate Holden, normally the most outspoken of politicians, said Monday when I asked him if he regrets saying that fellow council members Mike Feuer and Laura Chick “act like Westside Ku Klux Klan.”

Holden, who is black, was suggesting that Feuer and Chick, who are white and Jewish, had racist motives in calling for the resignation of Councilman Mike Hernandez.

Hernandez’s great trouble, contrary to what Holden may think, is not that he is a Latino living in a racist society. Hernandez’s problem hasn’t been with white people but white powder--a cocaine habit that was wrecking his life. Hernandez has said that, before his arrest in August, he contemplated suicide and that he is lucky to be alive.

Certainly he is lucky. He was fortunate to have been arrested, fortunate to acknowledge his addiction and get into a rehab program. He was also fortunate that, by pleading guilty to felony cocaine possession on Monday, he is able to enroll in a special program that would enable him to avoid incarceration and a felony conviction.

A felony conviction, you see, would have disqualified him from office under the city charter. Certainly Hernandez is fortunate that the framers of the charter didn’t seem to notice this little wiggle in the language. Chick calls it “a loophole.”

Hernandez has also been fortunate that it took Los Angeles leaders so long to say publicly what they’d been saying privately since his arrest: For the good of the city and himself, Mike Hernandez ought to resign from office.

*

Monday, Mayor Riordan added his voice to those who just say no to Mike Hernandez, arguing that his continued service sends the wrong message to the city’s youth.

All of this comes after many average Angelenos had expressed dismay that a felon might be serving on the City Council, not just the Hernandez critics in his own district. Editorials had also called for Hernandez to step down before Feuer and Chick finally broke the silence at City Hall last week. Riordan, before Monday, had simply said Hernandez’s fate was a matter for “his conscience and his constituents.”

This spasm of moral leadership is certainly welcome. Politicians spout all kinds of opinions, but the simple question of whether Mike Hernandez is still fit for office is one they wanted to avoid.

Certainly they hoped Hernandez would step down without public pressure, but Hernandez made it clear he had no intention of resigning.

But when Feuer and Chick broke ranks, nobody could have expected the hostility it would inspire.

Hernandez, perhaps understandably, accused them of seeking headlines. Richard Alatorre, a Hernandez supporter, suggested there was some anti-Latino bias. But it was Holden, famously contrarian and bombastic, who outdid himself.

What matters here isn’t the color of anybody’s skin, but the content of Mike Hernandez’s character. And what matters even more is the content of the City Council’s character.

Why did it take council members so long to make the not-so-bold suggestion that Hernandez step down?

Initially, council members and aides explain, there was the genuine heartfelt concern that a colleague many considered a friend would face such troubles. Hernandez was having marital problems and his mother had recently died--a fact he cited in explaining the stress he was under.

Later it was learned that Hernandez’s coke troubles long predated his mother’s death. It was also learned, though not widely reported, that police found a stash of pornographic videos in his City Hall office, raising uncomfortable questions about the extent to which he abused the public’s trust. And in a later interview, Hernandez admitted that he had attended meetings and cast votes while high on cocaine. All of these revelations added to the taint on Hernandez--and on the City Council itself.

The Hernandez mess prompted Feuer to call for the council to adopt a code of conduct. He and Chick also called for a charter change to close the loophole that now allows Hernandez to keep his job despite his felonious behavior.

Holden acknowledged that his antipathy for Feuer and Chick dates to the period in 1995 when Holden was facing a sexual-harassment charge on which he was ultimately acquitted. Adding to the controversy was the discovery of a photo of Holden being entertained by strippers on a business trip to Korea.

Feuer proposed the creation of a peer-review panel. And Chick said at the time: “It’s painful that there are no ways to control each other’s behavior.”

Too bad they didn’t expand an existing city program. Imagine the bumper stickers: “DARE to keep council members off drugs.”

*

Holden told me that Chick called him something unprintable the other day, part of which may be summarized as “an SOB.” He said he turned to Councilman Joel Wachs to ask him if he heard what Chick said, and Wachs replied: “Well, you are.” Chick and Wachs may or may not remember it the same way, but that’s how Holden told the story.

I was hoping Holden would apologize for his remarks about Feuer and Chick. Accusations of racism thrown carelessly have a way of boomeranging. Some Angelenos have interpreted Holden’s remarks as anti-Semitic, noting that in L.A. politics, “Westside” is sometimes a code word for “Jewish.” I thought he might express regrets, because the incident reminded me of another controversy during which Holden spoke with diplomatic calm.

This was in April 1991, a year before the riots. In the historic West Adams area in Holden’s district, an African American church and a preservationist group--mostly white, mostly newcomers to the neighborhood--were battling over whether a historic building owned by the church should be torn down. To their shock, the Rev. James Lawson referred to them in a church newsletter as “the sons and daughters” of people who “burned KKK-type crosses.”

Holden sided with the church. But when I asked Holden about Lawson’s comments, he laughed out loud and pointed out that white racists don’t move into such neighborhoods.

Imagine that: Nate Holden, peacemaker.

Scott Harris’ column appears Tuesdays, Thursdays and Sundays. Readers may write to him at The Times’ Valley Edition, 20000 Prairie St., Chatsworth 91311, or via e-mail at scott.harris@latimes.com Please include a phone number.