20th State Senate District

State Senate candidate Richard Alarcon has served on the Los Angeles City Council since 1993 representing the northeast San Fernando Valley. He currently serves as chair of the council’s Transportation Committee. Before his election, he was former Mayor Tom Bradley’s Valley-area coordinator. He recently answered questions about state and local issues:

* * *

Question: How do you stand on Proposition 227, the so-called Unz initiative, which would eliminate bilingual education?

Answer: I’m opposed to the Unz initiative but I do agree we should clamp down on accountability. The primary concern I have about bilingual education is we need to guarantee that once somebody is in the educational system, at some point they do learn English. And I think to the extent that it takes too long for people to learn English that it negatively impacts that individual’s opportunities on a broader scale.

*

Q: How long is too long?

A: I think three years should be plenty. That’s not to say that they speak perfectly, but that they may be capable enough to perform.

*

Q: Proposition 226 would require labor groups to seek approval from their members before union dues could be used for political contributions. How do you stand on that?

A: I think it’s unnecessary. We don’t see those kinds of constraints on corporate America. Labor unions use advocacy to promote the interests of their workers, and if their workers don’t agree with their advocacy, they won’t elect those labor officials.

*

Q: Prop. 223 would require school districts to spend 95% of their money in the classroom and 5% on administration, the so-called 95-5 rule. How do you feel about that?

A: I support 95-5. I think it’s time that we send a very strong and loud message that the money for our education system needs to go into the classroom. But I will work hard to ensure that it doesn’t negatively impact all of the ancillary services that are necessary to keep that classroom intact. There’s some dispute about how this might be implemented, but I believe the state of California can meet that mandate. Where they cut is really a function of local decision-making. In fact, since I support the breakup of the school district, it would be wrong for me to suggest that we cut specific items within the L.A. Unified [School] District out of context with what the breakup would look like.

*

Q: So you support the LAUSD breakup. What about the breakup of the city of Los Angeles, or Valley secession? Will you sign the Valley VOTE petition?

A: I’m not going to sign it. I do support moving forward with the petition, and I’m hopeful that it’s successful so that we can conduct the study. But to sign it might be misinterpreted because the language of the document says that you support secession. And I think as an elected official I have a responsibility to be very clear with my message.

*

Q: Most of the high-visibility issues in Sacramento this year involve education. How do you build accountability into a school system?

A: First of all, either they’re learning or they’re not. I think our school system over the last 20 years has deteriorated. I don’t think you need to look beyond the general issues. If we have more dropouts, that’s a measure. If we have fewer people reading English at grade level, that’s a measure. If we have larger numbers of people who are not accepted into college, that’s a measure. And I think that we need to act on the basis of this general problem of deterioration of the public school system.

*

Q: Early on in the campaign when you came out with a mailer, your opponent, Richard Katz, got upset and said you had taken a lot of information out of context. Now, you are critical of his mailers, especially those that accuse you of getting a home-improvement loan from the wife of a developer with business before the city. Would you comment on it?

A: I am challenging a lot of his voting records that the public might not be aware of and suggesting that, indeed, I would have voted differently on a whole slew of items. It’s quite a different act than to go into somebody’s household and make wild accusations. That is a very negative approach, and I won’t attack Richard Katz’s family. I think the voters will rise above it and will judge Richard and me on the basis of who will do the better job, and on the basis of what they know about the two candidates. They will know that somebody who gives up their salary to improve police services is somebody of high moral character. Somebody who gets $78,000 to attend two meetings a month doesn’t reach that level of character. So I’m confident the voters will vote for me.

*

Q: There is, for the first time in recent memory, a budget surplus in Sacramento. How would you use that surplus money?

A: First of all, I would cut taxes. I think it’s fair that we give a significant amount of that money back for no other reason than to send a clear message that we will not fall into the same kind of tax-and-spend philosophy. Secondly, some of the surplus is tied to specific uses, so we may have to use it for those specific things. Thirdly, education needs to be the highest priority after we give back to taxpayers. And I would invest in capital educational projects as opposed to service-oriented projects, which require a continuous impact on future budgets.

*

Q: The University of California system is grappling with declining enrollment among minority students. Some are even suggesting that UC admit the top 4% from every high school campus. How would you address that problem?

A: My belief is that the students of tomorrow are heavily minority. When I go to schools throughout the San Fernando Valley, it’s clear the vast majority are minority students. So my basic belief in life is that you raise the level of the water to raise all ships, rather than trying to lift up any one particular ship. And I believe that in providing greater education opportunity to everybody in the state of California that the minority communities would be greatly served.

*

Q: How do you feel about the state of gun control legislation in California?

A: I’ve supported on the City Council the elimination of the so-called Saturday night specials. I have typically supported gun control measures. I would continue to do that, but I think we need to be cautious on how we approach that subject and focus on where the guns are causing violence.

*

Q: Have you given any thought to bills you would introduce if elected to the Senate?

A: I have given some general thought to it. I’m focused on winning an election before I create a specific agenda. But I’ve been thinking a lot about a parental responsibility in education bill that would encourage parent participation at schools. It would be a fairly complex piece of legislation pushing the administrators to accept parents’ participation in their schools, look at providing some kind of tax credits to parents who donate time to the school beyond the service to their child--parents, for example, who have a high degree of computer knowledge. I know we were very fortunate to have a lot of flexibility to be able to participate in our children’s education, and I feel that not only did our children benefit from it, but I think other children benefited as well. I’m not suggesting that every parent doesn’t have a good reason for not being able to help out on campuses. I’m just saying to the extent that we can bring more parents in, we ought to try.

*

Q: What about city charter reform? Do you see any meaningful suggestions coming out of the two commissions working on the issue?

A: I think the charter reform commissions are both going to come up with great ideas. The question is whether the political will would allow those ideas to be implemented.

*

Q: One recommendation is increasing the number of City Council members. Do you agree?

A: Without being entrenched in a particular position, I generally believe that we should have more city council members. I picked 30 because it would cut the districts in half. It would ensure that we could in the Valley have 10 representatives as opposed to halves of three who don’t live in the Valley. I think it would increase the opportunities for diversity on City Council, particularly with regard to African Americans and Asian populations that have some concentrations but do not have a large one in any given area. In addition, I feel the mayor should serve on the City Council. I also think we should have neighborhood councils that are either elected or appointed, but with real budget authority.

*

Q: Do you think we need a mayor with more power?

A: I would be willing to make some trade-offs if the mayor were serving on the City Council.

*

Q: Many think you and your opponent are alike on many issues. Can you tell us how you are different?

A: It’s experience and approach. Richard Katz emerged in the California Legislature at a time when it was recovering from Prop. 13, and they came up with a lot of measures to find new ways to tax people. I enter into the state Legislature with a focus on efficiency, as I did when I came on the City Council, reducing taxes, creating more efficiency and reducing unnecessary jobs, and so there’s a whole different starting point. I believe that Katz still comes from a tax-and-spend orientation. I come from a new government approach. The Legislature had a different culture in the ‘80s, and it was much more power driven. I think the new Legislature of California needs to be much more locally driven and responsive to what the constituents are telling us. I think the Valley has gone through significant changes and they want new messages. They want people who will not only come up with good ideas, but will see them through. The creation of the MTA [Metropolitan Transportation Authority] was not necessarily a bad idea of Katz’s, but the fact that he did not see it through and ensure that it stayed on course is problematic. Conversely, if I come up with an idea to close Lopez Canyon, I see it through. And if it takes two years, we take two years and build the coalitions necessary to get it done. When my police facilities bond measure did not pass, I found another way to come up with a financial scheme that would allow us to build a police station. So I think that it has to do with implementation of delivery and just this general sense that we need to shake up government every once in a while. I don’t think that people in the 20th Senate District feel as if they’ve gotten enough from the state of California with regard to education, with regard to a freeway system and transportation in general and with regard to health care.

*

Valley Voices will return after the June 2 election.