City Council 7th District

When it comes time for voters to select a new city council member from the northeast San Fernando Valley, they may have to dig beneath the surface to pick a favorite.

That’s because both Alex Padilla and Corinne Sanchez publicly cite long involvement in the community, devotion to providing more city services to residents and a promise to improve the quality of life in the mostly working-class, Latino district, which encompasses parts of Arleta, Pacoima, Panorama City, Sun Valley and Sylmar.

The campaign has focused on endorsements and spending, more than $200,000 per candidate, an ironic sum in the mostly blue-collar 7th District.

Padilla, 26, an MIT grad, has been heavily backed by labor, with the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor chipping in nearly $60,000 for mailers and telephone banks. It also turned out 200 get-out-th-vote volunteers in the primary. Padilla cut his political teeth by working for Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and state Assemblyman Tony Cardenas (D-Sylmar).

In the endorsement derby, Padilla has secured the backing of Mayor Richard Riordan, City Councilmen Richard Alatorre, Hal Bernson and Rudy Svornich Jr.

Sanchez, 52, is an attorney with decades of experience runninga health clinic for the poor, El Proyecto del Barrio. She has the backing of state Sen. Richard Alarcon (D-Sylmar), the former councilman from the district; County Supervisors Gloria Molina and Zev Yaoslavsky, City Council members Laura Chick and Cindy Miscikowski and three of the four candidates in the primary who did not make the runoff.

Padilla tounced Sanchez in the primary, getting 47.9% of the vote to her 24.7%.

The Times recently spoke with each candidate about the issues that shape the election.

Question: What have you found is the biggest issue in your district?

Answer: The biggest single issue is basic city services. Everybody acknowledges those other issues: public safety, economic development, airport, you name it. But nine times out of 10 when I ask somebody, “ What is the most important thing to you? What can I do to make the biggest impact on your life?” it is the pothole in front of the house, it is the street light that has been out of service for a couple of months, it is the graffiti across the street, it is the park that is not safe for our kids anymore. It is the quality-of-life services.

Q: Do you feel city services in the 7th District are worse than in other, more affluent areas of Los Angeles?

A: Yes and it is not just today but it has been the case for many years.

Q: To what do you attribute that?

A: It is a combination of things, but it hasn’t been a priority for the city as a whole or at least not for representatives of the area. I came into this campaign with the perspective that this district is my home. This is where I was born and raised. I played in these parks, I went to these schools and I go to church here. What do I see? Streets that are cracked and haven’t been looked at in more than 20 years.

Q: Has this been because of a lack of leadership?

A: Partly. For me, I’m committed to making it a top priority today and always. When we turn our focus away from these things, then degradation begins.

Q: What about the appetite for secession in your district? Do you think people look at these problems and say we’d be better off if we were not a part of the city of Los Angeles?

A: It comes up very little when I’m precinct walking. It comes up more in political forums and interviews. What I hear is the bottom line. They don’t want to talk about secession, they just want to know who is going to fix the streets, who is going to fix the street light.

Q: Do you support the secession movement?

A: My preference is not to break things up, it is making things work. I do support the secession study or at least a fiscal viability study because there are some basic questions that have to be answered in order to make a responsible decision on secession.

Q: Who do you think should pay for it?

A: I think there is a role for the city to pay a part. Certainly, the applicants should pay a part.

Q: What about charter reform?

A: I’m in favor of charter reform because I think it would be better than what we have today. There are a couple of components that I particularly like about it, including the neighborhood advisory councils, the regional planning commissions. But what is important is, how can we implement it and make it grow? Do we have leadership? An interest and participation level in the community that is going to take us beyond what the city is asking us? We need to inspire people to get involved and active so that the residents know what the city is doing, and the leadership and representatives know what the community’s real concerns are.

Q: Do you favor a more powerful mayor?

A: I favor a city that can function more effectively and efficiently. If giving a little bit of power to the mayor is part of it, maybe that is responsible. At the same time, the ability to hire and fire is appropriate because I believe in the safeguard of a council override.

Q: What role would you like the neighborhood advisory council to have?

A: The role I envision them having may be determined by the Office of Neighborhood Empowerment, in terms of how they are created, how often they meet, what subject matters they bring up, etc. I’d like to give them a little bit more flexibility than would be mandated by the city: consistent meetings, how they network. I don’t want the neighborhood advisory councils to take the place and completely wipe away existing organizations. There are homeowner groups, neighborhood watch groups that have been around and are doing this already. We need to incorporate them. But when it comes down to whether they should have decision-making power or not, ultimately I believe that is what the representatives are elected to do. Not that I’m not going to listen to them. I’m going to turn to them for ideas.

Q: When you get out and walk around precincts, do people talk to you about the schools?

A: Absolutely, probably more than anything else with the exception of those basic city services. The bottom line with these residents is, “What are you or any other candidate going to do to improve the educational system for my kid?” Unfortunately, the City Council does not have direct jurisdiction over curriculum and spending, but I do think there are other things we can do to support education and the educational system. I went to an elementary in Sun Valley where even in a mild rain the school gets flooded, the water is coming over the curbs. I’ve been out there in the mornings and the parents can’t cross the streets to get their kids on campus because of the flooding. The kids miss school, the school misses out on funding and there may be other related issues. That is a Public Works issue. A couple other ideas: There is city spending on arts and cultural programs. If there is any way we can tie that to educational programs, I feel a sense of responsibility and urgency to do so. Another area is our library system. The one area we can’t do enough in is literacy. We have a library system in the city of Los Angeles, and I don’t know if they’re talking with the library system in the school district. How can we synergize, how can we maximize our resources, whether it is books, computers, staff or programs?

Q: Your opponent called for a moratorium on apartment construction in the district because she thought it was damaging quality of life. How do you feel about that?

A: I believe a moratorium is extreme. I believe there is a role for multifamily housing in the northeast Valley. There is certainly a need for affordable housing in the Valley. I acknowledge that when you have an over-concentration of apartments it presents a unique set of challenges. All we have to do is look at the North Hills area and parts of North Hollywood to see that. It is really the overall vision of the community and the planning. If you are going to decide to have this density of population, you need to plan accordingly in relation to schools, park space, job availability and transportation. That’s where I think we suffer. That takes us back to the new charter. Regional planning commissions are a very good idea. When you have somebody from San Pedro making decisions about quality of life in North Hills, Pacoima or Sylmar, that’s not a good thing, but when you have area planning commissions to really make decisions over properties or businesses or residences in their area that they are familiar with, you get better and more responsible decisions being made.

Q: How do you feel about the Valley having its own transit agency?

A: My biggest concern, when it comes to creating our own entity or authority for transportation, is how will we interface with the surrounding transportation jurisdictions? I believe we need to move in a direction to give public transportation a global perspective. How do we interface if we have separate authorities? Until I am more comfortable we are addressing that concern, I am not going to give my full support to a separate entity.

Q: How do you respond to the charges that you lack experience compared to your opponent?

A: I stand on the experience I do have at the federal and local level. At the federal level, I worked for Sen. Dianne Feinstein [D-Calif.], not in Washington, based in Los Angeles. I have worked at the state level, not in Sacramento but here in the Valley, managing Assemblyman Tony Cardenas’ [D-Sylmar] district office. I’ve also served in the city as a building and safety commissioner so I do have experience at all three levels of government. The experience I have is what it is like to live in the district, to be born in the district, to be raised in the district, go to school in the district, to play in local parks. It is that experience, that perspective, that point of view that really gives me a firsthand understanding of the issues. As I’m precinct walking, I hear people’s concerns, whether it is an alley that needs to be cleaned, an intersection that doesn’t have stop signs in any direction or sidewalks that are buckled. I know what they are talking about because I’ve seen it. It probably impacted me as well at some point in my life. It is that perspective that you can’t buy. It is a perspective that is almost absolutely necessary to make the best decisions possible when you are a representative.

Q: What about claims that you are supported by an old boys network?

A: My opponent has attacked me for being too young, so I don’t know how I can be part of an old boys network and be too young. That doesn’t make sense to me. In terms of machine politics, I invite you to come to my campaign office. If these volunteers from the district are a machine, I’m proud of this machine because it means the northeast valley, the 7th Council District has achieved a level of involvement, participation, sophistication, interest that we so desperately need. That dynamic is an essential part of getting these basic services from the city and getting our fair share of any resource or program.

Q: You do have a great deal of support, including financial support, from the unions. Would it be possible for you as a City Council member to vote contrary to their wishes on an issue?

A: I would always vote for what I believe and feel is the best interest of the city and of my district.

Q: You built a large lead in the primary. Do you think you have this election won?

A: This campaign is not over. I believe the figure I received on April 13 is a reflection of people believing in me and relating to me and hearing what I said because it is my community too. I’m not going anywhere any time soon.

Question: What are the basic issues in your district? What are voters talking to you about?

Answer: The core of basic services. It is their street, trees, garbage, graffiti, the roaming dogs, the first things they see every day when they leave in the morning and when they go home at night. Those are the foremost issues. Beyond that, they talk about taxes and police services.

Q: Do you feel your district gets less service than the others?

A: Absolutely, across the board. I haven’t talked with any one person who says we get our fair share. That isn’t happening.

Q: Does that mean the secession movement in growing in your district?

A: Residents feel affirmative toward the secession movement because they see that their needs might be met. I don’t think anybody quite understands or knows the implications of secession. But right away they say, “We support secession.” Some can’t pronounce it but they say, “We’d like to separate; we’d like to be our own city.”

Q: So some people think that prior officeholders in the 7th District haven’t been able to get things done. How could you improve on the record of your predecessors?

A: It reflects negatively on all government. I would address those problems immediately. I would commit any budget money they give me as a council member toward graffiti cleanup because that is something that stands out and can be completely rectified by giving our graffiti busters and neighborhood watchers paint and brushes to get that stuff off the wall.

Q: Do you believe in secession?

A: I support the study. I said that very openly. I believe our government should pay for it. I think we should analyze the situation. I’ve been here 27 years and I don’t believe that the quality of life has improved. I still believe that we are not getting the attention we deserve. It needs to be factually researched and evaluated. I’m not one to jump up and throw the baby out with the bathwater. I am one to say let’s look at it and study it. If it does not harm the Valley or the city, then I am in favor of it.

Q: How do you feel about charter reform? Do you see any good coming out of that for your district?

A: I’ve had mixed feelings on it. Initially, I thought it would be a positive, but I believe now I will not vote for it. I do not think it addresses the very core things that the San Fernando Valley is screaming about. First of all, I know it is an issue on the ballot, but I’ve never agreed with giving the mayor complete hire / fire authority. I’ve now rethought the expansion of the council and I believe our money could be better spent in the delivery of services and addressing the needs of the residents as opposed to having another politician. I think expanding the council is going to be costly and cause delays in getting things done. I don’t think that is the answer.

Q: What about the neighborhood council concept?

A: I’ve been in support of the ones that have been appointed or self-appointed, such as the neighborhood watches, the coordinating councils, which are very active. Those are the kind of people I would embrace, those groups that are already in place that have been functioning.

Q: You recently called for a moratorium on apartment construction. Would you tell us about that?

A: I’ve been living in the Valley for 27 years and I’m also a homeowner. One of the things that has upset me as a homeowner and also as a resident is when there are too many apartments. I’ve had firsthand experience and knowledge of the congestion. There are too many bodies in one area. The stores aren’t equipped to address that. The infrastructure, including banks and other services, are inadequate. I think there has been poor planning in our district. They see an open lot and, particularly after the earthquake, they put up apartment complexes. Unfortunately, many of these have been left unattended in the past by absentee landlords. It is not only an eyesore, and the value of homes go down, but the quality of life is impacted tremendously. I would stop it, look at it and have better planning before any other apartment buildings were constructed. I’m not against affordable housing. I do believe that we need affordable housing in terms of homes, but I’m not so sure we need more apartments.

Q: But how do you deal with the need for affordable housing?

A: We know there is a high number of people who live in the district who don’t make the income they do on the Westside. But I do believe that there are sufficient apartments and housing rentals available. If not, let them go into the 2nd Council District and some other districts where there are also apartments. I don’t believe a five-mile drive would be a hardship. I don’t mean for an indefinite period of time but for as much time as it takes for us to stop and look at this.

Q: There would be a limit on a moratorium?

A: Definitely. I don’t know what time frame, but I would say a year or so. I would want to look at this and study it factually and see the options and alternatives. Just because people are blue collar or are working class, they shouldn’t be subjected to a lower quality of life. Having hundreds of thousands of people in the area affects the quality of life. It encourages crime, anger and frustration.

Q: From a planning perspective, what do you want to see occur?

A: That construction is thought out and well-built and that there is going to be an infrastructure that is going to accommodate the needs of a new building. You look at a home and then you look at an apartment complex, and you triple, maybe quadruple, the number of folks in a two-block radius. I oppose that as a quality-of-life issue. I think if anything, we should plan where they go. If we have too many of them, maybe we should look elsewhere for the development. I think we have our fair share of apartments in the northeast Valley. I think we need to look toward our sister or adjacent districts.

Q: Do you think the Valley ought to have its own transit authority?

A: Yes. I believe the closer the government is to us, there is more accountability, more direct response to our needs. I feel the MTA [Metropolitan Transportation Authority] has failed us. I would support VICA’s [Valley Industry and Commerce Assn.’s] position on a Valley transit authority that would oversee and dictate what is going to happen here.

Q: Do you favor breaking up the L.A. school district?

A: I do support the breakup. I supported it six years ago when David Roberti was our [state] senator. I’ve not been as involved because of other issues that I’ve been working on. I believe the L.A. school district [Los Angeles Unified School District] has failed our children, and they continue to fail our children. LAUSD, I believe, is an enemy of our communities. Education, to me, is the root of getting out of the barrio, out of a cycle of poverty, and we are not getting that opportunity. I am in favor of the break-up concept and, I plan to work closely with [former Republican Congresswoman] Bobbi Fiedler, who is an unusual kind of colleague, to deal with our own schools straight on and make the difference by having our own district. I don’t support the concept of two districts for the Valley. I support a single district. There is a richer side of the Valley and a poorer side. I would like to see our whole Valley in one pod. I think there would be more fairness and equitable impact if we had one school district rather than two.

Q: You finished almost 23% behind your opponent in the primary. Do you think you can make up that deficit?

A: We have approximately 65,000 registered voters in the district, 14,000 of which come out and vote. He got 6,000 and I got 3,000. Our opponents got the remaining. The way I look at it, I got three of the primary opponents to endorse me. I believe our traditional high-profile, high-propensity voters did not vote. Also since there were so many candidates, they saw no real direct benefit. Walking the precincts now, I do feel more responsiveness and interest to go out and vote. People say they are going out to vote for me. But I have found that they are not going to say no to candidates. Latinos, in particular, are very swayed by a politician. They won’t tell you they won’t vote for you. They told [candidate Alex] Padilla and I that they were going to vote for both of us. But I do feel that my walking is making a difference along with more of my volunteers being out there. In the primary, the unions were out there in force, which had an impression and added impact. I hate to say it but the old boss and old muscle thing impacted our people in the district. I had several complaints, and we did file complaints, that they were at the polling places on the day of the election. I have a real challenge because more people came out to vote for him. I do believe it was partly because of those tactics.

Q: At one point in the primary, Padilla was said to be too inexperienced and too young to hold public office. Have you backed away from that stance? It seemed to have backfired.

A: I do believe he is inexperienced and I still hold that position. At 26, I had done a lot more than what he has done. I believe this post is very important for the city, and it needs someone to hit the ground running, go to the table with folks like yourselves who have comparable experience and education. We can go one-on-one with another. I don’t think Mr. Padilla has adequate experience to go to the table for us and hit the ground running. I think he is going to be influenced by [Mayor Richard] Riordan and the unions, and I’ve said that. Somehow it is not resonating with the voters. I’m concerned about that because things will be as usual and the typical machinery will continue. There are not enough qualified women at the table. I’m qualified. I’m going to the table and say I can take positions to counter the power base. I’m the independent candidate. Based on walking in the precincts, I’m hoping the voters are going to say that I’m the person they want representing us in the next two to 10 years because that is what this seat is. I’m very concerned about it.