Garcetti Seeks Weekly Debates With Foe

After refusing to debate his opponents in the March 7 primary, Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Gil Garcetti came full circle Thursday, challenging runoff opponent Steve Cooley to weekly debates between now and the Nov. 7 election--a total of 27 debates if the two rivals were to begin next week.

The unusual demand was brushed aside by Cooley’s campaign, which portrayed it as a political ploy by a candidate who was playing catch-up after finishing second in the primary and trailing badly in a recent poll.

“He’s desperate, and trying to divert everyone’s attention by sending out this almost laughable demand,” Cooley campaign strategist John Shallman said. He added that Cooley would debate Garcetti “as much as possible . . . but we’re not going to do it on his terms.”

The challenge came in the form of a letter sent to Shallman by Garcetti’s new campaign manager, Eric Nasarenko.

“As we made clear before the March primary, Mr. Garcetti is firmly committed to debating Mr. Cooley in the general election cycle, now that the candidates can discuss their positions in a one-on-one format,” Nasarenko wrote. But, he said, Cooley “appears to be avoiding debates, citing scheduling conflicts.”

“A debate a week will allow for open and spontaneous exchanges between our respective candidates,” he went on. “Most importantly, it will provide voters with an ongoing opportunity to make an informed decision on who is most qualified and experienced to serve as the county’s top prosecutor.”

The two candidates have held two debates so far, both in the past two weeks. Several others are in the planning stages, and each camp has complained that the other has balked in reaching agreements with debate sponsors.

Nasarenko specifically charged that Cooley had turned down offers to appear in debates on television stations KCAL-TV Channel 9 and KCET-TV Channel 28, and before the Sherman Oaks Homeowners Assn. He said KCAL had proposed a debate for next Friday night.

“It’s hard to believe they would have a scheduling conflict on a Friday evening at 10 p.m.,” he said.

Shallman said Cooley did have an event scheduled that evening. He added that Cooley was eager to reach agreements for debates on both television stations. In the case of the Sherman Oaks group, he said Cooley wanted assurances that the debate would be moderated by a journalist or other independent observer because the head of the association is a Garcetti supporter.

Richard Close, president of the association and a prominent San Fernando Valley secession advocate, acknowledged that he had endorsed Garcetti in 1996. However, he said he would be willing to let someone agreeable to both candidates serve as moderator.

Shallman noted that Garcetti had refused to participate in a candidates forum held Wednesday night by the Southeast District Bar Assn. in Norwalk. Nasarenko said Garcetti was invited roughly two weeks before the event and did not consider that adequate notice.

Shallman also charged that Garcetti was trying to disrupt Cooley’s fund-raising schedule by proposing debates during a period when the challenger is busy trying to raise money for the campaign, even targeting specific dates when Cooley has important fund-raisers planned. Garcetti received far more financial support in the primary campaign than Cooley, who is trying to avoid the fate of John Lynch, Garcetti’s challenger four years ago. Garcetti outspent Lynch 6 to 1 and squeaked past him by fewer than 5,000 votes out of more than 2.2 million cast.

“Now that we’re in a situation where we have literally 25 to 30 fund-raisers scheduled over the next 45 to 60 days, they would like us very much to cancel them,” Shallman said.