Mayoral Candidates Talk Tough in Debate

Candidates for mayor of Los Angeles engaged in a spirited, sometimes raucous debate Wednesday night, highlighted by businessman Steve Soboroff’s declaration that he opposes entering into a consent decree with the federal government to address charges of civil rights abuses by the Police Department.

In a debate that often featured the candidates trying to outdo one another in professing affection for the San Fernando Valley, where it was held, they found at least three points of agreement.

All said they wanted to reduce noise at Van Nuys Airport, and all favor closing dumps (the Valley is home to the particularly controversial Sunshine Landfill). And every one of the candidates who was asked vigorously opposed a proposal to have the city government contribute $4 million in taxpayer money to this summer’s Democratic National Convention. Soboroff’s opposition to that idea was particularly notable because it is favored by Mayor Richard Riordan, who has endorsed Soboroff’s campaign.

It was the issue of policing that first set the candidates at odds, however, and that represented the evening’s most striking political development.

“We cannot allow ourselves to get bogged down in political grandstanding,” Soboroff said to enthusiastic applause before the Sherman Oaks Homeowners Assn., a group known for its skepticism about big government. The next mayor, Soboroff said, needs to have the “guts to fight federal takeover of our local Police Department.”

Two other candidates, City Atty. James K. Hahn and City Councilman Joel Wachs, both of whom have called for outside investigations of the LAPD and have sharply criticized the department, avoided airing their views on the consent decree directly.

Only Assemblyman Antonio Villaraigosa unequivocally backed that approach, which gives a federal judge the authority to oversee police reform. That move, Villaraigosa said, was needed because the city has failed for too long.

“The federal government is going to have to do the job,” said Villaraigosa, who, though more liberal than the group he was addressing, nonetheless was warmly received, especially when he discussed his record on assisting the study of Valley secession.

The fifth major declared candidate for mayor, Rep. Xavier Becerra, was invited to participate but sent his regrets, saying he had to be in Washington on Congressional business.

The consent decree is among the most hotly debated issues at City Hall, where some police reform advocates favor the idea. Others, including Riordan, have sought a more flexible approach.

Not only did the substance of that campaign shift Wednesday, but so did its tenor. The candidates for mayor have had just one previous formal debate, and it was generally civil. Wednesday’s was contentious, with the participants egged on by a rambunctious crowd that cheered the candidates’ frequent swipes at each other.

The candidates increasingly abandoned their decorum. Seated elbow to elbow at a table, they would argue among themselves while another candidate spoke. They mocked others’ views--Hahn challenged Soboroff’s description of the number of lanes on a local road--and played for points with the crowd.

At one point, Soboroff was blaming City Atty. Hahn for settling too many cases. When he noted that many of the settlements go in favor of a few lawyers, Wachs loudly whispered: “They give the contributions.”

Soboroff leaned over to his rival and said: “I don’t go that far.”

The candidates even bickered over an issue on which they agree: opposition to spending public money for this summer’s Democratic convention.

“A deal’s a deal,” Soboroff said of the event, which was originally billed as one that would not require any direct public subsidy.

Hahn agreed, saying the public was cynical enough without having politicians change the rules of the game on the convention.

But Wachs, who has led council opposition to the subsidy, complained that Soboroff and Hahn are backed by leading supporters of that proposal.

“This is what’s wrong with politics,” Wachs said to a thunderous response from the audience.