43rd Assembly District

While the battle to represent the 43rd Assembly District is interesting on its own merits because it features two young, articulate and sophisticated candidates, there are issues just below the surface that make it particularly intriguing.

In the race, Democrat Dario Frommer is facing Republican Craig Missakian to represent the district, which includes parts of Glendale, Burbank, Toluca Lake, Los Feliz and Hollywood.

But behind the two candidate lurk a couple of Sacramento heavyweights who are putting power and prestige on the line.

Frommer is the former appointments secretary for Gov. Gray Davis and has the governor’s endorsement in the race. Missakian, meanwhile, has the support of former Gov. George Deukmejian, who doesn’t get involved in many races but was a political mentor for the candidate.

Beyond that, the two candidates represent ethnic groups that have sometimes been in conflict in the district. Frommer, a Latino, and Missakian, an Armenian American, both have vowed to work to ease tensions between the two communities, exacerbated when a Latino youth was killed, allegedly by Armenian gang members.

Both candidates are attorneys and both were raised in the district. The seat became open when Democrat Scott Wildman ran and lost in a state Senate primary.

The Times Valley Edition editorial board, as part of its series of interviews with candidates from select races about their views on the issues and about their campaigns, recently talked to Frommer and Missakian.

* * *

Question: What do you offer the district that your opponent does not?

Answer: I think there are major differences between us. One area is experience. I’ve been a chief of staff to state Sen. Art Torres. Several years ago, I was appointment secretary to Gov. Gray Davis. I also worked for the governor when he was the state controller. In my private law practice, I’ve been an advocate for cities and local government in Sacramento. I think I have an understanding of how Sacramento works, and I think in an era of term limits, it gives me an enormous advantage to be able to go up there and hit the ground running. I also think I know the community, having grown up here, being a homeowner here, teaching at the local community college, being part of the local schools. I have a feel for what’s happening. We have a lot of needs in this district. It’s a district that I think has been neglected in some ways, not getting its fair share of money from Sacramento.

Q: Speaking of education, how do you stand on the school voucher issue? (Proposition 38 on the state ballot would authorize at least $4,000 per pupil for use in attending qualifying private and religious schools).

A: I’m opposed to Prop. 38. I don’t think that school vouchers are the answer to our education problems. And I don’t think that plan is workable.

Q: What are the solutions to our education problems?

A: I would take a number of steps. One of them has to do with teacher training and teacher improvement. We’re going to have a teacher shortage in this state. We already do in many areas. And if we want to reduce class size, we’re going to need more teachers. At the same time, we want to make sure that we’re keeping teachers in the system. In the L.A. Unified [School] District, 50% of the teachers have five years or less experience. So there’s no one there to mentor younger teachers. We have to improve pay, we have to help teachers get their credential whether the state is helping them pay for it or giving them time and credit to do it. We need to do the kind of training program the governor has proposed using the Cal State and [University of California] systems and bringing teachers in for extensive training. We also need to train administrators. A principal can make a huge difference in a school. Every school district in the area I’m running in is having overcrowding problems. We can’t continue our class-size reduction if we don’t plan to address facilities problems. One of the major problems I see is that districts are caught in red tape in Sacramento, where it takes a long time to get plans approved. A lot of the laws that require Sacramento approval are well-intentioned, but I think you need to streamline them, make the process quicker. For example, a law was passed [that] requires every district that wants to build a new school to submit their plans for environmental review to the Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC). The problem is, nobody thought about staffing the department to make sure that those reviews are completed quickly. I’m not opposed to the DTSC doing the reviews. After Belmont, it’s probably a good idea, but sometimes in Sacramento people focus very narrowly on one thing and they don’t look at the big picture. We also need to work with districts to reform the whole building code on educational facilities, which was written in the ‘50s, when we had plenty of open space in places like the San Fernando Valley. We are looking at a time when there’s not going to be much open space. We may have to go with smaller facilities. We may have to look at doing things like building the basketball court, or a gymnasium, on top of a parking structure. But that’s going to take reform in the codes at the state level. The other area I think we need to focus on is that only 30% of our kids go to college, 70% of them will not. What I’m seeing in a lot of high schools is that there are many kids falling through the cracks. No one is really addressing what’s going to happen to those who are not college bound. And in this economy, we need to make sure that those kids get the skills they need to go out and get a good job. I think we need to build more partnerships in the private sector.

Q: Do you support the measure that would allow school bonds to pass with 55% of the vote?

A: I think this is one of the most important tools that we will have to speed school construction. I think it’s a good, common-sense measure. I think it ensures better accountability in many ways. It limits the increase in property taxes, which I think is prudent. But it also gives districts an additional tool to get these bonds on the ballot and hopefully passed.

Q: You mentioned the need to hit the ground running because of term limits. Do you favor term limits?

A: On the one hand, I like term limits because they’ve given people like myself an opportunity to get involved [that] might not otherwise exist. I do see some downsides. I think that there is some truth to the fact that you’re losing institutional knowledge as people pass through. It takes a lot of folks a couple of years to learn the job, and then they get good at it and have to move on. On the other hand, I have seen an increased willingness in the Legislature for people to put partisanship aside and work on issues. I think that one of the intended benefits of term limits was to create a citizen Legislature. And I think it has. I don’t think that’s a bad thing at all, that you have people who are not so wedded to the system, not so wedded to the party. I think that this current session of the Legislature, the last two years, has been extremely productive.

Q: The film industry is a major employer in the district. What would you do to offset runaway film production?

A: I think we need to look at how to streamline the process. There are a lot of different standards, there are a lot of different processes, and I think we ought to look at trying to standardize that. Number two, I like the idea of potentially looking at a production package. Maybe we’ll use bond money to have the state look at financing films that would be made here, with local talent, using local businesses. The other thing I think we need to look at is job training. We need to help people make a transition into different areas of what they can do within the industry, so maybe they’ve got a couple of different skills. So if one part of the work they’re doing is not happening right now, there are other things they can do in the industry and survive. As I go door to door, I am finding a lot of people who are telling me, “Boy, you know, I was doing fine, making decent money, and I’m really, really hurting now because of this lack of jobs.”

Q: What is the biggest issue you hear about going door to door?

A: Education is far and away the biggest issue. It’s interesting that although many people talk about the system and they’re concerned about it, many of them in Glendale and Burbank are very happy with their local schools and local teachers and administrators. Health care is a big issue. A lot of people in this district are small-business people, they’re self-employed, they work at home and they’re having tremendous difficulty affording insurance. One of the things I’d like to see us do is look at earmarking some of the money that we’re going to get from the tobacco settlement and locking it up and perhaps investing it and then taking the proceeds of those investments to provide tax credits. Or working on an arrangement to allow small-business people or self-employed people to go into a pool so you have the strength of numbers when purchasing insurance. Look at some innovative ways to do that because people just always tell me horror stories about $500, $600 a month for insurance for themselves and their families.

Q: What would you do to address transportation problems?

A: I think we’re off to a good start because the governor and the Legislature put money into to this area, particularly the Valley, for improvements. Long-term, we’re going to have to dedicate more money to transportation. I honestly would like us to look at light rail. I’d like us to look at programs to encourage ridership in high-occupancy vehicle and carpool lanes. But the other real issue that we have to address long-term here is growth. We have to look at how we attract people and build housing and businesses in an area so people can get to their jobs quickly, so they’re not forced, because they can’t afford to buy a house near their work, to live many, many miles away. And I think that as we look at affordable housing now as an issue, one of our objectives ought to be how we can encourage communities to build housing that’s close to work, that’s affordable, that’s sustainable. I think that’s an area that we really need to look at long-term.

Q: There have been some tensions in Glendale between the Latino and Armenian communities. If you were elected, how would you address this problem?

A: Some of the tensions are real and some of them have been hyped up. And a lot of it, I think, is bringing the two different communities together and dialoguing, and that’s happened in Glendale. I think that’s very, very positive. One thing I’ve been working on is to get a state grant of money for youth. There’s $250,000 in Glendale to be shared by a couple of different organizations, nonprofits, to do counseling and mentorship. I also think we need to look at our schools and focus on programs that bring students together and have a dialogue, or bring students together in a common purpose working on things. Although some students do integrate and have friendships, many do not. We ought to look at ways we can encourage students through positive projects, working together, team-building, dialogue about understanding different cultures. Once you do that, people begin to realize that there’s so much in common. If you look at a Latino and [an] Armenian community, they are very similar with very similar values. Family, hard work, faith, respect for the elders . . . they’re communities [that] really emphasize taking care of their own. I really do think that it’ll be incumbent on leadership to look for programs that we can work on with city leaders and others in the schools to bring about that sense of commonality.