Rogan, Schiff ‘Report Cards’ Depend on Who’s Grading

Just as the beginning of summer means report cards for students, the approach of an election brings a host of ratings of candidates by special interest groups.

In the congressional contest between Rep. James Rogan (R-Glendale) and state Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Burbank), they are coming fast and furious, often thanks to the campaigns themselves.

Some ratings are clear cut. Rogan, for instance, received a high rating of 83% by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for 1999, which endorsed him in the race.

In contrast, the League of Conservation Voters, an environmental group, named Rogan to its “dirty dozen list” of candidates with poor environmental records, saying he voted with the group only 6% of the time. In endorsing Schiff, the California League of Conservation Voters gave the challenger a 100% rating.

Jason Roe, campaign manager for Rogan, said the rating is misleading because there were other members of Congress who received lower ratings from the group but did not make the list of a dozen.

“It’s the worst 12 where they think they can tip the election,” Roe said dismissively about the list.

In deciding how to allocate $3 million for advertising, league officials said they also considered campaign contributions from polluters and how competitive races are.

Then there was the issue of gun control, in which report cards seem contradictory. Rogan has said he supports reasonable safety measures for guns, but the congressman made a “dangerous dozen” list put out by Handgun Control Inc., highlighting what it says are legislators who have voted against gun control measures.

Rogan, the group said, voted two out of six times against Handgun Control positions. The group endorsed Schiff in the race.

Luis Tolley, western director of the group, said its rankings are based on voting records, as well as consideration of close races involving candidates with strong records for gun control.

Yet a hard-line group opposed to gun control, Gun Owners of America, gave Rogan an “F” in its last report card. John Velleco, a spokesman for the group, said the grade is based on how many times a legislator votes for gun control measures.

“He got that on his own,” Velleco said of Rogan.

The national group only rated federal legislators, but Gun Owners of California gave Schiff a zero rating, meaning he did not vote with the group at all.

Roe said the conflicting ratings show how worthless such report cards are.

ROGAN REBUKED: Rogan is a former prosecutor, but his campaign drew a rebuke this week from Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Gil Garcetti.

The Rogan camp sent out a mailer that included a Garcetti letter that opposed legislation the D.A. feared would expand access to Department of Motor Vehicle records in a way that would let stalkers obtain information.

Schiff voted for the legislation, and the Rogan mailer maintains “Adam Schiff voted to sell confidential DMV records even though the District Attorney’s Office warned that it could ‘put the lives of stalking victims in California at greater risk of injury or death.’ ”

In a letter to Schiff from Garcetti this week, the prosecutor said the mailer was “incorrect.” After Garcetti opposed the bill, Schiff helped amend the legislation to prohibit the release of information involving stalker victims, the prosecutor said.

“As a result of this amendment, the Los Angeles District Attorney’s Office removed its opposition to the bill,” Garcetti’s letter said. “We appreciate your help in obtaining amendments to (the bill) which provided protection to stalking victims.”

Parke Skelton, a spokesman for Schiff, called on Rogan to apologize for what Skelton said was “just one in a series of outrageous misrepresentations.”

Jeff Solsby, a spokesman for Rogan, refused to apologize, saying the bill was bad even as amended and noting that Gov. Gray Davis vetoed it.

Solsby pointed out that in vetoing the bill, Davis said it would “erode the public perception of privacy and the confidentiality of private information in government records.”

TAKEN BY SURPRISE: How surprising was Mayor Richard Riordan’s announcement last week that he supports restoration of the senior lead officer program in the LAPD?

So surprising that a coalition of civic leaders who support the program did not have time to cancel a “town hall” meeting in Studio City for Wednesday night.

On Tuesday, after Riordan’s flip-flop last week, the Police Commission voted to restore the program.

But the fliers had already been distributed for Wednesday night’s meeting. Those who were scheduled to appear at the Sportsmen’s Lodge event included Police Protective League President Ted Hunt, state Sen. Richard Alarcon (D-Sylmar), City Council candidate Jill Barad, and Page Miller and Sandy Munz, co-chairs of Save Our Senior Leads.

Barad acknowledged that the purpose of the event was to put pressure on Riordan and the Police Commission to restore the popular program.

She said the event still was important because she and others question why the program has to be phased back in instead of being immediately restored.

APATHY HITS HOME: During a recent candidates forum, Republican Senate contender Paul Zee was asked in front of a group of Glendale college students what he thinks of apathy among young people.

“I understand the challenge,” Zee said. “It’s tough enough to convince my three college-student children to vote for me.”

BUSINESS DIVIDED: The United Chambers of Commerce of the San Fernando Valley voted Wednesday to support two controversial measures on the Nov. 7 ballot, but not without dissent from the maverick members of the Chatsworth chamber.

The United Chambers represents 23 chambers in the Valley. It voted to support a city proposal to raise $532 million in bonds for fire stations and animal shelters in Los Angeles.

But three representatives of the Chatsworth chamber voted to oppose the bond measure.

“The bond amount is exorbitantly high, and we would not get any new firefighters in place,” said Bill Powers, a vice president of the Chatsworth chamber and vice chair of the United Chambers.

The United Chambers also voted to support a county ballot measure that would increase the size of the county Board of Supervisors from five to nine members. Powers said the majority believed it would improve representation by reducing the number of residents in each supervisorial district.

Powers, however, said he and the other representatives of the Chatsworth chamber dissented.

“We felt it provided an additional level of bureaucracy that is going to cost us more,” Powers explained.

Both the United Chambers and the Chatsworth chamber agreed to oppose state Proposition 38, the school voucher measure, and Proposition 39, which would reduce the percentage of vote required for approving school bonds from two-thirds to 55%.