New Rules, New Leaders to Shake City Government

Los Angeles City Hall will shed its scaffolding this summer and reopen after three years and $300 million with a rubbery, earthquake-safe foundation, a buffed-up white facade and floors of remodeled offices for the city’s leaders.

But the most profound shifts will occur inside the 73-year-old building, where the city of Los Angeles is about to experience the greatest changeover in political leadership in its modern history.

Just about the time the historic building’s face lift is complete, term limits will help bring a record six new members to the once seemingly immutable 15-member City Council.

A new city controller and a new city attorney will join a new mayor, just the third new chief executive for the city in more than a quarter-century. Mayor Richard Riordan will return to private life after also serving the maximum time allowed in office: two four-year terms.

The new regime will be playing under a new rule book, too. The voter-approved city charter, which took effect last year, alters the powers and duties of every city office. It’s the most pronounced shift in the city’s structure since the reform movement of the early 20th century.

The new charter gives the mayor more power over his department heads and the budget, among other things, while attempting to spin energy outward with the creation of more than 100 neighborhood advisory councils.

Those paradoxical changes are intended to help Los Angeles’ new leadership wrestle with one of the city’s most elemental tensions: how to concentrate authority at the center to complete major projects, while at the same time engaging a citizenry that turns relentlessly outward, to its own neighborhoods, streets and backyards.

“The plate tectonics of Los Angeles are more uncertain now than they have been in a long, long time,” said Steven Erie, a UC San Diego political scientist who studies Los Angeles government. “The battle between localism and citywide needs still rages. And [the outcome] really affects all of Southern California.”

Los Angeles has emerged from the riots and recession of the early part of the last decade, when the city’s decline became the stuff of dark Hollywood scripts and endless media ruminations.

L.A. Armageddon theorists have been hushed, at least for the moment, by a record period of international trade, a mushrooming entertainment industry, a cultural life reinvigorated by a string of new museums, and a downtown enlivened by a set of iconic structures: a new Roman Catholic cathedral, the once-dead Disney Concert Hall and Staples Center, home to the Lakers, Clippers and Kings.

And yet, even as Los Angeles shows signs of new life and health, its failings are a powerful counterweight.

The city’s often underachieving public schools, its ever-more-crowded freeways and its seeming inability to keep streets paved and sidewalks whole provide fodder for the determined cadre of citizens who would dismantle the old Los Angeles. Civic secession movements have taken root in Hollywood, the harbor area and the San Fernando Valley, threatening to wrench the city apart.

The burden of reconciling the competing priorities of macro and micro Los Angeles will fall most heavily on the replacement for outgoing Mayor Riordan. Riordan will leave office June 30 after serving the maximum two terms. Six major candidates and a slew of less well-known ones are competing to succeed him.

There is no clear favorite. Also murky is the question of what issue or theme will capture the city’s imagination leading into the April 10 primary election and an expected June 5 runoff.

Bradley’s Formula Lasted 20 Years

In 1973, the ascension of Tom Bradley, the African American son of a Texas sharecropper, was in many ways the culmination of the civil rights movement.

Bradley’s promise to open City Hall to minorities and to unite Los Angeles--particularly black South Los Angeles with white and liberal West Los Angeles--galvanized the public and helped him vanquish the racially divisive incumbent, Sam Yorty.

The formula proved to be a winner through five terms, though in his later years Bradley’s influence waned as his accomplishments were overshadowed by charges of cronyism.

Multimillionaire businessman Riordan became the accepted antidote in 1993. The deeply painful recession and contraction of the aerospace industry, the 1991 beating of Rodney G. King and the riots of the following year left Los Angeles badly shaken, worse than at any time in three decades.

Riordan’s slogan, “tough enough to turn L.A. around,” and his proposal to sell or lease Los Angeles International Airport to pay for 3,000 more police officers, seemed to be the bold medicine a recession- and riot-weary city wanted. (He would eventually give up on selling LAX and increase the LAPD by about half that many officers.)

Today, the issues facing Los Angeles are less stark and more challenging for the candidates to crystallize.

The half-dozen candidates most likely to replace Riordan have already been campaigning and raising money for months.

None has yet emerged with an initiative distinctive enough to define the race. So the contest’s early debates have been something of a battle of nuances and widely divergent resumes:

* Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-Los Angeles) is a Stanford-trained lawyer and Latino rights activist who believes he can translate his legislative background in Washington into solutions for Los Angeles. The 42-year-old Sacramento native promises to be a no-nonsense, “buck stops here” leader.

* State Controller Kathleen Connell, 53, is a former adjunct professor of business at UCLA and UC Berkeley who preaches tough fiscal management and rigorous oversight of city department heads. She is the toughest-talking candidate--saying that Los Angeles’ management is a mess and that her experience as the state’s fiscal watchdog makes her best suited to launch a cleanup.

* City Atty. James K. Hahn, 50, offers a long family history of government service, presenting himself as the safest and most dependable choice in a city roiling with change. Hahn says that his five citywide election victories to become city controller and, now, city attorney, prove his success in government and his ability to appeal to the city’s many communities.

* Real estate broker and development facilitator Steve Soboroff promises to bring to the mayor’s office the same can-do business skills that were promised by his prime political benefactor, Mayor Riordan. The 52-year-old Pacific Palisades resident cites as proof his efforts to clear the way for construction of Staples Center arena and the Alameda Corridor rail project.

* Antonio Villaraigosa, former speaker of the Assembly, is a “big tent” politician who seeks alliances across the ethnic and political spectrum. Villaraigosa, 47, has tried to evoke the consensus-building style of former Mayor Bradley, with early support from not only Latinos and labor union members, but also Westside liberals, African American politicians in South Los Angeles, and even a few of the city’s politically active billionaires.

* City Councilman Joel Wachs is a nearly 30-year City Hall veteran who has styled himself as the populist outsider by fighting against government waste and opposing taxpayer subsidies for projects such as Staples Center. Wachs, 61, has emphasized his nearly 10 years of support for neighborhood councils and made it clear that he will push for maximum funding so the volunteer groups can work with professional staffs.

The candidates present an array of possible “firsts.” Connell could be the city’s first woman mayor, Wachs its first openly gay mayor, Soboroff or Wachs its first Jewish mayor, Becerra or Villaraigosa the first Latino mayor of modern times.

(When Cristobal Aguilar left the mayor’s office in 1872, he governed just 5,700 people. In his later job of zanjero, or head of the Los Angeles water system, Aguilar gained more renown, and pay, in the drought- and flood-ridden city.)

Beneath the veneer of a generally congenial campaign so far are the inevitable political tensions associated with running for mayor of the nation’s most ethnically diverse big city.

Latinos represent the largest group of Los Angeles residents, well on their way to becoming a majority. African Americans and whites are slipping as percentages of the population. Asians are the fastest-growing group.

But when it comes to voting, the city remains largely the province of white suburbanites, many of them homeowners. Whites have composed more than half the registered voters and 60% or more of actual voters in recent elections.

Only about one in five voters has been Latino and fewer than 5% Asian, with African American voting power holding at about 13%.

None of the minority groups can elect a mayor on its own, and whites are expected to divide their votes among many candidates, at least in the primary. That means the contenders will compete for thin slices of the electorate to put together enough votes to reach a runoff.

Winning less than one-quarter of the ballots--not even 150,000 votes in a city of nearly 4 million--could be enough to gain a spot in the two-candidate final.

More Cooperation May Be Expected

By consensus, any of the six would approach the mayor’s office in a manner markedly different from Riordan.

The former venture capitalist has thrived when he could rally his wealthy allies: to clear the way for Staples Center or the new Disney Concert Hall, or to promote a slate of school board candidates or the new city charter. But Riordan often shunned the compromise and detail work that carry most matters inside City Hall.

All six of his likely replacements are expected to work more cooperatively with the City Council. Several pointedly evoke the memory of Bradley who, in his prime, could count on an almost routine eight-vote majority from the City Council.

The city’s governing body often has been a strong-willed and unpredictable counterpoint to Riordan. It is expected to become an even more difficult group to master in the new era.

Seated around the council’s wooden horseshoe were once a venerable group of politicians led by such dominating figures as Richard Alatorre, Zev Yaroslavsky and John Ferraro, who each served for a decade, two or even three.

Los Angeles’ political graybeards will soon be relegated to history, though, thanks to voter-approved limits of two four-year terms. Five veteran council members will be “termed out” of office this year and another, Michael Feuer, will leave to run for city attorney.

The rest of the longtime veterans, including the ailing, 76-year-old Ferraro, will be forced to leave in 2003. That will leave Councilman Alex Padilla, just 28 and elected in 1999, as one of the council’s elder statesmen.

If the new generation of leaders is to get things done, it may be more in the mold of Jackie Goldberg, who just left the council for the Assembly after two terms.

Goldberg was a quick study who cultivated the native liberalism and labor orientation of the city’s legislature. She promoted equal hiring and treatment for women firefighters and police officers, and won approval for an ordinance that requires a “living wage” for employees of city contractors.

Smaller and more ethnically diverse City Council districts historically have favored council candidates who are more aggressively liberal than the mayor and other citywide officeholders.

The contrast between chief executive and council may become even more pronounced with the potential arrival of several new council members--including four Los Angeles Democrats ejected from the Legislature by term limits--who are not known for their reticence.

State Sen. Tom Hayden and Assembly members Scott Wildman and Carl Washington have already declared their intentions to run for City Council, while state Sen. Richard Polanco is widely expected to campaign for a central city council seat.

None of the state lawmakers is a sure thing in a city election, but all four would be among the favorites because of their high-profiles. If any win, their dominant personalities could make the council more contentious both internally and in its dealings with the mayor.

1st Challenge to Be Local Councils

The return to the renovated City Hall will be more than symbolic. The massive undertaking will make it even more difficult for the new government to take charge while its leaders are preoccupied with the mundane details of unpacking. The elected officials will be sworn in July 1, with moving day from temporary quarters in City Hall East likely to follow shortly thereafter.

But the elected officials will risk their futures if they become too enmeshed in political machinations inside City Hall. They will quickly be asked to oversee the creation of the neighborhood councils, each designed to communicate to City Hall the hopes and wishes of at least 20,000 constituents.

“These groups can surface new and additional leadership in communities and create more partners,” said Councilwoman Laura Chick, who is leaving her San Fernando Valley council seat to run for city controller. “I think they are going to be part of the solution.”

But critics worry that the neighborhood groups will force a City Council already enmeshed in local concerns to become even more parochial.

A Westchester neighborhood council preoccupied with noise and traffic theoretically could have much more influence on future improvements at LAX, for instance, than a citywide business alliance hoping to create an expanded entry for trade and tourism.

“There is going to be even less citywide focus,” worries one City Hall lobbyist who asked not to be named. “This is going to force the council to be even more focused on their districts and to get away from a larger perspective.”

The divisions in the government could become more painful as the new mayor and council confront the first economic slowdown in eight years. Besides the prospect of lower tax revenues, Los Angeles faces a raft of big new expenses.

It could cost as much as $50 million a year for several years for the Police Department to meet federal requirements to hire more supervisors and internal affairs investigators and to install a computer system for tracking the conduct of officers.

A legal requirement to expand the city’s fleet of vehicles burning clean fuels will cost another $10 million to $15 million a year. Hiring 500 paramedics for a badly overtaxed emergency system tacks on another $11 million, just in the first 18 months.

Moreover, the next several years are expected to feature a wave of judgments and settlements arising from police misconduct cases, especially those connected with the Rampart police scandal.

“The city has huge commitments on police and paramedics and on salaries,” said county Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, who previously oversaw city finances when he headed the City Council’s Budget and Finance Committee.

“That is a time bomb that they are sitting on that they have only gotten away with because of the unprecedented boom. I think there is going to be some real pain associated with city finances in the next four years.”

Those concerns arise even without considering how the city might resurrect Riordan’s flagging police expansion effort.

While the outgoing mayor was able to push a force of 7,600 to more than 10,000 officers, high attrition and the loss of recruits to other jobs in a flush economy stalled the buildup. Now, city projections show that by the time Riordan leaves office June 30, the force will stand at just a bit more than 9,000 officers, less than half the gain that the mayor had promised.

The scope of those issues--including traffic, the economy and public safety--suggest to some longtime observers a crying need for big solutions and big thinking.

In the early months of the mayor’s race, neither has been much in evidence, alarming some of those same observers. They worry that this year’s campaign could squander an opportunity for Los Angeles to confront its future.

“I don’t think the city can just drift into this new era without some sort of set of goals, ideas and priorities,” said Kevin Starr, state librarian and author of multiple histories of California.

“We are entering a new millennium, with a new generation coming into power. We need to know: What is the vision, what is their idea of Los Angeles?”

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

L.A. Issues Then and Now

Los Angeles will elect a new mayor this year for the first time since 1993. The issues confronting the six major candidates in the April 10 primary have evolved since Mayor Richard Riordan won election eight years ago.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

What’s on the Ballot

Los Angeles city government will undergo sweeping changes following an April 10 primary and June 5 general election. The city will elect a new mayor, city attorney, city controller and at least six new City Council members. The officials take office July 1 for four-year terms. City Charter reforms will create more than 100 new neighborhood councils to advise authorities in City Hall.

*

JOB: Mayor

SALARY: $172,966

DUTIES: Drafts budget, hires department heads, appoints commissioners to oversee city departments, including semi-autonomous airport, harbor and water and power departments. Influences regional transportation policy through four votes on the 13-member board of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.

*

JOB: City Attorney

SALARY: $159,661

DUTIES: Chief legal advisor for city. Office prosecutes all misdemeanors and infractions within city limits. Oversees staff of 900, including 470 attorneys and a budget of $70 million.

*

JOB: City Controller

SALARY: $146,356

DUTIES: Chief accounting and auditing officer. Charter changes give more authority to audit departments and monitor debt throughout City Hall.

*

JOB: City Council*

SALARY: $133,051

DUTIES: Members write city ordinances, approve city budget, control many land-use decisions, sit on committees overseeing city departments, provide constituent services.

*

* Eight of the council’s 15 seats are up for election this year. Incumbents are seeking just two, with five seats left empty because of term limits and one seat vacated by Councilman Michael Feuer, who is running for city attorney.