Villaraigosa for Mayor

It is Los Angeles’ good fortune to have two smart and capable men vying to be its next mayor. No matter who wins June 5, the city will be in the hands of a native son who knows this city and its people well.

The race between Antonio Villaraigosa, 48, and James Hahn, 50, has been tight, and we’re not surprised. The choice between these two Democrats, whose true policy differences could be counted on one hand, is a tough one. But it’s time to make it. And The Times chooses Antonio Villaraigosa.

Often political endorsements are of the “hold-your-nose” type, in which the candidate who represents the lesser evil receives the endorsement. In the case of Villaraigosa versus Hahn, the opposite is true; each candidate has strengths that commend him. City Atty. Hahn has calm command of the details of city government and has run large departments. Former Assembly Speaker Villaraigosa has worked as a top leader in state government, running the 80-member Assembly. In the end, it is that legislative experience--akin to herding cats--along with his impressive talent for bringing together those of unlike mind, that persuades us that Villaraigosa is best suited to lead the Los Angeles of 2001.

We like his energy. We like the audacity of his aspirations for the city. This collection of neighborhoods physically divided by freeways and psychically separated by race, class and ethnicity has yet to reach its full potential as the great American city similar to no other. Can the mayor of this sprawling town really, as Villaraigosa says, “excite the city about its possibilities”? Is it too much to hope for? Why should it be?

The office of mayor is a nonpartisan job, but it requires extraordinary political skill. Under charter reform passed by voters in 1999, the mayor now has more executive authority in the hiring and firing of city department heads. That’s good. But a strong City Council continues to hold significant legislative power. Thus the mayor, in order to move his agenda, must often lead by persuasion, a skill that Villaraigosa has shown in abundance.

On the basic issues, Villaraigosa and Hahn largely agree. They both want to help the school district find sites for additional schools. They both want to attack traffic congestion through the use of more buses, selected light rail and better signal synchronization. They both say they want a reformed Police Department, one in which abuses are curbed by civilian oversight and in which good officers feel appreciated. They want to keep good jobs here and attract more. They both say they will address the urgent problem of overcrowding at Los Angeles International Airport. Villaraigosa, with his connections to those who control the purse strings in Sacramento and Washington, is in a better position to twist arms to gain the cooperation needed from other Southern California cities to get a real regional solution to the airport mess.

A key example of how effectively Villaraigosa can work comes from his time as speaker, when the former ACLU president had to face skeptical Republican colleagues. He managed, uphill, to get a school bond measure passed by covering all of his political bases, just as a mayor must do: He surrounded himself with sharp staff and lieutenants, he identified roadblocks and then compromised on the developer fees that were holding back Republican support for the bonds. Villaraigosa thus was successful in moving the Legislature to place on the ballot the desperately needed $9.2-billion bond for new schools and school repairs, which voters later approved. And the Republicans who once wondered if they could work with the lefty firebrand were impressed. He got the job done, repeatedly, and won Republican fans in the process.

This is not to suggest that Hahn lacks political acumen. The son of one of Los Angeles’ legendary politicians, the late Supervisor Kenneth Hahn, Jim Hahn initially rode the family name into office in 1981. But 20 years in office has taught him much, and following several early unimpressive years he took up the fight, however belatedly, to help clean up the Police Department after the Rampart Division scandal. He worked closely with police reform supporters to ensure that Los Angeles finally adopted a federal consent decree, which requires close outside oversight of the LAPD.

On another police matter, workweeks of three 12-hour days for some officers, Hahn took a step backward. His signed pledge to the police union promising a certain work schedule is an advance capitulation to the union and could take away the city’s flexibility to deploy officers as citizen needs dictate.

Hahn no doubt could run Los Angeles government. Like Villaraigosa, he is experienced, affable and reasonable. But Hahn’s natural political tendencies are toward maintenance and upkeep of what exists. In many ways, that feels comfortable. But his political range of motion is limited.

This metropolis is in the midst of dramatic demographic change. It’s a city of ostentatious wealth just a few miles north and west of City Hall and of shocking poverty just a few miles south and east of it. It’s a city where its own residents need a Thomas Brothers map to find neighborhoods five miles away. It’s a city where some areas feel so disconnected from the rest that they want to secede. It needs an imaginative leader who can see and act on the big picture, who will foresee what makes us uncomfortable and help us deal with that discomfort in a constructive way.

Villaraigosa is certainly not without weaknesses, many of which have been chronicled in our news pages. Early scrapes with the law, bad choices that led to children out of wedlock in his 20s, marital indiscretion and most significant, in 1996, a rash and unwise plea for clemency for a convicted drug dealer whose father was a supporter of several local politicians, including Villaraigosa himself. All of these constitute large lapses in judgment. Villaraigosa owns up to them and says he has learned.

Villaraigosa is not a risk-free choice. But we choose to define risk more broadly; Hahn, with his inclination to focus only on the nuts and bolts of government, represents the risk of stagnation at a time when this dynamic city can least afford it. We go with aspiration. We go with the daring that built Los Angeles. We go with Antonio Villaraigosa for mayor.