Times Endorsements

The Times endorses selectively, on a case-by-case basis. Here are recommendations for Tuesday’s election.

Los Angeles mayor: Bob Hertzberg, Antonio Villaraigosa. Either would be a more dynamic leader than incumbent James K. Hahn, whose leadership has been lackluster and whose flawed appointments and lax oversight of City Hall contracts have fueled impressions of favoritism. Hertzberg is the enlightened businessman’s candidate, a high-velocity wonk who loves big ideas and is bursting with plans (some of them even doable) for hiring more police, improving public transit and reforming the L.A. Unified School District. Villaraigosa is the intuitive anti-wonk who operates from the gut. A gifted coalition builder, he is skilled at reading situations and people. Best outcome: a Hertzberg-Villaraigosa runoff.

City Council District 11: Flora Gil Krisiloff. A passionate civic activist, Krisiloff helped found the Brentwood Community Council and has been active in several other local boards, commissions and schools. She has been a key player in battles over commercial development on the Westside and is endorsed by the incumbent, Cindy Miscikowski, forced out by term limits.

This is the only open City Council seat.

Community College District Office No. 6: Gerald Perttula. This counselor to high-risk teens offers persuasive critiques of the district board’s decision to build a $20-million-plus headquarters downtown with money he says was earmarked for improving campuses. Incumbent Nancy Pearlman’s commitment to environmental issues is admirable, but a misplaced priority.

In the other two offices on the ballot, the incumbents lack serious opposition.

Charter Amendment 1 -- Inclusion of port police in the fire and police pension plan: No.

This amendment has flown under the radar, with little public discussion, at a time when public pensions are breaking the banks of cities nationwide -- not to mention California’s.

The Port of Los Angeles police force is separate from the Los Angeles Police Department. Port police now have the same pension benefits as the city’s civilian employees. This proposed amendment would include port officers in the city’s much more generous fire and police pension. The increased costs would be paid by the city’s Harbor Department, not the city’s general fund.

Backers argue that the change would help recruit port police at no taxpayer cost. But the point of a more generous pension is to attract employees to a dangerous line of work. Port police, although sworn officers who receive police training, simply do not face the same risks as the LAPD. Increasing benefits for port police also raises the more costly question of what to do about the city’s airport police. The city should not approach these questions piecemeal.

Charter Amendment 2 -- Modifications to Fire and Police Pension Plan: Yes.

This seeks to undo the unintended consequences of the generous pensions that allow fire and police officers to retire after 20 years. It would help the city to rehire retired employees who have specialized expertise. The need for it serves as a perverse reminder to hold the line against the pension creep proposed in Charter Amendment 1.

*

For complete Times endorsements, go to www.latimes.com/endorsements.