Lighten up on the mayor
MOST PEOPLE remember Rudy Giuliani for his handling of 9/11. But to those who study city government, it was what happened to crime rates during his time in office that made his tenure most memorable. It’s not just that crime rates fell dramatically and stayed down. It’s that, up until Giuliani, mayors and police chiefs tended to treat rising crime rates, disorder and a withered street life as intractable urban problems. He showed that a mayor and an aggressive police commissioner -- William J. Bratton, now L.A.’s police chief -- could restore vigor and civility to the streets.
This achievement did not spring from one big initiative but from a series of little ones, such as making the New York Police Department, from brass to precinct commander, accountable for results; using the CompStat computer statistics and mapping system to identify crime trends and policing priorities; and going after “quality of life” crimes.
This is an important lesson to keep in mind when assessing Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s term so far: Big achievements in city government usually grow out of small advances -- and sometimes take a while to flower.
After nearly two years of mostly positive media coverage, Villaraigosa got knocked around a bit in April -- a Times editorial wondered whether he was suffering from a “sophomore jinx” -- after the city lost its bid to host the 2014 Olympics and, more important, a state appellate court effectively kneecapped his drive for a greater say in the governance of the L.A. Unified School District.
These setbacks were noteworthy, said Cal State Fullerton professor Raphael Sonenshein, who has written extensively about city politics, “because there’s always been the question with Villaraigosa of whether there are too many things on his agenda and what will have been accomplished when his first term is up.” In other words, in a city that expects a lot from him, Villaraigosa doesn’t yet have any signal achievements on the order of, say, former Mayor James K. Hahn’s successful campaign to defeat San Fernando Valley secession. So the pressure is on the mayor in the remaining two years.
Villaraigosa’s accomplishments so far are hardly trivial, though. He has navigated the city’s treacherous currents of race and ethnicity with aplomb, most notably in defusing the racial tensions surrounding his veto of the City Council-approved settlement of firefighter Tennie Pierce’s racial discrimination suit. He has worked hard to give city government an appealing public face by showing up in far-flung neighborhoods to attend events big and small. Most important, he has taken hold of City Hall and its bureaucracy in a way Los Angeles hasn’t seen since Tom Bradley was mayor.
This is crucial, because it’s how a mayor actually leaves his imprint on the city. Villaraigosa has filled the boards and commissions that oversee city agencies with such imaginative and knowledgeable members as John Mack at the Police Commission, Mike Woo at the Planning Commission and Bruce Ackerman at the Community Redevelopment Agency. He has appointed highly respected general managers -- Geraldine Knatz at the port and Gail Goldberg at planning -- with whom, unlike his immediate predecessors, he meets regularly.
The result is a city government increasingly reflective of his priorities -- a port that works to persuade trucking and shipping companies to cut carbon dioxide emissions; a Community Redevelopment Agency that doesn’t go along with residential developers’ push to rezone industrial land without finding ways to make up for jobs lost because of the rezoning; and a planning department that clearly wants a more pedestrian-friendly L.A.
The problem with these achievements is that none of them are “big” in the way the public expects of Villaraigosa. Take the Planning Commission’s recently released blueprint for future growth in L.A. In contrast to previous blueprints, the new one is filled with ideas that reflect the latitude Villaraigosa has given Goldberg to rethink the city: promoting walkability in the city and resisting measures, like street widening, that discourage it; building housing and creating jobs along transit lines; developing and enforcing design standards that ensure better aesthetics. If implemented, these principles would reshape Los Angeles -- but not in a way most people would notice anytime soon.
The truth is, Villaraigosa actually has racked up one big achievement: He’s made Angelenos expect big achievements because he has repeatedly asked them to dream together about a better city. So, in a way that Hahn did not, Villaraigosa has invited Angelenos to hold him to account for delivering on his aspirations.
These have centered on two undertakings: improving public schools and reducing gang violence. Although it is increasingly unlikely that a court will endorse his quest to be a significant power in L.A. Unified governance, Villaraigosa may get a majority on the school board after the May 15 runoff elections (he needs two more sympathizers). It would be an indirect way to wield power, but it would strengthen his hand in forcing the district to deal with such glaring problems as its stultifying bureaucracy, as detailed in a recent independent audit. If the mayor wins his majority, his thwarted attempt to take more direct control of the district may eventually be seen as wasteful but not fatal.
Complex as the gang problem may be, Villaraigosa holds a decent hand, partly because he’s got Bratton, who’s seeking another five-year term, by his side, and partly because he knows the city’s past piecemeal approach has hamstrung its efforts. You can debate whether “prevention” or “suppression” should be emphasized, but it’s hard to second-guess the fight itself.
If Villaraigosa’s first term is judged on whether city schools improve and gang violence declines, it would seem only fair: That is how he has asked residents to judge him. Realizing these big goals will depend a lot on how well the mayor keeps City Hall and its commissions focused on doing the small things right.