City Hall Free-For-all

By Jack E. White

LOS ANGELES VOTERS HAD HOPED THE CURRENT mayoral race would feature a searching debate about the city's direction in the post-Tom Bradley era. What they got was the political equivalent of a freeway pileup. Even though 28 candidates have pulled out of the race, the names of 24 more still clutter the ballot for the April 20 election. "There are too many choices, too many options," says voter Stephanie Mancillas, a grammar-school instructional aide, echoing the widespread perplexity. "It's like when you take a child to the candy store and tell him there are hundreds of pieces to choose from. He can't."

Even worse, the campaign has shed little light on how Los Angeles can cope with its lagging economy, rising crime and deep racial divisions. The size of the field has muffled debate on the issues. The strongest candidates are not even trying to finish first in what everyone assumes will be merely an initial round of voting, with no one likely to get a majority. All are angling for just enough support to get into the two-person runoff election on June 8. Since the vote will be split among so many, a contender could do that by getting as little as 15% of the ballots next week. To that end, the mayoral hopefuls are playing it safe, narrowcasting their messages to voter segments where they are already popular rather than making broad appeals to the entire electorate. Their caution makes political sense, but it has left voters thirsting for inspiration.

The leader in recent polls is Democratic city council member Michael Woo, a 41-year-old Chinese American who would be the city's first mayor of Asian descent. By campaigning as a conciliator, Woo seeks to inherit the coalition of minorities and liberals that supported Bradley. Says he: "I want to be the mayor who unites the city," the one "closing the gap between the haves and have-nots." His critics fault Woo for being too soft on crime.

His closest rival, who is gaining fast, is Republican Richard Riordan, 62, an attorney and investment banker who presents himself as a Ross Perot-style outsider "tough enough to turn L.A. around." Riordan has already spent $3 million of his own money to spread his message that he would put more cops on the street and open more city government functions to bidding by private enterprise. But while Riordan has gained strong support from conservative whites in the San Fernando Valley, he has almost no name identification among minorities. And the little they know about him, they might not like. Last week a Dallas (Texas) Morning News story described an alleged conversation between Riordan and a woman in wealthy Bel-Air. According to the newspaper, when the woman remarked, "Black people are just awful -- don't you think so?" Riordan replied, "Some of them." He insists he does not recall saying it.

At this point, neither Woo nor Riordan has an absolute lock on making the runoff. They could lose to either of two experienced city council members, Nate Holden and Joel Wachs, or to Assemblyman Richard Katz, whose campaign is being run by James Carville. Whatever the outcome, the campaign has been a disappointment for voters who yearn for a more edifying exploration of new ideas. They can only hope that the quality of the debate will improve after the field is reduced in next week's voting.

With reporting by Jeanne McDowell/Los Angeles