Campaign Lesson: Voters in No Mood for Sweet Talk

During the recent presidential campaign, voters seemed to be looking for something more substantial than a tranquilizer.

The 20% vote for Ross Perot and his bitter pill solution for the budget deficit provides some evidence of that. So did the strong New Hampshire showing early in the campaign for Paul Tsongas and his tough-minded prescriptions. Bill Clinton’s predilection for rattling off 14-point programs--ridiculed by political reporters--gave his candidacy a substance that helped carry him through rough times. Substance also was the message during the second presidential debate when a questioner in the audience asked the candidates to stop “trashing” opponents and start reflecting “the genuine complexity and difficulty of the issues.”

Los Angeles may be more in the mood for reality when the city votes for mayor next spring. Sweet talk won’t go over in a city hit by the riots, crime, a leadership void, unemployment and economic decline. It’s time for something new to the Civic Center: fresh ideas, a break with the tired, bureaucratic ways of City Hall.

We’ve got a lot of smart people in town, in the universities, business, community groups, politics--and many who don’t have any particular affiliation. I want to occasionally air their views in this column, if they don’t mind their wisdom filtered through my own view of the world.

Take for example Campaign for a New L.A., a proposal by an organization called Jobs With Peace.

The day before the election, I talked to Sharon Delugach of Jobs With Peace. I found her in a narrow storefront on Western Avenue in South-Central L.A., where she was directing the get-out-the vote campaign of Coalition ’92. This is a group of liberal organizations that campaigned successfully to beat Proposition 165, the ballot measure that would have cut welfare and given Gov. Pete Wilson more power over the budget.

The place was busy with young election workers getting ready to walk precincts. I sat down in a big old chair. Delugach warned me the springs were broken, but she was too late. Shifting to another chair, I began my interview.

“We’re a Who’s Who of the progressive community,” she said. “We’ll have 925 people out working in the neighborhoods on election day. That is a powerful force. That is a machine.”

The next day, the machine’s program arrived at my desk by fax. It was a “Call For a New L.A.,” proposed by Jobs With Peace and supported by other members of the liberal coalition.

At the heart of the plan is a shift of power from City Hall to the neighborhoods, a vast decentralization of municipal power.

Planning--deciding whether someone builds a mall, a factory or a church in your neighborhood--would be in the hands of councils of neighborhood residents.

Just how these councils would be selected is unclear. What is clear is that they would take over much of the authority now exerted by the city’s Planning Commission and the Community Redevelopment Agency. Valley residents who must trek downtown to fight developers could wage their fights close to home. South L.A. residents, fearful their homes will be victims of a big CRA project, would have power to block unwanted development.

In addition, the program envisions greater citizen control of the Police Department, through the establishment of a Civilian Police Review Board. Neighborhood groups would have a say in the organization of community policing.

This is a radical proposal, too radical for me. I can see the city turning into a vast political battleground of warring neighborhood councils. That could be the most positive outcome. The reality might even be worse. The councils could be paralyzed because members of each council would be at war with each other. If you think nothing is accomplished at City Hall now, just wait until you attend your first neighborhood council meeting.

But despite these dangers, the Campaign For a New L.A. plan should be taken seriously. Proposals put forth by members of the liberal coalition in the past have found their way into law.

More than 10 years ago, I encountered the liberals when they were campaigning to trim the power of the Community Redevelopment Agency and use of its vast funds to build low-cost housing. They held a rally at a union hall on the fringe of downtown L.A. and some top members of the Bradley Administration, opposed to the idea, showed up to observe and to scoff. But in a few years, the Bradley Administration and the City Council adopted the proposal.

I’m going on vacation for a month. When I get back, I’ll listen to others around the city and write about their ideas. The coming year will be decisive in L.A. history. As another questioner in the second presidential debate said, it’s time to “focus on the issues and not the personalities and mud.”