LOCAL ELECTIONS / L.A. MAYOR : Personal Attacks Begin to Turn Race Into Brawl

In its first weeks, the race for mayor of Los Angeles often resembled a gang attack on City Councilman Michael Woo, the leader in early polls. But in a pair of debates this week, the campaign escalated into a barroom brawl, as a number of top candidates began throwing verbal punches at each other.

Woo took shots at Assemblyman Richard Katz. Katz called Woo a liar. City Councilman Nate Holden attacked multimillionaire lawyer Richard Riordan, as did Councilman Joel Wachs. And Riordan attacked everybody.

After an unusually venomous exchange between Woo and Katz at a forum Thursday sponsored by the Central City Assn., a downtown business group, Woo summoned reporters into a hallway, where he charged that Katz is unethical.

About three seconds later, Katz aides handed out press releases saying Woo is unethical. About an hour after that, Woo’s campaign manager telephoned reporters to say Katz is a liar.

Campaign observers said the strife is a reflection of the candidates’ sense that Woo’s lead may be soft and that, in any event, the second berth in the June 8 runoff election is still up for grabs.

They said it also is a sign of the candidates’ inability to find strong themes on which to campaign.

“This is a race in desperate search of a message, so falling into personal attacks makes sense because there’s no high ground to have a fight on,” Democratic political consultant Marc Litchman said.

The slugging started Wednesday night at a forum organized by Temple Valley Beth Shalom in Encino that drew a crowd of about 500--the largest audience yet to attend a mayoral debate.

Midway through, Holden prompted Riordan to acknowledge that the lawyer had profited from a land sale to the city’s Community Redevelopment Agency. Holden said that undercut Riordan’s claim to be an outsider untainted by City Hall experience.

Not longer after that, Wachs jumped on Riordan, saying that the lawyer--who is worth an estimated $100 million--has contributed more money to local politicians “than any other single person in the history of the city of Los Angeles.”

“Stop pretending that you’re clean and stop pretending that you’re an outsider and stop pretending that you hate special interests,” Wachs said. “You are the special interest.”

Riordan acknowledged that he has contributed large sums to city politicians and that he does “know how the city works from inside.” But, he said, “I don’t have an agenda like a lot of politicians.”

Criticism of his heavy campaign spending also led Riordan to defend contributions he has received from large corporations.

“Transamerica, First Interstate and a lot of large corporations have backed me, and I think that shows they have a lot of confidence that I can turn this city around,” he said.

On Thursday, the candidates resumed taking potshots at one another.

Woo charged that Katz “tried to take away $300 million from the city of Los Angeles” during the protracted struggle over the state budget last year. Woo said Katz “helped round up votes” for the proposed take-away at the behest of Assembly Speaker Willie Brown, a Katz ally.

Looking calmly at Woo, Katz replied: “Mike, you’re just a liar. It’s clear and it’s simple.” Katz claimed he was “on the front lines of fighting to protect L.A.” and asserted that he helped transfer $44 million to the city treasury from its harbor department.

After asserting that he has “studiously avoided attacking my opponents during these forums,” Riordan proceeded to strafe all the leading contenders.

Referring to a city law that provides tax funds to mayoral candidates, Riordan chided his fellow candidates for taking $8 million for their campaigns that he said could have financed 500 police officers.

“It’s just plain wrong,” he said.

Candidate Linda Griego, sounding a bit disgusted as her colleagues bashed one another, said that what distinguishes her is that “I don’t pound the table.”

“I don’t attack people; I attack problems,” she said.

Speaking at the Encino temple Wednesday, many of the candidates also engaged in an impassioned debate over how best to wipe out graffiti--a discussion that drew some of the strongest audience reaction.

Candidate John Borunda, a retired police lieutenant, was loudly applauded when he noted sternly that “graffiti is a crime. It’s vandalism pure and simple. . . . It’s a crime you prosecute.”

By contrast, candidate Oscar Valdes, a Los Angeles psychiatrist, was met with groans when he said that law enforcement alone would not solve the problem.