By HOWARD FINE

Staff Reporter

A collective sweat has broken out on the brow of City Hall.

The L.A. City Council has just two weeks to analyze, comprehend and approve not just one but two hugely complex policy issues that will help shape the city for decades to come.

“No question, this is historic,” said Councilman Mike Hernandez. “We are changing city government.”

With time running out, tensions are heating up.

“Our entire legislative staff is putting in long hours; I’m giving up weekends. Charter has become my nighttime reading,” sighs Nikki Tenant, chief of staff for Councilwoman Ruth Galanter. “This is definitely crunch time.”

Indeed, the council only has until March 5 to approve the charter reform and business tax reform proposals if they are to qualify for the June ballot. Failure to meet that deadline would bring severe political consequences for council members, and broader consequences for L.A. residents and businesses.

“This is the key moment,” said Larry Kosmont, a local real estate and tax consultant. “The next two weeks are a turning point for the city of Los Angeles. It is a big city, an older city that is having trouble governing itself. If reform doesn’t materialize, you have paved the way for people to leave the city in droves.”

Adding to the pressure is the fact that both measures remain moving targets. As of late last week, both charter reform commissions were still tinkering with various elements of their proposals, and council members were hashing over various alternatives to the business tax reform proposal put forth by Mayor Richard Riordan and Councilman Richard Alatorre.

“I hope these (charter reform) commissions don’t keep changing their proposals right up to the March 5 deadline,” said Galanter. “What’s particularly frustrating to me is that after all this public process, the final compromise is being written by two or three people in some back room somewhere.”

On the issue of tax reform, Galanter said, “We don’t have enough time to have the type of thoughtful and reflective debate we should be having on this. There’s no reason these issues should be coming to us on such a tight timeframe.”

Added another council member, who asked not to be named: “There is a lot of chafing on the council at having to make these decisions, both with such far-reaching impacts, in such a short period of time. There’s a feeling that we’ve been put into a corner.”

But while some council members are wringing their hands, others have been relishing the moment.

“I like tackling a lot of significant issues at the same time. It’s exciting and challenging,” said Councilman Michael Feuer, who is emerging as perhaps the key council player on business tax reform. “It’s why we run for office in the first place, to really make a difference.”

After a three-hour debate on business tax reform last week, Councilman Joel Wachs said: “Are these weighty and meaty issues with huge pressures? Of course. But that’s why we get paid the big bucks.” (Council members are paid about $100,000 a year.)

Actually, much of the pressure is trickling down to council staffers, who are paid significantly less.

“I’ve had more headaches in the last week than I’ve ever had. I’ve got another one today trying to sort through the latest business tax proposals from (council members) Feuer and Goldberg,” said Lisa Gritzner, an aide to Councilwoman Cindy Miscikowski. “With the business tax issue, just trying to get your brain around it. It’s maddening trying to do this.”

Adds Barry Glickman, chief of staff for Councilman Rudy Svorinich: “There’s always frustration when you get dealt a hand at the last minute. Frustration ricochets up and down the chain. We’re the last ones to get this. We’d love to have more time, but we don’t.”

While charter reform is indeed weighty, it’s business tax reform that seems to be the major source of the council’s frustration.

“We all knew months ago that this winter would be the crunch time on charter reform, so we were more prepared to deal with it,” Miscikowski said. “We were not as prepared on the business tax issue, which is why there is a lot of pressure now.”

Predictably, many council members are blaming Riordan for their predicament.

“Saying ‘1999 is the year of reform’ may be a nice 20-second sound bite from the mayor’s office, but it’s much more complex than that,” said Councilwoman Rita Walters. “If 1999 was to be the year of reform, they should have laid more groundwork with the council in 1998 and not sprung the business tax proposal on us right at the end of the year.”

Hernandez said the mayor’s office “kept it all very close to their chest” when developing the business tax reform proposal. “I have a problem with that, which is why I voted no,” he said.

(Hernandez was the only council member to vote no on a Feb. 17 motion to have the city attorney draft three business tax proposals into ordinances.)

Councilwoman Jackie Goldberg, who has been suffering from persistent pain as a result of back surgery in early January, has emerged as chief critic of Riordan’s tax-reform plan.

“You don’t take something as complicated as this and give it to us at the last minute,” she said. “Is it frustrating? You bet it’s frustrating. Look, I didn’t even find out until January 29 that’s just six weeks before the deadline the mayor put before us that many businesses were going to face a tax increase.”

Riordan was unavailable for comment last week. But his spokeswoman, Noelia Rodriguez, countered that the council has had plenty of time to digest both reform proposals.

“The mayor has more confidence in the council than the council apparently has in itself,” Rodriguez said. “The council and their staff have been part of the (business tax reform) process for over a year. The tax reform proposal shouldn’t have been news to them on Dec. 15 (when it was officially announced). There were regular briefings; it was just official on the 15th. Charter reform has been on their radar screens for two years, much longer than tax reform.”

Amid the confusion and frustration, certain council members have emerged as leaders on various aspects of the issues now before them.

“(Council President John) Ferraro has been the leader on charter reform. He’s the one who really handled the significant contentious issues behind the scenes,” one City Hall observer said. “He was deeply involved in the debate over the power of the mayor to fire department heads.”

Meanwhile, Wachs and Councilman Mark Ridley-Thomas have been active on the neighborhood councils issue, Councilwoman Laura Chick has been the point person on police issues, and Galanter has been involved in matters concerning the airport department and the Department of Water and Power.

On the business tax reform issue, Alatorre, who co-authored the Riordan proposal, was the original point man on the council. As budget committee chair, he is trying to steer the plan through the council.

But in recent weeks, budget committee member Feuer has also emerged as a leader. Feuer, who last month voiced objections to the Riordan-Alatorre plan, came forward with his own plan early last week and was in discussions with Riordan’s staff to try to hammer out a compromise.

Goldberg has also come out with a counter-proposal on business tax reform, but, so far at least, she has been unable to garner much support among her colleagues.

Despite the intense pressure council members themselves feel, or perhaps because of it, floor debates have been unusually well-mannered.

“I’ve been on the council eight years, and I think that the debates we’ve had on charter reform and business tax reform are a lot more civil than many other debates we’ve had throughout the years,” said Hernandez, who has announced that he will not run for reelection.

Glickman said that the civil nature is due primarily to the deadlines. “When you know you have to get things done in a certain timeframe, you tend to work better together,” he said. “You know you can’t grandstand or send things back to committee. You don’t have that luxury; you have to do it on the floor.”

Outside observers agreed.

“These deadlines are forcing the council members to act more quickly than they might have,” said Fernando Guerra, director of the Center for the Study of Los Angeles. “They could have taken a year or two to hash out some of these issues, as the council often does. But they really don’t have a choice, particularly on charter reform. If they don’t act, someone else namely the Elected Charter Reform Commission will act.”

The elected commission has the power to independently put a charter reform measure on the ballot.