REFORMS LEVEL FIELD IN L.A. ELECTIONS.

Byline: Patrick McGreevy Daily News Staff Writer

Campaign finance reforms adopted in 1990 have significantly leveled the playing field in Los Angeles city elections between incumbents and challengers, the city Ethics Commission said Thursday.

``In the pre-reform era we found the incumbents held all the cards,'' said commission Deputy Director LeeAnn Pelham. ``They out-raised and outspent challengers.''

Before the reforms, incumbents spent 82 percent of the money in elections, while challengers spent only 14 percent, the study found. In 1993, the first election when all reforms were in place, City Council challengers spent 52 percent of the money.

``In short, the matching fund program has helped provide more competitive elections, an essential element in holding elected officials accountable for their actions,'' said commission President Edwin Guthman.

The reforms were part of Measure H, a ballot measure approved by voters in 1990 in response to scandals involving then-Mayor Tom Bradley.

The reforms set lower limits on campaign contributions. They also created a program that gave City Council candidates up to $125,000 in city matching funds, dollar-for-dollar, if they agree to limit spending. Similar matches and restrictions were offered to citywide candidates, including those running for mayor.

The study, titled ``Investing in Competition,'' looked at all elections between 1989 and 1997, in which 218 city candidates spent a combined $55 million.

Since matching funds were first offered in the 1993 election, 80 percent of council challengers and 60 percent of incumbents have accepted them and their requirement to limit spending. Before 1993, the average council member spent $330,000 vs. $39,000 for the average challenger. In 1993, the average winner spent $316,077 and the average challenger spent $221,000.

``Our comprehensive approach to reform - including the public matching funds program - provides voters with broader choices and provides candidates with a source of campaign funding linked only to public interest,'' Guthman said.

Among the examples cited in the study was the 1993 race for the 3rd Council District in the West San Fernando Valley, where challenger Laura Chick used matching funds and campaign contributions to spend $237,397 to unseat Councilwoman Joy Picus, who spent $230,994, including matching funds.

Because the reforms placed new aggregate limits on contributions from business entities and allowed only contributions from individual people to be matched, another outcome has been a significant increase in contributions from individuals.

Between 1981 and 1985, Los Angeles City Council incumbents received 64 percent of their campaign contributions from business sources. From 1993 to 1997, after the reforms took effect, 75 percent of contributions to incumbents came from individuals.

An issue in question involves wealthy candidates. Richard Riordan rejected matching funds and spent $6 million of his own money in 1993 to win the mayor's race against 34 other candidates who spent $650,410.

The Ethics Commission study said there is an upward trend in candidates using their personal funds, and it suggests that the panel may want to consider additional measures to lessen the advantage of wealthy candidates.