Rich Examples.

THE tallies are in for the 2001 rankings of the richest people in town, and L.A.'s elite have generally gotten much wealthier over the past year. The combined net worth of the 50 richest Angelenos, at $75 billion, is up almost 20 percent from the year-ago level. Not too shabby considering the economic slowdown and stock market selloff.

Of course, not everyone came away a winner. Gary Winnick, for example, lost almost half his personal fortune over the past year. But that fortune had mushroomed almost as quickly, and he's still worth more than $2 billion. So he's pretty well set. Some other tech-oriented moguls also suffered steep downturns. Idealab's Bill Gross disappeared completely from the list, as did Winnick's former partners David Lee and Barry Porter, although the latter two just barely missed the cut.

And while there were a few others who suffered more modest setbacks, most of L.A.'s wealthiest residents enjoyed solid returns. Those invested in energy-- Marvin Davis and Selim Zilkha--hit gushers.

While having so many mega-wealthy people in town may seem like something to crow about, the pragmatic value for Los Angeles as a whole depends to a large degree on these moguls' desire to "give back" to their community.

Defining "community" in Los Angeles can be a tricky matter, and even more so for its wealthiest residents. These are people with global visions, and a global lifestyle to boot. But while they may consider their "community" to be the entire world, or their particular industry group, rather than Los Angeles, the wealthiest Angelenos as a group have been and continue to be tremendously generous benefactors to a number of worthwhile causes.

So what does that mean for Los Angeles, where the needs are considerable, even monumental in some areas of town?

Mayor Richard Riordan, seemingly more impassioned with each passing day as his term nears an end, has been trying to call more attention to the plight of L.A.'s poor. He's lashing out at county supervisors and nonprofit agencies, he's conducting inner-city bus tours with Antonio Villaraigosa, his likely predecessor.

Predictably, some of his efforts have been met with defensiveness and scom. "If he's so concerned about our neighborhoods, why doesn't he ride his bike around here instead of through the South of France," one activist quipped last week.

Such comments suggest that enjoying the fruits of one's labor and good fortune somehow demonstrates a lack of concern for the poor, or lack of commitment to help them. That kind of either-or thinking is simple minded, and wrong.

Riordan and fellow mogul Eli Broad, while never denying themselves the good life, are consistently demonstrating their personal commitment (in time and money) to making Los Angeles a better place to live and work.

No local mogul has better demonstrated a civic commitment to Los Angeles than Broad. Whenever there's something big percolating, whether it's the Democratic National Convention, a bid to bring back NFL football or getting the Disney Concert Hall back on track; there's Broad leading the charge.

And it's not mere lip service, either. Just last month Broad committed to donating $10 million for local school reform efforts. He put op $23 million to establish the Broad Center for Biological Sciences at Caltech. And now he's chairing a committee that is investigating the feasibility of developing a 110-acre biomedical campus near the County-USC Medical Center in Boyle Heights. (See story on page 4 of this issue.)

Now, if the other wealthy residents of Los Angeles, even those who see themselves as global citizens, were to demonstrate even a fraction of that commitment, this place could truly emerge as a world-class city of the 21st century.