Bruising Debate Winds Up Race : Mayoral campaign: Woo questions his opponent’s character in a broad attack. Riordan decries distortions and swipes at councilman on crime in Hollywood.

The campaign for mayor of Los Angeles climaxed Monday night with a bruising exchange between two candidates who represent different generations and ideologies and see in each other what is wrong with the city they would like to save.

In a debate televised live on KTTV Channel 11 just hours before the polls were to open this morning, City Councilman Michael Woo initiated the hostilities. He attacked rival Richard Riordan’s character, citing his memberships in exclusive clubs, his contributions to anti-abortion groups, his friendship with former Police Chief Daryl F. Gates and his delayed disclosure of a drunk-driving arrest.

Riordan parried coolly: “Mr. Woo, I think people are getting bored by your repetitious distortions of my record. When I leave as mayor, I want the city to be clean and safe. I want children to be educated so they have the skills to compete in our society. I want the environment to be clean, and I want every citizen of L.A. to be proud to be an Angeleno.”

He then took a swipe at Woo’s honesty and another at Woo’s record of fighting crime in his Hollywood City Council district.

“Mr. Woo has had so many distortions within (a) minute that it’s hard to answer all of them,” Riordan said.

“Mr. Woo should stand on his record of safety. In the eight years he’s been councilperson in Hollywood, murders are up more than 50%, aggravated assaults over 100%. Prostitution, drug sales, boarded up buildings are everywhere in Hollywood.”

Woo was clearly the more aggressive debater, interrupting and needling; performing, at times, like a prizefighter who has just one round left to score the knockout he needs to win the match.

He used the debate to put the final touches on his portrait of Riordan as a ruthless capitalist, a supporter of right-wing causes and a candidate who has tried to mislead the public about political and personal aspects of his past.

“It comes down to questions of character and questions of trust. . . . Mr. Riordan has been flip-flopping on a lot of issues, not just on choice, not just on country clubs, not just about his arrest record,” Woo said.

Often pausing as if to collect his thoughts, Riordan seemed taken aback by the intensity of Woo’s offensive. But if he was not as sure-footed as Woo, he was never rattled, as he has been occasionally in previous debates.

In the close race, likely to hinge on today’s voter turnout, Woo, 41, risked sounding shrill as he seemed to take every opportunity to turn the debate into a personal diatribe against Riordan.

“Mr. Riordan has a really horrible record, a miserable record, of standing up for the rights of ethnic minorities. . . . He joined a country club that refused to admit ethnic minorities, Jews and women as members.”

To which Riordan replied: “Mr. Woo has been running a racist type of campaign, divisive, trying to get people against each other on the basis of gender, ethnicity, class and sexual orientation.”

As he frequently does, Riordan, 63, spoke of the contributions he has made to inner-city educational and recreation programs.

“I’m proud of what I’ve done. I think that Mr. Woo should stop this type of racism that he’s been running in the campaign.”

From time to time, the candidates did talk about the issues. Riordan summarized his plans to lease Los Angeles International Airport to help pay for 3,000 more police officers and to streamline the City Hall bureaucracy to make it easier for businesses to operate in Los Angeles.

Woo talked about his competing plan to fund 2,000 more police by reducing City Hall budgets, and repeated his proposal to ban cheap handguns.

At one point, a member of the audience asked if there was any one promise on which the candidates would stake their political careers.

“The one thing I’ll promise is to take giant strides in making the city safe,” Riordan said. “I promise that I will add 3,000 police officers over four years.”

If he fails at that, he said, “I guarantee you I won’t run again.”

Woo, in turn, said: “I believe it’s absolutely essential for us to add more police officers out on patrol in every neighborhood of this city and as mayor I will lead the fight to make that happen. I won’t just lead the fight . . . I’ll tighten my own belt to make that happen,” he said, pledging to cut 20% from his office budget.

“And if I’m not able to do it or I don’t live up to it, yes, I will not run again.”

In summing up, Riordan sought to reinforce the image he has tried to project, of the citizen candidate who decided to run for office to repair the damage done to Los Angeles by inept career politicians like Woo.

“This election gives the voters a clear choice between two different types of candidates, myself, a non-politician, problem-solver who has had to meet many payrolls, who deeply cares about this city. And Mr. Woo, a politician who has never worked a day in his life outside of government.

“He now talks about plans to turn L.A. around, but where has he been the last eight years? Why didn’t he do something a year ago, three years ago, five years ago? Where has he been as crime has gotten out of control in our city? Where has he been as taxes have gone up and services have gone down? Where has he been as graffiti has taken over? Where has he been as neighbors have been losing their jobs?”

In closing, Woo defended his record.

“Dick Riordan asks where have I been for the last eight years. Let me tell you where I’ve been. I’ve been standing up and fighting for change. I’ve been fighting for the things I believe in.

“Tonight I’m asking you to come out and vote not against one candidate or another but to vote for Mike Woo. Tomorrow, vote for a mayor who will create jobs by putting people first. Tomorrow, vote for a mayor who will protect local businesses by fighting efforts to send jobs to other countries. Vote for a mayor who will cut city government expenses and use the money to pay for more police officers on patrol in every neighborhood. Vote for a mayor who will get deadly handguns like Saturday night specials off our streets even if it goes up against the National Rifle Association. Vote for a mayor who will stand up to the radical right and protect a woman’s right to choose on abortion.”

The hourlong debate was held before a 150-member studio audience, several of whom were allowed to question the candidates. The audience was selected by the co-sponsors of the debate: KTTV Channel 11; La Opinion, Los Angeles’ largest Spanish language newspaper, and the Southwest Voter Registration Project.

Xandra Kayden, a visiting scholar at the Claremont Graduate School Center for Politics and Policy, said she believed that Woo had prevailed Monday evening, in contrast to Riordan’s stronger showing in the televised debate the previous night.

By confronting Riordan to explain why he has not authorized release of the records of his three alcohol-related arrests in the 1960s and ‘70s, Kayden said Woo made it “more credible to attack him on a question of trust. Before that, it always looked like petty sniping.”

But political analyst Sherry Bebitch Jeffe said the overall advantage of both debates may accrue to Riordan, who, she said, came across looking more reserved and mayoral. “If you called up Central Casting and asked for a generic mayor, you’d probably get Richard Riodran,” Jeffe said. “This was the last chance that Woo had to get Riordan off balance--to stop whatever momentum he perceived there. And I don’t think he did.”

Meanwhile, as the campaign entered its final hours, both sides readied massive efforts to get their voters to the polls today.

The most controversial development came as the state Democratic Party sent out 100,000 mailers offering free doughnuts to voters who cast ballots.

The mailing comes after a state judge, citing a California constitutional ban on political party spending in nonpartisan municipal races, barred the state Democratic Party from spending $200,000 to help Woo.

“What we’re doing is totally consistent with the judge’s order,” state Democratic Party Chairman Bill Press insisted, noting that the mailer does not mention Woo.

“It’s not only our right to do this, but the duty of the party to encourage people to go out and vote,” Press said. “If the Republicans have a problem with this, they have a problem with democracy.”

The mailer invites Democrats to turn in their ballot stubs to receive half a dozen free doughnuts.

State GOP Chairman Tirso del Junco accused the state Democratic Party of violating the court order. He said he has asked Republican Party lawyers to look into taking the Democratic Party back to court, but he doubted that anything would be done until after the election.

The GOP chairman also objected to the offer of free doughnuts. But a spokesman for the secretary of state’s office said Monday that the gimmick, which has been used in some state legislative races in recent years, is legal. (Federal law is much stricter on the subject, prohibiting any get-out-the-vote enticements in elections including congressional candidates.)

“They cannot offer something of value for voting a particular way,” said Melissa Warren, spokeswoman for the secretary of state. “But there is no state law that precludes offering anything of value for the act of voting. . . . They have to offer it to anybody who comes in with a ballot stub, regardless of party affiliation.”

The Woo campaign also has hired workers to help volunteers staff phone banks and walk precincts on Election Day. City Councilman Mark Ridley-Thomas, who has been a key player in South-Central Los Angeles for the Woo campaign, said hundreds of volunteers have signed up.

“We have a strong operation on the ground in South L.A., which is one of the areas which will vote most heavily for Woo,” Ridley-Thomas said. “It is one of the more extensive operations I’ve witnessed in a good period of time.”

John Shallman, Riordan’s deputy campaign manager, said Riordan’s get-out-the-vote operation also would work key precincts, relying heavily on about 2,000 unpaid volunteers.

Polls have suggested that Woo is more likely to benefit from a high voter turnout. A Democrat who has touted his endorsement from President Clinton, Woo has sought to mobilize the city’s solid Democratic majority by seeking to portray Riordan as a right-wing Republican.

Meanwhile Monday, the A. C. Nielsen Co. estimated that viewership of the candidates’ debate Sunday night on KCOP Channel 13 averaged about 212,000 households.

The debate finished fifth among shows on the city’s seven VHF stations, drawing a far smaller audience than KTTV Channel 11’s reruns of “Married . . . With Children” and “Herman’s Head.”

Times staff writers Faye Fiore, Rich Connell, Ted Rohrlich and Steven Herbert contributed to this story.

* OTHER CONTESTS: Council seats, charter amendments also on ballot. B1