Stephen Box, Tomas O' Grady and Tom LaBonge

A forum for City Council District 4 candidates Tom LaBonge, Stephen Box and Tomas O'Grady ended Thursday night on a relatively touchy-feely note. 

"Maybe I was a little harsh earlier on [incumbent] Tom [LaBonge]," said candidate Tomas O'Grady.

Earlier that same night, O'Grady had pointed to LaBonge and said, "This guy makes 180 grand a year. That's criminal." 

O'Grady also accused LaBonge of being dishonest about wanting to protect Griffith Park from redevelopment--"I was told you could not be trusted"--and told the crowd that he once saw "this guy" (LaBonge) come to an event with an entourage. He also interrupted LaBonge at one point to correct the pronunciation of his first name.  

"I do like you, and I do like the city," O'Grady said to LaBonge at the meeting's conclusion. "Maybe we do need to change the tone here, so I'm going to be the first to change it."

Really, though, he was just following the positive tone set by the audience, a crowd that applauded for each of the candidates after almost every time they spoke. 

The forum took place because the City Council election for even-numbered districts is on March 8. LA Weekly news editor Jill Stewart moderated the forum and read aloud audience member's written questions.

 "If elected, will you commit to quarterly meetings with neighborhood council representatives in Council District 4?," read Stewart for the first question of the night.  

Box and O'Grady both said they would. 

"I'm the neighborhood council guy," said O'Grady. He serves on the board of the Greater Griffith Park Neighborhood Council.

"Just yesterday at the transportation committee meeting, public comment was reduced to 60 seconds....that's unacceptable," said Box, a well-known transportation activist.

LaBonge's response was more vague.

"The key to meeting people is to hear what they're saying and to act on it," he said. LaBonge is the incumbent who was elected to Council District 4 in 2001.  

"Did you commit to quarterly meetings?" Stewart asked LaBonge again later, trying to clarify his initial response.  

"I'll commit to helping people, that's what my job is," LaBonge said. "To meet quarterly is not necessarily the objective. I want to hear from you and act on it. So I can say, I'll meet anytime, and meet twelve times a month, Jill. I will not disappoint you, and I haven't yet."

"Ok, so my reporter ears," Stewart pressed on, "you don't want to do quarterly meetings?"

"I will tell you," LaBonge replied,  "Your time is valuable...if you want to meet four times a year, I will be responsive. But I will tell you, Jill, the key is to be focused, and work on it."

At one point, Stewart read aloud my own question, which asked LaBonge to respond to criticisms he received from Streetsblog for not mentioning Measure R in his own Daily News column about public transit, along with LA Weekly's recent cover story.

“You’ve been criticized in articles for not having a nuanced understanding of the city. An editorial you wrote for the Daily News about public transit doesn't mention Measure R. Streetsblog called your piece 'half-baked.' Today, LA Weekly said you’re known as an intellectual lightweight. How do you respond to that?”

The audience booed.

“Every day, you have an opportunity to help people, and…I’ve been called all kinds of names," LaBonge said.

In a blog post, Streetsblog had described LaBonge's Daily News column as "odd" and as "a half-baked wish-list of projects, many of which were redundant with Metro’s Long Range Plan or infeasible."

At Thursday's forum, LaBonge still did not address  the feasibility of the projects he proposed in his Daily News column, or Measure R.

"I'm proud that I was able to put back on the issue of our subway system...that vision was lost,  I'm bringing it back," LaBonge said. 

(Though his initial response was missing specifics, he finally said after the forum that he understood the limitations of Measure R).

One of the more pointed questions from the audience was about a dangerous crosswalk in front of the Silver Lake Trader Joe's in CD 4.

After a person got killed at the crosswalk, a light was eventually installed.  

"Why does someone have to die in order for lights to be put on the road?," read Stewart.

"Any tragedy is a tragedy, and that's why I always mention about traffic safety," LaBonge said.  He said he played an important role in getting that light installed.  He also said that drivers need to slow down, although he didn't mention any specific policy to encourage them to do so.  

The L.A. City Council often tries to make streets safer by raising speed limits, so that the LAPD can legally use radar, thus allowing the police to more easily ticket drivers.  

Box, meanwhile, argued that there are more effective ways to make streets safer than through higher speeds and traffic tickets.

"It takes a tragedy to get a street improvement, because we live in a complaint-driven city," Box said. Box, along with other transportation activists, argue that the streets need to be constructed differently, with "traffic-calming" techniques to slow drivers down.

"Twenty-five percent of our police department's budget goes to scraping people off the streets," Box said. "Literally. Picking people up after they've been, after their lives have been destroyed in traffic collisions. Our streets don't work."

Most of the questions, though, were less about the district, and more about general city plans.  Stewart had to  press LaBonge again for a less vague response when asked if he would cut funding for neighborhood councils.

"Everything's on the table...we're going to look at the whole budget, Jill, we're going to look at everything," LaBonge said.

For a question about DWP and energy consumption, O'Grady told the crowd about his green home, which includes a solar-powered jacuzzi.

"We need people at city hall that actually walk this walk," O'Grady said. "Every room in Los Angeles ought to have solar panels"

O'Grady and Box both had especially harsh words for the proposed NFL stadium in Downtown Los Angeles. 

"Absolutely no to tax payer money for the non-existent NFL team, and the non-existent NFL stadium, for the plan that doesn't exist," said Box. "Yet City Council has formed a committee to study the non-existent proposal, which has already been funded with $700 million dollars..." 

"Build it on their own or don't build it at all," O'Grady said.

LaBonge was more neutral. "No taxpayer's money, but let's see a proposal."

One of the final questions was about disaster-preparedness, one of the few issues that O'Grady actually complimented LaBonge on.

"I'm not going to criticize the incumbent on this one, he has been very outspoken," O'Grady said.

In his own response, LaBonge was optimistic about Los Angelenos, should a terrible natural disaster strike us: "Anderson Cooper said L.A. is the most prepared super city of any city."

Reach reporter Amy Silverstein here.