Bus May Be Driving Force Behind Key Votes : Politics: Practice of flooding meetings with residents--who get a free ride and, maybe, a free meal--to sway lawmakers draws criticism.

Even jaded members of the Los Angeles Community Redevelopment Agency were surprised when a recent meeting on a controversial North Hollywood project drew 70 enthused supporters bearing pro-CRA placards and stickers.

But the mystery behind the unusual pro-development display was quickly solved when a leader of the visitors announced that the chartered bus--paid for by a group of North Hollywood business owners--was preparing to leave.

“All of those riding the bus, let’s go!” said the organizer, sparking a mass exodus for the doors even before a vote had been cast.

The practice of busing supporters--or opponents--to such meetings in hopes of swaying decision makers is not a lesson taught in high school civics. But in city and county government it has become as much a part of the democratic process as circulating petitions and launching a letter-writing campaign.

It’s a numbers game: The side that brings in the greatest number of live bodies usually has an advantage in swaying constituent-sensitive politicians. Often, organizers of such trips also throw in a free breakfast or lunch and, as in the CRA hearing, arm partisans with placards, banners and stickers.

Though a time-honored practice, the marshaling of ordinary citizens is no longer the exclusive province of politically savvy developers or labor organizers. Homeowners, small merchants and religious groups are increasingly using the strategy to press their views on lawmakers.

Last month, a group of orthodox Jews who had opened a synagogue in an Encino home bused about 50 worshipers to a meeting of a Los Angeles City Council committee reviewing whether the temple’s location violated zoning laws. The council ultimately voted to close the synagogue, but the sight of several dozen faithful, many of them elderly, clearly made the decision harder.

The most visible example of the strategy has been at recent meetings of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, where labor unions have bused in thousands of county workers whose jobs may be cut to address a $1.2-billion budget deficit.

Sherry Bebitch Jeffe, a senior associate at the Center for Politics & Economics at the Claremont Graduate School, said the practice of flooding meeting chambers with constituents has become the politically correct alternative to plying politicians with hefty campaign contributions and expensive meals.

“There is an understanding that you can’t do it with money anymore,” she said. “What works better than almost anything is this so-called grass-roots campaigning.”

But there are some purists who don’t call it “grass-roots campaigning.” To them it is a transparent political ploy, the equivalent of flooding a politician’s offices with form letters from constituents with a specific agenda.

“When it’s organized, you have to say, ‘What’s in it for this person?’ ” said CRA Commissioner Bobbi Fiedler, a former San Fernando Valley congresswoman who dismissed the show of support at the CRA meeting as orchestrated. “It lessens the credibility.”

Fiedler and other skeptics also say that sometimes the masses of sign-carriers have little understanding of or interest in the issue at hand. Those organizing the bus trips cull their riders from a project’s immediate neighborhood, holding small meetings to sway residents to their side and inviting them to an upcoming hearing, transportation provided.

After the earthquake last year, when Los Angeles wanted to use redevelopment funds to rebuild quake-damaged neighborhoods and hired a nonprofit group to help rally support for the idea, one bused-in crowd included a slew of Filipino war veterans who were scheduled to appear before the City Council anyway to be honored for their bravery during World War II.

The other half of the bus riders were recovering substance abusers from a local rehabilitation center in the Valley.

“People care, but sometimes they have to be cajoled or persuaded to come to these meetings,” said a former political consultant who asked not to be named.

But does it work? Practitioners cannot boast 100% effectiveness, but they say that it is much harder for an elected official to rule against a room full of potential voters.

“Quite often, city and county officials want a level of comfort, they want to see a preponderance of evidence,” said Howard Sunkin, a senior account executive at Cerrell Associates, one of the city’s leading political consulting firms. “A large contingency of supporters or opponents gives them a higher comfort level.”

That is exactly what happened in the case of the North Hollywood project, a 700-acre site where city redevelopment funds have been used to fix up deteriorating properties, start new businesses and install new roads and lighting to stave off blight.

The show of support came a month after CRA Chairman Dan Garcia warned that the 16-year-old project had received so much criticism he was considering letting its funding expire unless he could see some evidence of community support.

The group of 70 supporters--rallied by members of the North Hollywood Chamber of Commerce--showed up at the following meeting, overshadowing the 25 or so opponents.

“I was somewhat reassured by the support,” Garcia said during the meeting. Rather than killing the project as promised, the board voted 4 to 1 to refer a 12-year extension plan to the Planning Commission and the City Council for final approval. Fiedler cast the only “no” vote.

Those who have bused large crowds defend the practice as putting policy-makers face to face with the people who will be affected by their decisions.

“Yeah, we bring a lot of people in. It’s called democracy,” said Steve Weingarten, a spokesman for Service Employees International Union, Local 660, which represents 43,000 county workers. In recent weeks, the union has bused up to 3,000 workers to county budget meetings where supervisors are considering cutting thousands of jobs.

“We don’t want the supervisors to think these are abstract numbers,” he said. “Thousands of lives are going to be ruined. It will affect real lives, real people and we feel those real people are their own best advocates.”

The former political consultant said that when he used to bus groups to City Hall or the county Hall of Administration, he often provided free breakfasts, lunches or dinners because it provided “an opportunity to go over the statements.”

He said residents with little experience in public speaking are often given “coaching tips” so they are more effective speakers.

Unlike Fiedler, many other policy makers say they are not opposed to choreographed demonstrations.

Garcia, former head of the Los Angeles Planning Commission, said he considers most displays “cheap amateur theatrics.”

Still, he said it does not diminish the impact of individuals who appear at public hearings to express themselves.

“It doesn’t matter how the people get there,” Garcia said. “It means something if people have the energy and courage to stand up and testify.”

Longtime City Councilman Joel Wachs said he tries to judge each group that appears before the council independently, regardless of how it was organized.

“It depends on who is there and who they represent,” he said. “I think you can judge it for who they are and what they want.”

But there have been many cases when a group’s mass transportation created a stir.

Former Councilwoman Joy Picus sparked one such controversy in December, 1990, when she used $178 in county transportation funds to bus three dozen members of the Woodland Hills Homeowners Organization to City Hall, where they protested a high-rise office tower proposed for Warner Ridge.

The city attorney’s office later accepted Picus’ claim that she had been unaware of the homeowners’ lobbying plans and concluded that the councilwoman, a longtime foe of the project, had not acted improperly. Still, the controversy prompted Picus’ office to adopt a policy of discouraging groups from seeking the county funds for political trips. The Warner Ridge project, meanwhile, has not been built.

Four years ago, the developer of a controversial 272-home subdivision in Altadena tried to gain support for the project by throwing picnics for the public, giving pony rides to children, donating money to area schools and promising jobs for the disadvantaged. Residents who backed the project got free bus rides to important county hearings on the development. Breakfast or lunch, or both, were usually included with the ride.

Opponents called such tactics a “slick” manipulation of community opinion. Supporters called it a show of support for the community. The project was ultimately approved by the County Board of Supervisors, and earlier this year cleared its last hurdle to construction.