Holden’s Outstretched Palm

Nate Holden is certainly beyond shame and, due to term limits, beyond the reach of Los Angeles voters for his blatant influence- peddling at City Hall. But his constituents and his colleagues on the City Council should be wary of who comes next.

The councilman, who for years railed against liquor stores and bars in South Los Angeles because of their tendency to generate crime, apparently has no problem pushing plans for new bars and nightclubs in Koreatown, on the northern edge of his district. As local retail and service businesses faltered after the 1992 riots, liquor filled the void. More than 40 zoning permits allowing alcohol sales have been granted in the Koreatown portion of Holden’s district in the last five years alone. With Holden supporters--and registered voters--concentrated elsewhere in the district, the councilman did not need to fear voter retaliation.

Liquor businesses are not automatically allowed under city zoning codes. Support from the council member of the involved district is often critical to approval, and Holden lobbied hard for his colleagues’ votes.

Case in point: a huge nightclub called Le Prive, which doesn’t open until 9 p.m., and then for only selected big spenders. The cheapest drink is a $200 bottle of whiskey. Hardly the “family-style” restaurant Holden’s aide represented to nervous council members and city regulators before final council approval was granted in early 2000.

The neighborhood around Le Prive, at Western Avenue and Wilshire Boulevard, now has twice as many liquor establishments as state guidelines call for. Koreatown residents blame the bars, karaoke clubs and pool halls for the late-night robberies and other alcohol-fueled violence that make the area one of the city’s most crime-ridden.

So what’s in this for Holden? Times staff writer Peter Y. Hong has detailed a long list of quid pro quos from grateful nightclub owners: generous campaign contributions to Holden and his son, who lost an election campaign to become Pasadena’s mayor, a $15,000 interest-free loan to a Holden deputy, even a $12,000 gold watch for the councilman. Holden has a history of playing fast and loose with campaign rules. The Los Angeles Ethics Commission has found that during his career he has taken money beyond permissible campaign limits 334 times, for a total of $164,789.

This sort of “the-rules-don’t-apply-to-moi” imperiousness is not confined to Holden. Think of Los Angeles County Supervisor Gloria Molina’s permit problem. She and her husband built a swimming pool at their Mount Washington home without obtaining a city permit or paying the necessary fees and ignored city requirements that they upgrade a retaining wall near the pool. But Molina’s hubris pales before Holden’s outstretched palm.

Holden’s last term ends next year. But if he is able to anoint a successor who will follow his advice and share his disregard for constituents, he will hardly be forgotten.

Holden’s fellow City Council members, who too often blindly support colleagues’ zoning decisions, are also part of the problem. The presence of new members on the council offers a chance to adjust this practice. Lawmakers new and old should temper their deference to colleagues on zoning matters with more regard for the good of the city.