SAN FRANCISCO (KGO) — On June 2, Californians will choose their top two picks to replace termed-out Gov. Gavin Newsom.

ABC7 Eyewitness News Political Reporter Monica Madden is catching up with candidates in these final weeks and spoke one-on-one with former Orange County Congresswoman Katie Porter.

Katie Porter: “I also think it’s important to give voters some choice here.”

In this crowded race for governor, former Orange County Congresswoman Katie Porter believes voters are still looking for detailed policy plans from top candidates.

WATCH: Full interview with California gubernatorial candidate Katie Porter

Monica Madden: “You have several proposals for how to make the cost of living better for Californians, one of them being free childcare, free college tuition at state universities, and then eliminating the state income tax for families that are making under $100,000. What’s your plan for how to pay for those?”

Porter: “I would pay for it by doing for corporations in California what we ask families to do, what we ask workers to do, which is in our higher earning years: when we earn a little bit more, we pay a little bit higher tax rate. And I think that’s a fair thing to ask corporations to do, too.”

The Democrat made the case that she has the most thought-out proposals.

Porter: “Nobody’s said that my idea to pay for it is a bad idea. These are actual things that give California families more money in their pocket. So, when we hear candidates say things like,’When I’m governor, you’ll have health care,’ like, how? And at what price point? So, I’m really focused on very concrete policies.”

Porter also pushed back on criticism about her temperament after a video of her berating a staffer resurfaced earlier in the campaign.

Katie Porter addresses leaked video of her yelling at staffer

Monica: “Do you think that there’s a double standard here?”

Porter: “Temperament is a word that you mostly hear used for show dogs, racehorses, and women candidates. Most importantly, when it happened years ago with that staffer, that’s who I owed the apology to — when I made it five years ago to that staffer. And that’s what really matters to me. That’s the mark of my character. And I think that’s what we ought to be talking about, is what is the character of each of these candidates?”

On the future of California, Porter says she believes AI can be an opportunity if leaders handle it correctly.

Porter: “AI also has the potential to fuel tremendous investment in California. I have done battles with large and powerful interests before with some of the, you know, the most wealthy and well-connected in the world — and come out as a winner. And I think that’s what it’s going to take to steer California in a way that makes things, like, AI positive.”

When I wrote last week about one of my favorite mountain ranges — L.A.‘s sidewalks — I immediately began fielding questions.

People wanted to know about the scoring system that awarded just 15 points, out of 45, to John Coanda and his wife, Barbara, who uses a wheelchair because of ALS. The Mar Vista couple had applied to the city’s Safe Sidewalks program to have some busted-up sidewalk in front of their home repaired.

With several sidewalk hazards on both sides of their block, Barbara can’t safely make it down her street. So how is it possible that under L.A.’s “Sidewalk Repair Program Prioritization and Scoring System,” their meager 15 points means they could be waiting “in excess of 10 years” for help?

I have the answers.

The Coandas got 15 points for being in a residential zone. But they didn’t meet the requirements for getting two additional awards of 15 points. They do not live within 500 feet of a bus or transit stop. And they had not been in the sidewalk repair backlog queue for more than 120 days.

It is not clear, however, that moving up to a score of 30 will bring out city work crews in less than 10 years. Knowing what I know, I wouldn’t bet on it.

The scoring system exists because in a lawsuit settlement 10 years ago, the city agreed to spend $1.4 billion over 30 years to repair damaged sidewalks and other infrastructure failures that impede the mobility of people with disabilities.

But there’s a backlog. A huge backlog, in the thousands. At my request, the city disclosed on Friday that it’s receiving about twice as many new disability-access repair requests each year as it’s addressing. In addition, the backlog for disability access requests and from residents applying for a sidewalk repair rebate program stands at roughly 30,000, with about 600 repairs being made each year.

As I said in a previous column, L.A. might indeed be all buttoned up by the ‘28 Olympics, but that would be 3028, not 2028.

Cracked sidewalks, to be clear, are but a symptom of a deeper, decades-long breakdown at City Hall. Basic services have been sacrificed to pay for employee compensation and pension costs the city can’t afford, with homeless services adding to the budget crisis.

By the way, I heard from one reader in response to my suggestion last week that if you can’t wait 10 years or more for the city to fix a broken sidewalk, you can apply to the rebate program, which will cover a portion of repairs. Don’t bother, said Lori Lerner Gray, who owns a house in Silver Lake and applied two years ago, but finally gave up.

“There is a massive waiting list and it’s a very complicated procedure just to try to get on it, let alone speak with anyone to help,” Gray said. “Once you finally get into the program, it’s impossible to proceed because of permits, engineering reports and finally you are required to bring the entire area to ADA compliance on your own dime.”

She said she was told she’d have to pay to relocate a utility pole.

And sidewalks aren’t the only infrastructure problem, as other readers noted. The city is way behind on filling potholes, repaving streets, installing curb ramps, making park improvements and replacing broken lights. I recently wrote about all the blight around City Hall, including the graffiti-tagged monument and fountain that has been inoperable for most of the last 60 years.

Oren Hadar, a Mid-City resident who writes about housing and transportation on his The Future Is L.A. website, reported last year in a Times op-ed that city streets were falling apart because the city had switched from repaving entire roads to doing what it called “large asphalt repair.”

With the switch, the city avoided federal requirements to upgrade curb ramps on repaved streets, Hadar said. He told me that when he travels to other cities near or far, “I’m always jealous of everything. Sidewalks are in better shape or there are better bike lanes. … You could go to even Santa Monica or Culver City. You don’t have to go far to see infrastructure that’s better.”

Other major cities have had formal infrastructure plans for years, while L.A. has ducked and dithered. Finally, earlier this month, Mayor Karen Bass introduced the city’s long-awaited CIP (capital infrastructure program), and offered a brutal assessment of what went wrong.

“For too long,” she said in the executive summary, “information has been scattered across departments, buried in lengthy reports and budgets, and difficult to fully understand. These challenges have had real consequences, contributing to decades of underinvestment in our built environment.”

The summary reads like an indictment of City Hall leadership and the manner in which public spaces have deteriorated. With Bass running for reelection, voters have to decide whether her role in those failures is grounds for dismissal, or her campaign-season pitch for a new day should help earn her a second term.

The report, with backing by members of the City Council, cited “fragmented systems and data silos,” “no shared vision across city departments,” “growing maintenance deferrals,” “slow, inefficient capital planning,” no “project intake standards,” “highly decentralized and uncoordinated grants,” “resource planning and staffing misalignment,” and “opaque capital planning process.”

Way to go, team.

You could take many of those same critiques and apply them to the haphazard way in which city and county leaders have addressed homelessness.

However, the city’s infrastructure plan does offer a framework for assessing the damage and prioritizing projects, and using charter reform to create a public works director position with greater authority. None of this will happen quickly, and given the budget crunch, you might be wondering how any of this would be paid for.

The suggestions in the report include bonds, a parcel tax, grants, fees on tickets to concerts and sporting events, fees on taxi and rideshare trips, and much, much more. None of this will be popular, especially if the public is unconvinced that city leaders can be trusted with more money.

Urban planner Deborah Murphy, chair of the city’s pedestrian advisory committee, noted that L.A. has gotten grants or state funding in the past for specific projects and then, because of staffing shortages or other stumbles, failed to hold up its end of the deal.

“It kind of ruins our reputation for getting future money,” Murphy said.

Jessica Meaney, executive director of Investing in Place and a longtime advocate for the infrastructure plan, is thrilled that the city has finally taken this step.

“But the key question is: who is actually in charge of making it happen?” she asked.

It’s critical, Meaney suggested, for city leaders to push for charter reform that puts infrastructure authority under a newly empowered public works director. If the city gets this right, she said, implementation of the infrastructure plan “could finally show Angelenos the true scale of deferred maintenance, make trade-offs visible, and create a road map for better sidewalks, streets, parks, and accessibility.”

If the current fragmented authority remains in place, Meaney said, the headline would be:

“No one is in charge of your sidewalk and City Hall is determined to keep it that way.”

steve.lopez@latimes.com