Ward Seen as Wild Card in Effort to Oust Antonovich

In January, seven neighborhood rebels maneuvered their vehicles around a sharp Santa Monica Mountains canyon curve, parked near a horse trailer and walked through the chilly air to a simple but substantial frame house, where an intense man waited for them.

The man, Dick Hubbard, a retired San Fernando Valley schoolteacher long involved in mountain growth-control and planning efforts, escorted them to the living room and dining room, where the furnishings clearly marked him and his family as part of the horsy, outdoor-loving group of people who populate the mountains.

This was the beginning of what seemed at the time a quixotic campaign to unseat Los Angeles County Supervisor Mike Antonovich, who is running for a third four-year term in the 5th District, a huge slice of the county reaching from Los Virgenes in the Santa Monicas, through most of the San Fernando Valley and over the San Gabriel Mountains to Pasadena, Alhambra and other parts of the San Gabriel Valley.

For his part, Antonovich said his record justifies another term. He cited creation of an arts high school in the county, increased action against welfare fraud, working toward increasing the size of anti-drug law-enforcement units and efforts to ease congestion by pushing for countywide synchronization of traffic signals.

Chances Look ‘Very Good’

Of his chances in June, Antonovich said, “I think it looks very good,” and of the collective challenge against him, he said he finds it quixotic.

But since their first meeting, the rebels’ goal has become slightly less impractical. Baxter Ward, a Populist, muckraking television news anchorman of the 1960s and the district’s supervisor from 1972 to 1980, announced a comeback. His entrance into the race, along with the presence of several candidates produced by the meeting at Hubbard’s house, has convinced the rebels that Antonovich will be forced into a runoff in the June primary.

Two other factors have combined with Ward’s presence to raise the challengers’ hopes:

- Throughout the district, in places such as Los Virgenes, Lancaster at the edge of the Mojave Desert and the once rural Santa Clarita Valley, slow-growth movements have taken hold. Hubbard said he envisions uniting them against Antonovich, whom they paint as pro-developer. In his defense, Antonovich said, “I believe in responsible growth. We have to protect the environment, but we are limited in many of the decisions we make. Local government cannot be involved in the confiscation of property.”

- The last time Antonovich was on the ballot, when he lost in the 1986 Republican U.S. Senate primary, he was badly beaten throughout the 5th District by fellow conservative Bruce Herschensohn, a Los Angeles television commentator. In some areas, Antonovich finished third behind Herschensohn and the eventual GOP nominee, Ed Zschau, a moderate Republican generally considered to be too liberal for local Republican voters. Historically in politics, a loser in one race does not necessarily lose in another, especially when running as an incumbent. Nevertheless, Antonovich’s foes interpret his poor Senate race showing to mean that the supervisor is not especially popular even with some of the Republicans in his district.

These two factors were far in the background as the rebels began their meeting in Hubbard’s home. Most important was to find a big name to run against Antonovich, someone who could attract instant votes and campaign contributions.

Someone mentioned Steve Garvey, the former Los Angeles Dodger first baseman who once lived in the Los Virgenes area. Don Wallace, a Los Angeles city fire captain who lives up the road from Hubbard, brought up the name of Assemblyman Richard Katz (D-Sepulveda), a popular lawmaker who represents part of the San Fernando Valley.

But neither Garvey nor Katz nor any other well-known person was interested in running for county supervisor, Wallace said. The group met at Hubbard’s house a second time.

“We came up with an elephant-and-ants strategy,” Wallace said. “Nibble him to death.”

An Informal Slate

That meant recruiting candidates from every section of the sprawling district and putting together an informal slate in the hope that each of them could take away enough votes from Antonovich to drop him below the total of 50% plus one vote he needs to win the election in June. If successful, the strategy would force Antonovich into a runoff in November.

Wallace, who had political contacts from his days as president of the Los Angeles city firefighters union, became the Santa Monica Mountains candidate.

Jose Galvan, a San Fernando Valley Latino political activist who owns a desk-top publishing company, read in the newspapers about the meeting at Hubbard’s house.

He called Hubbard and said, “I’d like to talk to you.” Galvan became a candidate.

Hubbard called Sally Clark, a secretary at the county hospital in Olive View, who was a slow growth advocate from the Santa Clarita Valley.

Became a Candidate

“I went to a meeting,” she said. “The strategy of having a group of candidates was discussed and I was excited immediately. I knew this was a method that would work. At the next meeting, they asked me if I would run. I said if they needed more candidates, I would be happy to run.”

Soon, the slate filled out: Clark, Wallace, Galvan and Peter O’Neil, 25, a marketing firm manager from Pasadena; Glenn Bailey, 32, of Encino who coordinates a reading program at Cal State Northridge; Robert R. Benjamin, a Glendale insurance attorney, and Martin A. C. Enriquez-Marquez, 27, of Pasadena.

Benjamin and Enriquez-Marquez are Republicans. The rest are Democrats.

Then Ward, 68 and living in retirement in Tarzana, decided to challenge Antonovich, who had defeated him in 1980. Like those on the slate, Ward accused Antonovich of favoring big developer campaign contributors. “I feel very strongly about the . . . influence of campaign contributions,” Ward said. “They are the greatest single evil in government on any level.”

Ward never accepted campaign contributions of more than $45 and watched helplessly when the well-funded Antonovich beat him. Nevertheless, Ward said he will not accept contributions in the primary.

His decision has left the slate with mixed emotions.

Ward Shows His Edge

“I’m ambivalent,” Wallace said. “I am sure it will mean it will be a runoff. I am not sure it will be me (in the runoff). I was at a function at the Antelope Valley. There was me and three other candidates working the crowd for two or three hours. Baxter walked in late and received a lot of attention.”

But, Wallace said, “I don’t think Baxter will win it in the general (election). I think I could. . . . His refusal to take campaign contributions is a wonderful, quixotic thing to do, but it dooms him in the general.”

Hubbard, on the other hand, said Ward’s entrance “will bring more publicity to the coalition.”

Galvan’s campaign provides a good look at how the poorly financed coalition is going about trying to beat Antonovich.

A major Galvan issue, as he campaigns in the district’s Latino areas, is Antonovich’s attitude toward immigrants.

Galvan cited a television advertisement made during the Senate campaign in which Antonovich said illegal immigrants cost American taxpayers $35 billion a year and act as a major conduit for drugs entering the country. After the ad was taped on the border, a reporter overheard an Antonovich aide say, “Who has the Smith & Wesson?” as the aide looked down at a canyon where several hundred illegal immigrants had gathered.

Called ‘Distasteful’

Roman Catholic Archbishop Roger M. Mahony called on Antonovich to apologize for what he called a “distasteful” ad and he criticized the campaign aide’s remark. Antonovich defended the ad and said the aide’s remark was “stupid” but “facetious.”

“That was not the kind of leadership I wanted, not the kind of person who should be elected to office,” Galvan said, explaining why he ran.

In a campaign without money, Galvan is using his desk-top publishing and computer skills. He has targeted precincts around his Sylmar home, in Canoga Park, Pacoima and other Valley areas where there are substantial numbers of Latinos, as well as some precincts in the San Gabriel Valley.

In all, there are 25 such precincts, and he intends to hit them with three mailings, as well as to concentrate on door-to-door campaigning. He said he hopes to raise $10,000.

Against these efforts, Antonovich in January reported receiving $745,860 and spending $442,157, $166,823 of it in the last six months of 1987 for political expenses ranging from postage to the salary of consultant Kathleen Crow.

Report on Contributors

The Times reported last April that developers needing Board of Supervisors’ approval for their projects were major contributors.

Among them were Newhall Land & Farming Co.; Santa Clarita Valley apartment builders Geoff and Dan Palmer; Nathan Shapell, who is partner in a large apartment project in the Calabasas area of Antonovich’s district; Paul E. Griffin Jr., a Calabasas-based builder, and Dale Poe, an Agoura developer.

Opponents are jumping on these contributions as evidence that Antonovich is in the developers’ pockets. But Antonovich replied, “We have had about 30% of our contributions from developers,” which he said is about the same amount as received from such sources by Los Angeles City Councilman Zev Yaroslavsky, who is getting ready to run for mayor on a slow-growth platform.

Antonovich strategists said the opponents’ plans will not succeed.

The supervisor’s weak showing in the Senate campaign, they said, was attributable to the fact that conservative Herschensohn ran so strongly, and that Antonovich had to divide the rest of the conservative vote with former Rep. Bobbie Fiedler and state Sen. Ed Davis, both well-known San Fernando Valley conservatives.

Antonovich said the reason he ran so poorly in the Senate race was that “many people wanted me to (remain) supervisor.”

Most Within Cities

And the Antonovich team said the slow-growth campaign of opponents will not work because most of the territory in the district lies within the boundaries of incorporated cities.

Residents of Encino, for example, blame Los Angeles City Hall, not Antonovich, for too much growth. It would require several weeks, and large amounts of advertising dollars, to make the case that county officials share the responsibility for growth and traffic, one backer said.