Drawn and Quartered, but Still Looking Out for No. 1 : Supervisors: They go down to the wire, spending millions and insulting the courts, to keep their monopoly on L.A. County. These are not responsible legislators.

The fight over the district map for the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors represented politics at its most arrogant. Of course, the big story is that blacks and Latinos finally have a chance of getting elected to the board, thanks to a federal judge’s findings that the present district lines are discriminatory. But there’s another, less obvious story here, about political contempt--about how far some elected officials will go to retain power, and how free they feel of the obligation to be accountable. The supervisors not only attempted to keep the five districts as white as possible; above all else, they attempted to keep their districts theirs.

The lawsuit filed by the U.S. Justice Department stemmed from the incumbents’ desire to protect themselves politically. Their drawing of district lines was probably not motivated by a wish to keep any minority group subjugated. More likely, the lines were drawn to dilute the voting strength of Latinos because the supervisors knew that otherwise their days in office were numbered. Self-preservation was their concern; they were indifferent to the consequences for voters.

As U.S. District Judge David V. Kenyon wrote in his initial decision that the present lines are illegal: “During the 1981 redistricting process, the supervisors’ primary objective was to protect their incumbencies and that of their allies. This objective, however, was inescapably linked to the continued fragmentation of the Hispanic population core.”

Perhaps most arrogant of all was the new plan submitted to Kenyon, which he rejected last week. Instead he chose a plan similar to that offered by the plaintiffs.

The judge had warned that he would become involved in the map himself if the the board’s revision was unsatisfactory. Despite this, Supervisors Deane Dana and Mike Antonovich, along with Supervisor Pete Schabarum (who is not seeking reelection but provides the third vote for the Republican majority) approved and submitted a plan that was little more than a political attack on Supervisor Edmund Edelman. A predominantly Latino district was created, but Edelman was moved into it, thus jeopardizing his future on the board. The plan also diluted the strength of black voters by combining in one district South-Central Los Angeles and Beverly Hills.

It apparently was like a game to the Republican majority. It was no surprise when Kenyon rejected their scheme, calling it a “nonsensical distortion” of the districts and “not the result of a good-faith attempt by responsible legislators to comply with the court’s” order to correct the voting-rights violations.

The Republican majority still appears resolute. Dana said, when Kenyon rejected the board’s map, that he was confident the decision would be overturned on appeal. Schabarum said that it was “consistent with the lack of objectivity Judge Kenyon has displayed during the entire trial.” Antonovich quipped that the plaintiffs and Kenyon were “trying to draw a district in the shape of a donkey.” Perhaps they preferred the shape of a donkey to the shape of a jackass.

Only Dana’s and Antonovich’s interests are served by defending the current lines and appealing Kenyon’s decision. Supervisor Kenneth Hahn estimates that the County has spent between $4 million and $6 million litigating the case and may face another $2 million if the county is ordered to pay the plaintiffs’ legal fees. An appeal would only waste more money. And all to protect three Republican political bases, in a county where vital public services are being scaled back for lack of funds.

Judge Kenyon’s decision should not be appealed. The supervisors should be reminded that a seat on the board is not a birthright. The majority’s arrogant maneuvering to stay in power under any circumstances should be rewarded by rejection at the polls.

It is more than ironic that Kenyon--a federal judge, appointed for life and not answerable to the voters--must step in to protect voters from elected officials. When politicians have lost all sense of accountability, and act only with their own selfish interests in mind, they have outlived their political usefulness and should be replaced.