Antonovich Faces Power of 6 Foes in County Race : Politics: Candidates for 5th District seat attack incumbent as pro-development and anti-environment. Pooled strength could force supervisor into a runoff.

One of Los Angeles County Supervisor Mike Antonovich’s opponents is outraged at his quip about a “hot flash”--directed at the only woman on the board. Two other challengers rail against board perks such as bulletproof cars and catered lunches.

Another pair of opponents blasts the incumbent as pro-development and anti-environment. And the sixth says Antonovich has not done enough to fix the crowded conditions and lengthy waits at county hospitals.

Yet the real threat to the three-term incumbent comes not from the content of such attacks, but from the sheer size of the field arrayed against him. A few political strategists say that the challengers’ combined strength in the June 2 primary could force Antonovich into a November runoff.

“If there’s enough negative reaction to the board, they could easily force him into a runoff,” said Democratic consultant Marc Litchman. “But then what have you got? He’s still going to be very hard to beat in November.”

Antonovich--who was forced into a runoff under similar circumstances in 1988--acknowledges that the nationwide backlash against incumbents and disclosures about the board’s spending practices could hurt him this time.

But he added: “The failure of my opponents to ignite a spark of interest among the voters has been very encouraging. They haven’t been able to mount a broad-based campaign.”

Indeed, only one of the six 5th District challengers enjoys any significant name recognition--Pasadena City Councilman William Paparian. Paparian, 43, received widespread media attention in December when he asked that some county sheriff’s deputies be barred from working at the Rose Parade because they were being investigated for alleged participation in a neo-Nazi group.

But political scientists and consultants suggest that the incident--which ended with Pasadena’s then-mayor apologizing to Sheriff Sherman Block--may not play well in the predominantly conservative 5th District. And at last count, in March, Antonovich had outstripped Paparian in fund raising by a 15-to-1 margin in the two preceding months. That, combined with leftover contributions from previous years, gave Antonovich nearly $1 million to spend on his campaign.

Candidate Lynne Plambeck--a Santa Clarita environmentalist who had planned to stay on the sidelines to help other challengers whittle away at the incumbent’s support--said she jumped into the race because no better-known opponents could be persuaded to confront Antonovich’s financial prowess.

“We were looking for a big candidate that would really pull the votes in,” said Plambeck, 41, who owns a small business in Burbank. “But they weren’t interested due to the enormity of his campaign funds.”

In addition, only Antonovich and Paparian have candidate statements printed in the sample ballot because none of the others could afford--or were willing to pay--the $15,500 fee charged by the county registrar-recorder for printing and mailing.

Candidate Craig Freis, a tax-reduction advocate who lives in the back of his Glendale bookstore, has made his inability to afford the 200-word statement a campaign issue, even pursuing an unsuccessful lawsuit aimed at making statements free for all candidates.

“The filing fee is akin to a poll tax,” said Freis, 47. “It’s a tax on the candidate and it also hurts the voters.”

To win outright in June, Antonovich needs a simple majority. Even if he falls short in June, few political observers believe that he will be unseated in November.

All opponents concede that winning the race is a long shot, particularly for those who are Democrats--Plambeck, Freis, feminist attorney Margalo Ashley-Farrand, 47, and waste management specialist Shereef Aref, 27. Even Los Angeles City paramedic Jim Mihalka, 33, and Paparian--both registered Republicans--may be too liberal for the district, political observers say.

New district boundaries drawn in 1990, as part of a court ruling regarding Latino voting rights, are expected to give Antonovich, a conservative and registered Republican, an even greater edge in the nonpartisan race.

The new 5th District is 49% Republican and 40% Democrat, taking on more of the conservative eastern San Gabriel Valley and shedding areas of the southwest San Fernando Valley, where some of the greatest opposition to Antonovich’s development philosophy lay. It still includes all of the Santa Clarita and Antelope valleys and the northern rim of the San Fernando Valley.

Opponents expressed frustration that Antonovich, 52, has forsaken candidate forums and challenges, such as Plambeck’s invitation to join her in a five-mile run followed by a discussion of environmental issues.

“I have other commitments,” he said, explaining that, for instance, on Monday, when a Pasadena candidates forum is scheduled, he will be honoring a group of Eagle Scouts.

Antonovich is campaigning as only incumbents can, giving speeches at civic events and holding news conferences around the county.

He has received endorsements from numerous law enforcement groups, including the Los Angeles County Deputy Sheriffs Assn., and from the Los Angeles County Young Republicans.

Meanwhile, only a few of his opponents have managed to tally significant lists of endorsements. The others have been left to meet potential voters where they can: in shopping malls, at public meetings and in private homes.

Paparian has received endorsements from the Sierra Club and new Pasadena Mayor Rick Cole. Plambeck also has a Sierra Club endorsement and one from the Audubon Society. Ashley-Farrand is supported by the National Organization for Women.

Although they come from various spots on the political spectrum, from liberal to conservative, the candidates agree more than they differ.

All six said development should be slowed in the district and allege that Antonovich is environmentally aware only in election years.

In the past year, Antonovich has voted against the expansion of Sunshine Canyon Landfill and he asked the board to reconsider approval of a water supply system for the proposed 7,200-house Ritter Ranch development near Palmdale after he learned that no environmental impact report had been done.

But environmentalists have repeatedly criticized him for voting in favor of such large developments as the 550-house Baldwin Co. project in the Santa Monica Mountains, which will be built on part of a county-designated significant ecological area.

Antonovich responded that he has “always been a conservationist, but you have to balance conservation with property rights.”

His opponents also support campaign finance and board ethics reforms and expansion of the Board of Supervisors from five members to either seven or nine members.

Antonovich says that any expansion will just add bureaucracy, confusion and costs and that campaign contribution limits only help incumbents.

Five challengers say that County Administrative Officer Richard B. Dixon should be fired for such decisions as including fringe benefits in the calculation of county pensions, which has cost the county an estimated $265 million. Only Aref said he was not “ready to release” his position on Dixon yet.

Antonovich has repeatedly defended Dixon in board meetings during discussion of the pension hikes and other issues.