Supervisors: 5th District

Questionnaires were distributed to candidates last month. Answers have been edited to fit the available space.

Ecological Areas

Q. Environmentalists have charged that designated significant ecological areas such as oak forests are not being adequately protected from development. Do you agree? If so, what should be done?

Antonovich: One of the first actions I took upon becoming supervisor was to vote to approve the designation of Significant Ecological Areas as part of the county’s General Plan. The plan designated 61 such areas and provided that only those developments found to be compatible with the resource would be permitted. However, it must be remembered that 32 of the 61 identified SEAs are not under county control, and many of those have been affected by new developments allowed by cities. With respect to the 29 in the unincorporated areas (and subject to county controls), an inventory is being conducted to determine whether our current policies are working. Current practice is that all developments in SEAs require a conditional use permit and review by a panel of biologists, etc. If the inventory discloses that SEAs are not being protected, we will take appropriate steps.

Aref: Yes. More enforcement power should be given to the committees that designate and oversee these areas. Develop environmentally and economically feasible plans to protect these areas.

Ashley-Farrand: Yes. There should be buffer zones between an SEA and any development to reduce any damage from activities such as grazing.

Freis: People are more important. Seek causes and solutions to violence, hire public relations experts as ombudsmen for police, promote ethics laws, bust up gangs, stop graffiti etc.

Mihalka: Yes. The areas of ecological significance should be set aside with funds coming from private as well as public areas. Developer fee or bond initiatives.

Paparian: Yes. Supervisor Edelman’s proposal designating ecologically sensitive areas was an important move toward preserving the significant ecological areas. The county General Plan should be amended to exempt these important resources from further development and preserve them for future generations.

Plambeck: Yes. Significant ecological areas are designated in the L.A. County General Plan as areas of great biotic importance and/or natural beauty. Development was allowed in these areas only at very low densities and in such a way as to be compatible with the natural resource of the SEA. Under Antonovich’s administration, SEAs in the 5th District have been under siege with development granted in as much as two-thirds of the area with no regard to compatibility. (The most recent of these being the approval given to Westridge/SEA64 in the Santa Clarita Valley by Regional Planning.) I would research public funding instruments so that what remains of these areas could be purchased for the public trust.

Committee’s Power

Q. Specifically, do you support the proposal to give more enforcement power to the committee that designates and oversees these areas?

Antonovich: Enforcement of SEA controls is the responsibility of the Regional Planning Department as part of its zoning enforcement responsibility. Creating a second enforcement entity to deal with only SEAs would be expensive and would divert resources from other critical county needs such as law enforcement, fire protection and health care.

Aref: Yes.

Ashley-Farrand: Yes.

Freis: Only by vote of people.

Mihalka: Yes.

Paparian: Yes.

Plambeck: Yes. SEATAC (Significant Ecological Area Technical Advisory Committee) is a volunteer commission of highly trained, disinterested (financially) professionals. Their opinion should be respected.

Environmental Reports

Q. Should the county conduct its own independent environmental impact reports instead of accepting those provided by developers?

Antonovich: The essence of the EIR process rests with the review of those reports by the public and interested parties. The Planning Department already reviews draft EIRs submitted by applicants to be sure that they meet acceptable standards before they are circulated for public review. EIRs also are reviewed by governmental agencies such as state Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife, environmental groups and neighborhood organizations for completeness and accuracy. All comments and corrections noted by the reviewers must be addressed before the EIR is ready for hearing. If the project is approved, staff--not the applicant--prepares the final EIR.

Aref: Yes.

Ashley-Farrand: Yes.

Freis: No.

Mihalka: Yes. Only if the county has the staff already in place. I do not support another bureaucracy.

Paparian: Yes.

Plambeck: Neither. A county-generated EIR would leave as much room for slanting the information as the present system. The fairest way would be to generate a list of companies qualified to provide EIRs from which the applicant could choose. A provider would be removed from the list if it was found that the data he produced was slanted.

Mountain Zoning

Q. Do you tend to support or oppose efforts to change the zoning of privately owned land in the Santa Monica Mountains to allow higher-density development?

Antonovich: The county General Plan designates virtually all of the Santa Monica Mountains for rural development. During the period when the northern portion of the mountains was in my district, I advised constituents not to seek amendments to the plan.

Aref: Oppose.

Ashley-Farrand: Oppose.

Freis: Only case-by-case basis.

Mihalka: Oppose.

Paparian: Oppose.

Plambeck: I oppose efforts to increase density in the Santa Monica Mountains.

Oak Tree Ordinance

Q. Critics say the county’s oak tree ordinance, which requires a 2-for-1 replacement, is not adequate because it replaces mature trees with saplings. Are you satisfied with the ordinance?

Antonovich: I fathered the county’s first oak tree ordinance, which was adopted in 1982, as well as the subsequent program to strengthen its provisions to better protect existing trees and to better provide for oak trees in new developments. I have on a number of occasions required developers to redesign their developments to save more trees, to provide specimen-size replacement trees and to provide more than two replacement trees for each one removed.

Aref: No.

Ashley-Farrand: No.

Freis: I think they should grow more trees so they can replace the buildings that burned.

Mihalka: No. I would look at what could be done to improve it.

Paparian: No. The 1982 ordinance was murky on monitoring and enforcement. The November, 1991, measure requiring two-year monitoring was an improvement.

Plambeck: This ordinance has no teeth and is not enforced. The fine for removing a tree ($400) is less than the price the wood would bring on the market. The Sheriff’s Department doesn’t even know there is an oak tree ordinance and will not respond to tree-cutting calls. Even when trees are required to be replaced, there is no enforcement to see that developers really have replaced the correct number or that those trees have survived the required two years. The ordinance needs to be rewritten, loopholes removed, fines raised and teeth put in the enforcement.

Replacing Vegetation

Q. Do you support requiring developers to replace vegetation and trees in addition to oaks?

Antonovich: Last year, I requested the Planning Commission to look at amending the zoning ordinance to provide for extending these protections to other trees in new developments.

Aref: Yes.

Ashley-Farrand: Yes. Area should be xeriscaped because too much water kills the scrub oaks.

Freis: I endorse people to replace deadwood politicians that turn to vegetables.

Mihalka: Yes. All new developments should include grass or greenbelt areas.

Paparian: Yes.

Plambeck: It would depend on the area. Of course some landscaping requirements are currently required, and I would not change these requirements.

Traffic Impact

Q. In general, do you believe traffic mitigation measures that are imposed on developers of large projects effectively reduce the traffic impact of those projects?

Antonovich: The county routinely requires builders to mitigate local traffic concerns, to pay additional developer fees to address communitywide traffic problems and to construct new roads prior to putting new projects on the market. An integral part of the development review process is the preparation of traffic studies and review by adjacent cities and interested groups of the proposed solutions.

Aref: No.

Ashley-Farrand: No.

Freis: No. The way to reduce traffic is to send illegal aliens back to their countries.

Mihalka: No.

Paparian: No. They don’t go far enough.

Plambeck: No. Adjacent cities have often had to sue to force the county to require adequate mitigation. The Development Monitoring System is not being followed by the county.

Environmental Mitigation

Q. What about environmental mitigations--do they sufficiently offset the loss of open space?

Antonovich: Environmental mitigations do not deal exclusively with open space. Rather, these measures are adopted to protect important environmental resources such as wetlands, hillsides and ridgelines. Mitigation measures are identified through the EIR process in consultation with other government agencies, homeowners groups and consultants.

Aref: No.

Ashley-Farrand: No.

Freis: The biggest open space is between politicians’ ears.

Mihalka: No. Not in all cases.

Paparian: No. They don’t go far enough.

Plambeck: No.

Sunshine Canyon Landfill

Q. Do you support the expansion of the Sunshine Canyon Landfill, which sanitation officials say is necessary and which critics oppose because it would destroy an oak forest?

Antonovich: I was the only supervisor to oppose the Sunshine Canyon Landfill expansion. My opposition was based on determinations included in the EIR that the landfill threatened the underground water basin and because it would cause the loss of 6,700 oak trees and destroy an important portion of the Santa Susana Mountains SEA. Finally, I expressed concern that the county relies too heavily upon landfills at the expense of other waste reduction and diversion technologies.

Aref: No. The expansion would destroy an oak forest.

Ashley-Farrand: No. I am opposed to destroying the oak forest; landfills tend to leak toxic wastes, and we can reduce the need for landfills by requiring all businesses to recycle their wastes. We should be researching alternatives, because with our growing population, we will be out of land to convert to landfills in a very short time, anyway.

Freis: No. Technology exists to decompose refuse. It must be implemented. Let me make that clear. I do support the expansion of the landfill on the condition that we dump the mayor and the rest of the gang in it.

Mihalka: No. We need to look at other ways to reduce and conserve. I, unlike Mike Antonovich, do not accept contributions from waste companies.

Paparian: No. The key to solid waste disposal starts with the 3 Rs: reduce, reuse, recycle. In Pasadena, we are beginning to divert 50% of our trash from the disposal cycle. We’ve developed a model program for voluntary and mandatory changes in our lifestyles to eliminate the need for more landfills.

Plambeck: Not as proposed. It would destroy a seven-acre wetland, permanent stream that supplies the last remaining wildlife corridor between the Santa Susana and San Gabriel mountains. Mel Blevin, water master, was heard to say at a hearing that there is a hydrologic connection between Sunshine and the Van Norman Dam. There is an acceptable 10-million-ton expansion that does not encroach on Sunshine Canyon or a wetlands area, but the city and county have to agree on it.

Elsmere Canyon Landfill

Q. Do you support the proposal to create a trash landfill in Elsmere Canyon near Santa Clarita?

Antonovich: As with the Sunshine Canyon Landfill, if it is shown that Elsmere Canyon would threaten the ground water or cause the loss of important environmental resources, I would oppose the approval of Elsmere Canyon as a landfill.

Aref: No.

Ashley-Farrand: No. Any contract with BKK should be looked at with caution. The BKK West Covina leaks are not resolved.

Freis: No.

Mihalka: No.

Paparian: No.

Plambeck: No.

Chatsworth Courthouse

Q. Do you support putting the Chatsworth courthouse on the selected site at Winnetka Avenue and Prairie Street, which neighbors oppose?

Antonovich: No. I support placing it on the nearby Allegretti site, which does not impact the residents.

Aref: No.

Ashley-Farrand: No. Vote should be reconsidered to place in area with better traffic management and further from residences.

Freis: No.

Mihalka: This site has already been selected. If, however, someone can come up with a better site, at the same cost, before the county spends more money, I would look at it.

Paparian: No.

Plambeck: No.

Soka Expansion

Q. Do you support the proposed expansion of Soka University near Calabasas from its current size of 100 to 4,400 students?

Antonovich: I have advised the Soka representatives that I would not support their expansion if it would adversely affect surrounding areas and parklands.

Aref: Yes.

Ashley-Farrand: No.

Freis: No.

Mihalka: No.

Paparian: No.

Plambeck: No.

Ritter Ranch Project

Q. Do support the proposal to build 7,200 houses on the Ritter Ranch near Palmdale, which is opposed by residents of Leona Valley?

Antonovich: While I have stated my opposition to the present design of this project, the city of Palmdale, and not the county, has the responsibility for its approval.

Aref: No.

Ashley-Farrand: No. Traffic is already too heavy in the area; there is no emergency plan for evacuation and such large developments are not ecological and not pleasant for humans to inhabit. We need to build new villages like Seaside, Fla., and Laguna West in Sacramento County. We should also consider co-housing, developed in Denmark and being built in Davis and Emeryville, Calif.

Freis: Put unemployed to work from surrounding area and retrain defense workers.

Mihalka: Unknown. Would need to look at the property rights of the owners vs. the residents and county.

Paparian: No.

Plambeck: No.

Board Expansion

Q. Should the Board of Supervisors be expanded, as some critics propose as a way to create a second predominantly Latino district or more manageable districts or both? If so, to what size?

Antonovich: No. This has been rejected by the voters. Making government bigger will not make it better; it will only cost taxpayers more and provide less money for services.

Aref: Yes. Seven.

Ashley-Farrand: Yes. The current plan to expand to nine appears to be the one best drawn to maintain ethnic communities’ representation on the board, as well as rational geographical units.

Freis: I believe in reducing the membership by one by removing “toxic dump” Antonovich.

Mihalka: Yes. I only support the expansion to have better control of districts and to have better control over the supervisor. I do not believe we should be creating districts based upon race or ethnic background; it only divides communities and creates extreme tensions.

Paparian: Yes. Both to increase diverse representation in the county that is now majority-minority and for more manageable districts. Increase to either seven or nine.

Plambeck: Yes. At least to seven, perhaps nine.

Ethics Code

Q. Do you support adoption of an ethics code to govern the board? If so, what rules do you think are needed?

Antonovich: State law requires members of the Board of Supervisors to make full disclosure of their financial interests and campaign contributions. I have introduced an ordinance requiring lobbyists to register and to submit reports, which would be available to the public.

Aref: Yes. The same rules that apply to federal and state executives, employees and legislatures.

Ashley-Farrand: Yes. Rules to prohibit acceptance of gifts of supervisors and county employees from entities doing business with the county.

Freis: Yes.

Mihalka: Yes. Limits on campaign spending and where those funds come from.

Paparian: Yes. I have previously announced an endorsement of the Molina proposal with a term limit amendment for the county chief executive.

Plambeck: Yes. This is greatly needed, and one of the reasons I am running.

AIDS

Q. AIDS activists accuse the Board of Supervisors of foot-dragging in fighting the disease. Should the board allocate more money to the county health system specifically to reduce waiting time for indigent AIDS patients seeking treatment? If so, from what current program or other source should the money come?

Antonovich: The Board of Supervisors has already made significant progress in reducing the waiting time for AIDS patients. Current policy is to keep the waiting period down to three weeks and to commit additional resources whenever waiting times start to increase beyond that.

Aref: Yes. Money should come from one of the Department of Health Services programs through better allocations of federal and state grants and through donations from Los Angeles fund-raising functions.

Ashley-Farrand: Yes. We need state-mandated universal health care, similar to Hawaii or Oregon. The Board of Supervisors should lobby to get such a system. In the meantime, raising the leases in Marina del Rey to the market rate would bring in eight to 10 times as much money as the county gets now and should be used for health care.

Freis: The county health system is a total joke.

Mihalka: Yes. This is something that is of great concern to me personally, being a paramedic and having had one L.A. city paramedic die of this disease already. The federal government needs to accept its constitutionally mandated responsibility for the “health and welfare of its citizens” and begin to fully fund not only AIDS treatment, but the health care of all citizens in this country.

Paparian: Yes. Early intervention programs funded through the Ryan White Care Act Fund help serve the indigent population. Unallocated funds should be redirected to Los Angeles County in a more timely fashion to enhance the program’s efficiency.

Plambeck: Yes. The recent pension increase, which perhaps is not even entirely legal and will cost county taxpayers an estimated $50 million more a year. Also, I believe there are many cost inefficiencies in the county budget yet to be discovered.

Welfare Benefits

Q. Do you support the state law that will reduce California welfare benefits by 25%?

Antonovich: Yes, in general I support Gov. Wilson’s welfare reform proposals.

Aref: Yes.

Ashley-Farrand: No. I support vigorous enforcement of child support by non-custodial parents, which would raise more than 25% of the funds being spent.

Freis: Only to illegal aliens and non-citizens.

Mihalka: Yes. Only if the program causes or makes more employment opportunities in the state.

Paparian: No.

Plambeck: I support some parts of this law, but not the law in its entirety. Welfare reform is necessary. By the year 2000, we will have more recipients than workers. This will cause our system to fail if it is not corrected.

Illegal Immigrants

Q. Do you believe illegal immigrants should receive welfare benefits if they need them?

Antonovich: No. Illegal immigrants are already costing the county hundreds of millions of dollars annually. Two-thirds of all children born in county hospitals are born to illegal alien mothers. AFDC for these children is costing $250 million and will reach $1 billion by the year 2000. This is diverting critically needed resources from sheriff, fire protection, health care, children’s services, senior citizens and other vital programs.

Aref: No.

Ashley-Farrand: No. One of the ways to reduce the pressure of immigration is for the federal government to consider the impact its policies have had in countries like El Salvador that cause its people to flee to escape the war.

Freis: Only if they go back to their own country after receiving their first check.

Mihalka: Yes. Only the court-mandated health care.

Paparian: No.

Plambeck: No, stressing the “illegal” part.

Parks Bond Initiative

Q. Do you support the county parks bond initiative proposed for the November ballot?

Antonovich: Yes.

Aref: Yes.

Ashley-Farrand: No. Although we need more parks and open spaces, until we are out of the recession, the county will have to prioritize for health care. We should pay as we go and use bonds only for urgent projects.

Freis: Yes. Only if the county enforces removal of the criminal element.

Mihalka: No. It does not go far enough to protect the Santa Monica Mountains.

Paparian: Yes.

Plambeck: Yes. I wrote one of the project proposals.

Industry Exodus

Q. What, if anything, should Los Angeles County do to try to slow the exodus of industry from the area?

Antonovich: The two most important reforms needed to stop the exodus of jobs are reform of workers’ compensation and government regulations. Because of restrictions placed on aerospace companies by the AQMD, they cannot paint their air frames and hence have moved that work out of California.

Ashley-Farrand: The county should be more business-friendly by streamlining the permit process, particularly for those businesses that do not require an EIR. We should not, however, drop our environmental or worker safety standards.

Aref: Develop economically feasible applicable regulations such as air-quality standards.

Freis: Reduce property, sales, utility, state income, city, federal income, federal excise and other taxes and workers’ compensation fraud.

Mihalka: Use redevelopment funds to help business meet the strict air standards in exchange for a commitment to stay for at least 40 years or more.

Paparian: Stop relying on tax dollars to create bureaucracies and deliver services and begin acting entrepreneurially by serving as a catalyst, leveraging private sector actions to solve problems. Reinvent county government into a better and less expensive one that steers more than it rows.

Plambeck: Permitting processes need to be re-evaluated with an eye to efficiency (no easing of regulations, just a more efficient process). Clean industries should be encouraged to locate here, perhaps with some type of credit system. Standards elsewhere in the country should be brought up to those of California so that relocating to avoid compliance does not make economic sense. County contracts should have a local company cost preference to allow for the capitalization of environmental safeguards. Workers’ compensation insurance needs to be revamped. I firmly believe that part of the reason people and companies are leaving Los Angeles is poor public transportation and air pollution. The county needs to improve these areas.

Industry Replacement

Q. What, if any, steps should the county take to replace the loss of defense industry employment?

Antonovich: Aerospace technology and the pool of highly trained and talented aerospace workers should be redirected into transportation and related high-tech industries that would profit from their experience and expertise.

Ashley-Farrand: We should make Los Angeles County into the environmental services capital of the country. We should promote businesses that develop techniques for disposal, build disposal containers, design and build transit alternatives. Environmental services will be the next big growth industry, we should get it going now!

Aref: Develop a retraining program for employees such as in the hazardous materials specialist field. There is a demand for specialists in this field, which is short of technically trained employees. Funds for training are available through the federal Defense Department. Develop programs and incentives that would attract other industries to the area. Assist citizens to switch careers.

Freis: Put Ronald “Star Wars” Reagan back in office and elect Sam Nunn a California U. S. senator and get rid of congressmen who vote against defense-industry jobs.

Mihalka: The ideas to build county transportation vehicles in this county are a start. However, we need to gain a significantly higher number of jobs than the ones that would be created this way.

Paparian: Mobilize the public and private sector toward achieving the vision of a sustainable future for our region by reinvesting in industry, in water and energy conservation, solid-waste recycling, toxic waste reduction and public transit.

Plambeck: The county needs to demand a share of the “peace dividend.” The federal government funded defense research, why not help fund research into public transportation, air pollution control equipment, electric cars (and I have a lot more ideas)? Why not recapitalize the defense industry into needed, environmentally compatible private sector industries?

Improving the Economy

Q. What, if any, other steps should the county take to improve the local economy?

Antonovich: We are working at the state and federal level on reform of workers’ compensation, medical malpractice, product liability and automobile insurance laws. We need to create enterprise zones and tax incentives and eliminate red tape at all levels of government.

Aref: Review local regulations to make them economically feasible to attract industries to the area. Develop environmentally feasible plan of growth. Provide economically effective services.

Ashley-Farrand: Revitalize the film-television industry, which has fled to Canada and Florida. We should make it easier for producers to film here by coordinating the permit process etc. on a countywide basis with all cities here. We should assist business to comply with various mandates, including the Americans with Disabilities Act, affirmative action, etc., because many smaller businesses need information and help to comply. This can be done by making information easily available to business with a county information agency, seminars etc. The county should treat small businesses as most favored nations. They should be assisted in every reasonable way to grow and thrive.

Freis: Reduce taxes. Dump Mike Antonovich. Recall Tom Bradley. Kick out special interests. Control spending. Limit supervisors’ salaries and pensions. Cut waste.

Mihalka: Bring jobs back to this country and to this county. Mr. “Buy American” Lee Iacocca needs to practice what he preaches. Jeep made by Chrysler cannot keep up with demand because the Japanese company that makes the transmissions cannot supply them fast enough. If Lee wants us to “Buy American” then make the cars in America. General Motors, a supposedly American car company, is closing in Van Nuys to move to Canada. Some American-made car!

Paparian: L. A. County lost approximately 100,000 manufacturing jobs from 1986 to 1991 and durable goods manufacturing decreased 20%. The county should provide incentives to those industries with the most potential: medical equipment, specialty plastics and pharmaceuticals. Employment demands will increase in health care and social services as the baby boom generation ages. The fastest-growing industry will be around-the-clock residential care.

Plambeck: See answer to question about slowing the exodus of business.

Freeway Congestion

Q. What, if anything, should the county do to reduce the congestion on the Antelope Valley Freeway?

Antonovich: I lead the effort to fund the construction of an additional traffic lane between the Santa Clara River and Sand Canyon Road, and was also able to add the Antelope Valley Freeway to the Caltrans State Transportation Plan. Through this effort, Caltrans will add one lane in each direction from San Fernando Road to Escondido Canyon Road and, subsequently, from Escondido Canyon Road to Avenue P-8 in the Antelope Valley. Furthermore, I strongly support the LAX-Palmdale high-speed rail project. Finally, I am funding from my Proposition A allocation the commuter express service along the freeway.

Aref: Develop an environmentally and economically feasible plan for growth in the area. Implement a clean fuel or electrically operated rapid transit system.

Ashley-Farrand: The best plan would be to encourage or demand increased ride sharing, van pools, flextime, telecommuting etc. to reduce traffic. An active rail commuting system will also aid traffic reduction.

Freis: Send illegal aliens back. Widen the freeway. Stop and take driver’s license away from drugged and drunk drivers. Send tailgaters back to driving school.

Mihalka: Build a true mass transit system and quit all the dog and pony shows.

Paparian: Encourage use of the recently opened park-and-ride lot in Palmdale. Help provide security at the lot. Use Proposition A dollars to build more and provide bus service. Provide incentives for work-sponsored van pools and/or disincentives for commuting alone.

Plambeck: The freeway should be widened to three lanes between Santa Clarita and Palmdale where it is currently only two. Development should be slowed in those areas and the Antelope Valley until the traffic problems created by it can be mitigated. Two other ways to solve this problem are to get the commuter rail running between Palmdale and Los Angeles and to retool the defense industries in the Antelope Valley for private sector production so that workers won’t have to commute elsewhere (improve the jobs-to-housing balance.)

High-Speed Train

Q. Would you support spending public money to help build an LAX-Palmdale high-speed train?

Antonovich: The current Los Angeles County Transportation Commission long-range plan contains substantial funding for the LAX to Palmdale high-speed train.

Aref: Yes. This would help reduce the congestion on the freeways.

Ashley-Farrand: No. If the idea is commercially feasible, private business will do it and should be encouraged and assisted to do so. If it is not, the county would not get stuck with another budget drain.

Freis: If it could be built half public and half private and economically.

Mihalka: No. We need true mass transit systems not use-limited ones. Although the county is building the most compatible system in the world.

Paparian: No. The managed-growth approach in Palmdale and Santa Clarita have impacted ridership projections. The cost, $100 million a year for up to 15 years, doesn’t justify the benefits. The public money would have to come from the county, not the state or federal government.

Plambeck: Yes. I believe that is what was meant by the “rapid transit” wording of the transit tax passed by the voters in 1990 and it is greatly needed to cut down on air pollution. Also, according to a recent poll published in your newspaper, 44% of commuters would use such a train. That’s pretty substantial! Also, let’s build it in the Antelope Valley!

Flood Problems

Q. How can the Antelope Valley’s flood problems best be handled, with a separate flood control district or by extending the county’s district to that valley?

Antonovich: Because the valley must be in a single flood control district, I have placed an advisory ballot question on the June 2 ballot for residents to select their preferred plan.

Aref: Separate flood control district.

Ashley-Farrand: A separate flood control district would best serve the area, because it would not get lost in the other priorities of the large county flood control district. We need to create more aquifers in the area (and other areas) to save our rainwater.

Freis: If needed.

Mihalka: By creating a district that is governed by the residents or a board from the Antelope Valley.

Paparian: Antelope Valley’s flood problems are best addressed by leadership at the local level through a separate flood control district focusing on the unique needs of that community.

Plambeck: There is great animosity about flood control between the developed cities and county areas and the surrounding rural areas governed by town councils. The town councils feel (and I believe rightly so) that flooding is caused by inadequate planning in the developed areas and that their rural areas, which are largely undeveloped, are not subject to massive floods. The rural areas do not want to bear the costs of inadequate flood control for the overdeveloped areas. Local input must be ensured without unfair tax burden. Perhaps some sort of combination of the two solutions would be best, i.e., a county-funded local district.

Airport Capacity

Q. Should the county add to the general aviation airport capacity in the Santa Clarita Valley? If so, should it expand the Agua Dulce airport or build a new one? If a new one, where?

Antonovich: I will not support expansion of the airport to allow either commercial or jet aircraft, nor will I support nighttime operations. The existing airport has been of value to the community and to pilots from throughout Southern California. I have asked the Agua Dulce Town Council to provide their input on this issue. I have also requested the Department of Public Works to review other locations.

Aref: No. Build a new one where it is economically and environmentally feasible after a public hearing to obtain public input.

Ashley-Farrand: Yes. A new one should be built well away from residences, and no new residences should be allowed to be built near it. With a buffer zone, there will be no neighborhoods to complain about noise and demand reduction. But aircraft can be made quieter and is quieter in Europe. We can do the same.

Freis: Airports that are being built must have a corridor where no houses are under the flight path.

Mihalka: Needs to be looked at and I am not that familiar with the proposal.

Paparian: No.

Plambeck: Agua Dulce is too far out. Indian Dunes off Highway 126 has been suggested as a possible site, but I believe an airport would severely increase our air pollution problems.

Recession Impact

Q. Have you been personally hurt economically by the recession? If so, how?

Antonovich: (Not answered.)

Aref: Yes. An individual in a recession does not have the ability to purchase the goods or pay for services that he normally buys or provides in good times. In a recession, government agencies are not able to provide proper services due to budget shortage (street repairs are not being done; public utilities are not being property maintained). Enforcement agencies do not have the staff for enforcement. An individual employed with private or public entities is faced with possible layoff and unemployment.

Ashley-Farrand: Yes. My law practice suffered from a reduction in new clients due to people’s inability to pay for legal services.

Freis: Yes. But I still managed to gain weight. We will all feel the recession when Antonovich allows $2.9 million on travel, meals, entertainment, automobile expenses on county credit cards paid at taxpayer expense.

Mihalka: Yes. I do not go out to movies or dinner as much as I used to a couple of years ago. I rent as opposed to owning my home.

Paparian: Yes. I am the sole source of financial support for a family of five that includes myself, my wife and our three sons, ages 8, 6 and 3.

Plambeck: Yes. My business suffered a slowdown. I am proud to say, though, that I was able to make economies without laying off any employees or cutting benefits.

CONTENDERS

Michael Antonovich, 52, of Glendale, was elected to the Board of Supervisors in 1980. A conservative, he was forced into a runoff in 1988 by former Supervisor Baxter Ward, but won handily with 64% of the vote.

Shereef K. Aref, 26, of Burbank, is a hazardous and toxic substance control specialist with the state Environmental Protection Agency. After graduating from Fairfax High School, he received a medical degree in Egypt.

Margalo Ashley-Farrand, 47, of Glendale, is an attorney. A graduate of New York University and Southwestern University School of Law, she volunteers as a judge pro tem in Los Angeles and Van Nuys municipal courts.

Craig Freis, 47, lives in the back of his Glendale bookstore, where he said he moved last year to protect the store after it was vandalized. Freis has a real estate license and provides tax reduction information from his 900 number.

Jim Mihalka, 33, of Glendora, is a businessman and Los Angeles city paramedic. He has made two previous unsuccessful bids for a seat on the Board of Supervisors. He is a county-certified paramedic and holds a real estate license.

William M. Paparian, 43, of Pasadena, is a self-employed attorney. In 1987, he beat a three-term incumbent 2-to-1 for a seat on the Pasadena City Council and was reelected to the council without opposition last year.

Lynne A. Plambeck, 41, of Santa Clarita, owns a Burbank film business started by her grandfather. She has been active in the area’s slow-growth movement and in the Santa Clarita Organization for Planning and the Environment.

NOTE TO READERS

The Times will soon finish publishing questions and answers of candidates in contested June 2 election races in the Valley Edition circulation area.

As a service to readers, we will be happy to mail a photocopy of any published questionnaire and responses to those requesting them.

Please send us a stamped, self-addressed, business-size envelope and a note giving the number of the district or districts you are interested in. In stamping the return envelope, assume that each questionnaire weighs one ounce.

Questionnaires for these districts have been published:

Congress: 24, 25, 26, 27 and 29.

State Senate: 19, 20 and 23.

Assembly: 36, 38, 40, 41 and 42 (still to be published: 44).

Address requests to:

Q and A

Editorial Department

Los Angeles Times

20000 Prairie St.

Chatsworth 91311

Supervisorial District 5

Overview: Incumbent Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich is facing six opponents in the district, which was redrawn last year to exclude most of his traditional support base in the San Fernando Valley. Issues raised so far by Antonovich’s opponents have included the need for better protection of the environment and for campaign and ethics reforms for the County Board of Supervisors.

Where: The newly drawn district includes the communities of Acton, Agua Dulce, Burbank, Castaic, Glendale, Gorman, Green Valley, La Canada Flintridge, Lake Hughes, Lancaster, Littlerock, Leona Valley, Mission Hills, Palmdale, Pearblossom, Quartz Hill, Saugus, Santa Clarita and Val Verde, and portions of Canoga Park, Chatsworth and Northridge. It also includes the San Gabriel Valley cities of Arcadia, Alhambra, Bradbury, Duarte, Monrovia, San Gabriel, San Marino and Sierra Madre. To find out if you live in the district, call the Los Angeles County registrar-recorder’s office at (213) 721-1100.

Demographics Anglo: 62% Latino: 21% Black: 5% Asian: 12%

Party Registration Demo: 40% GOP: 49% Others: 11%

Candidates Michael D. Antonovich, supervisor Shereef K. Aref, hazardous materials specialist Margalo Ashley-Farrand, attorney-mediator Craig Freis, tax reduction organizer Jim Mihalka, paramedic businessman William M. Paparian, Pasadena city councilman Lynne A. Plambeck, business owner