LOCAL ELECTIONS / 4TH SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT : Dana, Swanson Slug it Out in Costly Race : Politics: Incumbent and challenger step up attacks in bid for powerful county seat. Candidates will spend more than $3 million.

The campaign for Los Angeles County supervisor in the 4th District--pitting three-term incumbent Deane Dana against Rolling Hills Mayor Gordana Swanson--is shaping up to be one of the most expensive and vitriolic political contests in county history.

The outcome in the coastal district of nearly 2 million residents may hinge on whose attacks can inflict the most damage before the Nov. 3 balloting.

Both candidates have launched aggressive campaigns hitting hard at each other’s records: Swanson attacking Dana for expensive perks he enjoyed during 12 years in office, and Dana swatting back by accusing Swanson of not supporting Proposition 13--a claim that she denies.

The combined campaigns probably will wind up spending more than $3 million on radio, television and direct mail ads that deal little with the county’s fiscal crisis or deepening problems of crime, health care, unemployment and ethnic tension.

The cross-fire of accusations became so fierce that a Superior Court judge had to referee, after Swanson sued Dana over the accuracy of his claims about her record and about his own.

Judge Robert O’Brien ruled in September that Dana must strike from his official ballot statement questionable contentions he made about Swanson’s attendance record but found that Dana could make virtually any statement about himself, even if it is “political puffing.”

Both sides called the court ruling a victory--and then accused each other of lying about the results.

Despite their combative relationship, the candidates have much in common: Both are conservative Republicans and longtime politicians. Each promises to shake up a sluggish county bureaucracy, support the business community and expand the contracting of county work to private companies.

But in an election year when change and the expanding role of women in politics are overriding themes, Dana, 66, is running as a white, male incumbent and Swanson, 57, as the female outsider who supports a two-term limit.

“It’s a slugfest,” said H. Eric Schockman, professor of political science at USC. Schockman said polling data suggests an unusually high number of undecided voters. That, he said, is a result of the “shrill attacks” by both sides. One thing is certain, he said. “It’s going to be close.”

“The timing is not right for Deane Dana” said Sherry Bebitch Jeffe, senior associate at the Center for Politics & Policy at the Claremont Graduate School. “Swanson looks like an outsider because she wears a skirt. She’s trying to define the issue as ‘throw the bums out, the man’s out of touch.’ ”

But Schockman cautions that that message may not be enough to unseat a well-funded incumbent. “She may give reasons why he is inept,” Schockman said, “but what is her position on anything? Would she be different? . . . I don’t hear a constructive agenda--on either side.”

Seats on the five-member Board of Supervisors are some of the most powerful and coveted elected posts in California. The board controls a $13-billion budget, a work force of 83,000 and represents a population approaching 9 million--more than many states.

The 4th District overlaps five congressional, six state Senate and nine Assembly districts. All or part of 40 communities--along the coast from Marina del Rey to Long Beach and inland to Diamond Bar--are within the district’s 465 square miles.

Dana is seeking to hold onto a job that pays $120,000 in salary and benefits and offers perks such as a chauffeured, bulletproof car. He was forced into the runoff election when he won 42% of the vote in the June primary--short of the necessary 50%-plus-one majority.

Despite a $1-million campaign fund--swelled by large contributions from scores of county contractors, leaseholders and lobbyists--Dana’s six scrappy challengers denied him an outright victory in the primary and set the stage for next month’s showdown. Dana is expected to raise and spend an additional $1 million before Nov. 3, his campaign manager Don Knabe said.

Swanson, who has gathered about $400,000, including $220,000 of her own money, ran a campaign that blistered Dana for the supervisorial perks. She also pounded Dana for sitting by silently as county bureaucrats implemented a $265-million addition to their pension benefits.

She outpolled the other challengers, taking 25% of the vote in the primary.

Based on her success in the primary campaign, Swanson has continued to swing away at Dana’s record and county spending. Her latest radio advertisement, narrated by actor and supporter Jack Lemmon, says: “Just look at the abuses that now characterize county government: outrageous fiscal shenanigans, blatant conflicts of interest, private greed over the public good, excessive perks for supervisors . . . “

Knabe said some Swanson claims are misleading. Swanson called Dana’s county-owned car a limo when it is a 1990 Buick sedan. When outfitted with bulletproof features, however, the car cost more than $72,000.

Knabe also said catered lunches were stopped immediately after their public disclosure. And, he said, Dana has tried to repeal some of the pension increases.

Indeed, in his campaign materials, Dana claims to be “leading the fight” against fiscal abuses in county government.

But not everyone accepts that version of the facts.

“His Johnny-come-lately stand on reform is transparent,” said Schockman.

“He’s been a force for change for 2 1/2 months” out of 12 years in office, Jeffe said.

Dana, embarrassed by his poor showing in the primary, dumped his longtime campaign adviser, Ron Smith, and hired hard-nosed political consultant Harvey Englander. Known for waging aggressive, negative campaigns, Englander has specialized in recent years in salvaging sagging campaigns after a primary.

Englander has refocused the Dana campaign on Swanson’s record and recast the supervisor’s history.

He has criticized Swanson repeatedly for her failure to vote in 1978 at the Rolling Hills City Council on a non-binding measure on the effects of Proposition 13. He also has taken her to task for voting in 1988 for fare increases as a member of the Southern California Rapid Transit District board of directors. Dana’s appointee to the RTD board, Jan Hall, was president of the board at the time.

One mailed advertisement from Dana accuses Swanson of high absenteeism from council meetings and includes a picture of an empty chair--which Swanson insists was taken before a council meeting started.

Englander also has included pictures of Swanson’s gated community in campaign materials and has questioned her travel records as a member of the RTD board--even though Dana also lives in an upscale neighborhood on the Palos Verde Peninsula and, as a supervisor, has had numerous trips paid for at public expense.

One of Dana’s mailers is emblazoned with a large stop-sign-shaped warning: “Beware of Smears and Dirty Tricks.” Another says: “She Is Trying to Buy Your Vote With Deception.”

Englander has also sought to portray Dana as a reformer, though the supervisor largely has gone along with the board majority since he was elected in 1980.

Dana’s campaign says he led the fight for the removal of County Chief Administrative Officer Richard B. Dixon, though the supervisor had consistently backed Dixon since his appointment in 1987.

After disclosures about expensive office remodeling and pension increases primarily for senior county officials, Dana voted with the board majority to reject Supervisor Gloria Molina’s call to fire Dixon.

Dana eventually joined the call for Dixon’s resignation in July.

In his ballot statement, Dana says he is “leading the fight to reverse Los Angeles County’s obscene pension spiking practice.”

In fact, Dana has called for a minor rollback in some pension-related programs but continues to defend the largest single pension increase--even though it has been roundly criticized by the grand jury as “the height of fiscal irresponsibility.”

Swanson has called for repeal of the pension increase.

Swanson, whose posts on the Rolling Hills council and RTD board are part time, said Dana’s job performance is what the election is all about.

“I’ve tried to address the issue of what’s wrong with the county,” Swanson said. “It was negative because his performance as a supervisor was negative. He has not represented us well. And that needs to be addressed.”

She labeled many of Dana’s claims “blatant lies,” and took issue with the allegation that she opposed Proposition 13. Swanson said she supported the tax reform measure and campaigned for it.

When asked what she plans to accomplish if elected to the board, she said:

* Ethics reform, including a two-term limit for supervisors, limits on campaign contributions and new rules to govern county contracting.

* “One-stop shopping centers” for small businesses needing various government permits.

* Line-item review of the county budget, which she says has been neglected by the supervisors.

* Regular “town hall” meetings throughout the district.

* Expansion of preventive health care programs.

When asked what he plans to accomplish if elected to a new four-year term, Dana said:

* Create jobs by making the county more “business-friendly.” He said he would work with business to seek workers’ compensation reform at the state level.

* Work with cities to fight gang violence.

* Reduce the county’s work force through attrition and privatization.