Antonovich Digs In to Battle Low-Key Rival

One recent evening, Los Angeles County Supervisor Mike Antonovich was being roasted at a $500-a-plate dinner, attended by 800 supporters--all eager to shake his hand and aid his reelection campaign.

Across the county in a modest home in Palmdale, Don Kumaus, Antonovich’s only opponent for the 5th District supervisorial seat, was having a quiet dinner with his family. They talked about work and school, and then went to bed early.

Most observers do not expect much of a contest in the race between Antonovich, who expects to raise nearly $1 million, and Kumaus, a county deputy assessor who says he will not spend much more than $1,000. Indeed, Kumaus does not intend to pay for advertising, walk neighborhoods or devote much of his attention to the March 26 primary.

“It would be an upset of monumental proportions,” said Paul Clarke, a Republican political consultant.

Kumaus admits that part of the reason he is challenging Antonovich is to increase his name recognition when he runs for a second time for county assessor. Two years ago he finished 10th out of 13 candidates.

Additionally, “no incumbent should run unopposed,” he says.

The former Marine and Vietnam veteran, who will turn 49 on election day, has a strategy: He can win by capturing the 40% of those who split their vote among six Antonovich opponents in the 1992 election and by receiving an additional 10% plus one vote from those who have become disaffected by the county’s budget problems or other issues.

The winner must receive 50% of the ballots plus one vote, including write-ins, to avoid a runoff in the November general election.

Antonovich, who is running for his fifth term, is not taking any chances. He has hired a fund-raiser and three full-time campaign organizers. “We’re going to run a professional campaign,” Antonovich said. “We are going to be aggressive and not defensive.”

The two candidates have appeared together at one forum, but no other joint appearances are scheduled.

Defeating an incumbent supervisor has been nearly impossible in recent county history, and it is not unusual for supervisors to run unopposed, as 2nd District Supervisor Yvonne Brathwaite Burke is this year. The only race expected to be close is for the 4th District seat, where six candidates hope to replace retiring Supervisor Deane Dana.

The last time an incumbent lost was when Antonovich beat Baxter Ward in 1980 after Ward had refused to solicit campaign contributions, citing what he called the “impropriety” of it.

Antonovich raised about $400,000 that year, about the same amount he got at his Feb. 8 fund-raiser and roast, where his benefactors included fellow Supervisors Burke, Dana and Zev Yaroslavsky, Mayor Richard Riordan, state Treasurer Matt Fong and Los Angeles County Sheriff Sherman Block. Sen. Bob Dole took time from the presidential campaign trail to send a letter of support and former President George Bush sent his backing via video.

The evening was rowdy, notable for a lack of political correctness, and filled with off-color jokes about Antonovich’s stiff speaking style, fellow Supervisor Gloria Molina’s weight, prostitutes and sex.

*

The biggest laughs, though, were reserved for controversies involving Antonovich: his phone call to a Superior Court judge on behalf of a campaign contributor; his role in the county’s continuing budget problems; his decision to be chairman of a subsequently canceled dinner to welcome former Los Angeles Police Officer Laurence M. Powell home from a prison term for violating Rodney G. King’s civil rights, and his use of county Fire Department helicopters to get to meetings.

But political analysts doubt that any of those issues will cost Antonovich enough votes to lose the election, particularly to an opponent who is virtually unknown and does not intend to campaign.

“When crunch time comes, he has name recognition and a sizable campaign chest, and that is formidable,” said Jaime Regalado, executive director of the Pat Brown Institute of Public Affairs at Cal State L.A.

Antonovich, 56, is relying on the same factors that have worked for him since he upset Ward 16 years ago: a strong political base in the Glendale-Burbank area where he lives, plenty of TV and radio ads and districtwide mailers and, most important, lots of campaign contributions--a large part of which come from development, construction and real estate firms.

As of Dec. 31, 1995, Antonovich had spent $523,408 on his campaign.

To get his message out in the sprawling district, which is about the size of Rhode Island and covers the northern part of the county, Antonovich said he has no choice but to raise a lot of money.

Because of the size and vastness of the area, “there are different media markets,” Antonovich said. “So the bulk of our costs is in media coverage, including mailing. To reach everyone is expensive.”

Former candidates say Antonovich’s money advantage is intimidating: This year he has only one opponent, compared to six in 1992 and nine in 1988.

Antonovich has little competition even though he narrowly escaped a runoff four years ago against several underfunded candidates, some of whom could not even afford $12,000 for a ballot statement.

Lynne Plambeck, who came in fourth with about 10% of the vote four years ago, decided to sit out this year’s contest.

“I would hope voters would ask themselves why someone would spend $1 million for that seat. . . . It means that many good candidates cannot run because you’d have to spend all your time raising money,” Plambeck said.

In the 1992 race, Plambeck spent about $10,000. While she settled for inexpensive ads on cable television and small radio stations, Antonovich was able to purchase time on network TV stations in prime time.

Antonovich, though, dismisses his money advantage as inconsequential.

“Everybody knows me,” he said, “and they will vote for or against me based on what they think of me.”

If he is reelected, Antonovich said, his goals are to provide more money for law enforcement, push for additional public/private partnerships in the health care system, reform the county’s foster care and court systems and continue to fight the construction of a local subway system as being too expensive and too hazardous.

The county’s fiscal problems, he said, have largely been caused by the state government taking away more than $1 billion in property tax revenues and providing services for illegal immigrants.

But Antonovich, as the longest-serving supervisor and the last of a conservative board majority from the 1980s, has presided on the board during a time in which its health system nearly collapsed, the salaries of top county executives were raised even as county services were being cut, and county property was being mortgaged to help pay for current services.

And although thousands of county health workers were laid off by the board last year to help bridge a $655-million budget gap, Antonovich is still respected by Local 660 of the Service Employees International Union, which represented most of the workers and which bitterly opposed the layoffs.

“He doesn’t have the same politics as we have, but we appreciate his straightforwardness,” said union spokesman Dan Savage. “He doesn’t tell you what you want to hear and then do something else.”

Kumaus also considers himself a straight shooter.

“Much of my attitude is from the military,” he said. “I approach things like a battle.”

Kumaus, who has worked in the assessor’s office for 19 years, won the Purple Heart while in Vietnam and can regale visitors with stories of fierce battles--and, a la President Lyndon B. Johnson--will even show you his scars.

*

He is convinced that despite the financial crisis, money is being wasted and could be used in better ways. For instance, he believes 10% of the county’s $12-billion budget should be redirected to youth programs. Although he admits that he does not know where the cuts would be made, he says he is “sure it is there” and can be found without seriously harming basic services provided by the county.

“Someone,” he said, “has to step forward and lead.”

Unlike Kumaus, who is not campaigning at all, Antonovich said that he has been “running since [he] was elected” by providing good services to his constituents.

He meets at least once a year with the city councils and mayors of the 25 cities that are in his district. He also meets with many of the 67 unofficial “town councils,” which he helped establish as a way of building political involvement in his far-flung district.

All constituent mail is answered, and all telephone calls are returned.

He is proud of his ability to manage a rigorous schedule filled with breakfast meetings, briefings and, occasionally, a constituent’s wedding or funeral.

His busy calendar has sometimes led to trouble.

*

Last August, for instance, he was criticized after he took a county Fire Department helicopter to a state Transportation Commission meeting in Irvine at the height of the county’s budget problems.

But Antonovich notes that he went to the meeting on behalf of constituents--this time, to lobby for state funds for the improvement of a highway in the Antelope Valley.

Indeed, in some parts of the district, Antonovich’s jaunts are not perceived to be all bad.

At Antonovich’s roast, Larry Grooms, editor of the Antelope Valley Press, joked: “He came up to the Antelope Valley and said, ‘If you elect me, I’ll come back before the next election. . . . It was an unprecedented offer. And Mike did come back. It was in a helicopter.”