Crowded Supervisor’s Field Rises Above Factionalism : Latinos: Among the vital issues is the candidates’ willingness to be accountable to a demanding electorate.

The importance of the election in Los Angeles County’s newly created 1st Supervisorial District, should not be clouded by dire predictions that the contest will be reduced to a fratricidal turf war with “too many Latinos in the running” and no “consensus candidate.”

The real issues in this election, which is scheduled for Jan. 22, are not ethnocentric or petty factional disputes but the need for political reform, restoring the county’s health-care system, affordable housing, real citizen participation in planning and land use, regionalization and area governments, crime and communities held hostage by youth gangs and equal-employment opportunities for women, minorities and disadvantaged businesses owners.

The front-runners in the race--who are Mexican-American, and, with one exception, prominent veteran officeholders--have long been involved with such issues. In addition, most were supporters of the plaintiffs in the reapportionment suit won by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund against the Board of Supervisors. As supporters of the suit, the candidates will undoubtedly consider the financial and emotional sacrifices by the Latino community to make this election possible for all county residents. Such consideration will hopefully create a duty and obligation by the candidates to elevate the campaign to an intelligent discussion of the issues while resisting acrimonious debates--a temptation that is endemic to intraparty fights and community feuds.

The candidates also will be best served by being cognizant of the voters’ mood; now more than ever--regardless of ethnicity--voters are demanding greater accountability from their political leaders. This fact was bluntly stated, even if not entirely well thought out, by passage of Proposition 140. The need for political reform in Los Angeles County must be considered as position papers are drafted and the issues framed by the candidates and their campaigns.

During the court case against the county, the plaintiffs’ arguments described years of discriminatory gerrymandering against the county’s 3 million Latinos trying to win a seat on the Board of Supervisors. But the case also revealed that all county residents have been reduced to representation by five men operating literally as both chief executives and legislators in a region that exceeds the population, land area and economy of the states of Delaware and Rhode Island. Others have held that the current county apportionment is a political anachronism that has discouraged direct citizen participation, attempted to undermine communities’ efforts to incorporate and even blunted critical communication and dialogue between the supervisors and the elected representatives of the county’s 80 municipalities.

Thus, along with the companion issues relative to the quality of life, the issue of universal suffrage, or the right of county residents to again enjoy a real and viable relationship with elected representatives who respect the views of their constituents and welcome accountability and public scrutiny, must be considered. To achieve equitable representation, the new Board of Supervisors will need to place its expansion as a major priority item on its agenda as it faces reapportionment in 1991.

However, unlike past supervisorial contests, in which Latinos were outmaneuvered or outvoted, the 70% plurality of Latino voters in the district and the absence of any viable non-Latino opponents nearly assure the election of one of the principal contenders.

The question left to be answered in the coming campaign is whether the contestants will be able to intelligently articulate the wisdom and enlightened leadership that the people of Los Angeles County deserve, yet have so often been denied by the interests of most of the Board of Supervisors.