Dana Feels Heat From Big Field in 4th District

With the nationwide anti-incumbency movement gathering steam, three-term County Supervisor Deane Dana is facing the largest and potentially most threatening field of challengers in his career.

The race in the 4th Supervisorial District--a crescent-shaped swath that runs down the coast from Marina del Rey to Long Beach and then inland along the county border to Diamond Bar--includes six challengers who charge that Dana has been asleep at the helm for 12 years, allowing bureaucrats to run amok with high-priced programs, expensive perks and a penchant for conducting business behind closed doors. They say it’s time for a change.

Dana, however, is running hard on his record, ignoring his challengers in public and basking in the endorsements of other politicians. Dana said he wants to continue in office to pursue stronger law enforcement, fight gang involvement and trim the county bureaucracy.

“Obviously there is a strong, anti-incumbency feeling out there . . . (but) I feel good about the campaign and I expect to be reelected,” said Dana.

With a war chest of nearly $1 million--which his campaign manager said will probably all be spent before the June 2 primary--Dana’s resources dwarf those of the entire field of challengers combined.

But unlike 1988, when Dana had just token competition, this time he faces at least one challenger who has the funds to mount a credible campaign. Dana advisers acknowledge that there is a “50-50 chance” the supervisor will be forced into a runoff election in November.

Gordana Swanson, a 16-year veteran of the Rolling Hills City Council, is hammering away at what she says are the excessive perks enjoyed by the supervisors: $74,000 bulletproof cars, $40 catered gourmet lunches and a 19% boost in their own pension benefits.

Dana’s campaign advisers say the voters do not care about such things. “We’re not finding that showing up in . . . polling,” said Dana campaign manager Ron Smith.

But in the closing weeks of the campaign, Dana’s team of advisers is apparently taking Swanson’s candidacy--and her $120,000 campaign fund--seriously. Dana has hired a research firm to examine Swanson’s financial and voting records and Smith said he is planning some last-minute advertising to attack her record.

And that, political analysts say, is an admission that Swanson is making inroads and posing a serious threat.

In addition to the large field and general voter discontent, the election is complicated by new district lines that were drawn in 1990 after a federal court judge ruled the Board of Supervisors had deliberately violated the Voting Rights Act.

With the new lines, Dana’s coastal district was thrust inland, where he gained 500,000 to 600,0000 constituents he had never before represented.

Smith said the net effect is positive for the conservative supervisor: He lost liberal cities such as Malibu and Santa Monica while picking up conservative strongholds such as Hacienda Heights and Diamond Bar.

Challengers, most of whom are also campaigning on conservative themes, say the redistricting takes away the natural advantage of an incumbent and levels the playing field.

So far Dana has run a typical incumbent’s campaign: a high-budget, positive campaign that is heavy on glossy direct-mail pieces that highlight the supervisor’s career, his accomplishments and the power of an incumbent.

Dana, for instance, is leading his campaign literature and radio ads with the fact that he championed the creation of the 911 emergency phone line in Los Angeles County, a non-controversial service adopted nearly 10 years ago as part of a statewide program.

Most of the advertising is intended to drive home the campaign slogan of “Great Job, Deane Dana.”

Swanson also uses the “Great Job” tag line in her campaign pieces, but with a red-letter “NOT” across the slogan.

“He shouldn’t be rewarded with another four years,” said Swanson. “In addition to not doing anything about the county’s problems . . . there are these outrageous perks they vote themselves.”

Swanson’s theme is echoed by each of the other five candidates, all of whom say they are fed up with wasteful spending practices and the board’s inability to solve larger problems of crime, health care, homelessness and the environment.

“You know about the stinky stuff,” said Marina del Rey-based computer engineer Jeffrey H. Drobman, referring to the much-publicized perks that supervisors enjoy, such as armed chauffeurs. “But there are also important environmental issues” not being properly addressed by the board, said Drobman, who ran against Dana in 1988, drawing 13% of the vote.

Al Stillwell, a retired businessman who also ran against Dana in 1988 and drew 12% of the vote, said his reasons for running are simple: “The No. 1 reason is Deane Dana. The No. 2 reason is Deane Dana and the No. 3 reason is Deane Dana. . . . I see this man as a plunderer of tax money for his personal use.”

“I’m running because I’m mad as blankety-blank-blank,” said Lawrence Manning, a retired chemist and businessman. In criticizing the 19% hike in pension benefits the supervisors have allowed themselves, Manning said, “If they can’t plan for their retirement better than that on their ($99,000) salary, then they can’t plan for anything.”

Joe Chavez, a county data processing supervisor who ran unsuccessfully in the 1st Supervisorial District against Pete Schabarum in 1986 and Gloria Molina in 1990, said, “As a county employee of 18 years, I see a lot of duplication at all levels.” Chavez also says he wants more attention to health care. Dana, he said, “beats his chest about 911, but there’s nowhere to take people because of the crumbling trauma care system.”

County environmental health specialist Norman Amjadi, who mortgaged his house to raise $20,000 in campaign funds, said: “People are tired of government as usual and want to do something about it.” Amjadi wants more county attention to the environment and the health care system.

The candidates were all angry at Dana’s refusal to participate in community forums and debates.

Dana said he has simply been too busy to attend such events, especially since the riots that broke out April 29.

And Dana campaign manager Smith added that with a large, angry field of opponents “it would just be six people beating up on Deane Dana. That wouldn’t add anything to the debate.”

Smith also criticized Swanson for running what he called a negative campaign that is focused on Dana and the Board of Supervisors’ record and not on her own plans for office.

In an interview, Swanson said that if elected, she will fight for a two-term limit for supervisors; campaign finance reform; lobbyist registration; greater use of civilians in the the Sheriff’s Department to put more uniformed officers on the street; greater scrutiny of the budget; a review and overhaul of the health system; more and better trauma care centers; and greater scrutiny of the county’s practice of contracting out services to private enterprise.

Smith also attacked Swanson for her record as an 11-year member of the Southern California Rapid Transit District board of directors. Smith charged that Swanson took lavish trips at public expense while RTD services became increasingly costly.

Swanson said that the trips, including stops in Singapore and Japan, were for legitimate RTD business and that she picked up some expenses out of her own pocket. She denied Smith’s charges that she used RTD money on her hotel cleaning bill or for limousines.

If no candidate receives more than 50% of the vote in the June primary, the top two finishers face off in November.

But not all observers are convinced that the voter discontent and the large field can outweigh the advantages of an incumbent running for reelection and deny Dana a fourth term.

“I just don’t think there is the wherewithal within the opposition,” said Eric Schockman, a professor of political science at USC. “ . . . I don’t see a massive outpouring in his district to get rid of him.”