COUNTY BOARD'S DISTRICTS TOO BIG, LEGISLATORS SAY; DEBATE UNITES FOES, SPLITS ALLIES.

Byline: Patricia Farrell Aidem Staff Writer

Los Angeles County is more populous than 42 states, and each of its five supervisors has more constituents than some U.S. senators, three times as many as members of Congress and far more than any state legislator.

Residents of unincorporated areas such as Castaic, Stevenson Ranch and Agua Dulce share a supervisor, their only locally elected government official, with more than 2 million other people in the county.

A bipartisan effort is under way in Sacramento to enlarge the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors from five members to nine, a move approved this week by the state Senate and headed for an Assembly vote after the first of the year.

``How can we call local government `local' when you have 2 million constituents? I think it's impossible to perform those local functions with that size of a constituency,'' said Assemblyman George Runner, R-Lancaster, whose district includes the Santa Clarita Valley.

Runner is co-sponsor of a proposed state constitutional amendment that, if approved by the Legislature and eventually the voters, would create a nine-member board in Los Angeles County.

In this drive, Runner finds himself battling a political ally, county Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich, and aligned with a political foe, Richard Polanco of Los Angeles, a leading Democrat in the state Senate.

Runner said he views the proposed constitutional amendment and potential statewide vote as a way to persuade the Los Angeles County board to handle the issue locally.

``I think what's going to happen is a vote on this will clearly communicate to the . . . supervisors the seriousness of the movement, and they will then duplicate this, so it goes to just the county voters,'' he said.

``I think this best belongs to the county, not the state.''

Antonovich cast the dissenting vote last week when the supervisors agreed to study enlarging the board.

``His feeling is that all this does is increase the size of bureaucracy,'' Antonovich spokesman Cam Currier said. ``It does not provide one additional sheriff's deputy, one firefighter, one child-care worker, one park or library. It just makes government bigger.''

The measure on the table, however, holds a caveat: The board's budget would not increase.

``I think the best we can do is have a cost-containment in the motion, to make sure the financial pie stays the same size. It's just divvied into more pieces,'' said Bill Mabee, chief aide to Polanco.

But Antonovich believes it is no issue that he had far fewer constituents when he served in the state Assembly, Currier said. The supervisor, he explained, has made a point of having easily accessible representatives throughout his sprawling 5th District, which stretches from Glendale through the northern San Fernando Valley and across the Santa Clarita and Antelope valleys.

Polanco and Runner believe it's the perfect time to prepare for more supervisors because redistricting probably will be legally required after the 2000 census.

Polanco wants to see large populations of Asian and Latino immigrants represented on the board. For Runner, the issue is one of local interests. Antonovich, he said, must equally balance the issues of his constituents in Pomona with those in northern Los Angeles County.

``I'm a supporter of Mike Antonovich, but it's just a really large, divergent area for one person to represent effectively,'' Runner said. ``You have too many issues, too many conflicting interests.''

But Currier said county voters want less, not more, government and have rejected four efforts since 1922 to expand the board. Proponents argue that this time the move would include a cap on funding and active campaigning by the proponents.

For residents of northern Los Angeles County, a supervisor with fewer constituents could better address local issues, Runner said.

``We would have a greater say in the process,'' Runner said.