Critics say Fox officials' latest effort to ward of litigation is overreaction.

Twentieth Century Fox, ever since the Los Angeles City Council approved its $200-million expansion plan, has been anticipating a lawsuit, and has been going to unprecedented lengths to thwart it before it's filed -- angering the previously supportive council.

But homeowner advocates in the Century City area said they have no plans to file litigation any time soon.

"With a lawsuit, all that happens is you delay the development and you continue in an adversarial relationship," said Roy Belosic, president of the Cheviot Hills Homeowners Association.

Other homeowners, angry about the development rights granted to Fox by the Los Angeles City Council in June, admitted they "strongly considered" suing to stop the studio expansion project from going forward.

But then they reconsidered, and like Robert Stack's character in the comedy film classic "Airplane," decided: "No! That's what they'd expect us to do!"

The homeowner leaders said they fear that suing Fox may actually broaden the studio's development rights, under its agreement with the city.

Fox certainly was expecting a lawsuit. Fox Senior Vice President David Handelman said he'd bet "a lot of money" one will be filed.

The company has gone so far as to seek legislation invalidating lawsuits that may be filed against its 771,000-square-foot expansion plan for its 53-acre Century City studio lot. Later this month, the state Senate will take up the bill.

"I don't know anybody who's suing them," commented Belosic. "Where is this spate of lawsuits that sent them running to Sacramento for help?"

Handelman said the legislation is Fox's sole strategy now for battling persistent homeowner advocates, since fighting a new lawsuit in court could take years and "we can't afford to wait another three years."

The bill states that the Fox project complies with all local zoning and planning requirements and may not be challenged based on the California Environmental Quality Act. The bill is opposed by the L.A. City Council, which approved Fox's expansion plan in June.

"I don't blame them for not wanting to spend two years, but they knew what they were getting into when they started this," said Councilman Zev Yaroslavsky, who represents the Century City area.

Homeowner advocate Sandy Brown, president of the Westside Civic Federation, said many homeowner groups are opposed to the legislation because they are afraid it will set a dangerous precedent that will be applied to future developments. Yaroslavsky agreed.

"If Fox can do it, then Playa Vista can do it, and Porter Ranch can do it," he said. Playa Vista and Porter Ranch are major master-planned, mixed-use developments slated for the Marina del Rey and the Chatsworth areas, respectively.

Despite the bill, homeowner advocate Val Cole, president of the California County Club Homes Association, said she thinks Fox is trying to provoke a lawsuit.

"I really think they want to get sued," Cole said. "Their actions seem to be predicated on wanting a suit."

In addition to the bill, Cole was referring to language in Fox's development agreement with the city that allows Fox freedom from its commitments if the expansion plan is challenged in court.

The final version of the development agreement is not yet available to the public, but various draft versions have been circulated and discussed.

According to Laura Lake, president of Friends of Westwood, Fox has the option of splitting up the property and/or selling it for condominium development if someone merely files a lawsuit challenging studio expansion.

"This is total, total overkill," said Lake. "They have a way out of everything. The goal is unlimited development rights so they can sell it."

But Handelman said the development agreement only allows Fox to back out of its covenants "in the event of litigation, including pending litigation, which invalidates the (development) agreement." In other words, Fox would have to lose a lawsuit.

Fox only wants the condominium option in place in case the studio expansion plan is struck down, said Handelman.

If the studio "had assurances that won't happen," such as passage of the bill disallowing lawsuits, Handelman said he'd "gladly throw the (condominium) tract map out the window."

"It is our hope that the tract map becomes the most irrelevant thing in the world," he said.

Belosic said his unwillingness to sue is not based on the possibility of broadening development rights, but on his desire to work with the studio to obtain the best possible development.

"We're not interested in out-Foxing them," said Belosic. "This isn't a chess game."

Meanwhile, oral argument is scheduled for Aug. 5 in the Court of Appeals on another lawsuit dealing with a side-issue related to the Fox case -- whether Fox's 12-year-old tract map for condominium development on the property is still valid.

The homeowners, joined in the suit by the City of Beverly Hills, contend that the City of Los Angeles acted illegally last year when it extended the tract map until 1994. The City of Los Angeles won at the Superior Court level last October.

John Klein, president of Friends of Fox and a proponent of studio expansion, said he believes Fox should be able to hold on to the condominium development option if its project is challenged in court.

Last month, Klein sent Cole roughly 100 cards from Friends of Fox members in the Cheviot Hills area who are opposed to legal action against Fox. Cole's group and the Cheviot Hills Homeowners Association jointly represent about 2,000 homeowners.

"Anybody can challenge anything -- one word, one comma -- and tie this thing up for another two or three years," said Klein, who labeled the homeowner groups' previous suits as "frivolous."

Handelman contended that "there's been a history of harassing-type litigation regarding CEQA in this state."

"California is infamous for being a job-killing machine," said Handelman. "There needs to be a recognition on the City Council that this sort of litigation is job-killing."