Picus in a Pickle : Councilwoman’s Handling of West Hills Dispute Could Be Damaging, Observers Say

Los Angeles City Councilwoman Joy Picus hardly could have expected the West Hills issue to dog her all the way to St. Vibiana’s Cathedral during last month’s papal visit.

But as Picus sat in the church, Steve Ogg, a West Hills Property Owners Assn. member who also was waiting for Pope John Paul II to appear, tapped her on the shoulder.

“You should be aware that the Pope is going to make a statement about the West Hills boundary dispute,” Ogg told her.

Picus and West Hills leaders chuckle at the joke, but the longevity of the months-old dispute and the persistence of aggrieved people on both sides may be no laughing matter for the three-term councilwoman.

Picus, regarded as a moderate to liberal Democrat, does not face reelection until 1989. But the protracted controversy that has followed the adoption of a new community name--West Hills--by residents on the western edge of Canoga Park has alienated some voters and may have created a new front on which she could be vulnerable to opponents.

Reputation Undermined?

With final boundaries expected to be established this month, speculation has surfaced about whether a dispute over four square miles in the West San Fernando Valley could snowball into a lasting problem for Picus, a 56-year-old career politician with a reputation for community responsiveness.

Conservative political consultants outside the dispute and leaders of various factions within it assert that Picus switched positions during the controversy and hoped the ruckus would fade away. When the dispute festered, they said, Picus appeared reluctant to confront the issue.

Picus and her many defenders, though, see the councilwoman’s handling of the affair as a demonstration of her strengths as a responsive politician in a predicament where she could not possibly please everyone.

Perhaps the most dramatic change of position was Picus’ reopening of the question of who could belong to West Hills, regarded by some homeowners as having a better image than Canoga Park. Picus originally had established the eastern boundary of West Hills in January, but after more and more residents wanted in, she agreed in August to decide the final boundary according to results of a survey of more than 8,500 Canoga Park households.

Reopened Matter

Picus changed her mind because so many people found the original West Hills line “an unacceptable decision,” she said in an interview last week.

“I think it should be interpreted as responsiveness,” the councilwoman said. “You make a decision; if it doesn’t stick, you know it. That’s what happened.”

The controversy began after residents in the area east of West Hills--later called the “Open Zone”--claimed that the councilwoman had promised to include them in the community. Picus said her remarks had been misunderstood, but those neighborhood leaders cried betrayal and hounded Picus until she reopened the matter, infuriating West Hills residents who asserted that Picus should have stuck with her first decision.

Soon a third faction, composed of residents east of the “Open Zone,” was clamoring to be included. To try to put the matter to rest, Picus agreed to the survey, which is to be completed this month, nearly 10 months after the West Hills idea was started.

“Over and above the West Hills thing, it shows a large amount of indecisiveness” on Picus’ part, said Paul Clarke, a Republican political adviser in Northridge and husband of former U.S. Rep. Bobbi Fiedler. “It’s kind of axiomatic that voters don’t care too much for people in public office who are wishy-washy.”

‘Lack of Leadership’

“Most anyone I’ve talked to has been critical of what they view as a lack of leadership on her part,” said Arnold Steinberg, a Sherman Oaks consultant and pollster who was hired by one of Picus’ opponents in 1985.

“The problem she would have would be whether that bad press would extend to the rest of the district. In the past that has been pretty hard to do . . . what we’re really talking about is, can this be the beginning of some downward momentum?”

In 1985, Picus handily defeated five challengers to her council seat. She garnered about 56% of the vote, with her closest runner-up, Republican activist Jeanne Nemo, receiving 21%.

When no candidate receives more than half the vote in a City Council election, which is nonpartisan, the top two vote-getters engage in a runoff. There are plenty of ifs, but Clarke suggested that if the West Hills controversy generates a larger number of challengers than Picus faced in 1985, the likelihood of a runoff would be increased.

Traditionally, he added, runoffs have meant trouble for incumbents, the most recent case being former Council President Pat Russell’s defeat this year by Ruth Galanter, a relatively unknown community activist from Venice.

The West Hills issue could also cause Picus long-term damage if a challenger uses it to launch a credible campaign at an earlier stage than usual, Steinberg said.

Adds Steve Afriat, a Studio City political adviser and former Democratic state Assembly candidate who is sympathetic to Picus: “If this issue doesn’t go away, the 56% figure could drop. I think in her campaign, she’s got to address the issue.”

In addition, Picus might be damaged by the perception that the West Hills question had her running scared, said an aide to one Valley legislator. Publicity resulting from a Canoga Park Neighborhood Watch meeting Picus avoided in August was “like pouring gasoline” on the controversy, said the aide, who spoke on condition that his name not be published so as to maintain friendly relations with Picus’ office.

sh Avoided Confrontation

After the meeting in Canoga Park, Picus explained that she did not appear because she learned that residents involved in the West Hills controversy planned to angrily confront her. But residents at the meeting pleaded that they only wanted to talk of city services, although most of them lived in the disputed area.

“It would be difficult for the truth to be known,” Picus said.

Nonetheless, the legislator’s aide said, residents “may not feel strongly about an issue, but if they feel an elected representative is ducking them, they are offended by that.”

But for all the damage that might have been done to Picus’ image in the past year, the councilwoman, who said she expects to seek a fourth term, appears to have much in her favor.

“If there was an election this month or so, she probably would have been badly hurt,” said Greig Smith, chief deputy to Councilman Hal Bernson. “I’m presuming she will do something to resolve the hurt feelings there. She has two years.”

No Significant Damage

She also has a district with more than 105,000 registered voters, according to the City Clerk’s office. No official estimate is available for the number of voters in the area involved in the West Hills controversy, but Picus aides estimate the number of households there at more than 14,000.

“It is an issue that is among a very small group of people and it will not spread to unaffected constituencies,” Afriat said. “If you have to measure, she lost some friends, but I don’t think it has mortally hurt her or significantly hurt her.”

But a Picus challenger could argue that West Hills has distracted her attention from other issues, such as trash collection, transportation and development, said Rob Glushon, a member of the city’s Environmental Quality Review Board and a Picus supporter.

The West Hills issue has consumed “inordinate amounts of time” for her and her staff, Picus concedes. Yet she will survive, she added, by continuing to carefully tend to constituents who are more sympathetic than judgmental about her West Hills predicament.

Said William Vietinghoff, past president of the Canoga Park Chamber of Commerce: “They’re sympathetic, but at the same time they’re saying she should have been tougher.”

Newsletters Effective

As far as her responsiveness is concerned, Vietinghoff said, “Every time we needed help, we got cooperation from her office.”

Steinberg, the Sherman Oaks consultant, polled some of Picus’ constituents for one of her opponents in 1985 and said he found the councilwoman to be exceptionally strong, and “part of her strength was due to her very skillful use of the benefits and perquisites of incumbency, mostly newsletters.”

One staple of Picus’ career for the past 10 years has been an annual “information fair,” at which numerous local and state agencies set up display booths and answer shoppers’ questions. This year’s fair was held Sept. 26 at Topanga Plaza in Canoga Park. Picus said she faced only one person angry about West Hills and many more seeking help or just saying hello during the two hours she was at the shopping mall.

Moreover, leaders of the three factions involved in the West Hills controversy have yet to call for Picus’ head. Some say they share the councilwoman’s wish that this month’s survey results will end the boundary dispute once and for all.

“We’re not at the stage where she has said, ‘Well, this is it,’ ” said Joel Schiffman, president of the West Hills Property Owners Assn. “Until she does, we won’t be able to evaluate whether or not it has had a devastating effect on her political stock.”

RISING WEST HILLS DEBATE

OCTOBER, 1986:

Representatives of more than 4,000 homes in the far western portion of Canoga Park launch a campaign to change the name of their neighborhood to “West Hills.” They say they want their residential area to become distinct from increasingly industrial and commercial Canoga Park.

JANUARY, 1987:

Los Angeles City Councilwoman Joy Picus approves changing the neighborhood’s designation to West Hills after receiving petitions supporting the change from 77% of residents there. “I’ll probably uncork a bottle of champagne,” says Joel Schiffman, a leader of the movement.

FEBRUARY, 1987:

As residents to the east seek to join the secession from Canoga Park, Picus is quoted in news reports as saying the West Hills boundaries were extended east to Fallbrook Avenue. Later, Picus says she was misunderstood, but residents of the original West Hills are angered, and a movement to include even more neighborhood blocks gains momentum.

AUGUST, 1987:

After the dispute simmers through the spring and summer, Picus agrees to abide by the results of a survey to about 8,500 Canoga Park households on the final West Hills boundaries.

OCTOBER, 1987:

Picus is expected to announce the final boundaries after evaluating the survey results.