Staying in L.A. : The Truth Is, Most Angelenos Would Rather Gripe Than Switch

AS A RECENT Times poll showed, almost half of all Angelenos are so disenchanted with Los Angeles that they have thought of moving out.

On the other hand, few do. Some have decamped to Northern California, Oregon and other nearby states, but their numbers hardly constitute a land rush.

One reason we are reluctant to locate elsewhere, I suspect, is that we are afraid that our reputation as laid-back, amoral, greedy and rude will have preceded us, and we may find the natives hostile.

Our minorities may contribute to our overcrowding, but they are also victims of it. They might prosper in smaller communities elsewhere, but they may fear being ostracized not only because they are Angelenos, but also because they are minorities.

Seattle Times columnist Tom Kelly wrote recently about “California jerks” who sell their inflated equities and move to the Northwest, where they drive up housing prices and otherwise disturb the equanimity of life.

Noting that he came to Seattle from Santa Monica only 14 years ago, Kelly wonders whether there is a “statute of limitations” on California jerks, or whether, once a jerk, always a jerk.

He suggests that California jerks can ease their entry by making a few intermediate stops. If you spend a year in Arkansas, for example, and a couple in Iowa, you can really be “from” Iowa. On the other hand, newcomers from the nearby states of Idaho, Montana and Oregon are simply “neighbors, and get a free ride.”

I can understand why Kelly resents Californians coming into Washington and ruining the ecology of that wonderland (he is especially worried about the San Juan Islands). But, of course, this is a free country, not Russia; Americans can move anywhere they like.

I don’t like to use that old taunt, “If you don’t like it here, why don’t you go back where you came from?” The Statue of Liberty sheds her grace on all of us. “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses

Several years ago, I visited Good Thunder, Minn., at the invitation of the local publisher. The town was dying. Its young people had gravitated to the big city. It was wide-open for exploitation, with rows of empty storefronts and plenty of cheap houses. Why don’t some of us migrate to Good Thunder and bring its economy back?

There is plenty of space out there. What’s the matter with Medicine Bow., Wyo., near the Freezeout Mountains? Why not try Hardin, Mont., near the Custer battlefield? There must be opportunities in Mountain Home, Ida., near the Mountain Home Air Force Base. What about Syracuse, Utah, on the Great Salt Lake?

Bill Seavey makes a living out of helping city people relocate in small towns. He is president of EMIGRANTS (Endangered Metropolitan Inhabitants/Growth opponents Resettling in Arcadian Neighborhoods, Towns and Suburbs--perhaps the longest almost-acronym in existence), P.O. Box 1122, Sierra Madre, Calif. 91024. For $45 a year, members receive their Greener Pastures Gazette Newsletter and other publications.

In response to a previous column of mine on moving out, Seavey said: “I, too, agree that there are wide-open spaces in the West, and I’m obviously not alone. But convincing people to consider relocation is a tough nut. I maintain that there is no official encouragement, and that’s part of the problem. People need support.”

Maybe people longing to breathe free should get some official support. It might be helpful if the Greater Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce opened a Back to the Sticks desk to advise those who want to go elsewhere. They’d probably get plenty of cooperation from places such as Buffalo Gap, Tex. (There is also a Buffalo Gap in South Dakota, if you’re interested.)

Curse it as they will, most people are not likely to leave Los Angeles. Big cities, like big celestial bodies, have more gravity than small ones. Besides, with all its faults, Los Angeles is probably the freest city in the world.

As for me, I’m staying right here until I’m shot, hit by a car or asphyxiated.