Survey on Malibu Cityhood Attacked as Biased : Partisanship: Supporters of incorporation say the telephone poll raised “bogus issues” in an effort to sway residents.

Officials of a group that supports Malibu cityhood reacted angrily to a phone survey concerning incorporation that they say is a thinly disguised “propaganda instrument” by opponents of cityhood.

“It’s an obvious attempt to use innuendo and misinformation to sow doubts about cityhood in the community,” said Walt Keller, co-chairman of the Malibu Committee for Incorporation, regarding the survey conducted by a Santa Monica research firm.

Richard Maullin of Fairbank, Bregman & Maullin, the firm that conducted the survey, declined to discuss the survey or to identify who authorized it, saying that his client “prefers confidentiality in the matter.”

Several Malibu residents who participated in the survey said telephone interviewers identified themselves as representing “F, B and M” and said they were calling from Las Vegas. Maullin said the firm used operators in Las Vegas to make the calls.

Keller and his organization co-chair, Carolyn Van Horn, blasted the survey as the work of “anti-cityhood forces” intent on waging a campaign at the ballot box now that a Malibu cityhood election in the near future appears increasingly likely.

Van Horn said the survey contained loaded questions that were “intended to serve as a scare tactic” in relation to potential voters in a Malibu incorporation election.

She labeled as “bogus issues” questions included in the survey regarding increased taxes, and accused the survey of insinuating that a new city could be unduly influenced by special interests.

Among the questions asked by the survey was, “If you found out that your local property-tax bill would increase by $5,000 if Malibu became a city, to pay for local services such as adequate sewer channeling, would you vote yes in favor of creating a new city, or no?”

The survey also asked participants to respond to several common assertions about cityhood, both pro and con, as well as to indicate a favorable or unfavorable response to about 20 community leaders known for their views on cityhood.

A judge last month ordered the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors to stop delaying a long-sought incorporation election, clearing the way for the election to be held in June.

Superior Court Judge Dzintra Janavs gave the supervisors until Tuesday to conclude a hearing on cityhood, which the supervisors had indefinitely postponed in November. The hearing, required by law so proponents and opponents of cityhood have a public forum for their views, represents the final step that must be completed before an election date can be set.

The county is expected to appeal the decision, in which case it may be left to an appellate judge as to whether an election occurs in June or is delayed further, awaiting the outcome of an appeal.