QUALITY OF LIFE IN THE VALLEY : Public Officials Agree There Were Better Days

Public officials who represent the Valley generally acknowledge that the quality of life in the Valley is worse now than when they first moved to Los Angeles, according to a Los Angeles Times Poll.

Most of the 14 officials who responded also agreed with the public that they are responsible for conditions affecting the quality of life in the Valley, rather than passing the buck to their state or federal counterparts.

But when asked to assess the performance of officials on those issues, they differed with a majority of Valley residents. Asked whether public officials were “doing all they can” about a variety of problems--ranging from air pollution to growth--most officials said they were. More than half the Valley residents polled said officials could be doing more.

Councilman Hal Bernson said council members cannot be held accountable for what he sees as the biggest problem next to drugs: traffic. He blamed traffic problems primarily on a lack of regional planning to balance jobs and housing.

“There are some things that we just don’t have any control over,” Bernson said. “Most of the problems that affect the quality of life in the Valley are caused by traffic and a lot of that is being generated by communities outside of Los Angeles. The bedroom communities are growing bigger and bigger.”

Councilman Zev Yaroslavsky was more willing to shoulder some of the burden.

“By and large there are more things we could be doing,” he said. “I don’t think we are the only reason things are failing, but I think we could do more.”

The officials surveyed included members of the City Council, Los Angeles Unified School District Board, County Board of Supervisors, mayors of the cities of San Fernando and Burbank, and Mayor Tom Bradley’s liaison to the Valley. Only Supervisor Mike Antonovich refused to respond. The survey was identical to the Times Poll conducted throughout the Valley Aug. 11 and 12.

Officials were largely in step with the public on identifying many of the problems. All said crime and traffic had harmed their quality of life. They added growth to that list, often ranking it at the top.

But when it came to solutions, they seemed slightly out of step.

In the area of commercial and residential growth, only four of the 14 called for construction limits favored by the public.

They also differed on education, where they were more likely to support building schools elsewhere so students would not have to be bused to vacant classrooms in the Valley. The public favored splitting up the Los Angeles Unified School District so the Valley would have more local control. Only two officials favored decentralizing the district.

They were less likely than the public to support a cross-Valley rail system--with less than a third choosing that option. Instead of calling for more police officers to combat crime, they split evenly between that solution and providing more support for drug-intervention programs. None backed establishment of a separate gang department, which 24% of the public thought was a good idea.

A few of those surveyed declined to have their names associated with their answers. Councilman Marvin Braude said the poll was “unsophisticated and unreliable.” Councilman Ernani Bernardi said the questions and optional responses were too simplistic.

Those who did agree to answer did so selectively, refusing to respond in some areas and volunteering lengthy alternatives in others.

Two of those asked to respond to the poll--Councilwoman Joy Picus and Burbank Mayor Tom Flavin--said their quality of life had actually improved over the years.

“It depends on who you are and where you are,” Picus said. “Life has improved for me--my kids have grown up, we have two incomes--but that doesn’t mean I’m not concerned. Crime is worse, there’s no question about that and that’s just awful. Traffic is worse, too, and that makes life tense.”

Flavin said he based his optimism largely on improvements in Burbank, including the construction of a long-awaited downtown shopping center.

“It’s kind of human nature to reflect back on to the good old days,” Flavin said, speculating on why many believe their lives are worse now. “I try to look at it objectively, beyond just the emotional level . . . I wouldn’t be living here if I didn’t see a continually improving curve.”

In general, growth was one of the few areas where officials seemed to agree with the public, which believed officials could be doing a better job. Only three--council Vice President John Ferraro, Flavin and county Supervisor Ed Edelman--said officials are doing all they can to address growth issues.

On a question concerning commercial development, five of the nine who responded said it had improved their lives. The valleywide poll showed more mixed feelings about the effects of commercial development, with East Valley residents the most likely to feel it had helped them.

Most public officials were not in favor of restricting growth. Instead, officials tended to suggest an approach not included in the poll: balanced growth. Housing should be developed close to commercial areas and discouraged elsewhere, said Councilman Michael Woo, who represents parts of Sherman Oaks and Studio City.

San Fernando Mayor Pro Tem James B. Hansen said commercial development has helped the city of San Fernando, which depends on sales tax dollars to support city services such as police and park maintenance.

“Our city was having financial problems five, six years ago,” Hansen said. “We developed one major shopping center and several small ones. It’s really improved this city’s ability to provide services to the people.”

Bernson said the rest of the Valley has benefited from the convenience of commercial development, too. “There was a time when everybody had to go downtown to shop, or at least to Van Nuys,” he said.

In terms of solutions to the traffic problem, officials were split among building a cross-Valley rail system (the public’s favorite), encouraging companies to stagger work hours and making bus schedules more convenient. Expanding freeways ranked low for the officials, as it did for the public.

Officials also were more likely than the public to suggest imposing programs to force commuters to use mass transit to address air pollution problems instead of penalizing business polluters.

Included in the survey were all eight of the Los Angeles City Council members who represent portions of the Valley: Bernson, Yaroslavsky, Woo, Picus, Braude, Bernardi, Ferraro and Joel Wachs. Also surveyed were Richard Alarcon, Mayor Tom Bradley’s liaison to the Valley; both of the Valley’s school board representatives--Korenstein and Roberta Weintraub; Flavin of Burbank; Hansen of San Fernando; and Edelman, who represents a large swath of the East Valley between the San Diego and Golden State freeways.

REPORT CARD ON PUBLIC OFFICIALS Do you approve of the way local elected officials are handling the quality of life issues for people in the San Fernando Valley? Approve: 28% Disapprove: 56% Don’t know: 16% Do you think elected officials who represent the Valley are doing all they can to . . .

Don’t Yes No know --provide parks and recreational areas? 63% 25% 12% --attract cultural events and entertainment? 41 33 26 --deal with crime? 33 56 11 --deal with growth? 32 51 17 --deal with the traffic problem? 31 57 12 --deal with air pollution? 25 61 14 --deal with the quality of public school education? 22 60 18