Boland, Hayden--Legislative Sweethearts?

The front page headline came as something of a surprise: “Boland, Hayden Plan New School Breakup Effort.”

Now here’s a fun couple. Assemblywoman Paula L. Boland, the Republican ex-realtor from Granada Hills, and state Sen. Tom Hayden, the ex-campus radical from the People’s Republic of Santa Monica, tied the political knot Wednesday at a news conference outside Northridge Middle School. You could almost hear the Carpenters: “We’ve only just begun. . . “

Tom and Jane made perfect sense, although not a perfect marriage. But Tom and Paula? These are the new legislative sweethearts of Sacramento? Somehow it’s hard to picture them with one milkshake, two straws.

“People who are surprised don’t know Tom,” says Duane Peterson, Hayden’s chief of staff. “Tom has spent 40 years challenging institutions that have grown in-grown and have distanced themselves from people they were set up to serve.”

Indeed, although casual observers may not know it, Hayden has long favored the restructuring of the humongous Los Angeles Unified School District. The difference now is that with former Senate majority leader David Roberti gone by virtue of term limits, Hayden has assumed Roberti’s old role as the crusade’s point man in Sacramento’s upper house.

Whoda thunk that an alumnus of the Chicago 7 might lead conservative San Fernando Valley to the promised land? The timing is auspicious. With 28 new Assembly members and Assemblyman Willie Brown’s future as Speaker in doubt, the district breakup movement, dormant for more than a year, has erupted anew. For people who want a revolution--not just the reforms of LEARN and charter schools--things are definitely looking up.

The timing is good in another way. When I called schools activist Jill Reiss a few days ago, workers were finishing up earthquake repairs at her house. Reiss, a founder of VALUE (Valley Advocates for Local Unified Education), suggests that people who’ve been preoccupied with personal hardships since Jan. 17 are ready to regroup.

For many activists, Roberti’s departure last summer was a disappointment, because as president pro tem of the Senate, he lent influence and prestige to the cause. Reiss wonders whether Hayden, the fiery liberal, can build consensus the way Roberti could.

Actually, the guess here is that Hayden might prove more effective than Roberti--for several reasons.

There was, after all, ample reason to suspect the sincerity of Roberti’s convictions. Roberti didn’t support the dismantling of the district until redistricting moved him from Hollywood to the Valley, a hotbed of anti-LAUSD sentiment. Did Roberti see the light--or was he just a prudent pol saving his bacon? Hayden, by contrast, can be maddeningly true to his convictions.

And because his convictions are perceived as very liberal, Hayden’s new stature in the movement should help broaden its grass-root base, convincing more people south of Mulholland Drive that Los Angeles would be better served by several smaller districts. Just as Jack Kemp and William Bennett’s opposition to Proposition 187 helped conservatives oppose that measure, Hayden’s arguments will make it easier for liberals to challenge the LAUSD. (Maybe Hayden will have more luck than Kemp and Bennett.)

Hayden’s presence also makes it harder to tar the cause as racist or “segregationist”--as Los Angeles NAACP President Joseph Duff did in a hearing on breakup proposals on March 12, 1993.

A news article about that hearing bore this headline: “Racial Tensions Disrupt Hearing on Breakup of L.A. District.” The combatants were Duff and Boland, and their exchange is an example of just how quickly the rhetoric can get ugly.

Duff: “This is the same as Yugoslavia. It’s Balkanization, the breaking up of territories into ethnically pure states. It’s unabashed segregationism.”

Boland: “You’ve called me a segregationist and you’re absolutely incorrect. It is you, sir, who are the segregationist.”

You can practically imagine the comments afterward: Well, he started it! Yes, but so what? Boland would have better served her cause by keeping her cool and presenting the statistical evidence to deflate or deflect Duff’s charges.

Guess who turned down the volume at this hearing? It was Hayden, a man considered more fiery than either Boland or Duff. He offered the voice of moderation, suggesting that the debate shouldn’t be cast as a war of Us vs. Them. He warned Boland that her emphasis on Valley interests would fuel charges of suburban favoritism.

“It doesn’t advance the dialogue in this city,” Hayden said.

Now Boland has a new chance to advance the dialogue, this time with Hayden’s help. Given the history of race relations in Los Angeles, they will need to convince people from all over the city that children would be best served by smaller, more responsive districts.

Will it last? Who knows. Call me a sentimental fool, but I wish Tom and Paula the best of luck in their new life together.