Only 46% of Valley Residents Back Secession

Although they feel overtaxed and underserved, fewer than half of the San Fernando Valley’s residents support the idea of seceding from Los Angeles--particularly if such a split would increase their tax bills, according to a new Los Angeles Times poll.

Only 46% of the Valley’s registered voters would cast ballots in favor of secession if an election were held today. And of those, fewer than half say they would be willing to raise their taxes to support secession.

That’s barely more support for secession than citywide; 43% of Los Angeles residents oppose splitting off the Valley, saying it would damage a sense of community and drain tax revenues; just 37% support breaking the city apart, saying it would streamline government and give residents more local control.

“I think the main reason people want to sever their ties to Los Angeles is that they want to get away from problems they see, like crime and violence,” said Northridge resident Jason Collier, a 25-year-old law student at Southwestern University. “But we have the same problems here in the Valley, so we might as well work through them with the help of the city and all its resources.”

Support for splitting up the city is greatest in the Valley and on the Westside, as well as among whites and the more affluent. Opposition is strongest in the southern part of the city and among blacks and Latinos.

Even so, more than half of all city residents--51%--support state legislation that would among other things allow the Valley to vote unilaterally on whether to leave Los Angeles. Support for the bill, which also would eliminate the City Council’s veto power over secession proposals, is strongest in the Valley, where more than two-thirds--68%--say they should be allowed to decide for themselves whether they want to be part of the city.

Conducted from Saturday to Tuesday with 942 respondents--392 of them in the Valley--the poll also points up dramatic differences between how the Valley views itself and how it is viewed in other parts of the city. Valley residents tend to see their area as the most underserved in the city, but residents elsewhere see South-Central as the most underserved area. The poll has a margin of sampling error of 3.5 percentage points.

The poll supports the notion that Valley residents feel put upon financially to pay for services in other parts of the city but tends to undercut claims of secession advocates that there is a groundswell of support for breaking up Los Angeles.

*

In fact, 25% of Valley residents said they had heard nothing about the secession movement.

Some respondents in follow-up interviews said that although Los Angeles could probably deal financially and structurally with some communities breaking away, it would be difficult to avoid the appearance that the affluent and the educated were leaving the city to decay.

“I think the symbolism of a breakup is pretty bad,” said Ajay Nirula, a 29-year-old medical student from Westwood. “The message it would send is that the way we deal with problems is to split. This is a city, not a company where you buy your stock and can run away when you make your profit.”

Nirula also opposes the bill by Assemblywoman Paula Boland (R-Granada Hills) that would make it easier for parts of the city to secede, while Collier supports it, saying he favors the Valley’s right to decide for itself. The bill passed the Assembly last month and is pending in the state Senate.

Boland aide Scott Wilk said results of the poll do not contradict the rationale behind the bill. “The point is that people have the right to self-determination,” he said. “That’s one of the founding principles of this country.”

Indeed, the idea of self-determination has widespread support, and advocacy groups are sprouting up in the Valley and other parts of the city. But that support is often wider than it is deep. Particularly in the Valley, residents are less willing to support secession if it means more out their pockets, according to poll results.

But some supporters feel that a Valley secession could actually lower taxes.

“I think in theory it should reduce our taxes,” said Jill Logterman, a 32-year-old mother of two from Tujunga, who backs secession in part because it would give residents more control over how their taxes are spent. “What we’re spending now is supporting the whole area.”

That sense of shouldering tax burdens for the entire city is most prevalent among Valley residents. More than half--57%--say they pay more in taxes than they get back in city services, and 47% of Valley residents said they feel shortchanged.

“Oftentimes, what you are measuring is people’s perceptions and emotions as much as you are measuring hard facts,” said Steve Frates, a senior researcher at the Rose Institute at Claremont McKenna College.

Indeed, research by The Times shows that the Valley receives about the same levels of service in police and fire protection as other parts of the city. For example, the Valley had 28% of the city’s emergency calls on firefighting services in 1995. Yet it receives 31% of the firefighters and emergency medical personnel, according to Fire Department records.

*

The Los Angeles Police Department assigned 26% of its sworn officers--or 1,408 men and women--to the Valley in 1994, the last year for which figures are available. The Valley has a slightly lower crime rate than the rest of the city.

Only 4% of Valley residents who support secession cite lower taxes as a reason for splitting up the city. But they do cite the idea of smaller, more responsive government as a main reason and hold out the hope that a split city would give them a better return on tax money invested in law enforcement and other municipal services.

Citywide, only 30% think the Valley pays for more than it receives. Yet 41% echo the Valley’s lament that their particular part of the city is shortchanged. But when asked which part of the city receives less than its fair share from the city government, residents in all areas except the Valley most frequently cited South-Central Los Angeles.

In the Valley, though, more than a quarter--26%--of residents said the Valley was treated less fairly by the city; South-Central was next with 17%. Among the biggest gripes: police service and street maintenance.

“I think people in the Valley get the short end of the stick,” said retired Air Force Col. Roland Scott of Sherman Oaks, who nonetheless opposes secession because he does not know enough about the issue to support it.

“The streets out here are in very bad shape,” he said, adding that he has been trying for weeks to have city engineers study the placement of road signs on his street. “It would be a very simple job for two men to spend an hour and reposition them, but all I’ve had is the usual thank-you form letter.”

Despite those frustrations, Scott, like many others, said he is wary of what a fractured city would bring. “Voting on emotion isn’t very intelligent,” he said. But supporters such as Logterman, the Tujunga resident, said it would be hard for conditions to get much worse.

Like 42% of Valley residents who favor secession, Logterman said she thought a split city would give all residents more say in the day-to-day affairs of local government. “In such a big city, you get to be anonymous real quick,” she said.

While 54% of Valley residents think they should have the exclusive right to vote on whether they should leave Los Angeles, 52% of the city as a whole think they should also be allowed to cast ballots.

Those feelings are strongest in the central and southern parts of the city, where residents who oppose the split said they do so because they fear damage to the sense of community in Los Angeles and a loss of overall tax revenue to the city.

And despite the perception that the Valley spurns association with Los Angeles, 22% of those Valley residents opposed to secession said they are opposed because they just like being a part of Los Angeles. Law student Collier said: “Even though I live in the Valley, I like to say I’m a resident of Los Angeles.”

Contributing to this story were acting Times Poll Director Susan Pinkus and research analyst Monika McDermott.

How the Poll Was Conducted

The Times Poll contacted 942 adults citywide, including 392 San Fernando Valley residents, by telephone June 1 through June 4. Telephone numbers were chosen from a list of all exchanges in the city of Los Angeles. Interviewing was conducted in both English and Spanish. Random-digit dialing techniques were used so that listed and unlisted numbers could be contacted. The sample was weighted slightly to conform with census figures for sex, race, age, education and region. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 3.5 percentage points for the citywide sample and 5 percentage points for the San Fernando Valley sample; for certain subgroups the error margin may be somewhat higher. Poll results can also be affected by other factors such as question wording and the order in which questions are presented.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Verdict on the Valley

San Fernando Valley residents are not overly enthusiastic about the Valley seceding from the city and would not be willing to see their taxes increase for the sake of the Valley becoming its own city.

- If the election were held today, would you vote for or against the Valley’s secession? (Responses of registered voters)

ALL L.A.

For: 38%

Against: 46%

Undecided: 16%

*

VALLEY

For: 46%

Against: 35%

Undecided: 19%

- Would you be willing to see your taxes and fees increased if that were the only way the Valley could secede? (Responses of Valley residents)

*--*

Yes No Don’t Know All Residents 22% 68% 10% Among Those for Seceding* 43% 45% 12% Among Those Against* 5% 93% 2%

*--*

* Registered voters only

Source: Los Angeles Times Poll

-When it comes to getting attention and services from city government, residents of the Valley and South L.A. feel that they are being shortchanged the most.

Valley: 47% feel shortchanged

Central: 31% feel shortchanged

Westside: 21% feel shortchanged

South: 58% feel shortchanged