Secession Fever Is Spreading

The same centrifugal forces and feelings of alienation driving efforts to break apart the Los Angeles Unified School District and the city of Los Angeles have spilled over into Los Angeles County. Assemblyman George Runner Jr. (R-Lancaster) introduced a state bill this month that could allow communities from Gorman to Long Beach to opt out of Los Angeles County and form their own. Runner’s bill proposes a four-year, $1-million study to examine how well the county’s bureaucracy and service departments serve various communities. If the study proved that some areas could better serve themselves or spend their tax dollars more efficiently, Los Angeles County might be split into two or more new jurisdictions.

Taking a hard look at the effectiveness of county services and what they cost is a good idea. But Runner’s proposal to create a new local government agency to study another local government agency sounds a little like something out of a Dr. Seuss story. Service evaluation ought to be ongoing anyway--as it already is in many small cities where the county provides sheriff and fire protection on a contract basis.

Perhaps that sort of relationship could be extended so communities have more input into decisions by county departments such as regional planning or public works--two agencies that often get low marks from outlying neighborhoods. The bottom line is that any evaluation of county services will turn up deficiencies here and there. The county’s resources are stretched to the limit and some communities contribute more than they get back.

As is the case with the city and the school district, though, the easy option may not be the best. Leaving Los Angeles County would certainly benefit some wealthier communities, but only at the expense of some poorer neighborhoods--where county services can literally be a matter of life or death.

To his credit, Runner has taken pains to distance his bill from others in the Legislature clearing the way for a San Fernando Valley secession, saying he wants only to hold the county accountable. Let’s hope he’s serious.

We agree that county services and spending deserve scrutiny, but we’re not convinced that another layer of costly bureaucracy is the best way to do it. Tougher internal auditing of county departments plus aggressive oversight by the Board of Supervisors could work better. But the ultimate responsibility lies with the ordinary residents the county serves. Until they take a greater role in helping to guide the largest local government in the country, it will lumber along as it has--doing its job and getting by, but pleasing almost no one.

As is the case with the city and the school district, the easy option may not be the best.