Loving the Spin They’re In

You’ve got to give credit to the leaders of the movement to split off the San Fernando Valley from the rest of Los Angeles: They are masters of spin.

Richard Close, chairman of the main breakup organization, Valley VOTE, calls the city’s new 925-page analysis of Valley secession a “declaration of war.” That’s absurd.

His gripe comes down to this--the report, which will get its first City Council committee hearing today, dares to call for specifics on how the nation’s second-largest city would be divided and what exactly the costs and benefits would be.

The city’s report is the second-to-last step in a process set in motion by a 1998 VOTE petition drive. The spin then was that the group wasn’t really promoting secession, it just wanted to see a study done. The city’s analysis is the latest development in the study process. First the Local Agency Formation Commission, the body charged with deciding whether to put the breakup on the ballot, issued an initial fiscal analysis. Secession advocates and the city were asked to respond.

The commission gave secession its tentative blessing. A new city would not cause financial harm to what was left of Los Angeles as long as the Valley paid $68 million a year in “alimony” to make up for lost tax revenues. In their response, released in May, Valley secessionists concurred with the commission’s findings, though they differed on some details.

The commission called for some city assets to be split; the Valley, which has about a third of Los Angeles’ population, would get a third of the employees working in city departments and would keep city buildings north of Mulholland Drive. Some services are so entwined that a Valley city would have to contract with Los Angeles to run its water, power, sewer, computer, pension and 911 emergency dispatch systems, the analysis suggested. Secessionists agreed but said that some agencies, such as the Department of Water and Power, should be reorganized and operated under a joint-powers agreement.

The earlier reports made splitting up a city the size of Los Angeles seem easy. This new detailed, department-by-department analysis spells out the complexities, from the inefficiency of dividing such specialized units as Swift Water Rescue to the costs of duplicating the Animal Services software that tracks kennel occupancies.

Close claims it would take five years to answer the report’s questions. Secessionists have their hearts set on putting Valley cityhood to a vote in November 2002.

Is the city’s report a delaying tactic, as the secessionists are trying to spin it? Well, it is in the city’s interest to point out reasons it shouldn’t be dismembered, just as it’s in VOTE’s interest to smooth over potential problems and rush secession to the ballot. But surely it’s in no one’s interest to step into a polling booth thinking, in blissful ignorance, that a breakup would be simple and clean.