Valley Survey Indicates Support for Secession

Fueled by strong dissatisfaction with city services and a desire for more local control, a majority of San Fernando Valley voters support breaking away from Los Angeles to form an independent city, according to a survey released Monday.

The survey of 1,205 likely voters in the Valley found that 58% would vote to create an independent city if the matter were on the ballot today.

Voters who support secession were relatively evenly divided on the reasons, with 17% saying local control would increase, 14% saying local tax dollars would be kept in the Valley and 11% saying more efficient government would be created, according to the survey.

The significance of the survey was unclear because state law requires a majority vote citywide before the Valley may legally secede. The survey did not question voters outside of the Valley.

“It is clear to me that voters today are not just going to put up with rearranging the deck chairs,” said Studio City lawyer David Fleming, a Valley political power broker and a co-sponsor of the poll. “They want to design a whole new ship.”

As head of the city Fire Commission, Fleming is the most prominent Valley appointee of Mayor Richard Riordan, who has campaigned hard against secession.

Avowed secessionists quickly brandished the results as proof that support for their cause runs deep.

“This is what I’ve been hearing all along,” said former Assemblywoman Paula Boland, who unsuccessfully pushed two years ago for legislation to make Valley secession easier. “It did not shock me to hear this.”

The survey ranged beyond secession questions, finding strong support for some leaders, such as Riordan, and overwhelming dissatisfaction with others, such as the Los Angeles Unified School District board.

But the centerpiece of the poll was Valley secession, which gained momentum last year when the Legislature passed a bill making it easier for the Valley to break away. But the same current of Valley discontent has also prompted ongoing efforts to overhaul the city’s 72-year-old charter.

The poll--the first comprehensive survey of Valley voters since last year’s secession bill--showed that disaffection among Valley voters has increased since a Times poll in 1996 showed that only 46% favored secession.

The Times poll found that more than half--57%--of Valley voters believed that they pay more in taxes than they get back in city services. The survey released Monday found that 63% of Valley voters now feel that they are not getting their fair share of city services.

The latest survey, a random phone poll of 1,205 registered voters in the city portion of the San Fernando Valley, was conducted Feb. 21 to March 1 by pollster Arnold Steinberg. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

The poll was commissioned by Fleming and Herbert Boeckmann, owner of Galpin Ford and a police commissioner. The two men have formed a foundation to study matters of Valley equity.

Riordan and other opponents of secession conceded that the survey indicated a strong feeling of discontent among voters, but they continued to call for unity.

“The mayor wants to keep the city together,” said Riordan spokesman Deane Leavenworth. “Once the voters learn more about what is involved in forming a [separate] city, they will probably do the right thing and vote to stay with the city.”

Council President John Ferraro said the survey would be more significant if it were done after a study on the feasibility of a Valley city.

“Of course, it’s significant when you have those kinds of numbers, but at the same time, they don’t know what is going to happen,” he said. “How do you divide up the Police Department? How do you divide up the water supply?”

Other council members said the survey sent a clear message: Voters are demanding change in the way their city operates.

“I interpret these results as a strong message . . . that people want to be governed differently,” said Councilwoman Laura Chick, who represents parts of the southwest Valley. “My hope still is that we can deliver more efficient and effective government and still stay one city.”

Leaders of the group that pushed the secession bill through the Legislature last year said they were pleasantly surprised with the results of the survey.

“These results are fantastic,” said Richard Close, chairman of Valley VOTE, the group that plans to launch a petition drive calling for a study on Valley cityhood.

“It’s a call to action for our group.”

*

The survey found that 76% of the voters would favor a study to determine whether it is practical for the Valley to become a city. When asked if they would support putting Valley cityhood on the ballot, the number jumped to 81% in favor, according to the survey.

“The results will make the work of Valley VOTE significantly easier,” said Jeff Brain, president of the group.

Supporters of the effort to overhaul the city’s charter continued to promote charter reform as the most sensible alternative to secession. But they said the survey shows that Valley discontent with the city is more widespread than they thought.

Fleming, an early supporter of the charter reform movement, called the results “remarkable.” He said that he still supports charter reform but that reform must be substantial or it will be rejected by voters.

The survey briefly addressed charter reform by asking if voters would support rewriting the charter to give Valley voters more autonomy. A majority--56%--said they would support charter reform if it would give the Valley control over taxes, police, fire, parks, libraries and planning matters, according to the survey.

“This reflects the great dissatisfaction with the current governing arrangement,” said Erwin Chemerinsky, chairman of the elected charter reform commission. “But it also shows that people are flexible with the solutions.”

Chemerinsky also noted that the survey did not explore reform proposals, such as the creation of neighborhood councils, with limited authority over local planning and zoning issues.

“It’s impossible to tell from the question what types of decentralization would be sufficient,” he said.

Steinberg, a respected pollster and political strategist for 20 years, said the $50,000 survey was not citywide because it was designed only to gauge Valley sentiment.

“It would be premature to survey the city as a whole,” he said.

As a way to gauge the source of voter discontent, the survey asked voters to rate their local officials. Ironically, the city’s most vocal opponent of secession, Mayor Riordan, was given the highest approval rating--nearly 79%.

However, the City Council as a whole received a lukewarm rating. Only 47% of the voters said the council was doing a good or very good job.

The worst rating of all was given to the Los Angeles Unified School District Board of Education, with 61% of respondents saying the board was doing a poor or very poor job.

Times staff writer Jill Leovy contributed to this story.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Views on Secession

A majority of San Fernando Valley voters support breaking away from Los Angeles and creating an independent city, according to a survey released Monday. Other responses:

“Have you heard or read anything about the San Fernando Valley becoming a city, separate and independent from the city of Los Angeles?”:

Yes: 94%

No: 6%

*

“A private, nonprofit group proposes a study, without using any taxpayer funds to determine whether it is practical for the San Fernando Valley to become a city, separate and independent from the city of Los Angeles. Would you favor or oppose this study?”:

Favor: 76%

Oppose: 16%

Unsure: 8%

*

“If this study shows it is practical for the San Fernando Valley to become a city, separate and independent from the city of Los Angeles, would you favor or oppose putting the issue of Valley cityhood on the ballot for the voters to decide?”:

Favor: 81%

Oppose: 12%

Unsure: 7%

*

Top five reasons

For Secession:

* Control, independence, autonomy

* Valley dollars stay in the Valley

* More efficient

* L.A. is too big

* Valley not getting fair share

*

Against Secession:

* Cost, taxes

* Not enough information

* Too difficult/complex

* No need, why change?

* Effect on poor/diversity

Source: Arnold Steinberg and Associates