Taking on Secession and a Valley of Fury

Funny, but I had this feeling Francine was furious with me.

I didn’t mean to make her mad. It surprised and bothered me when a friend suggested that my Feb. 1 column, which described the Valley’s latest secession movement, if that’s the word, as “phony baloney” and “political posturing,” made Francine look, well, foolish.

I still don’t know about that. Francine Oschin, an aide to Councilman Hal Bernson, is running for state Assembly and she’s got me writing about her again. Foolish like a fox maybe.

We met last fall and shared a few laughs as judges at the L.A. Cabaret’s “Funniest Person in the Valley” contest, where I learned that she’s a connoisseur of political acronyms. By now we all know what NIMBY stands for, right? Francine’s collection includes such gems as NIMEY (Not In My Election Year), BANANA (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything) and NOPE (Not On Planet Earth).

When Francine endorsed a bill from Assemblywoman Paula Boland (R-Granada Hills) to ease the way for Valley secession from the city of Los Angeles (if ever a movement were to be revived), I called her. I was planning to write that, for reasons I’ll get to later, the prospects of Valley secession, unlike the movement to dismantle the Los Angeles Unified School District, qualifies as a NOPE.

Anyway, sometimes a story takes on a life of its own. Francine’s alphabet soup stayed in its can. I think that’s an unstated reason for her anger. The stated reasons may be found in a Letter to the Editor today (Page B17).

For now, I’ll just offer a solemn vow: If separatists ever prove me wrong, on the day the Valley achieves independence, they may serve me crow, as long as it’s well done.

But Francine isn’t the only reader who’s gotten mad at me lately. No, to hear it from some people, the whole Valley wants me tarred and feathered.

*

I can understand why some folks are angry. Take condo dwellers, for example. Some are furious because I’ve written too much and some because I’ve written too little. That all started with my Hollywood pitch for “Condo,” a suspense thriller very loosely inspired by the contretemps at a certain Chatsworth complex.

On the one hand, there are letters like this one from a reader in Woodland Hills:

“The incredible arrogance of many print and broadcast journalists, you among them, never ceases to amaze me.

“You people seem to think that you, as reporters, have a God-given right to any and all information just because you want it. Most of you are incredibly obnoxious, and the rest are tenacious beyond the point of rudeness.

“I am the president of a condominium association who is in a situation much like Mr.”--no, I’ll leave his name out this time--”and if you asked me the thing you asked him, my answers would be essentially the same, with a few choice words added. How much was the insurance settlement? None of your damn business.

“Because, Mr. Harris, it IS none of your business. . .”

See what I mean?

I’ve decided to shield the author’s identity--not to protect him, but me. If he’s in a similar situation as the other homeowners prez, I’d certainly hear from some disgruntled constituents. Several condo owners around the Valley suggest there’s a Pulitzer just waiting for the reporter bold enough to expose the corruption within their complex. Some are understanding, but some seem resentful when I explain how, as a matter of mental health, I’ve sworn off condos.

There’s been other criticism lately. A teacher at Birmingham High is angry because I failed to get her perspective for a recent column. What can I say? She’s right. And my boss passed on the complaint of a woman who says I took a cheap shot at Vanessa Williams in a Super Bowl column. You’ll hear no mea culpa on that one. The way she made “The Star-Spangled Banner” sound, a cheap shot seemed like the patriotic thing to do.

So my conscience was already burdened when I wrote the words that, according to Francine Oschin, held “1.3 million people up to ridicule.”

*

That’s her opinion, anyway. So far I’ve personally been underwhelmed by reader response. Not counting Francine’s Letter to the Editor, one--count ‘em, one--reader has written to me about that column. (She liked it.)

Still, there’s been plenty of reaction. Francine’s letter echoes similar themes of indignation expressed in a Daily News editorial and by columnist Dennis McCarthy. By the way, he also cast ballots for “The Funniest Person in the Valley.”

Everybody’s a critic. Dennis and the Daily News were definitely not amused by my suggestion that, instead of cityhood, the Valley try for statehood--or more. Nor were they amused that, in my reverie, the Valley was re-christened “Twentynine Malls,” a name once suggested by a Canoga Park resident in a whimsical contest. Nor were they amused by speculation that, since cityhood or statehood wouldn’t solve locals’ problems, soon the Valley would become the breakaway Republic of Twentynine Malls. . .

They charged me with “belittling the Valley.” I’ll admit to belittling the Daily News’ phone-in poll. The News reported that its “informal, unscientific” survey showed secession favored 1,032 to 133, a margin of “nearly 10 to 1.”

I had quoted this and already filed my column when copy editor Ed Silver, who really deserves a raise, said wait a sec, that’s not 10 to 1, that’s 8 to 1. Thus the margin was belittled.

But even if the margin were 80-1, a phone-in poll isn’t a grass-roots movement. It’s not even close. It’s fun journalism, but it isn’t serious journalism. Yet it had the Daily News frothing about “breakaway fever.”

A hot flash is more like it.

Twenty years have passed since the last genuine secession movement. Boland and others formed an advocacy committee that found that the Valley contributed 40% of city taxes and received only 15% worth of services. Keep in mind these numbers were promulgated by activists. And keep in mind the huge expense of police services is allocated based on crime rates.

Much has changed the political landscape since then: Proposition 13, shifting demographics, a new mayor who courts the Valley.

So it’s one thing to say, “What the hell, let’s secede.” The heavy political lifting is something else. The political obstacles are huge, much bigger than those concerning the LAUSD. And after all that work, what’s the glorious prize? Another big city. The ethnic politics would be more localized--what fun!--and instead of complaints about “Over the Hill,” the Valley would be more polarized between east and west, between hill dwellers and flatlanders, between people who find bogus polls amusing and people who don’t.

But perhaps you want secession anyway. And who knows? You may prove me wrong.

If so, please serve the crow with fava beans and a nice Chianti.

Scott Harris’ column appears Tuesdays, Thursdays and Sundays. Readers may write to Harris at the Times Valley Edition, 20000 Prairie St., Chatsworth 91311. Please include a phone number.