ValleyVote Update for 6-10-99
We are sending you this E-mail as you have requested to be notified concerning ValleyVote
If you can't read HTML E-mail (you get a lot of extra charters i.e. <p> <b> etc.) send us a reply with plain as the subject The updates are being added on the ValleyVote website
If your friends want to be added to our E-mail list to be notified about meetings and issues please send an E-mail with ValleyVote as the subject. We have added links to data referred to in the stories.
We thought you would find the editorial in Today's (6-10-99) Daily News interesting. For the source see http://dailynews.com/search/opinions/june99/0610/edit1.html
City Hall's master of manipulation, Chief of Legislative Analyst Ron Deaton, has sprung another trap.
Two years ago, Deaton -- the bureaucratic overlord of City Hall -- took charter reform hostage to protect his minions who pass as City Council members.
And on Tuesday, the very day that voters repudiated his two-year plot to thwart reform of the City Charter, there was Deaton again taking a hostage.
This time his victim is cityhood for the San Fernando Valley. The lambs of the Valley VOTE secession movement fell into his trap without a clue.
Believing they could get around Deaton's control of the city government data needed for the secession study being conducted by the Local Agency Formation Commission, Valley VOTE went to Councilwoman Cindy Miscikowski to ask her to form a council committee to make sure the information was fair, accurate and public.
How they could be so naive as to believe that the council -- whose neglect of the neighborhoods and the values of ordinary people has led to secession talk -- is capable of even the smallest act of honesty is beyond comprehension. (Just look at their duplicitous performance on charter reform.)
Like any other dutiful council member, Miscikowski, we presume, went straight to Deaton who turned a simple-minded request into a sinister ploy by which the council will virtually seize control of the secession debate through control of the information and staging of public hearings intended to defeat secession.
As Miscikowski put it: "Until now there has not been a public forum for either the official presentation by Valley VOTE of their issues, or for any official reaction by the city officials. The formation of this ad hoc committee will create the forum where that open, vital dialogue can occur."
What a joke!
It is the council that fought tooth and nail against the Valley's right to consider political self-determination. It is the council that has thrown every obstacle it can find in the way of Valley empowerment. It is the council that has refused to engage in a form of public debate about the issues that concern Valley voters. It is the council that refuses to give the Valley a fair share of its tax dollars. It is the council that refuses to pay its share of studying secession.
The reason 25 percent of all Valley registered voters signed petitions for the LAFCO secession study is they are fed up with the City Hall swindle and want to know if they would be better off in their own town -- which would be the richest, safest and most-integrated big city in America.
If Miscikowski and her council colleagues want to open a dialogue on secession, they should hold public hearings on why our taxes are so high, why services are so bad, why it costs so much in wages and benefits to run the city so poorly, and why they spend all their time pandering to influence peddlers and special interests.
They should ask Deaton if it's OK to start serving the people instead of themselves.
Copyright © 1999 Daily News Los Angeles
We thought you would find the editorial in Wednesday's (6-9-99) LA Times interesting. For the source see http://www.latimes.com/HOME/NEWS/VALLEY/t000051822.html
Council: Valley VOTE welcomes plan for subcommittee to keep tabs on data, but the mayor had issued a directive for a different approach.
By MIGUEL BUSTILLO, Times Staff Writer
Citing the need for a "fair and even-handed" discussion of the issue,
Councilwoman Cindy Miscikowski asked the City Council on Tuesday to create a subcommittee
to oversee an upcoming study on the San Fernando Valley's proposed secession from Los
Angeles.
Miscikowski's motion was immediately hailed by Valley VOTE, the group looking to cleave the Valley from the remainder of the city, but it was criticized by Mayor Richard Riordan's office, which had already devised a plan of its own to shepherd the politically explosive study.
"This is obviously going to conflict with the mayor's directive," said Riordan spokeswoman Jessica Copen. "It's going to cause a lot of confusion."
Under the proposal submitted by Miscikowski to council President John Ferraro, the committee would serve as a clearinghouse for the expected deluge of data on Los Angeles government that will be needed to analyze the proposed dismantling of the city. It would also serve as the council's main means of communicating with the Local Agency Formation Commission, the panel that will request the information and conduct the study.
An unprecedented analysis on the economic consequences of deconstructing Los Angeles, the study must arrive at certain findings for Valley secession to be placed on the ballot. Secession would require a majority vote of the Valley, as well as of the city as a whole.
"This secession could change the face of the city most dramatically," Miscikowski said. "We need to have a process in place to deal with the study and all the issues that come up because of it."
Secessionists have repeatedly expressed concerns that top Los Angeles bureaucrats and Riordan's office would try to sink the secession study by making needed information difficult to obtain, or even by manipulating city data. Those fears were stoked last month when Riordan issued an executive order--only the 10th of his administration--that placed his office, the office of the chief administrative officer, and the chief legislative analyst in charge of reviewing and releasing all city information needed to study secession. The order stated that such a centralized system would allow Riordan's office and top city officials to coordinate, and possibly amend, the figures before they are released.
Placing the City Council in charge would allow for greater public scrutiny of that process, said Valley VOTE President Jeff Brain. "We're glad to see Cindy taking a leadership role on this issue," Brain said. "We believe the best way to get impartial information from the city is to put the City Council in charge, not some bureaucrat that is not accountable to anyone."
Miscikowski stressed she was not attempting to one-up the mayor, but simply hoped to create a more inclusive process--one that included the public as well as the City Council. Her proposal would allow the mayor, or a mayor's representative, to sit on the committee. "The main purpose would be to create an official point of dialogue, and have it take place out in the open, not behind closed doors," Miscikowski said. "I think the committee could help shape that [the mayor's] plan. Clearly, my motion is looking to remove confusion, not create more of it."
Studying the breakup of the nation's second-largest city is expected to be a complex, time-consuming task. A county report earlier this year estimated that more than 1,000 properties, several thousand vehicles, nearly 1,000 computers and more than 30,000 public employees would somehow have to be appraised and divided to study secession.
Secessionists are advocating joint agreements between a new Valley city and the remainder of Los Angeles to run the Department of Water and Power, as well as the airport and harbor departments. But if the study eventually winds up including an analysis of dismantling the DWP, as some expect, it could become even more complex.
State law requires that Los Angeles officials cooperate with LAFCO on the secession study, but the law is short on specifics, and city officials have already argued that they should not have to spend public funds to reproduce information that is, in many cases, out of date or nonexistent.
The study was triggered earlier this year after more than one-fourth of the Valley's registered voters signed petitions to pursue municipal divorce. But the source of funding for the analysis, expected to cost $2.3 million, remains unclear.
Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa (D-Los Angeles) has proposed that the state pay most of the cost. But his proposal to seek the money as part of this year's state budget is expected to encounter opposition in the state Senate. Hoping to assist Villaraigosa, Miscikowski on Tuesday also introduced a resolution asking her council colleagues to formally support state funding of the study.
** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. **
If you friends want to be added to our E-mail list to be notified by E-mail about meetings and issues please send an E-mail with ValleyVote as the subject. We share our e-mail list with no one.Charles Brink Webmaster. If you want to have your name removed from the list just reply with remove as subject