SCV Talk · Archive
A decade of the Valley’s town square · 2006–2015
SCV Talk
April 18, 2011· scvtalk.com · WordPress (SCVTalk 3.0) · Wayback capture

LA or AV? – SCV caught in the middle

By Jeff — Jeff Wilson

The Signal asked a great question in its Sunday editorial on redistricting:

Because of our relatively low population here, our valley merits about one-half of an Assembly district, and about  one-quarter of a Senate district. So we will be teamed up with some of our neighbors.

The question is: which ones? With whom do we have the most in common in terms of politics, values, common economic and social interests and other important community standards?

Is it Palmdale/Lancaster? Points west — Simi Valley and Ventura County? Or perhaps it’s San Fernando Valley communities, such as Sylmar, Mission Hills or Pacoima?

Well speaking for SCVTalk.com, it most certainly is not Lancaster/Palmdale. I’d like the SCV to identify most with agrarian/bohemian Ventura County, but that’s intellectually dishonest of me. Therefore it is Los Angeles proper, not necessarily “Sylmar, Mission Hills or Pacoima” as those cities are mentioned in the Signal editorial to give a negative connotation to our association with Los Angeles.

Look, it breaks down like this (this is my grand unified theory of the SCV): We in the SCV are stuck in a tug-o’-war between High Desert AV values and Cosmopolitan Los Angeles Values. We’re about 35-40 miles from each place and we have the ecology of both places in common (high desert in the east, semi-arid to the west). Most of our workforce is employed either in the SCV or commutes to the LA megalopolis; few of us commute to the high desert.

But it’s more than that. We in the SCV are much more accepting of people different than us. We’re quite multi-cultural here: 60-65% white, 30% Latino, 10% Asian (sorry African Americans), and while we have our ethic and racial tensions, they are nothing compared to the Antelope Valley. True, we need some work on accepting gays, but we, as a community, nearly voted for a black man for president, and there are several very liberal pockets in Santa Clarita. The difference was most stark during Proud Racist-gate, when we had to import supporters from the Antelope Valley because so few SCVers showed up.

Maybe politics is a bad example; we’re still mostly conservative. Well then, what about local industry? We are Hollywood’s backlot, and you know what Bill O’Reilly says about Hollywood liberals. We wouldn’t tolerate all the filming up here unless we were permissive and tolerant in our very soul and character. The Antelope Valley? Well the only jobs up there are 1) defense and weapon related (they manufacture stuff that kills people), 2) retail, 3) prison guards. We couldn’t be more different!

The differences go to what we eat too: We wouldn’t bitch about all the chain restaurants out here if we didn’t know there was something better. People in the AV? They don’t bitch about Chili’s and Red Robin because when that’s all you’ve ever eaten, it doesn’t taste that bad. Do gourmet food trucks visit the AV? No they don’t, because AVers aren’t discerning about what they put in their mouth, unlike SCVers.

Now I know we collectively hate the San Fernando valley and moved here to escape it. I get it. But we love its amenities, don’t we? That’s why we drive to Nordstrom’s in Northridge, or the Glendale Fashion Galleria, or hang out on a Saturday in Pasadena’s old town. So let’s be honest. We hate Van Nuys and San Fernando and Sylmar and Pacoima. We certainly don’t hate Pasadena or Northridge or Burbank or any of the SCV-clones that have sprung up in the last 20 years. Hell, we’re trying to replicate the success of Pasadena in our Old Town Newhall!

This is the great battle for the SCV’s soul for the next 10 years. I say we yoke ourselves to Cosmopolitan Los Angeles Values and bid adieu to any association we have with the Antelope Valley. That way John Boston can continue to poke fun at our neighbors up the 14 and we can have the best of both worlds: being of LA but not in it. So go to these redistricting meetings and support the SCV’s inclusion in districts that represent parts of the San Fernando Valley rather than the Antelope Valley and High Desert.

Comments (16)

  1. Timothy Myers SR.April 18, 2011 at 2:32 pm
    The real consequence of redistricting is that the SCV will be marginalized by some other area so that the elected Assembly Members and Senators will come from AV, Ventura, or the SFV. My preference would be Ventura since we are less likely to be represented by a knuckle dragger (AV) or a crazed leftist (SFV). It would also be fun to go with the SFV to see if local Repubs could really get so angry with Democratic representative for the next ten years that their heads would actually explode.
  2. BertaApril 19, 2011 at 9:02 am
    Mr. Meyers, could you please explain what you mean by “represented by a knuckle dragger (AV)”?
  3. Timothy Myers SR.April 19, 2011 at 12:53 pm
    It means they are Neanderthal in their outlook, but I mean that in the nicest way possible.
  4. BertaApril 19, 2011 at 2:10 pm
    I was hoping you did not mean it as another racial slur used towards a black person relating them to gorillas who walk around dragging their knuckles. Perhaps another term would suit without that possible interpretation?
  5. Timothy Myers SR.April 19, 2011 at 2:51 pm
    “Mouth breather?”
  6. Venturan (NDApril 19, 2011 at 4:23 pm
    R. Rex Parris should have “cigarette” deemed the official smell of the Antelope Valley.
  7. Coastal SageApril 19, 2011 at 11:22 pm
    Tim, I agree that Santa Clarita is a good fit with Simi Valley and Moorpark. I know both places well, and both the education level of the most of the population as well as the outlook/philosophy of the population is similar.
  8. ToddApril 18, 2011 at 2:57 pm
    You’ve forgotten that assembly/congressional districts are not bound by any rule/law to make sense. They just have to be contiguous. Look out… Here comes the Thousand Oaks/Simi Valley/Santa Clarita district. Good, wholesome, conservative.
  9. Venturan (NDApril 18, 2011 at 3:21 pm
    Interesting. If true, Camarillo, Moorpark and possibly Porter Ranch could also be thrown in the mix depending on the population requirements. It would all be one suburban stucco box district with common representation and (mostly) common library management.
  10. Timothy Myers SR.April 18, 2011 at 4:39 pm
    Todd: Did you forget that a citizen’s commission, chosen by lottery, is drawing the districts? Much less likely to be a partisan gerrymander. Also much less likely to have the SCV sliced and diced between districts. The other thing that is going to have a huge impact is the open primary. This drives the professional political types crazy because the predictive models just go out the window, with Decline to States throwing their weight in.
  11. ToddApril 19, 2011 at 10:05 am
    Of course I remember that Tim. But to think that even a lottery drawn citizens’ commission is going to be immune from political influence is just head in the sand thinking. Who do you think is throwing their names into the hat to be picked? People who are politically apathetic and indifferent? Bargaining and deals will be made. Regardless as to how those who draw the lines are chosen. Sure its less likely to be gerrymandered to high hell… but I’ll betcha lunch @ the Chik-Fil-A that we end up in a funky looking district one way or another.
  12. Coastal SageApril 19, 2011 at 11:27 pm
    Tim re: the “nonpartisan” commission, if they stick SCV in with totally dissimilar populations, either to the north or the south, it would be interesting to consider having someone file a Federal Voting Rights Act lawsuits, claiming Santa Claritans would be denied political representation by being statistically marginalized. I’m serious, I think it would be an interesting lawsuit to pursue, if Santa Clarita isn’t glued to Porter Ranch, Simi and Moorpark, by this commission.
  13. Street KnowledgeApril 20, 2011 at 6:10 am
    Are you high?
  14. MikeApril 19, 2011 at 6:58 am
    I really liked this piece. I’ve never felt connected to the AV nearly as much as Ventura Co. and the greater LA area. If my mother in law didn’t live there, I think I’d visit once a decade. That said, I think a lot of AV people feel more attached to the SCV than the more rural areas around them. I really don’t know how an outside panel would see things, but I’m much more concerned that we’re in a single district than being grouped with like-minded communities. As a political junkie, I’d love to see some explosive local races for important seats. The future of Buck McKeon is the most interesting of them all. The chatter has always been that he’s retiring after this term in order to collect the maximum pension. But in light of his chairmanship, I think that’s unlikely. My prediction: Buck will be elected to Congress in 2012, but not necessarily representing the SCV. I think Buck is going to run in the part of the former 25th that gives him the best chance.
  15. BertaApril 19, 2011 at 9:12 am
    Jeff as you note many of us left the San Fernando Valley. I left 18 years ago precisely to get away from what happened to the valley in which I grew up. Ineffective leaders who cared more about being reelected than keeping communities vibrant and safe for all those in the country legally pushed along the deterioration process. I personally do not want Brad Sherman as my representative, or anyone with his similar views.
  16. CastaicClayApril 20, 2011 at 11:43 am
    Canyon Country goes to the AV, Newhall to the SFV and Awesometown goes to Ventura!

Preserved as part of the SCV Talk Archive. Text is presented as originally published; presentation has been standardised for readability. The original capture is available at the Internet Archive.

Support