Governance restructuring in Los Angeles and Toronto: Amalgamation or secession?

Towards the end of the 1990s, a perplexing situation occurred in two large North American cities. In Toronto, Ontario, and Los Angeles, California, co nservative political forces undertook to restructure the system of urban go vernance. While initiated by conservatives in both cases, in Toronto the re sult was consolidation; in Los Angeles secessionism is rampant. In both cas es the political debate on amalgamation and secession is tied in with disco urses on size, efficiency and form of urban government. In both cases, also , the shift from government to governance has been a central theme. This ar ticle investigates how local governance has changed in these two cities by comparing historical traditions of governance. Each city has a specific set of external relationships with other geographical and political scales and a set of characteristic internal contradictions. Internally, Los Angeles' tradition of splintered governance stands in contrast to Toronto's metropol itan governance model. Amalgamation and secession have been introduced as s trategic options of governance restructuring in both cities in the late 199 0s. Both (projected and realized) scalar changes of governance processes an d institutions have been accompanied and characterized by social struggles and widespread political debate. The article outlines these debates and dis cusses the respective political alliances which have formed in both urban r egions on the issue of amalgamation/secession.