Boland’s Valley Secession Bill Fails by 2 Votes in State Senate

Legislation that could have set the stage for the Valley to secede from Los Angeles was narrowly defeated in the state Senate on Thursday after a rousing debate in which both proponents and opponents claimed to have democracy on their side.

The final vote on the bill by Assemblywoman Paula L. Boland (R-Granada Hills) was 19-18 in favor, two votes shy of the 21 needed for passage. The measure would have removed the veto power of the City Council over applications to leave the city.

“I’m hurt for the people who are affected by this,” Boland said, “but we all won because we got the bill further than we thought. . . . It got out in the daylight. It was killed out in the daylight.”

Boland vowed to press ahead with a similar bill next year if she is elected to the state Senate from a new district.

The vote, with notable exceptions, tended to break along party lines.

All 16 Republican senators voted in favor of the measure (AB 2043), as did Democratic Sens. Herschel Rosenthal and Tom Hayden, both of whom represent Valley constituents. Sen. Quentin Kopp (I-San Francisco) also voted for the bill.

Following the lead of Senate President Pro Tem Bill Lockyer (D-Hayward), 17 Senate Democrats voted no on the measure. Sen. Lucy L. Killea (I-San Diego) was the 18th vote.

Three senators--Daniel Boatwright (D-Concord), Teresa P. Hughes (D-Inglewood) and Steve Peace (D-Chula Vista)--were either absent or did not vote on the bill.

A routine request for reconsideration of the bill was granted, which means it can be brought up again before the session ends next week. Subsequent votes typically do not change the outcome, unless the bill is substantially amended to meet the objections of its opponents.

Boland said she had not decided on her next move.

“I’m going to go and regroup right now and weigh my options,” she said. Earlier in the day, however, she said, “Until the last gasp, I’m not going to give up.”

Lockyer afterward said he did not plan to waver from his insistence on a citywide vote and appointment of a special commission to study the ramifications of splitting the city.

“These are serious things that need to be dealt with,” he said.

The debate on the bill started late Thursday morning as Boland stood anxiously at the back of the Senate chamber. She said later that success appeared to be tantalizingly close after indications that Killea and Sen. Nicholas Petris (D-Oakland) were leaning her way.

Both wound up voting no, as Lockyer had predicted weeks ago.

“I told her six weeks ago that on her best day she’d get to 19,” he said after the bill was defeated.

Rosenthal, who carried the bill for Boland in the Senate, assured the other senators that the bill did not call for a breakup of Los Angeles, but for removing “one insurmountable obstacle” to doing so--the veto power of the City Council over secession requests.

“The bill is about giving people their Democratic right to vote,” Rosenthal said.

State Sen. Ross Johnson (R-Irvine) joined the call for self-determination for Valley residents.

“There are more than 1.5 million people there,’ Johnson said. “This is not some bend in the road. We’re talking about the ability of an awful lot of Californians to be heard.”

Sen. Newton Russell (R-Glendale) said the veto power amounts to a “dictatorship” by the Los Angeles City Council, “who will never, ever relinquish their authority.”

Sens. Charles Calderon (D-Whittier), Richard Polanco (D-Los Angeles) and Diane Watson (D-Los Angeles) were among those who disagreed.

“Do we have democracy for everyone or only for the people in the Valley?” asked Calderon, referring to the provision that other residents in Los Angeles would not get to vote on Valley secession under the Boland plan.

Lockyer also disputed the proponents’ definition of democracy.

“It makes no sense to claim this is about democracy when what is being suggested is a small segment of a city being able to dictate to the entire city,” he said.

Polanco centered his argument on the perils of dividing Los Angeles at a time when “we should be reaching out.” He also challenged those who supported the bill to consider its potential statewide impacts.

“If this is such a good idea, let it apply to Long Beach,” Polanco said. “Let it apply to Glendale. Let it apply to San Francisco. Let it apply to Santa Monica. Let is apply across the state.”

Although there were pleas to compromise, they went nowhere. Boland did not want her bill amended and Lockyer vowed to hold her to it.

“There is a better bill waiting to be written,” Lockyer said, decrying the over-politicization of the issue by both sides.

Despite Thursday’s vote, the bill has sparked a debate that has already led to a movement to reform the Los Angeles City Charter.

“Now that this piece of legislation has been defeated, the focus should be directed to a process where voters can participate in revitalizing their city government--charter reform,” Mayor Richard Riordan said in a prepared statement.

At most, the measure, which Boland liked to call a “simple bill about democracy,” would have set the stage for a secession movement by removing the veto power of the City Council over applications to secede.

Boland had introduced a similar bill two years ago, but dropped it to concentrate on her successful fight to untangle a regulatory morass that made breaking up the Los Angeles Unified School District virtually impossible.

Even before that, Boland, along with many supporters of her measure, were key players in the 1970s, when the San Fernando Valley mounted a serious campaign to divorce Los Angeles only to to be thwarted by the law that Boland’s 1996 bill sought to undo.

Faced with insurrection from the Valley at the time, Los Angeles officials prevailed upon the state Legislature for protection. The result was a law that granted city councils veto power over restless areas, such as the Valley, that try to secede.

Long-simmering sentiments about equity of services and clout burst through three years ago when Riordan was elected mayor, largely on the strength of his appeal north of Mulholland Drive.

Against this backdrop, Boland introduced her bill early this year. And while Democrats loudly proclaimed it was a ploy for Boland’s state Senate campaign, the issue struck a chord with Valley business and homeowner leaders hungry for leverage.

For them, the bill was perfect because it provoked the threat of secession without calling for or initiating it. Thus, the Boland bill would be endorsed by groups that chose to remain neutral on secession itself.

The City Council voted 8 to 6 to oppose the issue and Los Angeles officials were key opponents of the Boland legislation. With the Assembly controlled by the GOP--and the Democratic leadership in the Assembly caught unaware--the measure sailed through the lower house.

That put Boland before the politically unfriendly, Democratic-controlled state Senate, albeit with powerful allies on the Senate’s Local Government Committee. Her supporters included Rosenthal, Republican Sen. William Craven, the committee chairman from Oceanside, and Kopp.

Boland had also picked up powerful foes--especially Los Angeles Sens. Polanco and Calderon. They viewed the bill as divisive and set their sights on killing it.

Although Boland succeeded in getting her bill through the Local Government Committee, Kopp, in exchange for his vote, forced her to accept an amendment about who would pay for a secession election.

Despite Kopp’s next-day attempt to release Boland from the amendment pledge, its introduction placed the bill at the feet of Lockyer, the legislator who paved the way for the measure’s ultimate downfall. Lockyer, the president pro tem of the Senate, runs the Rules Committee.

Lockyer had the discretion to send the bill to certain death in Polanco’s Elections Committee or to the Senate floor, as Boland urged him to do.

Instead, the bill lay fallow for weeks in the Rules Committee, until Lockyer decided to amend it himself to include a $1.2-million, state-funded study of detachment and incorporation law in general, and Valley secession in particular.

Boland was offered a choice between a Senate floor vote or a hearing on Lockyer’s amendments in the Senate Appropriations Committee. If she chose a floor vote, Lockyer made it clear he would fight the bill with the considerable power of his office.

Despite that challenge, Boland decided to take her chance on a floor vote.

Contributing to this story were Times staff writers Carl Ingram and Hugo Martin. Ingram reported from Sacramento and Martin from Los Angeles.

* CHAIN OF EVENTS: From secession bill’s inception to its defeat. A31

* REACTION: Measure’s supporters promise to reintroduce legislation. B1

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Secession History

Republican Assemblywoman Paula Boland’s efforts to pass a Valley secession bill began more than two years ago. Her bill, which would eliminate the veto power the City Council now has over secession requests, would make it easier for the Valley to break away. In response to an earlier threat to secede, the Legislature in 1978 gave the City Council this veto power, which would be revoked by AB 2043.

Feb. 24, 1994: Boland introduces AB 3370, making it easier for the San Fernando Valley to secede from the city of Los Angeles. Boland decides a couple of months later not to pursue the secession bill and instead focus on the school break-up bill.

Aug. 2, 1995: Governor Pete Wilson signs AB 107, sponsored by Boland, which lowers the number of signatures necessary to qualify the breakup proposal for the ballot--from 386,000 registered voters to 72,000.

Jan. 10, 1996: Boland revives efforts to ease Valley secession by introducing AB 2043.

April 17, 1996: Assembly Local Government Committee passes measure by a 5-0 vote.

May 7, 1996: The Intergovernmental Relations Committee of the Los Angeles City Council recommends the entire council oppose the Boland bill.

May 9, 1996: Assembly passes the AB 2043 by a 41-21 vote, catching the Democrats off guard.

May 14, 1996: Los Angeles City Council votes 8-6 to oppose Boland’s bill.

June 26, 1996: Bill approved 5 to 2 by the Senate Local Government Committee.

Aug. 2, 1996: Democratic State Senator Tom Hayden says he expects the bill, after sitting in the Senate Rules Committee for several weeks, to die in Sacramento and for Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan to personally pay for a petition drive to place a charter reform proposal before voters. A spokesman for Riordan says this “certainly would be one of the options” under consideration by the mayor.

Aug. 6, 1996: Democratic Senate President Pro Tem Bill Lockyer proposes amendments to the bill that would create a blue-ribbon commission to conduct a $1.2-million study of breaking up cities statewide and would require secession votes to be held citywide.

Aug. 8, 1996: Riordan announces his support for a citizens panel to push charter reform and vows to help bankroll a signature-gathering drive asking voters to approve the panel. In Sacramento, Lockyer offers Boland a choice between sending her bill straight to a floor vote or to the Appropriations Committee for further study.

Aug. 14, 1996: Boland exercises the option given to her by Lockyer and sends the bill as written to the state Senate floor for a vote.

Aug. 22, 1996: The legislation is narrowly defeated in the Senate. Although the vote was 19-18 in favor, the bill required 21 votes to pass. Advocates said they will try to get the measure approved in the future.