State Senate Kills Boland Bill on Valley Secession

Legislation that could have set the stage for the San Fernando Valley to secede from Los Angeles was narrowly defeated in the state Senate on Thursday after a rousing debate in which 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 to 18 in favor, two votes shy of the 21 needed for passage. The bill would have removed the veto power of the Los Angeles City Council over secession moves by voters in the Valley.

“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 L. Kopp (I-San Francisco) also voted for the bill.

Following the lead of Senate President Pro Tem Bill Lockyer (D-Hayward), 16 other Senate Democrats voted no on the measure. Sen. Lucy Killea (I-San Diego) was the 18th no vote.

Sens. Daniel E. Boatwright (D-Concord), Teresa Hughes (D-Inglewood) and Steve Peace (D-Chula Vista) were either absent or did not vote.

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 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 said afterward that he did not plan to waver from his insistence on a citywide vote of Los Angeles residents on the secession issue and appointment of a special commission to study the ramifications of splitting up the city.

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

The debate on the bill started 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 C. 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.”

Los Angeles Sens. Charles Calderon, Richard Polanco and Diane Watson were among those who disagreed.

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

Lockyer, too, disputed 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 be 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 us 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--for now.

The bill has sparked a debate that already has 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.

Boland had introduced a similar bill two years ago, but dropped it to concentrate on her successful fight to simplify the process of breaking up the Los Angeles Unified School District.

Boland and many supporters of her measure had been key players in the 1970s when elected officials in the Valley mounted a serious campaign to divorce Los Angeles only to to be deterred by the law Boland’s 1996 bill sought to undo.

Long-simmering sentiments about equity of services and clout burst through three years ago when Mayor Richard Riordan was elected, 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 homeowners group leaders hungry for increased leverage.

For them, the bill was perfect because it provoked the threat of secession without calling for or initiating it. So 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’s attempt before the Democratic-controlled state Senate, albeit with powerful allies on the Local Government Committee. Her supporters included Democrat Rosenthal, Republican Sen. William Craven, the committee chairman, and Kopp.

Boland had also picked up powerful foes--especially Polanco and Calderon, representatives from the Eastside of Los Angeles who said the bill was divisive.

Although Boland succeeded in getting her bill through the committee, in exchange for his vote, Kopp 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 the legislator who turned out to be Boland’s ultimate downfall, Lockyer, the president pro tem of the Senate.

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. Boland decided to take her chance on a floor vote.

Times staff writers Carl Ingram in Sacramento and Hugo Martin in Los Angeles contributed to this story.