McClintock Revives Valley Secession Bill

One day after taking office, Assemblyman Tom McClintock (R-Northridge) revived the hotly debated issue of secession Tuesday by introducing a carbon copy of a bill defeated in the last legislative session that would ease the way for the San Fernando Valley and other areas to break away from the city of Los Angeles.

“It’s Boland II in its original and pristine form,” said McClintock, referring to the author of last session’s controversial measure, former Assemblywoman Paula L. Boland.

Boland’s bill, which would have prevented the Los Angeles City Council from blocking secession attempts, was killed in a state Senate committee on the last night of the legislative session in August.

Its demise after months of intense election-year combat here disappointed many local business and homeowner leaders who had lobbied for a change in the law.

Many of them were not secessionists but said that without veto power over secession, the City Council would be forced to be more attentive to the needs of the Valley.

The civic group that formed to lobby for the measure vowed to continue the pressure.

“We told everybody last year, we were not going to go away,” said Jeff Brain, co-chairman of Valley VOTE (Voters Organized Toward Empowerment). “It is not an accident this is being reintroduced.”

McClintock, who represents the same northwest Valley district that Boland did, said he was asked to take up the issue by voters he met while campaigning for office.

“It was a promise I made early in the campaign,” he said Tuesday.

Like his predecessor, McClintock said the bill, AB 62, is about self-determination, not secession, which might not be necessary if the city of Los Angeles became more responsive to the Valley.

“If a disaffected or abused community has restored to it the right to walk away from an abusive, dysfunctional city government, the attitude of that city government might change on its own,” McClintock said.

Given the new Democratic majority in the Assembly, the discussion may be academic this session. Boland won in the GOP-controlled Assembly last session, ensuring her victory by calling for a vote when Democratic opponents weren’t paying attention.

She was ultimately stymied by Senate President Pro Tem Bill Lockyer (D-Hayward), after the two feuded publicly for months. He is still in charge of the state Senate, which is also controlled by Democrats. Boland, forced out of the Assembly by term limits, was defeated in her bid for a state Senate seat in November.

Another potential factor working against the bill this session is the Assembly’s new speaker, Cruz Bustamante, who is closely tied to the Latino Caucus.

Bustamante could not be reached for comment, but the secession effort was unpopular among powerful members of the group. Local Sens. Richard Polanco (D-Los Angeles) and Charles Calderon (D-Whittier) were among the bill’s staunchest foes.

The Valley’s first Latino legislator, Assemblyman Tony Cardenas (D-Mission Hills), said Tuesday that while he favors getting rid of the City Council veto, he is opposed to the bill.

Cardenas said it fails to take into account what would happen to the rest of the city, especially to the areas just outside the boundaries of any new municipality. He favors either a citywide vote or some hybrid method of ensuring stability for all neighborhoods.

As for his own northeast Valley district, Cardenas said it might not fare better as part of a new Valley city.

“If the Valley considers itself the unwanted stepchild of Los Angeles, likewise, the northeast Valley might become the stepchild of the Valley city,” he said.

Newly elected Assemblyman Bob Hertzberg (D-Sherman Oaks) favors the bill. “I’m for it but would prefer a citywide vote.”

One of the Boland bill’s staunchest supporters, Sen. Herschel Rosenthal (D-Van Nuys), said he will support McClintock’s bill as well.

But Rosenthal added that the measure faces tougher sledding this year. “I think there will be more of a problem in the Assembly.”

McClintock, however, believes pressure can be brought to bear on unnamed legislators who are looking to run for statewide office and may not be eager to alienate Valley voters.

Lockyer, for example, is considering running for state attorney general.

McClintock opposes a citywide vote. “It is not a citywide issue,” he said. “It is not the business of people in Venice how the people in Chatsworth want to govern themselves and vice versa.”

Since the original bill was defeated, Valley VOTE said it has organized activists in communities all over Los Angeles who are dissatisfied with City Hall.

Operating as the Alliance for Self-Determination, the group claims members from San Pedro, Eagle Rock, Wilmington, Westchester, South-Central, Pacific Palisades, Venice, West Los Angeles, the Melrose-Fairfax area and Hollywood as well as the Valley.

Some of them want to secede, others favor charter reform or neighborhood councils, but all want to make their own decisions, Brain said.

With election year over, Brain said his hope is that the issue will be debated on a less partisan basis.

“It is not a partisan issue. It’s about the quality of our life in L.A..”