Governor Signs Secession Bill

Concluding a two-year, white-knuckle roller-coaster ride in the state Legislature, Gov. Pete Wilson on Sunday signed into law what is commonly called the Valley secession bill, giving dissatisfied residents of Los Angeles and elsewhere the right to vote on whether to form new cities.

“This bill . . . is something that has been sought by the residents of the San Fernando Valley now for I’d say about a quarter of a century,” Wilson said from his Capitol office. “I have a feeling that there will be celebration there.”

Among those celebrating at the signing ceremony were former Assemblywoman Paula L. Boland, who started the effort but couldn’t get the bill passed last year, as well as the bipartisan team that succeeded this year--Assemblymen Tom McClintock (R-Northridge) and Bob Hertzberg (D-Sherman Oaks).

“This is Independence Day come in October,” McClintock said. “It’s common in history for people to lose power to the government. It’s a rare instance when government loses power to the people.”

In the meantime, Valley supporters of secession are poised to launch a petition drive, the first step in the arduous process that could lead to separation from Los Angeles.

Some residents of other areas of Los Angeles--the harbor area and Venice, to name two--have also expressed interest in forming new cities.

The bill--AB 62--removes city council veto power over secession petitions submitted by an area of the city, requires votes in both the entire city and the area affected and requires a finding that the new and remaining cities would be financially sound.

But, in deciding whether to sign the legislation, the governor had to wrestle with its impact on all of California, amid strong opposition from cities throughout the state.

Opponents of the bill, including the powerful League of California Cities, argued that the elimination of city councils’ veto power over secession attempts would give rise to a wholesale exodus from urban cores.

Wilson concluded that getting rid of the veto is as right for the whole state as it is for the Valley and the rest of Los Angeles.

City government, the governor said, must be accountable to the people and the change in the law represents a “welcome and overdue return to majority rule and citizen self-determination.”

With the governor’s signature, the state law reverts to what it had been for nearly a century until the city council veto was put in place in 1977.

The measure becomes law Jan. 1.

Wilson emphasized that while the new law would make secession possible, it by no means made it probable.

Noting the many hurdles that must be surmounted before a secession effort could reach the ballot, Wilson said: “This is a bill that permits detachment, but it doesn’t make it easy. . . . There are many, many requirements.”

One of the safeguards is that any municipal split must be revenue neutral for both the detaching and remaining parts of the city.

Also, any secession requires a dual-majority vote of approval. That means voters in the entire city, as well as the area seeking to secede, must approve any detachment.

After the dual-majority provision was added to the bill this year, the Los Angeles City Council supported the legislation. Mayor Richard Riordan had voiced support for the bill previously.

Although the change in the law only makes it possible to begin a secession effort, the Valley lawmakers were thrilled to have the bill enacted after a two-year effort.

At the least, they say, they have won the leverage needed to make the City Council pay attention to the area’s complaints about being underserved.

Wilson presented signed copies of the bill to Boland, Hertzberg and McClintock. Wilson also praised Senate President Pro Tem Bill Lockyer (D-Hayward) for his help in moving the bill through the Senate.

Hertzberg said the bill had been widely misinterpreted as divisive when it was people “simply searching for a more responsive government.”

“I am not a secessionist,” Hertzberg said, “but if we can’t find in Los Angeles a way to rewrite our city charter to make our government more responsive, I may become one.”

Boland said she had given up hope after last year’s bruising battle that pitted her against Lockyer, whose help with the bill this year contrasted sharply with his successful effort to kill it the first time around.

But Valley residents did not forget, Boland said. “They didn’t forget something was wrong. Democracy was taken away from them.”

Getting it restored left local activists such as Jeff Brain elated.

As co-chairman of a group formed to lobby for the bill, Brain testified frequently in Sacramento as the measure’s fortunes would rise and fall--sometimes on the same day.

“This has been a long, hard-fought battle to get this through,” Brain said. “The opposition threw everything they had at us but we prevailed.”

While Valley activists savored the victory, Brain’s co-chairman, Richard Close, was already looking ahead: “I’m relieved but I recognize that a lot of work lies ahead. This is the start of a process, not the end of a process.”

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Next Steps

* Draw boundaries for a new proposed city--an expensive process that could take several months.

* Collect signatures from 20% of Valley voters, or about 80,000 people. Proponents plan to start petition drive in January.

* Complete study on impact of secession, which could take two years to complete and cost about $1 million.

* Hold hearings on the study.

* Put secession to a vote of the Valley and the rest of the city. Secessionists hope vote will take place in 2000.

* Valley secession would create the sixth-largest city in the nation, with 1.5 million residents, about one-third the population of Los Angeles. The new city would be slightly larger than San Diego but smaller than Philadelphia.