Secession Groups May Find Breaking Up Is Hard to Do

Now that the so-called San Fernando Valley secession bill has been signed into law, what next?

Secessionists have already drawn up tentative plans to form the state’s newest city, a municipality of more than 1.5 million people that would be located north of Mulholland Drive.

“The next step would be to start the process of forming a new city for the San Fernando Valley,” said Richard Close, president of the Sherman Oaks Homeowners Assn. and one of the most vocal secessionists in the Valley.

If successful, Close and other secessionists will create the sixth-largest city in the nation, slightly larger than San Diego but smaller than Philadelphia.

But it won’t be easy.

The process is fraught with legal pitfalls and is likely to get wrapped up in an expensive and bitter political campaign that could pit neighbor against neighbor.

The simultaneous secession and incorporation of an area this size has never been accomplished in California, officials say. The closest example is the 1890 secession from San Diego that created the city of Coronado, which today has a population of only 30,000.

Still, Valley secessionists hope to circulate a petition as early as January that would ask for a study of the impacts of a secession. A final citywide vote could take place as soon as 2000.

The secession agenda has been fueled by complaints from some Valley residents who say they feel ignored by a distant and mismanaged government in downtown Los Angeles. But Valley leaders say a breakaway has been all but impossible because state law gives the Los Angeles City Council the veto.

In response, Assemblymen Tom McClintock (R-Northridge) and Bob Hertzberg (D-Sherman Oaks) drafted a bill that would eliminate the council’s veto power. A similar bill drafted by former Assemblywoman Paula Boland failed last year.

But the legislation does not make secession a cakewalk. If Close and other secessionists are to succeed, they will have to complete a lengthy, complex and expensive process that could cost more than $2 million.

Close said he hopes a secession movement will be funded by contributions from Valley residents and business owners who he believes are frustrated with the city’s high business taxes and spotty public services.

“Some of the money will come from residents who want a better city, a city where there is more local control,” he said. “But most will come from major industries who want the tax dollars that come from the Valley to stay in the Valley.”

Here are some of the key steps and hurdles to secession:

* Secessionists must first hire engineers and lawyers to draft specific boundaries for the area that is to secede. This may cause disputes between those residents who want to be part of a breakaway city and those who want to remain part of Los Angeles.

“Before you prepare boundaries, you have to have meetings and discussions with all sorts of people to get a consensus from the people,” said Larry Calemine, executive officer of the Local Agency Formation Commission, or LAFCO, which oversees secession and incorporation matters in the county.

The legal work needed to draw the boundaries alone could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.

* Once the boundaries are drawn, secessionists must collect signatures from 20% of the registered voters in the Valley--roughly 80,000 signatures.

Political consultants say a professional firm could charge up to $200,000 to collect the signatures, but Close hopes volunteers will do most of the work.

Close said he believes it won’t be difficult to collect the necessary signatures because the petition will simply ask voters whether they want LAFCO to study the feasibility of a secession. The actual vote on secession comes later.

* If the petition drive is successful, the most difficult part of the process then falls on the shoulders of LAFCO, the county agency that must study the matter.

Calemine said the bulk of the work will be spent figuring out how the city of Los Angeles and the Valley can split up public facilities, such as airports, sewer systems, reservoirs, city buildings, streets, parks and other properties.

According to state law, LAFCO can support a secession only if the breakup results in “fiscal neutrality,” meaning that neither the Valley nor Los Angeles suffers financially by the change.

But Calemine said the language in the law is unclear on whether the “fiscal neutrality” must be met immediately or over several years during which taxes are adjusted and bonds are paid off.

He estimates that the study could take up to two years and cost more than $1 million, barring any legal challenges, which Calemine said are highly likely.

“If the parties are going to be adversarial, it could be nearly impossible to do,” he said.

Even Hertzberg, the coauthor of the secession bill, concedes that the laws regarding secessions are vague and hard to interpret. He said that is why he has introduced a bill in Sacramento to create a commission of experts to study the gaps and problems in the law.

“There are a tremendous number of issues that we have to deal with on a detachment and incorporation,” he said. “The law is not clear, and I’m trying to fix it.”

Jeff Brain, co-founder of a group that has worked to eliminate the council’s veto power, shrugs off concerns about the complexity of the process, saying it can be handled just like a divorce.

* If LAFCO completes its study and votes to support secession, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors would have to conduct hearings to allow the public to comment on the results of the study. But again, Calemine said, state law is unclear on whether the supervisors have the power to kill the secession effort if they find flaws in the LAFCO findings.

* If the supervisors approve the LAFCO findings, a majority of the voters in the Valley and a majority in the entire city must approve secession.

Brain and Close believe it is possible to win a so-called “double majority” vote because they say support for secession is strong in the Valley and has spread throughout the city to such communities as San Pedro and Venice.

“It’s not going to be easy, but that is why we have been working with groups throughout Los Angeles,” Brain said.

A secession vote is likely to become politically charged and highly emotional because it would mean the end of Los Angeles as it now exists. The toughest opponents may be city politicians who will see their clout diminish under a transformation that shrinks the size of the city by more than one-third.

Secessionists expect they will have to spend at least $1 million, to run an adequate pro-secession campaign.

But even if the majority of voters support secession, Calemine said, the City Council may be able to use a “silent veto” to kill the effort.

Before the secession can be completed, the law requires both the Valley and the city of Los Angeles to agree on a transfer of property taxes, he said. By rejecting the transfer, the City Council can kill the secession effort.

Hertzberg conceded that the property transfer could be problematic and hopes that the law can be changed to address it.

But even if a secession movement is successful, Hertzberg believes it will not end there.

He predicts that Valley residents won’t be happy as part of a city of more than 1.5 million people spread out over 275 square miles.

“Clearly, there is a frustration level. That is why this bill was written,” he said. “But ultimately, if we have a secession in the Valley, it will be lots of different secessions. I think it will break up into a number of pieces.”