Valley Secession

* The latest wrinkle in the San Fernando Valley secession saga, (“Goldberg to Seek a Vote on Secession,” Oct. 22) includes a proposal by two City Council members suggesting that the council create a citywide advisory vote on secession, to be placed on the June 1998 ballot. I believe this is likely an attempt to derail breakaway efforts.

There is no need today for any City Council action on secession. The framework for the procedure has been set in part by the state Legislature’s approval of Assembly Bill 62, which removed the council’s unilateral power to block secession efforts. The Local Government Reorganization Act of 1985 outlines the remaining procedures for annexation, detachment and reorganization of local government structures.

It is up to the people of Los Angeles to act on secession under the processes set up by state law. Maps, petitions, analyses, agreements, hearings and elections need to be [carried out] before a thoughtful vote can take place. Secession efforts do not need interference from the Los Angeles City Council. Indeed, council action at this time would run counter to the spirit of AB 62, which I supported. It would be wrong for the City Council to re-inject itself into the secession process, just one week after Gov. Pete Wilson signed the law removing the council’s veto power.

Barring new information, I do not support efforts to divide the city, but I greatly respect citizens’ right to explore such proposals and to exercise their right, if they so choose, to vote on this important issue in a thoughtful, informed manner.

LAURA CHICK

Council member, 3rd District

* Before this issue reaches a ballot and we must vote on it, I think it would be very wise to spell out the advantages along with the disadvantages. I agree that the population of the Valley has grown to the point where it can be and probably should be responsible for the decisions that will affect its future. I would also like to know how this would affect our taxes and whether we would have a substantial increase in order to support the many services and offices that must be paid out of L.A. County and city taxes. Would such a decision result in a duplication of services or increase the bureaucracy needed to provide what it takes to operate a city?

We need more information, and the time is now, as I suspect this will soon be on a ballot where uninformed people will be asked to vote on such an important issue.

VIRGINIA L. ROCKHOLD

Reseda

* Valley City, Calif., has a nice ring to it. . . . However, the one thing that troubles me is the size and population of the San Fernando Valley. With a population of 1.5 million and an area that stretches from Universal City to Woodland Hills, Valley City would be too big to be responsive to the needs of a particular community--a major reason for seceding in the first place.

I believe the Valley should be divided into smaller cities. This would better serve residents by providing “true” local governments. . . . Potential cities like Encino, Woodland Hills, Chatsworth and Arleta would be better off [on their own], rather than as [communities] of a larger city.

JOE PUNONGBAYAN

Woodland Hills