County Backs Extension for Secession Petitions

San Fernando Valley residents seeking a vote on whether to divorce the region from the city of Los Angeles won support from the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday for their efforts to double the length of time allotted for gathering the 135,000 signatures needed to begin the legal process of secession.

Supervisors voted unanimously and without discussion to back proposed state legislation to increase from three to six months the period to gather the signatures. The board’s support means the county will begin to lobby area lawmakers to submit such legislation.

Under state law, residents who wish to break from a city must first gather valid signatures from 25% of the registered voters in the area seeking to secede--in the Valley, this means 135,000. The statute allows either three months or six months--depending on population and type of separation requested--to gather signatures.

If the petitions are valid, they are then turned over to the Local Agency Formation Commission, which studies the feasibility of secession and decides whether to put the question before voters of the entire city.

Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, who submitted Tuesday’s resolution, said it was only fair that the signature-gathering period be extended to six months, because under state law similar movements in small cities already have that long to complete their petitions.

The state legislative counsel’s office ruled verbally last week that the Valley secession drive has six months, not three as leaders of the movement previously believed.

But Richard Close, co-chairman of Valley Voters Organized Toward Empowerment--or Valley VOTE, the organization that wants to put Valley secession on the ballot in Los Angeles--said he is not comfortable relying solely on a legal opinion. Other experts, he said, have interpreted the law to read that because the Valley’s secession would affect more than 100,000 people, a provision in the law kicks in that reduces the signature-gathering time to 90 days.

“The only way to get certainty is to wait for a court to rule or go to a legislative solution,” Close said.

Either way, solving the problem could mean that Valley VOTE will put off its May target date for beginning the drive, Close said.

The group does not expect to be able to gather the signatures in 90 days, Close said. An even less likely option would be to ask a court to rule on the question, because that would take too long and cost too much, he said.

That leaves the legislative solution. If the group persuades a local lawmaker to take up the cause, such a bill would require a two-thirds vote of the Assembly and Senate to make the new rules take effect immediately.

Otherwise, a new law--if passed this year--would not go into effect until next January, and the petition drive would have to begin some time after that.