Deadline Is Arbitrary

When did November 2002 become the sacrosanct date for putting a vote on San Fernando Valley cityhood on the ballot? For that matter, when did it become a done deal that secession would go to a vote?

State law says only that breakup elections must occur in even-numbered years. But the supposedly neutral Los Angeles County panel charged with analyzing breakup proposals is using this arbitrary deadline--a goal set by Valley VOTE, the very group pushing Valley secession--to flog city officials for “stonewalling” on information and therefore “delaying” an election.

City Councilman and Local Agency Formation Commission member Hal Bernson went so far as to urge his fellow board members to commit to completing their analysis in time for the 2002 general election whether or not they had all the information they needed. This from a panel that is supposed to decide if the proposal should go to a vote, not when.

For Valley VOTE to accuse the city of delaying the study--a charge it has made repeatedly since before the study even got underway--is, of course, self-serving: Anything that makes the city look bad helps the secessionists’ cause. That alone is reason for the city not to drag its feet.

Never mind that Valley VOTE itself has offered only the sketchiest details of how a Valley city would operate police, fire, water and other key services and has never revealed the names of all its financial backers.

The county panel analyzing breakup gave city officials a list of more than 800 questions in August, covering topics as esoteric as where the Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation picks up horse manure. By November, the city had responded to all the questions. That’s stonewalling?

What set Bernson and other LAFCO members off earlier this month was a city report tying tax revenues to zip codes, which LAFCO described as inaccurate and incomplete. Valley VOTE described the Valley figures--35% of the population and 31% of major tax revenues--as “suspiciously low.” (Don’t like the numbers? Attack the source!)

Obstructionist behavior on the city’s part? Or, as the city countered, a preliminary attempt to break down information no one had needed to sort before?

LAFCO Executive Director Larry Calemine once said that breaking up Los Angeles was such a huge undertaking no one even knew what information would be needed--or what a truly realistic deadline would be.

To now turn this unprecedented study into a race toward a secessionist-set deadline may be Valley VOTE’s goal, but it should not be LAFCO’s.