No Free Land for Valley City, Lawyer Says

In a setback to proponents of San Fernando Valley cityhood, lawyers for the commission planning a referendum on secession have found that Los Angeles cannot be forced to give up parks, libraries and other property without compensation.

Secessionists are seeking the transfer of all city property in the Valley, along with fleets of garbage trucks, street sweepers, firetrucks and police cars. They contend that Valley taxpayers are entitled to a fair share without payment to Los Angeles.

But in an opinion released Monday, Los Angeles County Counsel Lloyd W. Pellman advised the commission handling secession that in most cases it could not order the transfer of city assets without payment.

Secessionists said they disagreed with the legal opinion.

The opinion raised the possibility that a Valley city could be forced to raise millions of dollars to buy some of its basic infrastructure. Among other things, Pellman found, the Valley city would have to pay Los Angeles for parks, libraries, firehouses and police stations. And if the economic slump persists beyond 2002, it would have to do so as local governments are struggling to avert service cuts amid a drop in tax revenue.

Pellman said the state constitution bars any “taking” of assets from Los Angeles in the same way it prohibits seizure of property from private citizens without “just compensation.” Los Angeles city officials had no cost estimate on the city’s Valley properties.

The only major assets that could be legally transferred without payment, Pellman said, are city streets. Los Angeles could also be forced to transfer any property previously donated for public use, but officials were not immediately clear how much, if any, there might be.

Pellman’s opinion offered guidance to the county Local Agency Formation Commission, which is drafting terms of a referendum on secession that could go before voters next November.

To Valley VOTE, the group pushing for secession, it was a major blow.

“It’s clearly not the opinion we wanted,” said Valley VOTE Chairman Richard Close. “We need to have our assets.”

Secessionists fear it will be tougher to persuade Valley voters to support secession if Los Angeles were to keep nearly all city property. If the issue reaches the ballot, it would require the approval of both a majority of voters in the Valley and a majority of voters in the city as a whole to pass.

Close said he still expects LAFCO to order the transfer of city assets--with or without compensation. If payment is required, he suggested the Valley city could spread its payments to Los Angeles over 30 years--or it could float bonds to pay for them upfront. The Valley city might also lease them from Los Angeles for $1 a year, he said.

“Where does it say it has to be c.o.d.?” he asked.

Pellman’s opinion further complicates the immensely complex task of devising a final blueprint for breaking apart the nation’s second-largest city government. LAFCO is struggling to meet a series of legal deadlines for reports and hearings to put the proposal on the November 2002 ballot. And now it might need to have city property in the Valley appraised before it can devise a compensation package for Los Angeles.

“I don’t think an asset transfer can be put on the ballot without compensation,” said City Councilwoman Cindy Miscikowski, a LAFCO board member.

Los Angeles Mayor James K. Hahn has said the city might eventually agree to transfer some assets to a Valley city but has also suggested it might demand compensation.

Despite the setback on assets, secessionists gained ground on another front Monday: LAFCO Executive Officer Larry J. Calemine said the agency will resume its work on a proposal for Hollywood secession from Los Angeles.

Valley secession advocates hope proposals for both Hollywood and harbor area secession will be on the ballot at the same time as their own, each requiring the same majorities for passage. The more proposals on the ballot, the better the chance of winning voter approval, they believe.

LAFCO had stopped work on the Hollywood proposal because of a lack of state funding for the fiscal study required to put it on the ballot. But leaders of the Hollywood VOTE secession group last week gave LAFCO $150,000 to finish the study. If the study finds that Hollywood secession is feasible, LAFCO could still meet the deadlines to get it on the ballot next November, Calemine said.

LAFCO’s preliminary study found that a harbor city would not be fiscally viable. To put harbor cityhood on the ballot, LAFCO would need to reverse that finding.