What have you heard about SECESSION

What parts of the city are trying to secede? When will it go to a vote? When is the last time a city seceded from another city?

Do you know how secession could affect you? Why are people talking about secession?

Facts about the attempt to break up the City of Los Angeles

Table of Contents A. The Basics B. How We Got Here C. Where We’re Going D. Secession Dangers

Two areas could be broken off from the City of L.A.:

San Fernando Valley Hollywood

These areas would become their own, separate cities. Their proposed boundaries:

Valley

Hollywood

Total seceding population: 40% of current L.A. residents 1.5 million residents Would leave the City of L.A.

Secession is governed by the L.A. County Local Agency Formation Commission, or LAFCO, a governing body with jurisdiction over incorporations. LAFCO has decided to put Valley and Hollywood secession on the November ballot.

Timeline : How We Got Here

The Players Convene: 1975: Hal Bernson, Paula Boland, Bert Boeckmann, Bobbi Fiedler, Larry J. Calemine and Sandor Winger found the Valley secessionist organization CIVICC.. Committee Investigating Valley Independent City / County

The Players Take Their Positions: 1979: Hal Bernson elected to L.A. City Council. 1995: Larry J. Calemine becomes Executive Director of LAFCO and hires Sandor Winger as Deputy.

1997: Authored by Paula Boland and put forth by Tom McClintock and Bob Hertzberg, this bill removes the right of the L.A. City Council to veto a proposed secession plan. AB62 is passed in the state assembly: Thou shalt not veto.

January 9, 2002: LAFCO issues a final Comprehensive Fiscal Analysis of Valley and Harbor secession. It specifies that in order to be viable, the proposed cities would have to rely on the City of L.A. to provide virtually all municipal services. CFA:

Timeline: Where We’re Going from Here

November 5, 2002: Election BOTH 50% of voters in the seceding area AND 50% of voters in City of L.A. as a whole must vote yes for secession to pass.

City Council Elections for Proposed Cities: Elections for the city councils that will govern the proposed cities will also be on the ballot alongside the secession vote. Candidates will file to run for mayor or city council from July 15 through August 9.

This means that candidates for Valley and Hollywood mayors and council members must run a Nov campaign – without knowing whether secession will pass. There will be no runoffs. These will be the people who will govern the proposed cities during the highly volatile transition period.

Secession Dangers

LAFCO is currently refusing to calculate the process of transferring employees and municipal services from the City to the new cities. Without a detailed plan for reorganization, there is no way to know what will likely happen to city employees or service levels until after the proposed cities take over. Workers Lose:

Loss of City Jobs: Funding for 10,265 jobs will be transferred to Valley and Hollywood. Proposed cities can pull this employee funding to contract out or form their own city services, provided they give L.A. 6 months notice. Also, a Valley or Hollywood city council could later reorganize city departments or decide that its city can’t afford certain workers.

Employees whose funding will come from the Valley or Hollywood: 561 Dept. of Parks and Recreation employees 468 Bureau of Sanitation employees 460 General Services Dept. employees 425 Transportation Dept. employees 351 L.A. Public Library employees 4,165 Police Dept. employees 1,224 Fire Dept. employees

Loss of City Charter Worker Protections: By state law, proposed cities must honor existing collective bargaining contracts, but many L.A. worker protections exist not within collectively bargained contracts, but within the City Charter. Proposed cities would be General Law cities and automatically lose all ordinances in the L.A. City Charter.

City Charter protections that would be lost to workers and residents of proposed cities: Civil Service Living Wage Ordinance Equal Benefits Ordinance Responsible Contractor Ordinance Service Contract Worker Retention Ordinance

Later Loss of State Prevailing Wage: If proposed cities later become charter cities, they could opt out of the state Prevailing Wage.

LAFCO has refused to require the proposed cities to recognize current collective bargaining units when they hire their own workers. Union Workers Lose:

City workers’ MOUs expire on the proposed date of their transfer to the new Valley city. Workers will be negotiating new contracts in a city whose likely officials have proven themselves very hostile to labor.

For example, the secession movement’s lead funder, Galpin Ford owner Bert Boeckmann, was found guilty of “unfair labor practices” by the NLRB, after firing 3 of his auto salesmen for attending a union meeting.

Residents Lose: After secession, L.A. would move from the 2 nd largest city in the U.S. to the 3 rd – after Chicago. A proposed Valley city would be # 6 – after Philadelphia. Proposed cities would have a weakened voice in Sacramento and D. C., meaning less state or federal funding for the area as a whole. Loss of City Rank and Funding:

Loss of Rent Control and Housing Trust Fund L.A.’s rent control laws will be lost to residents of the proposed cities. If the city is broken up, a $100 million affordable housing trust fund could not exist. L.A. is depending on motor vehicle fee increases to build this fund, but those fees would be lost to all residents after secession.

Hollywood Residents Lose: A proposed Hollywood city would have to cut services by $10 million over the first three years. Part-time Hollywood council members would each receive salaries of only $9,600 year. A large percentage of Hollywood homeowners and residents have petitioned LAFCO to be left out of the secession plan altogether. Many have been refused.

Residents of Remaining L.A. Lose: The remaining City of L.A. will have to reorganize and downsize departments, which could lead to service cuts for residents and job loss for workers, even in areas not seceding.

Alimony payments not guaranteed: LAFCO is directing a proposed Valley city to pay the City of L.A. $128 million in annual mitigation fees. However...

In Sacramento County, the new city council for the newly incorporated Citrus Heights refused to pay the alimony previously agreed upon before incorporation. The dispute went to court, and the new city had its alimony payments cut in half by the judge.

Loss of Businesses to L.A.: Secessionist leaders have stated that proposed cities would pointedly attempt to pull businesses from L.A. to their cities. If forced to compete commercially with a Valley city, the remaining City of L.A. may face a loss of businesses, meaning a further loss of jobs.

Labor’s Strategy Timeline: May - Sept. ‘02: Campaign Preparation Sept. – November 5, 2002: Labor - to - Labor Campaign Possible Labor - to - Neighbor Campaign