BILL REKINDLES OBJECTIONS TO SECESSION VOTE.

Byline: Rick Orlov Daily News Staff Writer

With a new measure in the state Legislature to restore the power of self-determination to Los Angeles communities, city officials began mapping strategy Wednesday to deal with the volatile issue - possibly producing rival legislation.

Council opponents said their main complaint with AB 62 - introduced Tuesday by Assemblyman Tom McClintock, R-Granada Hills - is not over the fact that it would strip the City Council of its veto power over any secession drive.

Rather it centers on the provision that would require a secession vote only in the area seeking to leave the city, and not through citywide balloting.

As a result, there is discussion at the higher levels of City Hall on whether to find a sponsor for a measure that would require a citywide vote on secession if the council relinquishes its veto power.

``We are looking at whether it would be feasible to seek such legislation that could serve as a compromise,'' said one official, who asked not to be identified.

Chief Legislative Analyst Ron Deaton, who wields considerable influence with the City Council, said the council has yet to take an official position on McClintock's measure but he expects it to do so by the time it is assigned and heard in an Assembly committee.

``Our concerns remain the same,'' Deaton said. ``If you are talking about a large part of the city wanting to leave, then the entire city should decide it. When you're talking about an area the size of the San Fernando Valley, or the harbor area or Westchester, it will have a major impact on everyone in the city.''

Efforts to reach McClintock for comment Wednesday were unsuccessful.

His bill, known as the People's Right to Self-Determination Act, is a carbon copy of the bill introduced last year by his predecessor, Republican Paula Boland.

In debating the Boland bill last spring, the council voted 8-6 to oppose it unless it included a citywide balloting on any secession drive.

The city lobbied heavily against the Boland measure with several city officials testifying frequently against the proposal.

At the end of the legislative session in August, when Boland agreed to accept a citywide vote as a compromise on the Senate floor, city lobbyists and powerful Democrats representing central Los Angeles districts fought successfully to kill the bill by a narrow margin.

But the battle raised the profile of the self-determination issue, and prompted efforts in other parts of the city - most notably the San Pedro and Wilmington areas as well as in Westchester and Venice - to explore their own secession efforts.

Council President John Ferraro said Wednesday that he would be willing to look at an alternative to the McClintock bill in which the entire city would have a say if any one portion wanted to break away.

In addition, he said, he would like to include the proposals made in the previous legislative session by Senate President Pro Tem Bill Lockyer, D-Hayward, for a study on the statewide impact of secession.

``We aren't living in a vacuum,'' Ferraro said. ``We should be looking at how this affects not only Los Angeles but every other part of the state.''

Ferraro also has said the measure should apply statewide and not only to the city of Los Angeles. Boland fashioned her bill to apply only to Los Angeles by saying it should apply solely to cities with 2 million population or greater.

Councilman Mike Feuer, whose district includes a large portion of the Valley, said it would make some sense to have a citywide vote since Boland had come around to accept such a proposal. Feuer and Ferraro, who also represents a Valley swing district, cast the deciding council votes to oppose the Boland bill.

``I have no desire for the council to keep its veto power,'' Feuer said. ``But this issue affects the entire city, and the entire city should have a say.''

Mayor Richard Riordan has maintained the same position he took on the Boland bill, saying that he supports removing the City Council veto but would fight any secession effort, said spokeswoman Noelia Rodriguez.

The McClintock bill does not face an easy road. Last year, Boland, who lost a state Senate bid Nov. 5, got her bill passed in the Republican-controlled Assembly, largely because key Democrats were out of the room when the vote came up.

Democrats are now in control of the Assembly, and even if the bill does clear the lower house, it is expected to face the same problems it had in the last session.

Lockyer said he still wants to have a comprehensive study to determine the statewide impact of secession, just as he proposed last year, said spokesman Sandy Harrison.

``Even though this bill only affects Los Angeles, the senator wants issues addressed that would provide a statewide overview,'' Harrison said.

In the debate over the Boland measure, Lockyer said he wanted an 18-month study on state secession laws combined with a $1.2 million economic analysis of a Valley split from the city.

Boland rejected Lockyer's amendments, and called for a vote on the Senate floor where she ultimately lost her battle.

City Council members now appear to be as divided over the McClintock measure as they were over the Boland bill.

``This is strictly a matter of self-determination, and we should allow that,'' said harbor-area Councilman Rudy Svorinich. ``We live in a country that is still a democracy.''

Councilman Richard Alarcon, whose district is in the Northeast Valley, said he remained a supporter of the concept in the McClintock bill.

``I supported the Boland bill, and I support this,'' Alarcon said. ``But what it all shows is that we have to do more to make people want to remain in the city.''

Councilman Richard Alatorre, who represents the east side, said he could not support the measure unless the entire city can vote.

``We have to look at the city as a whole,'' Alatorre said. ``We are all in this together and everyone should have a say.''