GROUP SAYS VALLEY IS OWED $5 BILLION.

Byline: Harrison Sheppard Staff Writer

San Fernando Valley secessionists claimed Thursday that Valley taxpayers have paid up to $5 billion more to Los Angeles than they have gotten back in services - a figure immediately dismissed by opponents as a meaningless guess.

Secession leaders used the estimate to bolster their argument that the Valley already has paid for police and fire stations, libraries and other municipal property, and shouldn't have to buy them from Los Angeles if the Valley becomes a separate city.

``We believe that number's important, because when they say the Valley should have to pay for assets in the Valley, we argue we've already paid for those assets plus we've given the city of L.A. $5 billion,'' said Jeff Brain, president of Valley Voters Organized Toward Empowerment.

Both Valley VOTE and the city formally responded in critical terms to the study made for the county's Local Agency Formation Commission, which is overseeing the secession process.

In October, LAFCO consultants released a report spelling out some proposals for cityhood but also leaving many unanswered questions, such as whether the Valley city would own municipal assets within its boundaries.

Called a draft Comprehensive Fiscal Analysis, it will ultimately lead to the final plan that could go before voters as early as November 2002.

The city's response said LAFCO's report for the Valley and Harbor-area secession proposals had ``serious shortcomings.''

``We do not believe the draft CFAs are practical or complete,'' said the report by City Administrative Officer Bill Fujioka.

The draft Valley CFA also proposed that the Valley city have a part-time council earning nominal salaries.

But in its response Thursday, Valley VOTE proposed that the new Valley city have a full-time city council with members paid $75,000 a year, and a full-time mayor paid $100,000. The council would have 14 members holding district-based seats, while the mayor would be elected Valleywide and would preside over council meetings.

By comparison, each of the 15 Los Angeles City Council members is paid $133,000 a year and the mayor gets more than $172,000.

``We believe it will require a full-time council to run a city this size, and that in order to attract quality people they need to get fair compensation,'' Brain said. ``It should be noted it's considerably less than what the current City Council gets - just about half.''

Also for the first time, Valley VOTE released a detailed list of the Los Angeles assets it hopes a new Valley city would acquire at no cost, including six police stations, 35 fire stations and 19 libraries, along with animal shelters, public parks, recreation centers, senior-citizen buildings, offices, parking lots, maintenance yards and various other facilities.

Valley VOTE argued that Valley taxpayers paid for one-third of all assets citywide, but said the new city would give up its claim to assets south of Mulholland Drive in exchange for full rights at no cost to all city of Los Angeles property now located in the Valley.

Los Angeles County Counsel Lloyd Pellman, however, has said that under state law, the Valley city would have to pay for those assets, potentially a price tag that would be out of the new city's reach.

Pellman's legal opinion also said LAFCO does not have the power to take away property from the city without requiring compensation. Alternately, the Valley city could lease the property or Los Angeles could retain control under a service-contract arrangement.

Los Angeles officials have indicated they might be willing to negotiate for a transfer of assets at no cost, if all other issues are settled so that the city is not financially harmed in a split.

``An important point of negotiation for the city is that the new Valley city, if one is to exist, would share in its proportional share of the total liability of the city,'' said Tim McOsker, chief of staff to Mayor James Hahn. ``Those are issues that need to be resolved to keep the city whole before the city could consider the transfer of assets.'

Brain said the $5 billion difference between what the Valley pays and what it gets back was a rough estimate. It was partly based on a 1977 study done by a pro-secession group called CIVICC, or Committee Investigating Valley Independent City/County, which claimed that the Valley paid $247 million more to Los Angeles that year than it got back and partly based on LAFCO's finding that the Valley now pays $60 million more annually.

Valley VOTE then added up estimates of the years in between and came up with the figure.

Attorney Jeff Daar, one of the organizers of the Valley-based anti-secession group One Los Angeles, said the 1977 figure likely was tilted in favor of the secession group and that Valley VOTE had nothing but guesses for the years in between.

``It sounds like speculating and doing guesswork,'' Daar said. ``It's end-result driven.''

Brain responded: ``It's an estimate. Let's assume we're off by a lot - even by half. Two and a half billion dollars is still a lot of money.''

DIVIDING THE PIE

Here are assets the Valley wants:

Six police stations (one under construction)

35 fire stations

19 libraries

131 parks and recreation centers

Two animal shelters

13 municipal buildings

28 miscellaneous facilities

In exchange for these, the new Valley city would give up its ownership right and interest in municipal assets located outside the Valley. Utilities:

The Valley also wants to be part of a new regional entity, such as a regional utility district, that would own and operate systems for water, power, sewer and solid-waste management.

Harbor and airports:

Both cities would have an ownership interest and a share in control of the harbor and airports, based on population.

CAPTION(S):

box

Box:

DIVIDING THE PIE (see text)

- SOURCE: Valley Study Foundation Inc.