Voters Won’t Decide in November Whether to Split California

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

SACRAMENTO — A measure that would divide California into three parts won't appear on the November ballot, the state Supreme Court decided Wednesday, marking the latest defeat for a long-shot push to reimagine the nation's most populous state.

The justices ordered the secretary of state not to put the ballot initiative before voters, saying significant questions have been raised about its validity. The court now will consider a challenge from the Planning and Conservation League.

"We conclude that the potential harm in permitting the measure to remain on the ballot outweighs the potential harm in delaying the proposition to a future election," the justices wrote in a unanimous ruling.

They said time constraints forced them to rule on the issue immediately.

Venture capitalist Tim Draper, who spent more than $1.7 million on his "Cal 3" initiative, has tried for years to split the state, arguing it has become ungovernable because of its size, wealth disparities and geographic diversity. His last attempt to divide California in six didn't gather enough signatures to make the ballot in 2016.

"The whole point of the initiative process was to be set up as a protection from a government that was no longer representing its people. Now that protection has been corrupted," Draper said in a statement. "Whether you agree or not with this initiative, this is not the way democracies are supposed to work."

Howard Penn, the executive director of the Planning and Conservation League, led the charge against the concept. In his argument to the high court, Penn maintained the way Draper pursued his proposal amounted to a misuse of the initiative process, skipping needed approval of the state legislature for a significant constitutional change.

"The citizens initiative process and the way that it was set forth was to amend the constitution, not to revise it or replace it and this basically abolished the California Constitution," Penn said.

The environmental group's lawsuit says major changes to the state's government structure require approval from two-thirds of the Legislature before being considered by voters or a state constitutional convention.

Penn's group was also very concerned about the measure because of how it could impact its past achievements, like the California Environmental Quality Act.

Draper has argued that the measure doesn't go beyond what voters can enact through an initiative. If passed, it would be only the first step toward splitting the state, he said.

Penn knows Draper could easily bring his idea back, going to lawmakers first. He doesn't think it would pass muster there and then.

"You can't add another state to the union without Congress approving it," Penn said.

The initiative, which could appear on a future ballot if the court ultimately rules in its favor, seeks to divide the state into Northern California, California and Southern California.

Northern California would comprise the Bay Area, Silicon Valley, Sacramento and counties north of the state capital. California would be a strip of land along the coast stretching from Los Angeles to Monterey. Southern California would include Fresno and the surrounding farming communities, reaching to San Diego and the Mexican border.

Supporters gathered signatures from hundreds of thousands of Californians, and the secretary of state in June announced they had enough to get the effort on the general election ballot.

The justices' decision leaves 11 ballot measures for voters to weigh in November.

See below for the total number of signatures collected in each California county.

Notice: you are using an outdated browser. Microsoft does not recommend using IE as your default browser. Some features on this website, like video and images, might not work properly. For the best experience, please upgrade your browser.