ShareThis Page
World

Billionaire drops quest to split California into 3 parts

| Friday, Aug. 10, 2018, 6:48 a.m.
FILE - In this Aug. 5, 2015 file photo, executive producer Tim Draper participates in the 'Startup U' panel at the Disney/ABC Summer TCA Tour at the Beverly Hilton Hotel in Beverly Hills, Calif. Draper, the billionaire behind a proposal to split California in three says he's giving up on the effort after the state Supreme Court knocked it off the Nov. 2018 ballot. (Photo by Richard Shotwell/Invision/AP, File)
Richard Shotwell/Invision/AP
FILE - In this Aug. 5, 2015 file photo, executive producer Tim Draper participates in the 'Startup U' panel at the Disney/ABC Summer TCA Tour at the Beverly Hilton Hotel in Beverly Hills, Calif. Draper, the billionaire behind a proposal to split California in three says he's giving up on the effort after the state Supreme Court knocked it off the Nov. 2018 ballot. (Photo by Richard Shotwell/Invision/AP, File)
FILE - In this July 15, 2014 file photo, Silicon Valley venture capitalist Tim Draper presents his drivers license for identification purposes to Heather Ditty, elections manager for the Sacramento County Registrar of Voters, as he turns in boxes of petitions for a ballot initiative that would ask voters to split California into six separate states in Sacramento, Calif. The court struck venture capitalist Draper's initiative from the ballot in July 2018 as part of a legal challenge in response to a lawsuit but didn't rule on the merits of the case. Draper says he's giving up on the effort after the state Supreme Court knocked it off the November 2018 ballot. (AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli, File)
FILE - In this July 15, 2014 file photo, Silicon Valley venture capitalist Tim Draper presents his drivers license for identification purposes to Heather Ditty, elections manager for the Sacramento County Registrar of Voters, as he turns in boxes of petitions for a ballot initiative that would ask voters to split California into six separate states in Sacramento, Calif. The court struck venture capitalist Draper's initiative from the ballot in July 2018 as part of a legal challenge in response to a lawsuit but didn't rule on the merits of the case. Draper says he's giving up on the effort after the state Supreme Court knocked it off the November 2018 ballot. (AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli, File)

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — The billionaire behind a measure to split California in three said he’s giving up on the effort to reimagine the nation’s most populous state after the state Supreme Court knocked it off the November ballot.

“The political environment for radical change is right now,” venture capitalist Tim Draper wrote in a letter to the court dated Aug. 2 and made public by his opponents Thursday. “The removal of Proposition 9 from the November ballot has effectively put an end to this movement.”

The court struck Draper’s measure in July in response to a lawsuit but didn’t rule on the merits of the case, allowing Draper the opportunity to fight to put it on future ballots. He’s not moving forward with the case.

Draper spent more than $1.7 million to qualify his initiative for the ballot, which requires gathering hundreds of thousands of signatures.

It’s not his first effort to break up California — his plan to split the state into six didn’t qualify for past ballots. He’s argued California has become ungovernable due to its size and diversity, politically and geographically.

The latest plan would have divided California into three pieces. One would comprise the Bay Area, Silicon Valley, Sacramento and the rest of Northern California; the second would be a strip of land from Los Angeles to Monterey; and the third would include San Diego, the Central Valley and Orange County.

The Planning and Conservation League sued to keep Draper’s initiative off the ballot, arguing that such a massive change to the state’s governance couldn’t be done through a ballot initiative.

“At the end of the day, this was a billionaire’s massive and illegal use of the initiative process, and the court was correct in stopping this folly,” Carlyle Hall, an attorney who worked on the suit with the environmental group.

Draper, meanwhile, said he had “no idea” if his initiative would have passed or if Congress would have given the necessary approval for the split but that the ballot measure would have spurred debate over government failings.

“I wanted to let the voters debate, discuss and think about a different way forward — essentially a reboot. And, I wanted the political class to hear and witness the frustration of California’s voters with decades of inaction and decay,” he wrote. “I believed there was significant benefit to our democracy in that.”

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me