The response indicates that consultation was conducted with the local neighboring groups. At the community forum - whose audio you can find on an earlier blog post - residents seemed not to have been aware of the proposal until the very recent news items appeared. There is reference to consultation with the Carter family which also seems to be contradicted by the spokesperson from the family at that forum. Finally, there is reference to consultation with academic leaders. However, it appears from a recent Academic Senate action that the matter has only very recently been referred to an appropriate Senate committee.
The court decision to which the official response refers occurred in the late summer of 2010. The fact that only now are protests coming from the Carter family, neighbors, and others and only now is there a referral to a Senate committee suggests that the whatever consultation there may have been was extremely limited.
Some people yours truly has talked with have tended to view the process - particularly the 2010 court filing in Alameda - as a conspiracy to keep this matter secret until it was too late to object. But since there has already been one letter of protest from a current member of the LA City Council (Paul Koretz - see an earlier blog post), I am reminded of an old quote from a former City Council member - Ruth Galanter (photo above left) - suggesting an alternative explanation:
"I used to believe in conspiracies until I discovered incompetence."
Below is the official response from EVC Waugh:
From: Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost <provost@ucla.edu>
Date: February 3, 2012 12:53:03 PM EST
To: {name of recipient}
Subject: Hannah Carter Japanese Garden
Date: February 3, 2012 12:53:03 PM EST
To: {name of recipient}
Subject: Hannah Carter Japanese Garden
Dear {name of recipient}:
Chancellor Gene Block
has asked me to respond on his behalf to your message about the pending sale of
the Hannah Carter Japanese Garden.
While we are sensitive
to your concerns and those of others who value the garden as a special place,
it is not used for our primary mission of teaching and research. Each year,
UCLA spends approximately $120,000 to maintain the garden. It is located in a
residential neighborhood and has no dedicated on-site parking; the only
available parking (three spaces) is on adjacent property leased to the
University on a short-term basis. These facts, which were unknown in 1964 when
then-UC Regent Edward W. Carter made his gift to the University, now make our
continued operation of the garden extremely problematic. A sale at this
time will help us realize Regent Carter’s expressed philanthropic intent to
benefit UCLA’s academic programs.
The process we
followed in reaching a decision to sell the residence and garden was
deliberate, exhaustive and open. The Restructuring Steering Committee, a body I
chair to evaluate ways to adjust to sharp reductions in state support, in 2009
publicly identified the garden and residence for potential sale, as well as
other properties owned by the Regents and managed by UCLA. Since that
time, we have consulted with a broad array of interested groups and
individuals, including representatives of the Carter family, academic
leadership on campus and the Bel-Air Homeowner’s Association, to discuss the
reasons we need to sell. We also have been in contact with groups and
individuals interested in maintaining the garden, allowed them to view the
property and encouraged bids. At this time, the bidding process is expected to
begin in early February and conclude in May, allowing all prospective bidders
to review the property and gather resources toward a purchase.
Throughout the
process, we were mindful of our obligation to Regent Carter, who died in 1996
and whose gift to the University included both a commitment to provide the
residence and funding to acquire an adjacent Japanese garden. The original
agreement with Carter expressly envisioned the University’s sale of the home if
the University did not desire to use it as a Chancellor’s residence. A
subsequent agreement noted that the UC Board of Regents did not wish to use the
home as a residence and stipulated that proceeds from its sale would be used to
establish specific professorships in support of UCLA’s academic mission and an
endowment to maintain the garden. Regent Carter could not have envisioned that
the garden’s maintenance costs would exceed the estimated payout from the
endowment by approximately $100,000 per year. Nor could he have envisioned the
complete lack of available parking, the result of a mistaken property
description, and the constraints it placed on operating a public garden.
For all these reasons,
we determined that continued maintenance of the garden was impractical and an
impediment to our ability to meet Regent Carter’s intent that his gift benefit
our academic mission. In September 2010, a judge agreed with our reasoning and
cleared the way for the sale.
I want to assure you
that we are wholeheartedly committed to honoring the philanthropic intent of
Regent Carter to benefit UCLA’s academic programs. Together, the garden and the
residence are valued at approximately $15 million. Consistent with the
agreement, $4.2 million from the proceeds of the sale will be used to establish
professorships and endowments for programs across campus, from the arts to
medicine to management. Any additional revenues from the sale of the residence
and garden will be available for other campus priorities at the discretion of
the Chancellor.
To further honor
Regent Carter’s gift and Mrs. Carter’s passion for the garden, we have removed
four representative artifacts and are caring for them at the Fowler Museum at
UCLA while we determine an appropriate method and location for their public
display.
While we value the
beauty, serenity and cultural heritage of the garden, we have concluded that it
is best to use our limited resources for our core priorities of teaching and
research rather than to maintain a public garden that serves no academic
purpose. We have taken reasonable and responsible steps to address concerns and
share information and have followed all necessary and appropriate legal and
internal channels to evaluate the feasibility of the sale. I trust you will
appreciate our position and understand that we have treated this issue with the
careful consideration and respect it deserves.
Sincerely,
Scott L. Waugh, Executive Vice Chancellor and
Provost
No comments:
Post a Comment