And now the Regents and the donors are the target of a lawsuit. This problem, as we have noted oh so many times, might have been avoided by a) scaling down the project to something reasonable, and b) talking and negotiating with those folks and interests in the community that had concerns about the project. UCLA bulled ahead, however, getting the donors to sign a letter stating that no alternative was OK. Ironically, that step opened the door to a legal challenge since state environmental law requires a review of alternatives. Ruling out alternatives meant that the alternative review that UCLA purported to make was essentially a sham. One of the Regents pointed this fact out back at the July Regents meeting. By bulling ahead, in short, UCLA has succeeded in embarrassing a major donor. Read on:
==============
Save Westwood
Village: A Business-Community Alliance
Dedicated to Quality Revitalization
SAVE WESTWOOD
VILLAGE CHALLENGES UC
REGENTS APPROVAL OF 250 ROOM UCLA LUSKIN HOTEL
Los Angeles – Save Westwood Village
filed suit today in Los Angeles Superior Court to challenge the UC Regents’
September 11, 2012 approval of the 250 room $162 million UCLA Luskin Hotel on Lot 6, adjacent to Pauley Pavilion. UCLA hotel donors
Renee and Meyer Luskin are named as real parties in interest. The mission of
the University of
California is research
and teaching, not operating hotels. Save Westwood Village
supports a conference center but not a UCLA hotel financed by bonds secured
with student housing fees.
The lawsuit alleges environmental impacts from UCLA’s
failure to pay local taxes for the Luskin Hotel and existing UCLA hotels,
inadequate fire protection service in Westwood, pre-commitment regarding
alternative projects, and violation of city zoning.
Based on square footage, the Luskin Conference and Guest Center
is 91.5 percent hotel. It will charge $224/night but not collect the city’s
15.5 percent hotel and tourism tax. The hotel tax has a profound impact on the
environment by funding vital city services including emergency fire and police
service. UC Santa Cruz collected this tax for the University Inn; UC Davis’ Hyatt Place
collects local hotel taxes; Cal Poly Pomona’s on-campus Kellogg-West Conference
Center and the USC
Radisson also collect this tax.
Whether on or off campus, part of a hotel chain or managed
by the campus, only federal/state employees, Federal Credit Union employees, or
foreign diplomats are exempt from Los Angeles transient occupancy tax. UCLA does not collect this tax at any of its
hotels on or off campus (Tiverton House, Faculty Guest House, Courtside Collection
and dorms rented during the summer).
In 2008 the L.A. Fire Department reported that service in
the area was inadequate. It is even worse now. LAFD receives about 1100 calls
from the UCLA campus annually that cost the city at least $1.7 million. With
the addition of the Luskin hotel to existing campus hotels, UCLA deprives the
city of millions of dollars needed for our firefighters and other critical city
services.
CEQA requires an objective analysis of alternatives. In
March UC Regents refused to approve financing for the Luskin Hotel and required
UCLA to explore less costly and risky alternatives including the purchase an
existing hotel. Instead of a good faith evaluation of alternatives, the Regents
received a secret letter from the Luskins dated July 3, 2012, that insisted on Lot 6. That letter short-circuited the evaluation of
alternatives. On July 17, six weeks prior to the release of the Final EIR, the
Regents approved a financial plan similar to the one they refused to approve in
March. Certification of the Final EIR on September 11, 2012, did not address
alternatives because the commitment to a hotel on Lot
6 had already been made in July.
UCLA’s campus is zoned Public Facilities in the Westwood
Community Plan. A hotel is not permitted in this zone. In 1999 UCLA received a
zone variance from Los Angeles
for cell towers on campus. The approval states that the campus is subject to
city zoning.
UC is a public trust that requires its Regents to exercise
due diligence. The Regents failed to uphold their duty by accepting inaccurate
and nonsensical responses to their tough questions and backing down from their
demand for less costly alternatives.
Attached is a copy of the conformed complaint.
Laura
Lake, Ph.D., Co-President
Save Westwood
Village
A Business-Community Alliance
Dedicated to Quality Revitalization
310-470-4522
1557
Westwood Blvd. #235, Los Angeles, CA 90024You can read the lawsuit below:
Does this case already solved? I’m just curious…
ReplyDeleteGeoffrey@Little Hotels Spain