BELMONT NO CRIME BUT ... IT'S A 'PUBLIC WORKS DISASTER OF BIBLICAL PROPORTIONS,' D.A.SAYS.

Byline: Beth Barrett Staff Writer

A two-year investigation of Los Angeles Unified School District's unfinished Belmont Learning Center found a ``public works disaster of biblical proportions'' but no criminality, Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley said Monday.

Cooley said he was disappointed that the $1.6 million investigation failed to unearth evidence that would have led to criminal prosecutions over the $166 million downtown high school, which sits atop a shallow oil field and an earthquake fault.

``Would I have liked to haul someone in by the collar? Absolutely ... It would have been a happy day,'' Cooley said during a news conference at which he described how prosecutors had felt a deep and ``visceral'' anger toward what the LAUSD had done.

``But we have to go where the facts lead us and that's where we went.''

Superintendent Roy Romer said while ``we are all very sorry mistakes were made on this project, ... what this is talking about is the old LAUSD. We are completely different now.''

``We have put in place many of the changes and environmental controls that are suggested in the reports,'' he said. ``We are confident of our ability to move forward with the aggressive building program that taxpayers have supported to relieve overcrowding the district.''

Romer is exploring whether Belmont can be salvaged, possibly in a new reconfiguration on the site, and at what cost.

School board President Caprice Young said she was surprised there were no indictments, adding, ``Everyone needs to take the findings to heart.'' Board member David Tokofsky, who has been a leading critic of Belmont, said plans for the 5,000-student school were faulty from the start.

``Whether it's malfeasance or misfeasance, it never made sense for kids educationally,'' Tokofsky said.

Prosecutors said the report underscored the importance of a strong and independent inspector general.

LAUSD Inspector General Don Mullinax produced an exhaustive report on Belmont in September 1999, and referred seven key players to federal, state and local prosecutors for possible violations of environmental, hazardous waste and education laws.

No agency prosecuted based on those referrals, and Cooley attacked District Attorney Gil Garcetti's finding of noncriminality during the 2000 campaign, which Garcetti lost. Cooley said he broadened this investigation's scope, but still found no financial crimes, including bribery, grand theft or securities law violations.

Mullinax declined comment.

Roger Carrick, Mullinax's former special counsel on Belmont, issued a statement charging Cooley with lowering the bar for environmental compliance ``when it comes to protecting our children and their schools.''

``Mr. Cooley should be ashamed of himself. Today Mr. Cooley simply reaffirmed his office's prior whitewash of Belmont.''

Cooley said the investigation was anything but a whitewash.

``I know what our office did. I know what the lawyers did in this case. I'm very pleased and proud of what we did,'' he said.

This was the second high-profile District Attorney's Office investigation within five months to end without prosecutions. In November, Cooley declined to file charges in 82 Rampart cases investigated by the Los Angeles Police Department, citing insufficient evidence and the unrealiability of former rogue cop Rafael Perez as a witness.

Cooley said the LAUSD bungled Belmont from the outset by not using a competitive bid process, and warned the district against ever again using a ``design build'' process in which taxpayers risk paying more.

Dominic Shambra, who oversaw Belmont for the LAUSD until he retired in January 1998, felt vindicated.

``So we're clear, what's the news? It's not a surprise.''

Shambra said Belmont was the victim of its own ``complexity,'' and of union and political forces. ``It was strictly bad politics.''

But Shambra said he agreed with the D.A.'s assessment of the district at the time.

``The district needed to be hit; they didn't know what the hell they were doing,'' he said. ``I admit the district needed to be turned around.''

Prosecutors investigated whether Shambra might have been bribed by Kajima to support selection of the development team, but found he had not been.

The $6,279 check from Kajima Construction Services on March 20,1999, went to a firm, N.S. Construction, owned by Shambra's son, Nick, who endorsed the check to his father for partial repayment of debts.

``Dominic Shambra's interpretation of the circumstantial evidence of the $6,279 check is reasonable, consistent with the evidence, and points to innocence,'' the report said.

Shambra's attorney was Curt Livesay, whom Cooley since has hired to be his second-in-command. Cooley said Livesay recused himself from all aspects of the Belmont investigation.

Scott Wildman, the former Burbank-Glendale assemblyman who led the state's review of Belmont, called the report ``really disappointing.''

``That's amazing,'' said Wildman, now a consultant. ``This fiasco, I think, was rife with stretching the law at least. We did our Assembly report, and we felt clearly this could be classified as a toxic waste area.''

David Koff, a Hotel and Restaurant Workers Union Local 11 researcher who was a key critic of the project, questioned the report.

``I doubt we've heard the last of Belmont, any more than we've heard the last of Rampart. I don't think the report tells the whole story.''

Anthony G. Patchett, who headed the Belmont Task Force until Cooley removed him July 21, 2001, said the report contradicts what was in the LAUSD inspector general's report and the findings of his investigation.

Patchett said grand jury time reserved for Belmont was canceled, and that he was gagged last November - after having left the task force - in an advisory letter from Cooley's office not to disclose anything he learned during the investigation.

Cooley said Patchett ``passionately'' believed there must be criminal culpability involved in such a public works disaster.

But the D.A. said that over a three-day briefing period in July 2001, it became ``very clear'' that the criminal theories presented were not supported by facts.

Cooley said the grand jury was used to subpoena financial records, but that the 343 witnesses cooperated voluntarily with investigators.

INVESTIGATION HIGHLIGHTS

Here are the highlights of Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley's Belmont Learning Center investigation:

ENVIRONMENTAL:

--The District Attorney's Office concluded that the school site is not contaminated with hazardous waste, as defined in California's Hazardous Waste Control Law. Methane and hydrogen sulfide gases were the product of an oil field and, as such, not subject to state law.

--The site could be managed satisfactorily by installing a mitigation system, as is done at similar building sites in Los Angeles.

--The Los Angeles Unified School District, Temple Beaudry Partners and Turmer/Kajima ``acted in a reasonable manner'' in attempting to address the soil's gas problems as they were discovered.

DEVELOPER SELECTION:

--Attorney David Cartwright, with the firm O'Melveny & Myers, did not have a conflict of interest in working on Belmont for the LAUSD, while the firm had a business relationship with Kajima International. Cartwright was not a ``public officer,'' the firm had at most a ``remote interest'' and the LAUSD had waived any potential conflict.

OPENING MEETING LAW:

--Some LAUSD Board of Education meetings may have failed to comply with the state's Brown Act, but ``intentional misconduct'' could not be established. The board has since modified its open meeting practices and now appears to be in ``full compliance'' with the law.

BRIBERY:

--There was insufficient evidence to prove that Kajima bribed or attempted to bribe LAUSD Planning Director Dominic Shambra. ``There is a legally viable alternative explanation of funds passing between them.''

SECURITIES LAW:

--Neither failure to disclose possible retail use for a part of Belmont nor environmental concerns met the legal test of ``material omission'' in issuing tax-exempt securities.

--The district was ``fully committed to preserving'' the tax-exempt status of these certificates of participation.

SUBCONTRACTOR BILLING:

--A review of each claim of a billing violation showed that ``neither (Temple) Beaudry Partners, nor Turner/Kajima, nor the six subject subcontractors intentionally overbilled for work performed on the project.'' The LAUSD's breach of contract and its handling of the project after it was shut down were the main sources of billing problems.

CONSPIRACY:

--The theory of a conspiracy was ``highly speculative'' and did not meet the ``stringent evidentiary requirements'' for a criminal prosecution. --There was no direct evidence from a purported co-conspirator, insider or knowledgeable witness of an illegal agreement, which would be needed to prove a criminal conspiracy.

CAPTION(S):

photo, 2 boxes, map

Photo:

The Belmont Learning Center as it appeared in late 1999.

Box:

(1) BELMONT LEARNING CENTER CHRONOLOGY

Warren Huskey/Staff Artist

(2) INVESTIGATION HIGHLIGHTS (see text)

Map:

Active fault line verified