BELMONT RESURRECTION IS NOT ABOUT THE CHILDREN ROMER'S OUT-OF-THE-BLUE PROPOSAL ONLY BENEFITS LAWYERS, DEVELOPERS.

Byline: Bryan Steele Local View

LOS Angeles Unified School District Superintendent Roy Romer has proposed using private contractors to determine the facts surrounding Belmont.

On its face, Romer's move seems downright responsible. Have expert contractors propose the method, cost, time and indemnity requirements necessary to make Belmont viable. Only through this process, Romer contends, can the truth of Belmont be known.

Besides Romer's effort seeming like a replay of the Belmont Commission, something else is wrong. Almost in the same breath as we heard Romer's proposal, angry LAUSD board members publicly disclosed they previously directed him to sell Belmont as soon as possible.

Yet there is no evidence the superintendent has made any effort to follow the board's directive - just the opposite. Romer's apparent willful act of defiance requires scrutiny.

The basis of Romer's fact-finding effort is to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) to contractors. The problem is that there is no inherent correlation between responses to an RFP and the facts surrounding any project, especially Belmont.

All a contractor needs when responding to an RFP is to estimate what will satisfy the project's needs based on the information supplied. It is then up to the LAUSD to wade through these proposals and decide which are reasonable.

But the potential for RFP shenanigans is significant. In the case of the LAUSD, where outright defiance exists between administrators and the board, an unrealistically low bid could be accepted, only to be inflated later through change orders after receiving board approval.

This is why public contracts often exceed the original bid.

Then there is the seeming incongruity between past claims that the board closed Belmont without all the facts and the current call for RFPs. It is a contradiction to say the board acted on insufficient information while also arguing that same level of information is sufficient for the RFP process.

Further complicating this scenario is the unprecedented nature of the work needed at Belmont. Despite claims to the contrary, Belmont is a unique site. It is neither a classic Brown Field where decades of unregulated industry contaminated the soil and groundwater; nor is Belmont a classic oil field with a few wells going down thousands of feet to otherwise sealed oil deposits.

In fact, Belmont is a combination of both situations plus additional complications.

The geological formation under the 35-acre site includes a natural pathway or chimney wherein oil and gases can migrate to the surface from thousands of feet below.

Plus, years of unregulated wildcat drilling dating back to the mid-1800s resulted in an unknown number of wells that were never properly sealed. It is assumed a majority of these wells may never be located.

Additionally, there is the primary toxic hot-spot generated by decades of industrial contamination located directly under the site's largest building making testing and cleanup problematic.

In order to combat this unique situation, an impermeable membrane, like an extra thick wrestling mat, must be constructed below the surface of the entire 35-acre site. Blowers and filters must be installed to ensure gases neither congregate nor, in the case of hydrogen sulfide, reach the lungs of students and staff.

With hydrogen sulfide lethal at 300 parts-per-million and readings of 130,00 ppm at the site, the concern over gas is more than simple methane explosion. In addition, this unprecedented system must work around large, established buildings.

Add to all of this the issue of who will maintain this system for the next 80 years without fail - an extraordinary effort that must produce a level of safety equal to residential housing.

The problem is that no contractor can claim it has successfully deployed a system under the exact circumstances found at Belmont. So any RFP is going to be nothing more than an educated guess.

Even if such a project were constructed, its theoretical nature almost ensures the project will not arrive on time or within budget.

To suggest Romer's RFP will somehow generate objective fact is absurd. With Mayor Richard Riordan, a pre-eminent representative of the development industry as adviser, the argument becomes disingenuous.

The pro-Belmont argument is supposedly based on concern for students. A more likely explanation is the huge liability facing O'Melveny & Myers, the blue chip law firm accused of providing the LAUSD with misleading information over Belmont.

To what end would one of the largest and most influential law firms in the world go to protect its pocketbook and reputation?

O'Melveny has publicly acknowledged its hiring of the powerhouse public relations firm Cerrell & Associates to provide ``an aggressive public affairs communications strategy'' to push Belmont forward.

What we are witnessing today is not adults concerned about children but adults concerned about themselves.