School District Ousts Belmont Project Lawyer

Controversy over potential environmental hazards at the new Belmont high school mushroomed Friday as the Los Angeles Unified School District removed the outside lawyer who helped craft the deal and a state lawmaker called for a criminal investigation into the $200-million project.

David W. Cartwright, a partner at O’Melveny & Myers, confirmed Friday that he had been relieved of his duties on the Belmont Learning Complex project, which has engulfed district officials in a public firestorm over possible contamination at the site just west of downtown.

Cartwright predicted that others would be purged too. “You have to kill everyone, because you can’t keep anyone alive to tell the tale,” he said.

Meanwhile, a legislator who has been critical of the Belmont project called for a criminal investigation into whether district officials engaged in a pattern of misrepresentation on environmental documents necessary for government approval of the complex.

“We have to put them in jail or fine the district or whatever is necessary to make sure this doesn’t happen again,” said Assemblyman Scott Wildman (D-Los Angeles).

He said the district’s environmental documents failed to disclose crucial information about contamination on the 24-acre Belmont site that would have triggered greater scrutiny.

Wildman, who chairs the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, declined to specify who should be singled out but said he will press on with an investigation until those responsible are identified.

The fast-moving events came in the wake of a Times story Thursday revealing that top school officials--including then-Supt. Sid Thompson--failed to act on warnings five years ago that they relied on inadequate environmental tests when they bought the land at 1st Street and Beaudry Avenue.

The warning came in an April 1994 memo written by the district’s real estate director that said a crucial environmental study provided by the seller, Shimizu Corp. of Japan, didn’t cover basic environmental questions such as the extent of contamination, the location of abandoned oil wells, or the methods and costs of cleaning up potential hazards.

District officials opted to fix environmental problems as they arose during construction. But that decision has boomeranged.

Under mounting criticism, the district has conceded that its testing was incomplete and ordered a $700,000 soil examination. In turn, that testing could run up as much as $3.4 million in construction delays and prescribe another $10 million to eliminate hazards.

Potential dangers at the Belmont property include cancer-causing chemicals such as benzene, unknown oil products floating on shallow ground water and methane seepage, which could collect under buildings and explode.

As the district’s outside real estate attorney, Cartwright has been closely identified with the Belmont property from the onset. He found the land, negotiated on the district’s behalf with the seller, served on its committee to select a contractor, and hammered out the terms of the construction contract.

Now, however, the district has decided to replace Cartwright, who has fallen out of favor with Board of Education members in light of problems at Belmont and another land transaction that recently unraveled.

Richard K. Mason, the district’s general counsel, said Friday that he made the decision because the district will enter “potentially contentious” negotiations with the developer, Temple-Beaudry Partners, to share the cost of construction overruns caused by the new testing and cleanup. The contract, as Cartwright negotiated it, now requires the district to pay the total cost of the overruns.

The talks, Mason said, could put Cartwright and O’Melveny & Myers in a difficult position because one of the firm’s clients, Kajima International of Japan, is in the Temple-Beaudry partnership.

“It is better for everyone if we have a new counsel for that purpose,” Mason said, adding that he made the decision several days ago, before the Times story ran, and informed Cartwright on Thursday.

Mason and the school board have known about the law firm’s relationship with Kajima for many years. But Mason said he did not believe that the situation presented a harmful conflict of interest until he decided to seek concessions from Kajima on the cost overruns.

Cartwright is still handling other business for the district, Mason said.

Cartwright blamed his removal on “fanatics” who are now in control of the district’s environmental program. He accused them of blowing Belmont’s risks out of proportion to stoke “huge egos” and line their own pockets. As a result, school officials are looking for someone to blame, he said.

Angelo Bellomo, an outside environmental consultant on the district’s new safety team, said there was no such financial incentive because team members work on an hourly rate and have no lack of other clients.

State and local law enforcement officials said they had not yet received Wildman’s report calling for a criminal investigation of the Belmont project.

Wildman has issued several reports strongly critical of the district’s procedures for handling contamination at school sites.

He has not publicly released his latest report, which he said he put in the mail Friday. But he said it goes further than others in that it “deals with the inconsistencies and the possible criminal actions of individuals” in the school district.

Wildman’s staff has concluded that district officials violated sections of the state’s Health and Safety Code that require full disclosure of any environmental hazards before construction on a project begins. For example, they say the district’s 1996 environmental impact report on the Belmont property referred to hazards from methane but did not identify other contaminants.

If the district had indicated the presence of toxic substances such as oil field waste, benzene and hydrocarbons floating on ground water, the state Department of Toxic Substances Control would have become involved in the project from the outset, Wildman’s staff contends. They say the district knew of these contaminants, which had been reported in studies dating to 1989.

Once it reviewed the records late last year, the toxics department concluded that the hazards at the site had not been adequately characterized.

Mason said the district would cooperate with any investigation but doubted any criminal activity would be found. “I think people of good faith, with the interest of students at heart, made some difficult judgment calls,” he said.