South Central Farm
Join us this Friday for a day of dialogue and community engagement. We will be updating everyone one on the current class action lawsuit against the City of LA & PIMA. Six CD9 residents are fighting to hold our elected officials accountable. We deserve green jobs, clean air, clean water and green spaces in our communities. The Lancer Site(south central farm) should be put in a neighborhood land trust. We need to restore the two green lungs of South Central. It’s been 12 years of hard work and community organizing!! We need all the help we can get to win this fight. Help us make banners and poster signs for our August 9 Rally in Dtla. Through our work we were able to partner. up with UCLA Extension school of landscape and architecture. Come see our alternative Re-envisioning of the South Central Farm! Seeds, vegetable coloring book and T-shirts available. Repost Tag us and follow us @southcentralfarmers.
WHEN: August 9, 2018 Gathering at 12PM, Hearing 1;30PM
Twelve years after the forceful eviction of hundreds of urban farmers and their supporters from the historic South Central Farm (LANCER site), the community rallies in a class action lawsuit to challenge the City of Los Angeles and the Current landowners (P.I.M.A), over the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and California Environmetal Quality Act (CEQA) process for a proposed new development on the site.
When: September 27, 2018 @9:30AM Rally after court hearing.
Where: Stanley Mosk Courthouse (111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012) Department 85, Room 834
Stand with us this Thursday as we continue our fight to Restore the #SouthCentralFarm and stop the construction of 4 manufacturing warehouses that will cause more air pollution, therefore hurting our health and that of our planet. We want to purchase the land and put it in a Land Trust for the benefit of community. Join us in court, or right after, as we gather under the large tree outside the courthouse.
- - - - - -
"Twelve years after the forceful eviction of hundreds of urban farmers and their supporters from the historic South Central Farm, the community rallies in a lawsuit to challenge the City of Los Angeles and current landowners, over the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process for a proposed new development on the site.
On August 8, 2017 Los Angeles Superior Court Judge James C. Chalfant ruled in favor of the Restoration Committee and community plaintiffs and found that the City of Los Angeles did not conduct an adequate environmental analysis of the cumulative traffic impacts of other proposed developments in the Project study area. In response, Judge Chalfant ordered the City of Los Angeles to revise its Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
This will not be a minor review. In considering cumulative impacts of proposed nearby development - a requirement under the California Environmental Quality Act - the original EIR only considered five additional projects already filed with the City in the project study area, but not yet approved. CALTRANS argued the EIR should have studied 82 such projects!
Why does this matter? Because too often such background context is disregarded, and projects with detrimental environmental impacts are approved via ‘overriding’ considerations - a legal term where the legislative body decides the benefits of a project outweigh the costs.
Ignoring Cumulative Impacts
Insufficiently considering potential cumulative impacts in this manner is one reason why traffic, congestion and air pollution in Los Angeles is so bad.
Yet in this case, PIMA is arguing that the only thing the LA City Council has to do is certify the new EIR, and that PIMA’s prior project approval should remain in place without further review. But this would defeat the purpose of the new EIR, because it would preclude the Council from considering the proposed project within a more accurate environmental context.
Therefore the September 27th court hearing raises key questions that could apply to proposed development across Los Angeles:
- If a project has’t complied with all applicable environmental laws, why should the project be allowed to proceed?
- Why should neighbors be subjected to construction impacts on a project that may not turn out to be approved after the full potential environmental impacts are studied?
- Why should developers be allowed to establish ‘facts on the ground’ and influence decision-making, by their project being substantially built when it returns for final approval after mandated environmental review?"
** The above text taken from a recently published piece by Mike Feinstein, a member of the SCF Restoration Committee & former Major of the City of Santa Monica