Robbins Seeks to Move Court of Appeal to N. Hollywood

State Sen. Alan Robbins (D-Van Nuys) has launched a drive to move the state 2nd District Court of Appeal from leased quarters in the mid-Wilshire area to a new North Hollywood courthouse.

But the court’s 26 justices are not rushing to pack their legal briefs.

For one thing, the court recently renewed the lease for three years on the building it now occupies. For another, the court has planned to make a permanent home in the long-delayed, $120-million downtown state office building proposed for Spring Street.

To reverse field now would be “premature,” asserted W. J. Anthony, director of the state General Services Department, which oversees state construction projects.

Resolution Introduced

Still, Robbins on Thursday introduced a resolution urging Anthony’s department to shift the appellate court from the downtown state building to an unspecified site in the North Hollywood Redevelopment Project. The resolution also called for speeding up construction of the downtown building.

Jerry Belcher, manager of the North Hollywood project, said he would have no comment until he received a specific proposal from the state. If the state used the redevelopment process to obtain land at at a discount, the courthouse would require approval of the Los Angeles Community Redevelopment Agency and the City Council.

Robbins, who has pushed a number of courthouse construction projects through the Legislature, last year won approval to build a superior court with 12 courtrooms in North Hollywood.

Now he argues that building the appellate court next door would lead to a “substantial cost saving” by enabling the two courts to share common facilities, such as a cafeteria and law library. The appellate court now shares space with the state Supreme Court when the high court comes to Los Angeles four weeks a year. The Supreme Court also would meet in North Hollywood under Robbins’ plan.

Robbins said “downtown Los Angeles doesn’t need any extra traffic,” which he said the courts would generate.

Proposed Last Spring

Robbins first raised the North Hollywood proposal last spring in discussions with Anthony of General Services and in a letter to Gov. George Deukmejian.

But, in an interview this week, Anthony said “the whole thing is premature” because the downtown office building is still on the drawing boards. He expects a decision on whether to go ahead with the building in about 60 days.

Anthony said he was uncertain whether the court should be moved to the Valley. “What’s so unique about the courts that they have to be in North Hollywood?” he asked.

Robbins also has spoken to Appeal Court Justice Armand Arabian, a friend of Deukmejian’s. Arabian said he recalled the conversation but said that at the time that he was not fully informed about the contemplated move downtown, and told Robbins the North Hollywood move “would be a good idea if other things wouldn’t work out.”

Another Site Favored

Now, Arabian said, he prefers another Civic Center location closer to other judicial offices, not the Spring Street site where the building has been planned. If that is not possible, “then a viable option would be North Hollywood,” he agreed.

Robbins said his office has been told that the Administration would go along with the proposal “if we can get an expression of legislative intent.” He said that a resolution, not a bill, was all that was needed to indicate that intent. A hearing on the resolution has not been scheduled.

Kevin Brett, a Deukmejian Administration spokesman, said, “We will consider the senator’s proposal,” but he said the governor’s senior advisers have not discussed the matter with Robbins or made any commitments to him.

Robbins’ proposal has caught some court officials by surprise.

Hadn’t Heard of Proposal

Robert Feinerman, assistant administrative presiding justice of the appeal court, said he had not heard about the proposal.

Feinerman said, “I don’t think it would ever fly for the simple reason . . . we should be centrally located and I don’t think North Hollywood is.” He said the court serves a large constituency of litigants and lawyers in Los Angeles County who find a downtown location more convenient.

He added, “It’s never been discussed by the justices of this court . . . and my personal opinion is that it would be opposed.”

“A lot of money and time have gone into the design” of the downtown building, he said, and “it’s not going to be that easy” to reverse.

Oliver Burton, chief deputy director of the administrative arm of the state courts, asserted that “generally speaking, we’re responsible for finding our own quarters.”