Put Facts on Belmont Before Politics

If the facts prevail, the Los Angeles school board’s decision to abandon the Belmont Learning Complex will be reversed. Belmont will open as a high school because scientific fact and the interests of children will win out over politics. There is no sound alternative for a new high school, a fact that will become even more obvious as interim School Supt. Ramon Cortines completes his 60-day search for other sites. Most of all, Belmont will one day open its doors to students because the community simply will not stand for a process that has been dominated by politics and tainted by the cover-up of key evidence. When the scientific facts become known, when the lack of alternatives becomes clear, and when the failed process is exposed to public scrutiny, the board’s decision to abandon Belmont will be reversed.

Let’s make one point clear: Every child must have a safe and accessible learning environment. However, the board’s actions were taken without providing alternatives to a community that has long been promised relief from its overcrowded high school. Moreover, startling new revelations are being exposed in the wake of the board’s decision, making it clear that further delay in meeting the needs of this community is unnecessary. These revelations make it obvious that, throughout the entire Belmont saga, politics has come first and our children have come last.

The one player in the Belmont drama with no political ax to grind--Cortines--admitted that he does not have the facts to justify abandoning Belmont. But the facts supporting the continuation of Belmont are there.

* The independent commission created by this same board to review Belmont recommended the continuation of work on the school. The commission made its decision after holding 27 hearings and receiving testimony from more than 100 experts.

* Impacts from building on top of an abandoned oil field can be mitigated. The current Belmont High School stands on the same abandoned oil field. So do most of the homes, businesses and schools just west of downtown Los Angeles. The brand new Gratts Elementary School is two blocks from the Belmont site; the new Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce building is directly across the street, and the L.A. Business Magnet is no more than 80 feet away. Beverly Hills High School and some of the most expensive homes and commercial developments on the Westside also sit directly on top of abandoned oil fields.

* The environmental issues at the Belmont site can be mitigated at a cost significantly less than the $60 million cited by those who oppose it. According to environmental experts who testified before the independent commission, effective mitigation measures would cost $12.8 million and possibly as little as $10 million--not $60 million. According to sworn testimony, this information was hidden because the experts were instructed to provide only worst-case scenario estimates.

Those who have put politics aside and focused only on the facts have concluded that the Belmont Learning Complex should open.

The entire Belmont process has been tainted because vital evidence was withheld from the public. Sworn court testimony now becoming public shows that Belmont’s opponents deliberately covered up key facts about the true cost of ensuring Belmont’s safety. By suppressing this evidence, Belmont’s opponents have been free to argue that it will be unduly expensive to make Belmont safe.

With this new information, the case for completing Belmont is more compelling than ever. Every independent expert who has examined the facts agrees: Belmont can be made safe for our children.

It is the parents who make the most compelling argument. Today, more than 2,000 students are bused out of their Belmont neighborhoods because there is no classroom space for them. Some kids sit on buses for three hours a day. By 2006, more than 7,000 students will be bused. Those who are not bused must often stand during one class and fight their way through crowded hallways to their next class.

So why did the board vote to abandon Belmont? The answer is simple: politics. None of the current board members will be around in 15 years to answer for an entire generation of poorly educated Belmont-area students who were ill-served by their schools.

On the other hand, if the board had voted to complete Belmont, it would have felt the immediate wrath of the politicians, bureaucrats and the press who have exploited Belmont for their own narrow, self-interested reasons.

There is simply no justification to support abandoning the Belmont Learning Complex. Those who do not resist the political pressure will, in the end, pay a huge price. They will have to live with the reality that their actions doomed thousands and thousands of young people to an inadequate education.

We cannot sit idle while this unjust treatment of a community continues. We all have a responsibility to insist that those in positions of authority and responsibility put our kids and the facts first and, for once, put the politics last.