Lincoln Place Q&A


By Sheila Bernard

For those who believe that we are a society of laws in which people who make promises keep them, and for those who believe the opposite, here is a little quiz. Answers next month.


1) If a developer proposes a project which includes conditions to mitigate the negative impacts of the project, and if the city grants a discretionary approval for that project which includes those mitigating conditions, is the developer required to actually meet the mitigating conditions in order to build the project?

2) Is the developer required to meet ALL the conditions of the project, or may the developer pick and choose which mitigating conditions he wishes to meet?

3) If a developer promises to relocate tenants as a condition to mitigate the impacts on the population, is the developer then able to turn around and evict the tenants using the Ellis Act?

4) If a developer attempts to evict tenants using the Ellis Act, and if the tenants file suit for declaratory relief (asking the court whether the developer is actually entitled to use the Ellis Act), are the tenants guilty of a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP)?

The brave tenants of Lincoln Place (more than 160 households) seek answers to the above questions. The courts have provided answers to some of them, but landlord AIMCO does not interpret the court’s opinion the same as the tenants do.

If a developer comes into a neighborhood and proposes a project, and the neighbors fight the developer tooth and nail, it is no wonder. Neighbors are apprehensive that if a project is approved with conditions that are intended to mitigate the negative impacts of the development, it does not matter. The conditions will not be met by the developer or enforced by the City.

The appellate court rendered a decision which says in clear language that mitigating conditions are not “empty promises,” that they are not “mere expressions of hope.” The court upheld the subdivision for Lincoln Place, but said that the conditions must be complied with. The conditions include relocation for Lincoln Place tenants within Lincoln Place, instead of evictions. But the appellate ruling has had no effect on AIMCO’s pursuit of a completely empty community.

In addition, the recent designation of Lincoln Place as a California Historic Resource has had no effect on AIMCO’s determination to destroy 45 buildings containing 668 units. It seems that AIMCO is impervious to the rulings of courts and the determinations of public agencies.

Now we will see what it will take to get the City of Los Angeles to see to it that the mitigating conditions on development projects are met. And we will see what it will take for the tenants of the historic Lincoln Place apartments to prevail against a giant corporation that has proven itself to be anything but a good corporate citizen.

Posted: Thu - September 1, 2005 at 11:44 AM          


©