Everything said in this document about the “draft” study has been obtained from information
*
made public by Expo. Last week, in connection with mediation, Expo made the “draft” studyavailable to any party willing to accept it under terms of the confidentiality agreement governingmediation. LAUSD and Expo agreed that LAUSD would receive the “draft” report under thoseterms, subject to the further agreement that it was “without prejudice to parties’ rights to contend atan evidentiary hearing that they or their representatives should be permitted to refer to the draft studyin testimony or cross examination or to introduce it into evidence in whole or in part or, to thecontrary, that such uses of the draft study should not be permitted.” This motion is brought for that purpose, to determine that LAUSD is entitled to use the draft report because the claim of privilegeis without merit. Until this motion is ruled upon, LAUSD will not rely on any information obtainedfrom its access to the “draft” report. However, Expo has publicly provided enough information toenable LAUSD to describe it as it has here.2Farmdale Avenue to implement one of the alternative designs for the Farmdale crossing thatthis Commission ordered the Expo Authority to analyze. Expo has marked this study, prepared by one if its outside contractors, as a “draft” and withheld the study, asserting adeliberative process privilege. Expo then commissioned another study, a study of the firststudy, which, we now know, has reached the opposite conclusion from the “draft” study.
*/
Last Friday night — 63 hours before the evidentiary hearing began — Expo produced this“final” study — and amended its testimony that had been based on the “draft” study. YetExpo still refuses to produce the antecedent document.How important is the study? Sufficiently important that it has led Expo’s witnessesto completely reverse their opinion on the traffic effects of closing Farmdale. For example,the Prepared Testimony of Eric Olson served on June 9, had Expo’s Chief Project Engineer testifying that “closing Farmdale and diverting that traffic to other streets would causeadverse traffic congestion and delays.” (P. 19.) But last Friday night at 7:38 p.m., Exposerved new Prepared Testimony for three of its witnesses, including Mr. Olson, in which theforegoing statement was replace by the opinion that “closing Farmdale and diverting that
Add a Comment