Secret School Bonds Spark Video Blog Rebuttal ….. From Former Prosecutor #VB6

July 2, 2005No Comments

Los Angeles, CA. Former Special Assistant L. A. County D. A. Anthony Patchett, who headed the Los Angeles Unified School District’s (LAUSD) Belmont Learning Center investigation has attacked the Full Disclosure Network™ video blog citing certain statements which he says indicate there was an “intent” by the LAUSD to violate federal and/or state laws governing the finance and construction of public schools.

Patchett presents his response in this rebuttal video blog. The former prosecutor’s rebuttal statements seeks to substantiate his views that the school district violated state law and or the Internal Revenue Service Codes, referring to statements made in a Full Disclosure interview with David Cartwright, Sr. Partner, O’Melveny & Myers who served as the LAUSD outside legal counsel and Dominick Shambra who was Director of Planning and Development for the still incomplete controversial Belmont project.

[fdnVideo_embed yt=”oiqjqo-fUqs” download=”no”]

In the Full Disclosure video blog Cartwright & Shambra claim that no crime was committed after spending non-voter approved, tax-exempt Certificates of Participation, known as COPs bonds for the design, construction and fixtures to be used by a private enterprise retail development that never materialized. Out of a total $92 million, approximately $72 million of the COP bonds, issued for Belmont, are still outstanding. David Cartwright claimed that private sector sources paid for the retail portion.

The retail portion of the publicly financed project was to be located underneath the Belmont Learning Center which has never been occupied, has cost taxpayers $330 million, was partially demolished in December 2004, slated for remediation of toxic hazards and is soon to be reconstructed.

Patchett rebutted Cartwright and Shambra’s claims saying “If you look at what occurred in the Belmont Learning Complex, using $17 million dollars of COP money to fund the project and then to say well we haven’t committed a crime because we don’t really have retail. However, the money has been spent, it’s just like in any other crime, if you steal money or you if take money with a certain intent, their intent here was to build a retail structure. That is what has occurred they used the money”

In his rebuttal Patchett said “That’s how they were finally able to escape from the grasp of the IRS. The LAUSD indicated, well we have never put a retail structure in there, we put a frame. So now what we are going to do is we are going to build, exclusively a school. And then I say, ‘if you build exclusively a school you violated the law because, you didn’t give the contract to the lowest bidder (as required by state law).’ They ended up giving it to the highest bidder, which, as I have indicated, took a bid of $95 million which was the highest bid and its on it’s way to half a billion dollars.”

Featured in this rebuttal video blog are: Anthony Patchett, Dominick Shambra & David Cartwright, moderated by Full Disclosure Network™ host Leslie Dutton.

Leave a Reply

Make a