I have so far been forwarded two responses to communications sent to Chancellor Block about the proposed sale of the Japanese Garden. Apparently, when such complaints are received, a response is sent under the name of EVC Waugh. The text was the same in both cases so I assume others have received the official response. The recipient of one of the official responses gave permission for the text to be reproduced. If you scroll towards the bottom of this posting, you will find it in italics.
The response indicates that consultation was conducted with the local neighboring groups. At the community forum – whose audio you can find on an earlier blog post – residents seemed not to have been aware of the proposal until the very recent news items appeared. There is reference to consultation with the Carter family which also seems to be contradicted by the spokesperson from the family at that forum. Finally, there is reference to consultation with academic leaders. However, it appears from a recent Academic Senate action that the matter has only very recently been referred to an appropriate Senate committee.
The court decision to which the official response refers occurred in the late summer of 2010. The fact that only now are protests coming from the Carter family, neighbors, and others and only now is there a referral to a Senate committee suggests that the whatever consultation there may have been was extremely limited.
Some people yours truly has talked with have tended to view the process – particularly the 2010 court filing in Alameda – as a conspiracy to keep this matter secret until it was too late to object. But since there has already been one letter of protest from a current member of the LA City Council (Paul Koretz – see an earlier blog post), I am reminded of an old quote from a former City Council member – Ruth Galanter (photo above left) – suggesting an alternative explanation:
“I used to believe in conspiracies until I discovered incompetence.”
As noted in earlier blog posts, the UCLA Faculty Association has not taken a position on this matter. But it does seem to have been badly handled. Brad Erickson, the director of campus administrative services, has been left to be the spokesperson on the garden sale. (He appeared at the community forum, for example, representing UCLA.) But he really isn’t responsible for the decisions that have been made and at this point it really is unfair to leave him to be the defender. It’s time for the chancellor to take a hand in finding a resolution.
Below is the official response from EVC Waugh:
From: Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost <provost@ucla.edu>
Date: February 3, 2012 12:53:03 PM EST
To: {name of recipient}
Subject: Hannah Carter Japanese Garden
Dear {name of recipient}:
Chancellor Gene Block has asked me to respond on his behalf to your message about the pending sale of the Hannah Carter Japanese Garden.
While we are sensitive to your concerns and those of others who value the garden as a special place, it is not used for our primary mission of teaching and research. Each year, UCLA spends approximately $120,000 to maintain the garden. It is located in a residential neighborhood and has no dedicated on-site parking; the only available parking (three spaces) is on adjacent property leased to the University on a short-term basis. These facts, which were unknown in 1964 when then-UC Regent Edward W. Carter made his gift to the University, now make our continued operation of the garden extremely problematic. A sale at this time will help us realize Regent Carter’s expressed philanthropic intent to benefit UCLA’s academic programs.
The process we followed in reaching a decision to sell the residence and garden was deliberate, exhaustive and open. The Restructuring Steering Committee, a body I chair to evaluate ways to adjust to sharp reductions in state support, in 2009 publicly identified the garden and residence for potential sale, as well as other properties owned by the Regents and managed by UCLA. Since that time, we have consulted with a broad array of interested groups and individuals, including representatives of the Carter family, academic leadership on campus and the Bel-Air Homeowner’s Association, to discuss the reasons we need to sell. We also have been in contact with groups and individuals interested in maintaining the garden, allowed them to view the property and encouraged bids. At this time, the bidding process is expected to begin in early February and conclude in May, allowing all prospective bidders to review the property and gather resources toward a purchase.
Throughout the process, we were mindful of our obligation to Regent Carter, who died in 1996 and whose gift to the University included both a commitment to provide the residence and funding to acquire an adjacent Japanese garden. The original agreement with Carter expressly envisioned the University’s sale of the home if the University did not desire to use it as a Chancellor’s residence. A subsequent agreement noted that the UC Board of Regents did not wish to use the home as a residence and stipulated that proceeds
from its sale would be used to establish specific professorships in support of UCLA’s academic mission and an endowment to maintain the garden. Regent Carter could not have envisioned that the garden’s maintenance costs would exceed the estimated payout from the endowment by approximately $100,000 per year. Nor could he have envisioned the complete lack of available parking, the result of a mistaken property description, and the constraints it placed on operating a public garden.
For all these reasons, we determined that continued maintenance of the garden was impractical and an impediment to our ability to meet Regent Carter’s intent that his gift benefit our academic mission. In September 2010, a judge agreed with our reasoning and cleared the way for the sale.
I want to assure you that we are wholeheartedly committed to honoring the philanthropic intent of Regent Carter to benefit UCLA’s academic programs. Together, the garden and the residence are valued at approximately $15 million. Consistent with the agreement, $4.2 million from the proceeds of the sale will be used to establish professorships and endowments for programs across campus, from the arts to medicine to management. Any additional revenues from the sale of the residence and garden will be available for other campus priorities at the discretion of the Chancellor.
To further honor Regent Carter’s gift and Mrs. Carter’s passion for the garden, we have removed four representative artifacts and are caring for them at the Fowler Museum at UCLA while we determine an appropriate method and location for their public display.
While we value the beauty, serenity and cultural heritage of the garden, we have concluded that it is best to use our limited resources for our core priorities of teaching and research rather than to maintain a public garden that serves no academic purpose. We have taken reasonable and responsible steps to address concerns and share information and have followed all necessary and appropriate legal and internal channels to evaluate the feasibility of the sale. I trust you will appreciate our position and understand that we have treated this issue with the careful consideration and respect it deserves.
Sincerely,
Scott L. Waugh, Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost
