For Immediate Release

On August 20, 2012, the Superior Court of the State of California in Los Angeles has again ruled in favor of FTR International Inc. regarding the anti-SLAPP motion submitted by the Los Angeles Community College District (LACCD). The Superior Court has issued a tentative ruling granting FTR attorneys’ fees, as well all additional costs as a consequence of defeating LACCD anti-SLAPP motion. The Court’s tentative ruling is as follows:

1)    The Court finds that the LACCD Anti-SLAPP motion was frivolous.

2)    Petitioner (FTR) is awarded attorneys’ fees plus additional costs.

On March 13, 2012, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Jane L. Johnson issued a detailed 17-page order directing the Board of Trustees of the LACCD to throw out its February 8, 2012 order debarring FTR from “bidding, contracting, subcontracting, or performing work on any District project for a period of five (5) years.” Based on a thorough review of the evidence considered by the Board, Judge Johnson found that the Board abused its discretion in debarring FTR because the evidence did not support the charges against the company. Judge Johnson also found that the Board violated the constitutional rights of FTR by refusing to rule on any of its defenses, and by rejecting FTR’s request that the debarment hearing be held before a neutral arbitrator, rather than a committee of the Board. In so ruling, Judge Johnson specifically found that the Board harbored an “unacceptable probability of actual bias” against FTR.

On June 6, 2012, Judge Johnson issued an Interlocutory Judgment Granting Peremptory Writ of Mandate against the Board of the LACCD, ordering them to set aside their February 8^th decision finding to debar FTR, as well as to reverse their finding that FTR was a non-responsible bidder on the Math & Science Complex at the East Los Angeles College. In addition, the judge prohibited LACCD from attempting to debar FTR on the basis of previous counts in which the LACCD wrongfully accused FTR of making false statements.

FTR is proceeding with their civil, constitutional and contractual suits against LACCD and its individual board members to collect for all damages suffered as a result of the wrongful debarment by LACCD and seek other non-monetary relief.

According to the LACCD May 23, 2012 meeting, the LACCD board has allocated $160 million out of the $2.7 billion remaining from measures A/AA/J Bond to spend on contractor’s claims and other expenses. The utilization of the bond money for projects not listed on the bond list approved by the taxpayers has triggered an investigation against the LACCD by the California State Controller’s Office, John Chiang and the City of Los Angeles Controller’s Office, Wendy Greuel. These investigations have unveiled poor bond management, waste, and the questionable selection of the Inspector General.

–

Attachments:

Wendy Greuel Letter and Report – July 18, 2012

John Chaing Letter & Report – October 11, 2011

John Chaing Audit Report – August 10, 2011