A Los Angeles Zoo nonprofit established more than 60 years ago to help the city operate and develop the zoo says a recent motion filed by the City of Los Angeles seeking a preliminary injunction to manage the use of $50 million in surplus funds meant for the zoo’s benefit is “flawed.”
The Greater Los Angeles Zoo Association also claims, in a new court filing that seeks the dismissal of the city’s case, that the complaint is “an exercise in overreach” and that all of its claims are duplicative of the other.
“But the city’s efforts to buttress its meritless claims by means of repetition neither lends credence to its false allegations, nor entitles it to relief that is contrary to the express terms of the parties’ governing agreement,” the GLAZA filing reads, noting that the city’s suit was filed five days before Christmas.
GLAZA also issued a separate statement regarding the city’s recent filing.
“GLAZA is an independent organization that has, for more than 60 years, fulfilled its mission of supporting the LA Zoo,” according to a GLAZA statement. “As this filing shows, the current leadership of the zoo and some in city government seem to be pursuing priorities other than proper management of the Zoo. The filing is deeply flawed and we look forward to contesting it vigorously.”
The preliminary injunction motion was brought on Tuesday in Los Angeles Superior Court by the City Attorney’s Office. It stems from a lawsuit the city filed Dec. 20 against the Greater Los Angeles Zoo Association, alleging breach of contract and the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing as well as breach of fiduciary duty and conversion.
The city also seeks an accounting and a judge’s declaration of the rights and duties of the parties.
GLAZA manages at least $50 million in an endowment and in other accounts made up of money that GLAZA raised on behalf of the city for the zoo’s benefit, the City Attorney’s office states in its filing. The city argues that those funds must be used only to benefit the zoo, and not for any other purposes, even after the partnership agreement between the city and GLAZA ends later this year.
“Unless a preliminary injunction issues, GLAZA can and will dissipate funds for its post-contract operating and other expenses to the detriment of the zoo,” the City Attorney’s office states in its court papers in advance of a scheduled May 14 hearing before Judge Kerry Bensinger, two weeks before the hearing on the GLAZA motion.
GLAZA was founded in 1963. According to the city’s lawsuit, the parties entered an interim agreement last May that will run through June 30 of this year to ensure the continuity of critical programs and services while the city completes the bidding proposal process for the zoo’s long-term management.