ADRIAN RISKIN VS HISTORIC CORE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT

Petition

On August 13, 2018, Riskin filed the Petition for writ of mandate, which alleges in

pertinent part as follows.’

Riskin is a resident of Los Angeles who publishes a blog where he regularly reports on

information obtained through CPRA requests. Pet. §The Parties, 41.

HCBID is a property owners’ association created by the City of Los Angeles pursuant to

the Property and Business Improvement District Law of 1994, Streets & Highways Code §§36600

et seq., that manages the Historic Core’s Business Improvement District (“BID”). Id. at § 2.

HCBID is subject to the CPRA. Ibid.

Riskin made five CPRA requests on many different dates to discover how HCBID’s staff

and board of directors influence local officials and legislation, especially involving HCBID’s

renewal process for its BID. Id. $Overview, §§ 2-3.

Generally, Riskin alleges that HCBID engaged in a pattern of non-compliance, delay,

obstruction, and broken promises of compliance amounting to a wrongful refusal to produce

requested records under the CPRA.

Riskin seeks (1) a writ of mandate directing HCBID to immediately conduct a diligent and

comprehensive search for the requested records and promptly produce those records, (2) a

declaration that HCBID has violated CPRA, (3) an order for HCBID to produce all responsive

records to any future requests within 30 days unless HCBID shows an extraordinary hardship, and

(4) reasonable attorney fees and costs. Id. §Request for Relief.

B. Standard of Review

A party may seek to set aside an agency decision by petitioning for either a writ of

administrative mandamus (CCP §1094.5) or of traditional mandamus. CCP §1085. A petition for

traditional mandamus is appropriate in all actions “to compel the performance of an act which the

law specially enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station.” Ibid.

A traditional writ of mandate under CCP section 1085 is the method of compelling the

performance of a legal, ministerial duty. Pomona Police Officers’ Assn. v. City of Pomona, (1997)

' Riskin’s 16-page opening brief exceeds the 15-page limit of CRC 3.1113(d). The court

has exercised its discretion to read and consider only the first 15 pages.

? Riskin does not consistently number his paragraphs sequentially in his Petition. Thus, the

court has included the Petition’s corresponding section heading in the following citations.

1

Causes of Action

in filed the Petition for writ of mandate, which alleges in

les who publishes a blog where he regularly reports on

ts. Pet. §The Parties, 41.

ciation created by the City of Los Angeles pursuant to

strict Law of 1994, Streets & Highways Code §§36600

s Business Improvement District (“BID”). Id. at § 2.

many different dates to discover how HCBID’s staff

fficials and legislation, especially involving HCBID’s

ew, §§ 2-3.

CBID engaged in a pattern of non-compliance, delay,

liance amounting to a wrongful refusal to produce

te directing HCBID to immediately conduct a diligent and

ecords and promptly produce those records, (2) a

, (3) an order for HCBID to produce all responsive

days unless HCBID shows an extraordinary hardship, and

Id. §Request for Relief.

agency decision by petitioning for either a writ of

of traditional mandamus. CCP §1085. A petition for

ll actions “to compel the performance of an act which the

g from an office, trust, or station.” Ibid.