A Los Angeles Zoo nonprofit established more than 60 years ago to help the city operate and develop the attraction says an amended motion filed by the city seeking a preliminary injunction to manage the use of $50 million in surplus funds meant for the zoo’s benefit would cause “needless significant harm” to the nonprofit and its donors.
The Greater Los Angeles Zoo Association also maintains in a new court filing that the city’s revised motion is “overreaching” in that it would restrict GLAZA to raising and using funds for the exclusive benefit of the zoo, regardless of donor intent.
“In fact, the city’s manufactured modification disregards express terms that it negotiated and agreed to, including GLAZA’s right to raise funds for its own operations and to continue to manage its endowment until its dissolution, as well as GLAZA’s status as an independent nonprofit public benefit corporation,” the GLAZA attorneys further state in their court papers.
The City Attorney’s Office’s amended the preliminary injunction motion was brought on April 10 in Los Angeles Superior Court. It stems from a lawsuit the city filed Dec. 20 against the GLAZA, 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 Zoo 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 Wednesday hearing before Judge Kerry Bensinger.
GLAZA was founded in 1963. According to the city’s lawsuit, the parties entered an interim agreement in May 2024 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.
But in their court papers, GLAZA attorneys contend that in addition to running afoul of the interim agreement and applicable law, granting the preliminary injunction will cause significant and needless harm to GLAZA and its donors.
“Sanctioning the city’s improper efforts to force a nonprofit corporation to surrender all $50 million in its accounts while simultaneously crippling GLAZA’s ability to solicit funds using its own data and name will almost certainly result in GLAZA’s demise, as it will be unable to pay its ongoing expenses while adhering to its charitable purpose,” the GLAZA lawyers state in their pleadings.