The ACLU of Southern California today filed a long overdue class-action lawsuit in federal court against the city of Los Angeles and its Department of Recreation and Parks for discrimination against a girls' softball league in the San Fernando Valley [Kaitlyn Baca vs City of Los Angeles 98-2865 R(RCx)]. For 29 years, the West Valley Girls' Softball (WVGS) league, which includes more than 400 girls ages five to 18, has been denied equal access to the publicly-owned fields that are consistently made available to boys' baseball leagues.

In a first-of- its-kind challenge, the ACLU is seeking injunctive and declaratory relief for violation of equal protection and gender discrimination under both state and federal constitutions and California's Unruh Civil Rights Act. Plaintiffs seek a judgment to stop the city from discriminating against young women. This is the first lawsuit brought against a city or county park department for discriminatory treatment of girls in the use of public recreational facilities.

In spite of persistent attempts by the WVGS to get a permit for permanent facilities, it has been denied equal access to public parks. The girls have been forced to spend significant time and resources to secure piecemeal temporary permits to play in substandard school fields, even to the point of carrying in dirt to improve the only fields made available to them.

By contrast, not only does Recreation and Parks give the boys' leagues permanent access to smooth, safe and well-maintained park fields with bleachers, dug-outs and concession stands, it also sponsors three West Valley boys' leagues. The ACLU says the city's treatment of the girls' league is a blatant example of historical discrimination against girls' athletics that prevents girls from participating and excelling in high school and college sports, attaining educational scholarships and even aspiring to Olympic competition.

The West Valley Girls Softball League was established in 1969 as a privately-run, non-profit organizational sponsor of girls' softball. Most of the 400 members live in the West Valley communities of Woodland Hills, West Hills, Calabasas and Canoga Park. Players are grouped into four sub-divisions based on age and experience. Players compete with teams within the league. The season extends from February through June with post-season championship games and special tournaments.

Every year, since its inception 29 years ago, the League has sought and been denied a permanent recreational facility for its games commensurate with those used by the West Valley Boys' league. For that reason, each season, the girls' league must go through the laborious process of securing weekly or monthly field permits from various local facilities to get a place to practice and hold games. The girls' league is never guaranteed the use of the facilities from one year to the next. The lack of a permanent home eliminates any possibility of obtaining display advertising from companies who may wish to sponsor the girls. What's more, the poor conditions of the facilities have forced the girls and their families to take on the effort and expense of maintaining and improving the grounds. To add insult to injury, the girls' league has been denied access to the very facilities it has improved and maintained over the years.

ACLU of Southern California Legal Director Mark Rosenbaum said, "The great American pastime is not only the preserve of boys. These girls love this game. This case is about an end to roving girls' leagues and getting a field of their own. The days of the girls' traveling teams are over."

The ACLU claims that the facilities made available to the boys at Adam Bishoff, Knapp Ranch, Shadow Ranch and Woodland Hills parks are better maintained and provide typical playing field amenities such as backstops, outfield fencing, dugouts, spectator bleachers, and bull pens. By comparison, the fields used by the girls offer few or none of these types of amenities, the grounds are poorly maintained and, in some instances, the conditions are unsafe.

"This case is unique, but the historic discrimination against girls and women it uncovers is prevalent and deeply rooted." said ACLU staff attorney Rocio Cordoba, "The unjust treatment suffered by these young athletes, simply because they are girls, should be an embarrassment for every person in the City of Los Angeles. Rather than supporting young women who have the talent and aspiration to succeed, City officials are sending the message that girlsunlike boys should be relegated to the bench. We all have a stake in making sure this discrimination is ended. By favoring boys and excluding girls, the City of Los Angeles Department of Recreation and Parks is reinforcing the stereotype that `girls can't play like boys' or worse `girls shouldn't play like boys.' This demoralizing treatment brands girls as inferior, second-class citizens. It must end now."

Civil rights groups, including the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area, the ACLUs of Northern and Southern California, Equal Rights Advocates and the Employment Law Center, have filed a lawsuit (Barlow vs. Wilson) in Alameda County Superior Court in Northern California challenging Governor Wilson's Executive Order W-172-98 which eliminates monitoring of state contracting.

ACLU of Southern California Legal Director Mark Rosenbaum said, "We bring this suit to stop Governor Wilson's cover-up of the true face of Proposition 209."

The Order, released March 10, requires all state agencies to "cease any enforcement of the minority and women business enterprise participation goals and the good faith effort requirements related thereto under Public Contract Code ﾌ_10115 et seq." In addition, that "[a]ll actions, programs and regulations which seek to monitor, promote, or comply with the minority business enterprise and women business enterprise goals or the good faith efforts thereto under PCC ﾌ_10115 et seq. shall no longer be administered and where appropriate, be repealed."

Plaintiffs charge that by ending the monitoring and reporting provisions of the code, the Governor and State are violating Article III, section 3.5 of the California constitution which requires all state agencies to implement state law, unless and until an appellate decision declares such law unconstitutional.

The Executive Order followed the recent Ninth Circuit decision in the case Monterey Mechanical v. Wilson. In that case, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down, based on the Equal Protection Clause, Public Contract Code ﾌ_10115's requirement that contractors make good faith efforts to do outreach to women- and minority-owned firms.

Plaintiffs say the Executive Order goes beyond the elimination of affirmative action goals and outreach, and is being used to end tabulation of the number of minorities and women receiving the State's contracting business. Public Contract Code ﾌ_ 10115.5 requires that "each awarding department shall report to the Governor and the Legislature the level of participation of minority, women, and disabled veteran business enterprises in contracts."

Plaintiffs say that although the Ninth Circuit's decision does not require the State to stop monitoring and reporting on contracting with minority- and women-owned businesses, the State's latest contracting manual, updated immediately after the Executive Order, indicates that this information will no longer be collected.

The lawsuit alleges the people of California and throughout the nation have a right to information regarding the number of women and minority contractors awarded state business contracts. This information is vital determine whether women and minorities have equal access to taxpayer-funded state contracts. In the wake of Prop. 209 and the Ninth Circuit decision, civil rights groups anticipate a severe drop in the number of women and minority-owned businesses receiving state contracts. To gauge the effects of Proposition 209's ending of affirmative action, and to determine the extent to which barriers to women and minorities remain, monitoring information is obviously critical.

The ACLU of Southern California has filed a federal lawsuit [Taylor vs City of Los Angeles 98-1979 GHK (RNBx)] against the City of Los Angeles Recreation and Parks Commission for violating the First Amendment rights of a 23-year-old muralist. The Commission prohibited Richard Taylor from installing a public mural at the Venice Graffiti Pit although his work had been approved by the Cultural Affairs Commission and the Social Public Art Resource Center (SPARC) which coordinated the project.

The lawsuit calls the City's action a violation of free speech under the federal and California constitutions. Further, the suit says action violates the Los Angeles Uniform Building Code which prohibits censorship of "an ideological, political or other non-commercial message on a sign," and an unconstitutional interpretation of the Code. Additionally, the suit claims that the Commission requires artists to waive their rights under the California Civil Code. The ACLU seeks an injunction to stop the City from blocking Taylor's work, a declaration that the City's action violates free speech, that the Uniform Building Code covers public and private property, and that requiring artists to waive their rights in unconstitutional.

Stephen Rohde, ACLU Board Member and cooperating attorney who is representing Taylor said, "The Commission violated Richard Taylor's constitutional rights by basing its decision on the political message of the work. Once a city opens a public forum such as the Venice Graffiti Pit, it cannot deny artists the right to exhibit based on an artist's point of view. This lawsuit embodies the principles that the courts have used to strike down content-based restrictions imposed in 1991 by the Congress on those receiving grants from the National Endowment for the Arts."

In November 1997 Taylor submitted his mural concept which shows a family, apparently immigrant, fleeing from a lurking boar while vultures holding television cameras film the scene. Speaking before the Recreation and Parks Commission, Taylor said his work embodies the tradition of Picasso and Thomas Nast in so far as it utilizes animal imagery to express their ideas. "This is my political idea of what I see going on around me every day and it's my First Amendment right to be able to portray this," Taylor said.

The Venice Graffiti Pit was historically a walled area where people painted navbar without approval or involvement by any public or private. Last year, during a scheduled clean up of the area by the City, the navbar were completely covered when the walls were painted.

The City worked with SPARC to coordinate mural projects following public outcry after the graffiti pit was painted over. Founded in Venice 21 years ago by muralist Judith Baca, SPARC produces public art projects throughout Los Angeles which employ thousands of city youth. Taylor's first image was approved by SPARC last summer, but was painted over because the Recreation and Parks Commission felt it depicted Los Angeles police officers negatively. While Taylor and SPARC objected to the Commission's action, Taylor offered to submit a new image which was rejected by Recreation and Parks Commission.

Taylor attended San Francisco State University and the Art Center College of Design. He has done murals for the AIDS Memorial Quilt and the 50th Anniversary of the United Nations.