The only last word that counts on the legality of presence of the Save Our Future/Youthbuild charter school at McCarty has already been spoken. That word is neither yours nor mine, but is there for everyone to read in the Order to Comply issued by the City of Los Angeles.
Ultimately, the neighborhood's due process rights were respected, and the students were afforded an earthquake-retrofitted building with all proper fire safety precautions and ADA compliance. It strikes me that you should consider that having the code enforced, and providing safe buildings to school children, might be conceivably be something the Neighborhood News would stand behind. One would hope that the Council Office might be commended for sending this issue to be decided by the Zoning and Building and Safety officials charged with this duty. But perhaps this would involve saying something positive about the Council District, and maybe this would be difficult for you. As far as due process is concerned, you seem to have a real blind spot here, or perhaps, to put it charitably, a double standard. You feel free to champion what you see as your personal due process rights in your own neighborhood regarding gating, where you might be characterized as one of a few disgruntled neighbors. The due process rights of West Adams, however, was of no concern to you. Why is this? I think it is proper and gracious of you to apologize for the fact that this article was rushed to press without proper research. In the process, some people's reputations have been publicly undermined by you, and you admit that you did not adequately investigate the facts at hand prior to doing this. Imagine if this reputation-bashing had happened to you, in the face of inadequate research by the publishing party. It is not sufficient to bury the admissions you make about making under-researched accusations while the accusations are still trumpeted on your front page. Journalistic ethics require at very least that your admissions about the way you have handled this are on the front page of your online edition. It's too late for the paper edition, but you are not exercising the fundamental obligations of journalistic integrity in this matter.