Group against ‘Forever Marilyn’ statue responds to Palm Springs decision to amend downtown plan
The lawsuit against the city of Palm Springs over the "Forever Marilyn" statue is continuing to move forward, after the city declined to settle, according to the group that filed the lawsuit.
Trina Turk of the Committee to Relocate Marilyn posted an update on the group's GoFundMe page updating the situation. The update comes a little over a month after the Palm Springs City Council voted to amend the city’s 2016 Downtown Palm Springs Specific Plan which directly affects the statue’s location on Museum Way.
The 'Committee to Relocate Marilyn’ filed a lawsuit in 2021, claiming the city illegally closed Museum Way for the placement of this statue. CReMa members added that the statue blocks the view of the museum
In Feb. 2023, California's 4th District Court of Appeals overturned a dismissal and ruled that Museum Way was closed illegally for the placement of the statue.
The city's decision last month would permanently vacate or close off that portion of Museum Way, making it a pedestrian walkway going forward. The decision doesn’t guarantee Marilyn will stay in her current spot.
The decision still needs to go through a few steps, including by several committees. After approval, the conversation about the statue’s final location could be voted on.
"At the December 4 City Council meeting, it was clear the Council was concerned about the mounting legal fees associated with this case. There was discussion of permanently changing the block of Museum Way between Belardo and Museum Drive to pedestrian only. The council voted to proceed with formally and permanently vacating the street, which is what they did NOT do back in 2021. The lack of proper street vacation procedure was the basis for CReMa's lawsuit, and the Court of Appeals did rule that the street closure is illegal."
- Trina Turk 1/30/24
So far, that lawsuit has cost the city more than $350,000 and if it continues, it could cost taxpayers nearly $1 million in a year.
Turk said the group took into account the City's supposed concern over legal fees and made an offer to settle which would have allowed for a "positive resolution of the litigation" and many of the group's concerns.
"The City rejected our offer without serious consideration," Turk wrote.
Turk said the case is moving forward. Last month, the judge stayed their case until March 22, 2024. At the court date, the judge will decide whether to continue to delay the litigation or set new hearing dates for the case. It will depend on the status of the city's street vacation proceedings.
"This is an unfortunate delay for CReMa, as we were hoping the court would compel the City move the statue prior to the City completing official street vacation proceedings," Turk wrote. "It seems the court is reluctant to force the City to move the statue and reopen the street--despite having ruled the street closure illegal--while the City is in the middle of street vacation proceedings."
According to Turk, the city must meet several requirements for the street vacation to be legal.
- The city must have evidence to support a finding that the section of the road is no longer necessary for present or prospective uses.
- The city also needs to provide evidence regarding the impacts of the elimination of the street.
- The city must address whether the street vacation would cause excess congestion and whether it would harm accessibility to the future development in Block D, which is the pit just south of Museum Way. Block D is registered to become multi-story residential at some point in the future. The area will be quite different from how it appears now.
Turk added that the city must comply with the California Environmental Quality Act to have a legally allowable street vacation.
"Here, the City has said they will not be relying on another categorical exemption, so they will prepare either a negative declaration or an EIR--Environmental Impact Report. Either of these documents allow for a public comment period," Turk wrote.
The date for the public comment period has not been set as of Thursday.
Turk said the group will be watching to see what the city does in February when the License Agreement between the City and PS Resorts for the temporary use of the public street expires. PS Resorts purchased Forever Marilyn for $1 million in Feb. 2021.
"The City's actions at this time may result in additional legal violations, and we stand ready to address them," Turk wrote. "The City of Palm Springs has apparently decided that it's more important to keep the statue where it is than to compromise, save some money, and move it."
Stay with News Channel 3 for continuing updates on the "Forever Marilyn" case.
