The Court Cannot Compel A City To Exercise Its Discretion In A Particular Way.

In response to a Request for Proposal for a golf concession at Los Angeles public parks, a business group submitted a bid. A Board for the Recreation and Park Commissioners voted to award the contract to the business group. Pursuant to an Executive Directive, the contract had to be reviewed by the mayor’s office because it was for longer than three years. The Office of the City Administrative Officer [CAO] recommended that the City Council authorize the Board to execute the contract. The mayor’s office asked the CAO to review the matter again, which it did and made the same recommendation. Eventually the matter was put up for a vote by the City Council, which voted to disapprove the proposed contract. The business group filed a petition for both ordinary and administrative mandamus, alleging a competitor improperly sought to influence the Board and the City Council by hosting golf outings and engaging in behind the scene maneuvers.  The trial court granted the City’s demurrer without leave to amend after the City contended it could not be compelled to exercise its discretion in a particular way. The Court of Appeal affirmed, stating:  “Thus, [the business group] seeks a trial court judgment to the effect that self-operation is not to the advantage of the City, and only an award of the concession to [the business group] would be to the advantage of the City. Such an order would [] exceed the scope of mandamus review.” Michael Leslie Productions, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (Cal. App. Second Dist., Div. 8; July 16, 2012) 207 Cal.App.4th 1011.