NIONS [VOLm.a! 58 MAY 197:)) fj.S. ~~;arin~;~: A11'ORNEY GENEllAL'S OPINIONS
case must be reported 

### by the sed the condition, or by both
ithout qualification that "[a]ll the 

### name, date of bitch, and 'clercharacterized by 

### lapses of iyed by the legislature, it

### is of 

### :d by a sratute is the 

### prime t 

### v. County of Cala~e,aI, 29 mination of section 

### 410 that ds caused by persons 

### having 1indful that 

### the function of

~purpose of th(; 

### law (Sele<;t l Cal. 2d 640, (;45 

### (1959»), blic safety gathered from the :aL App. 2d Supp. 905, 909 e term "physician" in stating 

### rely report
.. :' is indicative ; of the section by establishadmleistrative ageocy having ive 

### on the Stare's 

### highways, elng the grant 

### ofthe driving 

### lese circumstances, it :would

.the physician 

### upon whom nsbly and practically sought 

### Id be reported 

### in faa, 

### by'
the terms of section 410 (1) :dundant reports ofthe 

### same sonableaess of a regulatory tred to the legislature; and e and me objett thereof 

### is and safety, the legislative 116 

### Cal. App. 2d 807,810 reasonable 

### resultconsisrenr 

### :aJ. Pacific Collectiom, 

### Inc. ito conclude that when the zner isnonetheless requlred consciousness under 

### section )hysicia.n is notified of the 

### :patient to the local health ,.


### ~ .. ,.j-

,
., ~r

.., :1:· .:':.... 

# tj

· :~. :;, x'; 

# ,n
.'

..

. ,'

... ., In summary. therefore, it is concluded that the responsibility to report cases of

disorders characeerieed by 

### lapses of 

### consciousness is the 

### individual responsibility ofboth the diagnosing and the treating physician.



### Opinion No. 

### CV74·317-May 30,1975 SUBJECT: SANTA MONICA AIRPORT-USES-COMMISSION-Considering its numerous contractual IIrid lease obligations, Santa Monica may not cease using Municipal ,AiJ:portfor airport purposes. Conflict of interest arises when members 

### of Airport 

### Commission participate 

### in proceedings to determine charges for tie-down 

### spaces where they 

### are lessees of

### such spaces. 'Z',,;'BequeSted bY:.ASS~LX~,44thl)ISTIhcr "......... ,·c;,~;i'~~~Yi~.;~~r~flj.i

. 

### .• ~.Opinion

by:.· 

## EVELLEJ~:;¥.£?.tm'f~ ',.'!'i•... Daniel Weston,Deputy The 

### Honorable Alan Sieroey, Assemblyman from the Forry-Fourth District, has requested an

### opinion Onthe 

### questions which may be stated as follows: 1. May the City of Sanra Monica, at the present time, cease 

### using the Santa Monica 

### Ml.1nicipalAil:pol:t

### for airport 

### purposes? 2. Would 

### 'rtconfiki'of lineere$[ 

### $.rise'where 

### members of the Santa Monica. Airport Commissio~'parrictPQte':int.i~~issIoii~proceedings for the purpose of making reco.mmendations 

### to tl~e

### SanHi'Monic{ City Council 

### concerning charges to belevied for aircraft tie-down spaces at the Sant;l.Monica Municipal Airport where such members are 

### lessees of such 

### tie-down ~pacesat 

### s-uchairport? 

# •

The conclusions 

### a.re;

1. 

### The City of Santa Monica, at the present time, may not cease using the SantaMonica Municipal Airpor.tfor alrpcrrpurposes.

- 2. ,A

### conflict ofInrerese does 

### arisewhere 

### ~~mbers ofthe Santa 

### Monica Aitport Commission 

### particiPate in CommiSsion' 

### ptoceedWgsfor the purpose of making recommendarions to 

### theSanta'Monica'CitY'Councilconcerning charges 

### to be levied 

### ior aircraft tie-down 

### spaces at the Santa Monica Municipal Airporr where such members llre lessees of such tie-down spaces llt 

### such airporr, 

### The conflict 

### ofinterest 

### m$.Y be avoided 

### bythe affected member by immediately disclosing the interest, withdrawing from participation 

### in the matter, refraining from ".9ting, refr~ing 

### frotnllttempring to inB.uBnce

### other members, and having all ofthese mseeers reflected 

### in.·the minutes.

...



### _rd' • ir'qL;:;/lon5",·;~Iclln_L.i.'



### ""ANAYS!S.,>". 1. 

### May the City of 

### Saa'~Monia:'at'rh~~pre;e;;ttime, cease using the Santa Monica Municipal ,Airport for airport purposes?A'rTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINIONS [VOLUME 58 

### The Santa Monica Municipal Airport,l is owned

### by the City ofSanta Manka. 2 

### The initial property 'Was

### acquired pursuant 

### toabond measure approved OnApcil 14,1926, with thebond monies robeusedforpublic park purposes.! In 1927, 

### the Stare Legislaeure 

### enacted the following provision into law:4 

### "Any lands previously acquired 

### by , . , any municipal corporaelon

. , , for park purposes, may be used for any of the purposes in this section specified [airport operation); it being hereby specifically declared that the purpose specified in this section shall constitute park purposes,"> The property initially acquired consisted of approximately 128 acres lind included CloverField,athen 0PeL'llt1og airneld. The City, since the original acquislsidon, haspurchased outright, additional lands and the 

### Airport presently consists of approximately 215 

### acres. ... Almost from the 

### inception, and continuiag to 

### the present time, the 

### City has eneered 

### into numerous 

### contracts, !eliSe'S

### and licenses affecting the use ofthe Airport. 

### It is abundantly clear that the City had such authority to obligate itself. Section 50474 of the Government Code? subdivisions (c) and (h) provide that in COnnection with the erection ormaintenance ofan airport, alocal' 

### agency may "Lease 01: 

### assign for operation any space and anynecessary or useful appurtenances, appliances,orOtt!!rconveniences," andmay "Enter iaeo 

### Contractsor Otherwise cooperate 

### wirh the Federal Government 01: 

### other public or

### private agencies," Section 50475 provides; "A 

### Iocalagency operating ormaintaining $.D. 

### airport may grant leases, licenSes,concessions,and other privileges, regarding aviation facilities to 

### the state ortheUnited Scares,fo.r 

### theuse or occupation ofhangars, 

### structures, works, or other aviation facilities 'by the'

### Department of Defense, National Guard, or other state or federal departments or agencies in connection with avjation or air

### commerce."

1

### Hereinafterreferred to as the Airport.
2Hereiouter somccimesreferred TOas City.

~The people oESal1ta MOlliQL,00 

### April 14, lSi26,'adopted [he following proposition:



### ._ .."Shall the CiqqJ, S1UltaMoniclL incur a beDdedindebtednessoE$860.000 

### for the acquisition, eonstrucdon and'completion oi-« certain municiplll Jmprovem¢OT, to wit: ml: acqliliitioD of lands in the:City oESanta. MOllica., California, beio8 & par[ of thllt certala ~Ct of 

### land c;ommonly 

### koOWllas Qoverfield for public;parlepurposes, lind the improvement thereof by the acquisition 

### or COI15UUCtiOD thereill of illl lUc;h buildings; stnlaures and improvemenu as may be necessary 

### or conveuiecr for putpoSe of a public pa.dc?" '
4 Stats. 1927, Chap. 267, effective July 29, 1927. ISCases in other jurisdictions have held that airport 'Weis atype ofplU'kusc, lrrespeeti"e of stll[\Itory ddinltions. ODe such we was S~hmolJI v. 01ldh01n4 City, 144 Okla. 208 (1930). In the SchmolJI cue, [he court considered "whether 

### or 'not an aviation llirporr, wirh IlU n.ecC&slUY.andlropet' equipment •.. may be paid for Oltt of funds derived from the 

### saleof bonds issue and 

### soldfor 

### the purpose of public; park improvement.... The court dedded: "If a dlT may use a portion ofsud! fund:! (deFived from the sale of bonds voted 

### topurchase orlI)a,j/ltaio, apark) for buildles $jdewaIb arouod.:Walks and driveways through a pll.tk for the lImuscmeDc OJ:the public; WI!see'no good tWoll'[or 1101dJn8the dty canner expend aput ofits funds iQfll&intaining an ilitpon.

.. :' Cl 

### Allreferences 

### aretothe Goveroment Codeu~s otherwise stated, "j

'.'

..'

.: ,;"'T 

### ".;.\ v :



# .. ):t

# i~;~~il~

~l.·C)~q5r.~<Q

### I,;;.;':,

...... ~:~ MttIOU'B'~~ ,.,. UIl/.Ltl/'::VVO ~.LVf.uVV.J..V


## ;:\;kA'i 1975J ATrO:R.Nlrr GENERAL'S OPINIONS 347 

# \?:'.':

.. Section50478 provides:

.. }/::~~ "A local.agency may lease or sublease p.openy owned, leased, or .,:,.:. otherwise controlled 

### by itfor not to exceed 50 

### years f~r airport 

### purposes ;':::,' :: i

.

### orpurposes incidental to alrcrafr, including: ;}::':.'. (:" •.(a) Manufacture of aircraft, airplane engines, and aircraft equip

## h;';,'?:· menr, parts, and accessorles, 

# Kr~'.·.;·~ "(b) Construction and maintenance of hangars, moodag masrs, .'

..'

. flying fields, signal lights, radio equipment, service shops, conveniences, appliances, works, structures, and other air navigation, aircraft, and airplane engine manufacturing plants and facilities." Itisdear that amunicipality may enforce 

### its airport contracts, 

### CityandCounty 

# ~/':of San Francisc/) v. Western 

### Au' U'nes, Inc;

### 204 Cal.App. 2d 105 (1962); and that :'::;:contractS



### ateenforceable againstthe municipality. Trans World 

### Airlines Y. 

### City and 

### !<:'¢~~1Jty ofSan Pf,mcisco, 

### :228f.2d 473 (1955), cert, 

### den. 351 U.S.919 (956). 

### !;:,:':ijrithiscase,the City andCount)' ofSanFrancisco, in 1942, entered into alongterm
~II •••: ••• 

### • <COntractfor :20years with ~, A with the payment charges fixed by the agree-



# .t·iti~nr.In 

### 1950,the Board ofSupervisors attempted by resolution to raise the fees 

# :!3qbep~d 

### byTWA. The Coun held tbat the 

### City and County of San 

### Francisco had

.':J;;Ql1nd itself asto its rates and charges by entering into a 

### valid contrscr 

### expressly ~J:~i:lrhorUed

by state law, and

.tbatduiing the term of such contracr, it could not ::·~iiclia.terally

change the terms thereof. (See Berkeley lAwn 

### Bowling Clubv. 

### City of 

### .:~:$er~ele1, 

## 42Cal.App. 3d280 (974).) 

# fi~<:~:: Note 

### is further made of the legislative intent that these municipal airport ~'::~i)p~racrs

arc:tobe observed, Sections 37440 through 37444 provide generally that a .(-)~~cipally owned airport, which is restricted to use for airPOrt purposes, may, (.'~iindercertain conditions;bc sold.Seaion 37443 expressly provides that such sale '?>;~:'shall be made-subject to any duty pr obligation imposed by 

### law or contract upon 

### )?tlie cit;' with respect to suchproperty:~rJ1t;L .' ".h·oll~.,' I 

### ~;":/.:;.;.' We'now rurn to a consideration of thenumerow contracts which have been t)~tered into by the City'respeedngthe use of the Airport and its property. No ·K.:~rfulpmpose would be served by considering in detail each ofthese agreements 

## ;:;:~!~CC a.consideration of some of them. will amply demonstrate the degree to \.,,:w.~ichthe Oty bas contraCted ~way 

### itS rights to deal freely with the Airport .<~f~P~ty lW,dj~~.,\J.~~~~ 

### ~_a;{por~ ,J~e~e.l1gr~t:m~tpDJlybe subsumed. under 5

. {)~E;lleral 

### c:lassificui0J:l~i Fed~rlllprantAgreements, Federel Lease Agreements, Fed- ::.:'..~al Transfer Agreement, State,Grant AgreemcDtS~~d Prlvate LeaseAgreements.s ".,' If' , ,."-J •.!.,, '_.'.1"_""'4.L. _.L.'_"-.'_.~ > \.

_- ... ..,' ". "e.": •.. i.".!~'. 7In the event of a sale of·an airport 'pursua.nt to ,these sectloes, the airport must 

# '\;::'§.;~~4a~

to be used for "jrport pUl'J?OSc:sfOInOtless than 10 years from the date of sale, ::(' {.:;:.~':'" SThe Offir;e of the City Atmeney of Santa MoniC*. has 1;'Iovldecl.us with copies of 

### ~:""iJ:Y.nyof the OU~'~fldjl'l8privare leases as well as a compreheoslve chronolcgical history of ~::.:.~,vents

affer;tifl,8the Airporr. 

### the Federal Aviation Ad.ininisu~ioo bas provided us with ~'i(~CWies

of 27 documeaes in"lolving agreements with the Federal Gcverrimece, The State V.:'PC~tmc:n~ ofACIonautics has pro..•• ided us with copies of 12 grant I\sreemenu made pursuant "}~:J~e_CaIi(ornilj, .Airpw·t_Ass)~tlnCl".~l)nd$, (§§ 21680-21688, Public Utilides Code.) 

# '~~:F

. '.'

. - ,·~t·:~vvo

348 An'ORNEY GE.NERAL'S OPINIONS {VOLUME 58 In 1941, the Oty of Santa Monica and the Federal Government entered inro 

### lease No. 

### W-04-193·ENG.4894, modified 

### by supplemental 

### agreements number 1, dated 

### July 23, 1945, and number 

### 2, dated July 

### 15, 1946. The City and the Federal Government also entered into Lease No. 

### W3460-ENG.549, dated December 1. 1941, and modified by supplemental ageeemenes number I, daeed December 20, 

### 1944, and number 

### 2, dated JuI}.25, 

### 1946. These leases cover approximately one hundred seventy acres 

### of [he property located at the Airport. The Federal Government expended approximately 

### $800,000.00 in improving the land leased to it, and the 

### City, in return, agreed 

### pursuant to the 

### above mentioned 

### leases, to maintain the alrport for the benefit of the public during 

### the life of 

### ehese improvements. The nature of such Improvemenes were the construction of two hangars, the construction of IIcontrol cower,fencing, construction of a service road and utilities and improvement of So concrete runWay and 

### taXiway.'" In addieion, six grant agreements were entered into between the City and the Federal Government. In essence, these grant agreements provided the City with 

### Federal funds for rbe improvement of the Airport propexry. In return 

### for such funds, the City has agreed to maintain the Airport 

### fOr the use and benefit of rhe 

### public during the life of 

### rhe improvement 

### made with the 

### Federal funds. In no 

### event is the life 

### of ehe particular 

### improvement deemed to 

### be more than twenty years, under any grant agreement. Therefore, the 

### maximum duration of the obligations of the 

### City under these 

### grane agreements is twenty 

### years from the dace 

### of execution 

### ofthegrant 

### agreeJ:!lent.".. .", The lim such grant agreement is number 

### 9..Q4·044-801, Contract No. CA6A2985. 

### It was entered into 00 May 11, 

### 1944. Two amendments dared 6-24-48 

### and 10-18-48 were also executed. This agreement, 

### by its terms, expired in twenty years from the dare of the last amendment to it, or in 1968 and thus is not material to Ollr 

### inquiry. The 

### second grant agreement, number 9-04-044-5702, Contract 

### No. C4A4161A, was entered' into 00 

## June 25, 1957. Under 

### this grant agreement, the United 

### Scates agreed' to incur maximum'obligations ·of 

### $20,056.00 for the conserucdon of 

### an entry road, 

# fence rclcri.iiori,iinStaJlatiori of obsrrucdon lights, and installment of taxiway entrance siges. As with the previous gtaoc agreement, Section 8 of the 

### JUDe 25, 

### 1957 agreement 

### requi,r;ed that 

### the a.greement remain in full force and 

### effectrhroughout the useful life of 

### me fa.cilities developed under the project, nor to exceed twenty years from the date of accepmnce of the agreement. Therefore, the City (If Saara Monica ceases to be bound 

### by the 

### provisions thereof onJ:une 

### 25,197,,, The actUa1cosdncurrea by the 

### Federal Government under this grant agree:menr!as. 

## f~.~,266.26~: ." " .'(,'I(!

.



### .The third grant 

### agreemenr,·n\lmhcr,9.04-044083, Contract No. C4CA4906-A, was eneered 

### into on.ApriI2~, 1958, and provided for Federal funding fOrCOIl8tnlCoMost of the agreementS with the Federal GovermIlenr provide tha.cthe term of the obligation &hall condnue during the useful life of the improvements. No inforznation has been prQvidecl us, nor f.U.;aestiOD made to US,that the useful life of all $Uch improvemems have DOWexpired. "'t!.:J vvv

,:' MAY 1975J ..•.. rrOlUmy GENEl'tAL'S OPINIONS 349 rica of a 

### taxiway crossing, construction of 

### an aircraft apron, and construction of extensions to existing a.ircraft aprons, indudlog 

### storm drains. 

### The federal Government 

### expended $19,574.00. Again, this agreement was limited in duration to the useful life of the 

### improvements provided 

### for thereunder, but in no 

### event to exceed twenty 

### years, or 1978. The fourth 

### grant agreement, number 9·04-044-5904, Contract 

### No. FA-4-188, was 

### executed on April 29, 1959. The improvements to be made 

### by The Federal 

### Government under this grant 

### agreement were the construction of an additional apron 

### including a drainage 

### :1nda retaining wall. The amouae expended 

### 'Was $13.952.00. As with the other agreements, this one 

### wasIimited to the 

### useful life of the 

### improvements constructed thereunder, DOt 

### to exceed twenty years, or 1979. 

### The fifth grant agreement, 

### number 9-04-044·D205, 

### Conerace No. FA·WE· 

### 2313,was 

### entered into on

### June 

### 22,.1962_The improvements made under this 

### 1962 grant agreernenr 

### were rhe consrruction 

### of an extension 

### of the aircraft apron, in

### eluding' areeaining 

### wall, hazard lights, and 

### the relocaelon of utilities. The obligation of the 

### Federal Government 

### under this agreement was $72,804.00. The duration 

### ofthis agreement 

### wasthe:usefl.lllife of [he

### improvementS made but inany 

### event the agreement term wasnor to exceed

### twenty years, or 

### 198'2. Asapart ofthis 

### agreement, a sponsor's assurance agreement was 

### executed 

### by the City. A 

### similar sponsor's agreement had 

### previously been incorporated 

### in the amendment to the firSt grant 

### agreement, executed in 1948, and 

### reincorporated in the grant 

### agreement of June 25. 1957. Paragraph 6 of the 

### project application dated April 

### ,0, 1962, states as follows: ''The 

### sponsor will 

### operate and 

### majnra.in, 

### in a safe 

### and serviceable condition the 

### airport and .all facilities 

### thereol1 and connected 

### therewith which 

### are necessary to serve the aeronautical users of the airport

... and will not 

### permit any 

### llctivity thereon 

### ,\\,h~ch.\'vouldinterfere with 

### Iesuse N'";';'" ',. C' ':-f> for airport purposes. . . .'

. The following language is contained in 

### Pan 3 of the same sponsor's assurance 

### agreement:"2. The 

### sponsor wHl operare the airport as such for the 

### use and benefit of the public. In furtherance of this coveaaae (but 

### without limit. ingIes 

### 'geneiiFapplicability and effect), 

### the sponsor 

### spedncp-lly agrees th~t it will keepthe airport open 

### eoall'types,'Jc:inds, and 

### classes of 

### aeronautical 

### uses .. _ ((o;,'\1C(;O;,



# • 

# • •• "4. The sponsor agreestbac 

### it will 

### operate the airport for 

### the use and 

### benefit of ehepublic On fair and reasonable 

### terms.
. ." These provisions 

### were incorporsecd in the later 

### gnnt agreement, The sixth gran~ .

### ags:ee.cneoc,.number 9-04-04+906, Contract No. 

### DOT· PA69WE~153~, WaS:executed on July 24, 196R The improvements to be con

### suuCtedthereunderiricludedthe rerooval·of aii,rilbandonc:d coatrol tower, 

### the350 .,:~ ArroRNl·:Y G£NER.A.l':S OPINIONS {VOLUME 

### 58
modernization of

### fieldlighting, the relocating offield lighting controls and circuits, and a new 

### control rower, Also, a 

### new control tower panel 

### Was to be 

### built. The actual amount spent 

### by the Federal Government 

### under this grant agreement 

### was $12,406.00.

. In addition the 

### City has eneered

.into numerous 

### lease agreements 

### with the Federal 

### Government. Some 

### of these 

### ate noted below. 

### Lease No. 

### F.A4-1718, was 

### executed on 

### July 26, 1961, and expires June 

### 30, 1981. The Federal 

### Goveenmenr installed 

### anavigational aid fa.cilityall the property which 

### isthe 

### subject oj 

### this lease, which is known as aVassyVisual Slope Indicator, 

### The COst

### for this visual slope indicator was 

### $26,560.00, and this cost was borne 

### by the Federal Governmene, lease 

### No. WE-l.7024, was executed 

### on April 

### 12, 1963, 'and expires 

### June 30, 1983. The land was acquired 

### by the 

### Pedeeal Goveramene fOJ: installation 

### of a very high 

### frequency omni 

### range facility, The cost for the construction of this facility was 

### $226,000.00 which was borne 

### by the Federal Government, LeaseNo. 

### FA64-WEI054, was execured on July 2. 

### 1964. and 

### expires June 

### 30, 1984. The land 

### leased to 

### the Federal Government is used 

### forrunway and 

### identifiet lights. 

### The amount ofmoney expended 

### by the 

### Federal Government for this facility was 

### $5,420.00. LeaseNo. 

### PA65-WE1153, 

# was ex~d.ltt:d:onApril 

## 6, 1965 and expires June 30, 2015. This lease 

### ;5 for 

### property upon which a 

### control tower was constructed. The 

### COstfor the construction of 

### rhcconrrol tower 

### facility by the Federal GOvernment was

### $386,931.00. Lease

### No. FA65-WEl194, was executed on 

### Auguse 25, 1965, and expires 

### June 30, 2015. The 

### land leased 

### is used for a remote transmitter 

### receiver. The 

### cost to the Federal Government for this 

### ~adlity was $46>600.00.

_ ,,~. ' ,'·, ••••••r "'7"'- '","

. - -". 

### Lease No." 

### DOT.P472·'WE-1830 

### wis exefUte~June 30, 1972, and expires June 30, 

### 1982. The COstto the' 

### Feder~J:Governmentfor this lease 

### is $ll,OOO.OO pet 

### year. The land is used for' 

### gCl1eril'avlatioo"'distriCt· offices and the amount spent 

### by the Feder~Go";li!t~~nt to date for iroprovemenrs is 

### $22,540.00

.. 

### In addition 

### to the above, various Other leases with the Federal 

### Government have, from time 

### to time, been entered into. 

### These leases include the lease 

### signed 

# on January 

### 1.5, 1953, two signed on :May

### 29, 1968, 

### and.three 

### oo.Ma.tch ~9'il~]1..'n>~_expiratiol\ dates of these 

### leases

~.' : ~.

__) ~_~.""'''' .•.•••.• ;~~. ,-c" "~.'.'

. _.,_, are, respectively, 1978, 

### 1.9. 81, 

### lQ83,,:t984. 20.15 and 2015.

. '-.- -." • ,_ "'; ,_- .. _. A •• ~_)\j. ' 

### On August 10, 1948, 

### the Cityflnd(~Ltl!~~~ral_~\1ern'IIlent executed 

### adocument 

### eneieledImt'#menl of T1'an.t!er.By 

### this ~eni: 

### the Federal Government acting pursuant 

### to the War Assets 

### Adc.qioist.tation Act, rerurned coarrol of the Airport propetty to the 

### City. The Insmeot of 

### Transfer provided that the surrender to 

### the City 

### was suj;.ject .to certain reservations, 

### resericricns, conditions and covenants as thereafter set forth, and thac the same 

### shall tun with 

### the land. Only a few of [he conditions, ere, will be alluded 

### to. .: .. .,

.'i'.;··
'-'.:"'!.! 

### :~. ;',-'.

### ~ 

# ::1i:

.

### :':.:~~:.':MAr 1975J ArrORNEY GENERAL'S OPINIONS 351

The City agreed thar the pIopery transferred "shall be used for public airport 

### purposes for the use and benefic of the public," that "tbe United States of America

• , • fhrough any of its 

### employees or agents shall at alI times have the right to make non-exclusive use of the landing area," and finally that "0<> property transferred by 

### this instrument 

### shall be used, leased, sold, salvaged, Ordisposed 

### of by

... [the 

### City of Santa Monica] for ocher ChllQ airport 

### purposes without 

### the writtee.Fonseq.; of the Civil Aeronaucics Adminlsu-acor, which shall be,gr~tcd only 

### if said Administrator determines that the property can be used, leased, sold, salvaged' 

### Or disposed offor other than airport 

### purposes without 

### IDllteriallyand adversely affecc

### ing [he development, improvement', operation 

### Or maintenance 

### of the 

### airpono at .; 

# i which such property is locared,"lo, '.

. ':\ From 1962 

### through and indudingl97~,the'Ci~ hahet~ivecl"1.1~payn1en:tS-"----·:~! ~ in excess' of $37,000 from the AirpOrt A$sistan,~e ~volyjng"f"und 

## ~tnJtli"s~r~c 

# i! by the State Dcpatcm.ent 

### of Aeronautics. 

### ·ra each Casethe 

### CitY' obligati~ itse!i,' 

### ~! 

# ~~~~~~~~~~?T~ 

# ~::~t~:::F~!ft 

# :6~~f;~

.. '*i'W~ time periods. However section 216B7 Public Utilities Code does provide that [\ In tbe event a benefidaty airport Ceases to be used as an airport wirhin 20 years of a granr, thar repayment of the 

### monies muse be made to the Airport Assistance Revolving 

### Fund as therein more specifically 

### s~cforth.

. We consider linally the contract obligations 'Whichthe City has lucurredwlth [ private parries relative to the use of the Airport. There are numerous master 

### lea~e; agreements and 

### subsidiary sub-leases executed 

### by the master lessees. 

### "Extensive' consideration 

### of these leases regarding the use of the Airport is nor necessary, Some of the master leases include leases with Clover Leaf

### Aviation, .Lear Siegler, Bel Ai.t Service, Douglas Alrcrafr Corporation, Pacific Aerornotive, Inc" Gunnell Aviaoon, Kettler Aviacion, Jon Daudy, Earl Beacon Lease a 

### :PliLne~and Briles Helicopter. These leases expire 

### respectively in -1996, 

# 19j9,-lSi79~19S6:)979·,·1~)791' 1979, 1982, 1981, and 

# 1979. "."

. "y; In summary, 

### it is.apparent that the 

### Cicy has entered 

### into numerous contracts and leases wherein it has conrracted away its rights to deal freely with the Airport property aod 

### itsuses as an airport. These connaceuel sgreemeces when 

### considered as awhole and in light of the overall pattern ofextensive and extending obligation,
II'The former City AttOrney of Santa Monica, Roben G. Catkins, 00 }I\lluary 23, 1%2, issued an opinion which concluded, "Deed No. 4 (CCS) ("IDstrunJenfo£ Transfer") liod the rerms of theJ;ltoje~ application above alludett to tOInpel the l;Olldusion that .the City muse operate the ailpOtCas An airport. and that the City canDOt Je,sally utl.ill1terally,on lti_ OWn moricn, abandon the use ofthe Santa Monica Mu.nicipo.lAitpou III an airport." ".,,,,, The present City Attorney, Richard L. Kllic'kerbodcer, hll$ suzgested mu stvetal of thaG a8teem~nt1leoceredinto with the FederQ.!Government (inc1udiOS said Insuu.m.enc oETransfer) may be voidable under gl:1lc:ra1 COOtl'llCtlaw. For the purposes of this opinion we assume WimO\lt deciding mat all tbe $lgrccmenrs considered herein are valid, since the avoldance of several of the agreemeoti would not sjJ;:ni6cantly dect the remaining overall patrern of obligation, •. . 

## ••"'C::I vvv

AnORNEY GENERAL'S OPINIONS (VOlUMB 58
leads to rhe conclusion that the 

### Gty may not at the present time cease using the Airport 

### for airpon purposes.Jl 2. Would a conflice of inreresc arise where members of the Santa Monica Airporr Commission participate in Commission proceedings for the purpose of 

### making' recommendarions 

### to the 

### Santa Monica City Council concerning charges to 

### belevied for 

### aircraft rie-down spacesat the Sanea

### Monica Municipal Airport where such 

### members are lessees of such de-down spaces at such airport?

.The Santa Monica Airpo« Commission" is created 

### by the City charter, Section 

### 1015 of the Santa Manka Municipal Code 

### provides:

"There shall be 

### an Airport 

### Commission, consisting offive members, which shall be appoinred 

### by the City Council. They shall be qualilied electors of the City. 

### DOne~£whom 

### shall hold ~y paid 

### officeor employ. 

### ment in the City 

### government." The dudes of the Commission are set forth in section 1016 of the Santa 

### Monica Municipal Code as follows:

"The Airpore Commission shall have power and be 

### required to: "(a) Acr in 

### an advisory capacity to the City Council in all matters pertaining 

### to the Municipal Airport and 

### to aviation matters generally to the extent that 

### they affect the 

### City; "(b) Approve or disapprove the appointment 

### of a Municipal 

### Ailport Director h)'the City Ma.nage.r,as and when the:City Couacd provides 

### for the 

### Alling of.such position; and

.

..(c) Consider 

### and recommend 

### to the,City,

### .Council roles and 

### regulations 

### forthe rnansgemeat.and operation, of,the 

### Municipal Airpon." We 

### are informed 

### by the City Attorney that rhe Commlssion acting under SUbdivision (a) above, 

### advises the City Council as ro

### what rates should be charged for de-down spaces; and 

### acting under subdivision 

### (b) above, the Commission exercises an absolute vero power over the appoinemenr of the Aupon 

### Director. The Airport Director's duties and powers are extensive. U It is thus apparent that

11In concluding 

### tlUt ~oottat'tU~; 'ommitmcnts prevent the preseDt cessation of airport \lsase,· we do not reach the Clut'stio~ ast9 Vihat eleteDt,t.be partial acquisitioD of airport property pursuant to the 1926 bC>llQ c!lecti9~ was ,tanWDOUOC to ,P\1blic dedication of such prop<mythereby cxercising furthee resrrainu"on'the Oty as'to ~irsoptions in dealing with the properly.
,~Hereafter referred to asCornmission. ~3Section 2217 ofthe SinCB Monica Municipal· Codeprovides: "The duties and funwons ofthe Airport Director shall be asfollows: ." (a) Beresponsible for alllle:tivities ofthe Santa Monica Airport; "( b) Act liS depanmeot head for the SlUItl!. Monica Ai'Port Departmecr; •.(c) SUpIID'iseall pe!sotloeI, pJ:orect facilities and properlY of the Cily at lU,hAirp~- H'-· ,.", " "(d) MaincaiD allreicirt;bofflight operations asrequired; •.(e) SUI>etv.isc

the oj:ietatioD

### Ofthe Conuol Tower;
•• (f) Aqeod allmeedngs .9f-tbe A~rt Cozn.t:njuic:ln; aD<! "(g) Perform such other duties in conn~ion with the ·maintcnaoce and operation ofsuch Airport asmAyheprescribed by the City Maoager:' ',.j

",'..- .

. ::.: \1, :,,>

.....,

.~.:. -.

.r'::; I "



## '::~;

. 

# i<,:' , 

# i"l'r 'Ii~::~ 11' " t, i~

" ,~ 

# :vd !1

### :1~ '~:d 1·I·r: t· , 'r Ie J" • 

## :(;','\ :;,l 

# ·t~~: I' i I Conflict 

### of interest 

### laws fall under two broad 

### classifications, searurory law ':;::

# ! and 

### the common Jaw of conflicts of interest. We 

### shall examine themboth."

.. ,,,,. ""',,', 

## ,'f{ ,···.'$o':'f'1~];:1

. 

### The Political Reform Act of 1974 (known as Proposition 

## 9 in

## 'thcJwui'

# 4i~:;'ftii: 

# ! 1974 primary election),' is codified in sections 

### 81000 through 

### 91014. Section' 

## i;\ I 

### 82048 provides that, '''Public official"means every member, officer, employee OJ:' :,::',

### j consultant ofa StateOrlocalgovernment agency." Section 87100 provides that, "No 

# ~!\! ( public officW at 

### any level of state or local government shall.make. participate in 

## .!~ : making Or

### inanywa.yattempt to

### usehiso.Bicialpos¥on.f'llnB.\.tence.a gQ.Ysr~~t,~L_, '_,

__

## -.=\.. ' decision in which he knows or has re~n to know 

### beh~ a beancid interest." .:

### 'il

## I However it appears that Commission.~~s do not fl\lt:withiI.1~c~~~71Q9, in that they do not have a financial interesr lIS 

### such a5tte.6ned 

### ln 'se<:tion;~pO w

### hich 'provides in relevant part: .'

. .' '.~"

. ..' .,:",,'l: ., "~:



### "An officialhas afinancial interest 

### in a decision within the meaning ofSection 87100 if it isreasonably foreseeable 

### that thedecision will have a material financial 

### effect, dlseinguishable from its effect on the public 

### generally, on: MAY' 1975) ATIORNEY GENERAL'S OprnIONS 

### the Commission functions 

### not 

### ooly in an advisory capacity, but alsoexercises some of the governmental powers of the 

### city, The members, therefore, appear to be "officers," Consequently, 

### we need nor meet 

### any potential issue as to whether the 

### members are "officers" or "officials" within the meaning of the various conflict 

### of interest statutes. See, generally, 42 Ops. Cal Atty. Gen. 93,95 (1963).

"(b) Any 

### real property in which the public oflicialhas a direct or 

### indirect in~erest worrh mote 

### than one thousand dollars ($1.000);'" the We havebeen informed that the caseof ric-down spacesrange from $40 per month to $130 per 

### month and that the rentals are from month to month. From the facts lIS 

### weunderstand them, itwould appear that 

### a onemonth license interest costing $130 would nor he an interest in property' 

### havwg a lair marker value in excessof

### $l,OOO.u

. ... .

~ " -" M ;..- •••• ~ ~~

•• _....;.~_

.•.••.-> ' Similarly, 

### it would appear: that die 

### conflict of interests; pro\11si6n-

# of the "MosooneAct," 

### (§§ 3600-3760), would not apply 

### sm,se<;[io9,.)62~'<b).<2) excludes therefrom properry interests of less than $1,000' value,' G' 

## Fri~,lp~ore

. sections 1090-1097 do not apply 

### since 'these 

### sections ptohibit 

### ce,tt-a.in :financial ioterests "in any contract" made by a member in his oJEdaI capacity. §. 1090.10

HThere are approximately 600 

### tie-downspaces available, "or all 

### of whj~ life filled. An ap~licant fiUsout a dor;ument entitled. "Rental of SpaceLicense," This agreemenr provldes thll( the: "Iicease m~ybe renewed monthly by pllyment of the monthly charge on or bclore the first of 

### eachrncnth, Failure to !"'-y monthly In advlI.nceshall automatically revoke 

### this license •... " 1:; 'Ibis Ac:chas been substantip,l1y amended by 1974 Stilts. Chapts. 48 and 1249. ; . ~8We are advised thllt the Commission members do' nOt participate direcdy in the mwng lU'ld 

### letting of the tie-dowq licerue conttaas. Thus, Uterally, ",dons 1090~'~BI SIq, have no Ilpplication to the questions prescnted herein. However, this proscription of the Code hu been held to be a.ppliCllblenot only to the aecv.alJlOvcrwnenral l:olJ¢CIcungbody, hut also [0 tsdvisou the~eofas to me contrsce, or others who may plIldopate in we makiog ;;153

### ~

# .....••

'" ArrORNEY" G:ENERAL'S OPINIONS {VOLUME 58 

### Also, sections 8920-S926 do nor 

### apply since by 

### its terms it does nat extend to city officials. 

### We turn to 

### a consideration 

### of the common law 

### of conflict 

### of interest which 

### wefind applicable, Ie

### wasscaredin42 Ops,

### Cal Atty. Gen. 151 

### at 155 (1%3):

"The COUltS have made dear that even though 

### 'a specific confliCt of interest situation does not come within tbe 

### sratutory proscription-such 

### a confliCt may still be 

### condemned by the courts as violative of public policy which 

### is always susceptible to broader interpretation 

### than the 

### express statutory provisions: Kaufmann &

### Widiss, The California ConfticJ oflnteres» Laws, 

### 36So.Calif. 

### L.Rev. 186, 187 

### (1963). 

### the fundamental 

### policy is that 'A

### public officeis a

### public trust created 

### in the interest and 

### for the

### benefieof the

### people. Pu.blicofficersareobligated

... to 

### discharge their responsibilities with integritY and fidelity

.. " {T]hey 

### may not exploit Or 

### prostitute their official position £01' their: private 

### benefits. 'When 

### public officials are influenced in the 

### performance of [heir 

### public duties by base and improper 

### considerations of personal advantage, they 

### violate their oath 

### of offiCeand viriare the 

### trust reposed in them, and the 

### public is 

### injured 

### by being deprived 

### of their loyal and honese services.

, . .' Terry 

### v.Bender, 143Cal.App. 2d 198,.206 (19%) ," And further in 40 Ops, Cal. 

### .Atty: Gen. 210, 212· (1962) :

"It is

### alsoimportant to note 

### that the California courts have 

### traditionally predicated 

### conflict of interest declsioos On 

### the dual basis of: (a) the Statutory- restriction; 

### and (b) the prohibition of 

### sound public policy evolved 

### (rom common law 

### principles. See City 

### of Oakland v. 

### California Const. 

# cs: 15Oil. 2d573,576 (1940); Schaefqr

# v,BeritJste;n, 140Cal App. 2d 278,290(1956). Thus, inNoble v.qty ofPaloAlto, 89Cal. App.4l,51 (1928), the 

### courtconcludedrhst, 'Apublic 

### officerisimpliedly bound 

### to exercise the 

### powers conferred on him with 

### disinterested skill, zeal, and diligence

... .' (Emphasis added.) Fidelity in the 

### public officer muse be maintained, and 

### the law 

### does not 

### permit a

### public officerto place 

### himself in a position in which he might be 

### tempted by his Ownprivate interest to disregord the 

### interests of the public. See

### StiCall v. 

### C#~ ofTafl, Cal Sup. 

### Cr. Dkr, No. S.F.20906 (Oct. 23, 1%2); People v. Darby, 114 CaLApp.2cl ,412,.425 .(1952)."

- .. ..__



# ------------------ of the COot1'l\(t. SeeSd.,"!1ff' v.'"lJ8rj;'Jlsin, 140 Cal.A~p: :zd 278. :291-292 (956); 46 Cps. Cal. Atty. Gen. 74.(1965) re/advisors;' SeeSdgall'v.CiW of TRItt 58 Cal.2d 565 (962); MilJbril8AUfJ.

### Po, Rflsi1~"ti4~urt'i1!1Il :~.C~ ol.~1.iJJb.rtl8,

262 Cal.App. 2d 222,236.237 OS/68),.reomerput1op"nrs.

c , ••• ,J .; •. d. However, we believe thar under theuniqNe 

### cirrotnsmncesof this easea court would probably not 50 apply section 1090 if the Commission members complied with the subsequenrly dis~ssed comrcoa law rules regarding £u1l disclosure and nonparddplltion. The unique

### circumstances

hetein are (I) that there is a

### ,mdtipte memberCommission insteadof a sin,!;lc "advisor" or other participant, as was the: case In

## me aUthoritiesabove cited, and (2) cile advisoryor participation stamsis one srep removed trotn the l1-CtUslcoo tract itself. The public should be suHicie.ndy protccred by dlsdosure nnd abstention as hereafter set forth. Under.similarclrcwnsuno:s.we.have $imiJadyconcluded

..LettertoHon. Sig Hansen, Di,ret;tol', Department ofHuman ltcso~es Developmenc. J\US\lSt 16; 1972,1~. ]2·143. ; ':';~lj;\ i.)~ '~_f::.~::"~ ";' _~,., ~~"* v .
" (b) {he ,Of! i ~ 

# :j

.., 

### ':1 

### :j

,, 

### .1 'j I -,] .I .J,

### .

.

## ::).~.

I.

:.- .:: MAy 197:1) ATTORNEy GENERAL'S OPINIONS 

### 355

This office 

### has further 

### pointed Out that, 

### "The general 

### common Isw-conflict ofineeresrrule 

### isnot resrriceed to contractual 

### relationships

.... It strictly requites 

### public officers to 

### avoid placing themselves 

### in aposition in which personal interest may come 

### into conflict with their 

### duty to 

### the

### public." 46 Ops, Cal. Atty. Gen. 74, 86 (1965). The 

### gist 

### ofthe 

### common law 

### ofconflict of

### interest:is to

### prevent the 

### doing of an officialact where the 

### officialmay have a direct or iadieece interest in the OUtcome. The 

### courts of this sraee have 

### held thae 

### an interest may 

### be so 

### remote and speculative as nor 

### to create auy conflict of 

### interest. HOlchkiJs v, 

### MQran, 109 

### Cal. App, 321,323 (1930). What 

### coestirurcs a remoee and 

### speculative 

### {merestis nat 

### dearly defined. 

### For example, in

## Peopu Y. 

### Da,t"ll(CaJ' App. 2d412 (19'2),

. the 

### court used language that mightsuggesftharanfjneeresnhannightaffeet-s.n'·- --c.-' .••..• '-:::.: 

### official's conduct creates It

### conflict. 

### InDllrbr. theCo~.~pprovin~th~!,,~structions,.;;~! of the 

### trial court, stated (at page 

### 455);. ··~;i;~; -""i~



### ",

. . Whether the Irlter;esrwas 

### direr;1 or 

### tnd;re~/,nnnole'''Orr;~~:: :. tingen/, 

### the sum lind substance of the three 

### instructionsr~dasa!whoIe is

### that ifthe inrerese 

### ofrbe

### memberissufficient

## tocausehim to /;9!wayed :in the sligh/BJI degree 

### from his duty'to the 

### public, it is a v

### Iolarion of section 1097 as 

### well as lOlL" (Emphasis 

### sdded.) In light of the language in Darb.1,'-extreme 'caution should be exercised in 

### concluding that an 

### interest is tOOremote. 

### It 'Would appeal: not to 

### be tOO

### remote an interest where 

### the interest of the member of the Commission was 'that; the' member's spouse leased 

### tie-down space 

### fromthe 

### City (e.g., 

### seethe last paragraph; 

### ofseceioa 

### 87103 where 

### the interest 

### ofthe spouse 

### isdeemed 

### ehaeof the official). 

### Further it 

### would appear that 

### lin interest 

### would nor be 

### eoo remote 

### where a member 

### of the Commission leases tie-down 

### frorn a private parry at the 

### Airport. This is so because a. 

### member could hypothetically keep the City rates low and thereby through the forces ot 

### competition keep 

# meprivate rates low. We have 

### been informed that twOof the 

### Commisslon members 

### fall wiehln these two examples. We 

### turn finally to 

### the question of'rhe 

### remedy thar is 

### to be applied. when 

### it is determined 

### that a condice 

### exists. Several 

### opinions of

### this olike'have dealt withe situations wherein marttrs have 

### come before boards 'or comm1ssio~ 

### wherein'a member of the board had an interest 

### in the matcer, In 

### 26 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. :5 (19") we wererequired to rule upon the question whether a 

### supervisor could participate in the deliberations and decision 

### regarding the 

### relocation of a 

### county road where the supervisor owned property 

### traversed 

### by one ofthe twO 

### routes under consideration. We held thar he could QOt,

### stating at pages 

### 6-7:,

"The question which arises at this 'point 

### is whether the supervisor who owns the affectedland mayParticipate in the prlcr'deliberarions 

### a.ndt 

### decision concerning the route 

### the relocated road is to 

### take, It 

### Is obvious rhat 

### this decision \ViIIdirectly affect aprivate interest of the supervisor; that is,

### whether Or

### norhis land will be condemned 

### by the county. 'While Government 

### Code section 

### 1090does not forbid his participation, since~56 ,;, ATtORNEY G£NElVJ.'S OP~NIONS [VOLUME 58 '; 

### ~ 

## .~,

,\'~ 

### ehe section 

### isresrriceed to aceiviries of a contractual nature, the 

### common law rule on which 

### lr is based 

### is not so 

### lirnired." Likewise, in 39 Ops, CaLAtty. Gen. 165, 168 (1962) weheld rhar amunicipal ordinance 'Wasinvalid 

### which granted an 

### excepeion to a zoning ordinance in which a city councilman, 

### having a direct financial interesr, Castthe deciding vore, In SO 

### holding, wenoted:

".

.. this opinion should no; be construed asholding thar a member of a

### city council cannot have an interest, regardless of his 

### lack of participation in the VOte,in property subject to a zoning regulation 

### of the city. As regards non-contractual matters coming before a governing 

### body, if the interested officer refrains from votiog, it would appear that the demands of

### public policy have been met; '

.. ,otherwise, only citizens who live and work in a complete vacuum, could be ~alifiec:l to sit on public bodies',

.. ." 

### "\ '..



### ~ :

Thus, it is seen that the common law 

### doeuine prohibits participation 

### by 11 Commission member in 

### rnaeters in which 

### ehe member 

### bas an interest. This includes not only participation in the voee, but also

### prior deliberations. The larter is of course to prevene the member from inf11~encingunduly the outcome of the vote,In numerous opinions this 

### office has, in 

### ardculaeing thi~ COmmonlaw remedy in 

### conflict of interest sieuations, 

### spccified the approach of abstention:

"(1) he should immediately disclose the interest, 

### (2) he should withdraw from any participation, in the matter, () he 

### should refrain from attempting to influence another 'member of'the bo.ard and should refrain from voting, and (4) 

### all of t,bisshould be reflected in the minures/?" It is concluded that a conflict of interest does arise where members of the Santa Monica Airport Commission pareicipare in Commission proceedings for rhe purpose ofmaking recommendations to
.the Santa.Monica City Council concerning charges [Q be 

### levied. 

### io~u,~!!~~~p~e~~Q~{l ,s~ccs at.the Santa Manka Municipal Airport where such members,l1,1;'eJess~spf such tie·d0w'lljjspaces at such airport. The conflict 

### of imerlMmay be Qvoided 

## by the 

### aHected member 

### by immediately disclosing the 

### interest, withdrawing-froml'aiticipationin thuDJutcr, 

### .cet~~ining from VOting, refraining trom attempting to influence other members. and having all of these matters reflected in the minures,

11Letter to HOll, Sig Hansen, Direcror, Depattment of Human Reseurces Development, August 16, 1972. I.L. 72-143, A.ccora: leeter to Mr. T. P. Stivers, District Securities Officer, Dlsericr Sccurities Division of ()ffice ofStateiTreasurer,Octobcr6.-1970, I.L. 70-177: Letter to Speci~IAssistant,AttorQey Gen.eraI, FeJ,tuary 17~19?2, U~c.7t·53; L~~r, to Dr. Malcolm H. Merrill, M.D., Dlteaor of

### PublieHC'lth,OCTober 1~"1964, I.L. 64.163.