R10827City Council Meeting: July 22, 2014
Santa Monica, California
RESOLUTION NUMBER 10V 7 (CCS)
(City Council Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA PLACING ON THE BALLOT A MEASURE
AMENDING THE CITY CHARTER TO ESTABLISH THE PROCESS FOR PLANNING
REUSE OF THE AIRPORT LAND IF THE AIRPORT IS CLOSED, INCLUDING
VOTERS' RIGHTS TO SET PARAMETERS FOR USE AND DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to place before the voters a measure that
would amend the City Charter by empowering the voters to establish parameters that
will guide the future use of the Airport land if the Santa Monica Airport is fully or partially
closed to aviation use; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to California Elections Code Section 10403, the City
Council has previously requested that the County of Los Angeles consent and agree to
the consolidation of all aspects of a General Municipal Election with the Statewide
General Election scheduled for Tuesday, November 4, 2014, for the purpose of the
election of Members of the Santa Monica City Council, the Santa Monica Rent Control
Board, the Santa Monica - Malibu Unified School District, and the Santa Monica College
Community College District.
1
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That a measure is to appear on the November 4, 2014 ballot as
follows:
PROPOSITION " ": Shall the City Charter be
amended to: (1) prohibit new development on
Airport land, except for parks, public open spaces Yes
and public recreational facilities, until the voters _
approve limits on the uses and development that
may occur on the land; and (2) affirm the City No
Council's authority to manage the Airport and to
close all or part of it?
SECTION 2. That the City Clerk is directed to file a certified copy of this
resolution with the Board of Supervisors and with the election department of the County
of Los Angeles.
SECTION 3. That the City of Santa Monica recognizes that additional costs may
be incurred by the County by reason of the addition of this measure to the ballot and
agrees to reimburse the County for any additional costs.
SECTION 4. That the City Clerk shall transmit to the City Attorney, in
accordance with applicable law, a copy of the proposed measure. The City Attorney
shall prepare an impartial analysis of it, which shall not exceed 500 words in length.
The impartial analysis shall be filed by the date set by the City Clerk for the filing of
primary arguments. In accordance with applicable law, not less than 10 calendar days
2
before the City Clerk submits the official election materials for printing, the City Clerk
shall make a copy of all applicable elections materials available for public examination
in the City Clerk's office.
SECTION 5. The City Council authorizes its members, as follows, to file written
arguments for or against the measure described above and which is contained in
Exhibit 1 to this Resolution, which Exhibit is incorporated by reference herein:
FOR: Gleam Davis Terry O'Day, Tony Vazquez, Ted Winterer
AGAINST:
All written arguments filed by any person in favor of or against any measure,
including any rebuttal arguments, shall be accompanied by the names and signatures of
the persons submitting the arguments as required by applicable law, and any names,
signatures and arguments may be filed until the time and date fixed by the City Clerk in
accordance with applicable law, after which no change may be submitted to the City
Clerk unless permitted by law.
SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall cause the text of the measure, which is
contained in Exhibit 1, together with the City Attorney's impartial analysis, and any
arguments for or against the measure, as well as any rebuttal, to be mailed to all
qualified voters with the sample ballot. In addition to other notices and publications
required by law, the City Clerk shall cause the text of the measure to be published once
in the official newspaper and in each edition thereof during the day of publication, which
M
shall be not less than forty (40) days and not more than sixty (60) days before the
General Municipal Election.
SECTION 7. The provisions of Resolution Numbers 10680(CCS), 10681(CCS)
and 10682(CCS) are referred to and incorporated into this resolution for more
particulars concerning the conduct of the General Municipal Election to be held on
November 4, 2014; and in all respects, the election shall be held and conducted as
required by applicable law. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to procure and
furnish any official ballots, notices, printed materials and all supplies or equipment that
may be necessary in order to properly and lawfully conduct the election.
SECTION 8. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution, and
thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
13
Exhibit 1
PROPOSED CHARTER AMENDMENT
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Monica owns and operates Santa Monica Airport ( "the
Airport "), and significant controversy exists about the Airport's future and the future use
of the 227 acres that comprise the Airport land;
WHEREAS, the Airport is one of the oldest general aviation airports in the country;
dating back to the 1920's, when the City acquired the Airport and Airport land and
aviation was in its infancy;
WHEREAS, over the decades since the City acquired the Airport, aviation, the City, and
the Airport's surroundings have all changed dramatically;
WHEREAS, when the City acquired the Airport, it was a simple landing strip surrounded
by agricultural fields;
WHEREAS, prior to and during World War II, the Airport became home to Douglas
Aircraft, and it became the City's major employer and the country's foremost aircraft
manufacturer;
WHEREAS, during the war years, the City supported the war effort by leasing the
Airport to the federal government; Douglas employees worked 24 hours a day, seven
days a week, producing military aircraft; and the property around the airport was
developed as housing for Douglas Aircraft's tens of thousands of workers;
WHEREAS, homes in those residential neighborhoods adjacent to the Airport were built
close to the Airport's boundaries on three sides, with some only 300 feet from the
runway ends;
WHEREAS, the end of the World War II brought significant changes: the lease to the
federal government ended, control of the Airport premises was returned to the City,
Douglas Aircraft left the City, and jet aircraft traffic came to the Airport;
WHEREAS, with Douglas Aircraft's departure and the advent of noisy jet aircraft, the
community's interests and the aviation community's interests diverged; and the
relationship between neighbors and the Airport became highly contentious;
WHEREAS, during the ensuing decades, Airport neighbors sued the City claiming that
aircraft noise had ruined their quality of life; Airport tenants sued the City claiming that
the City's regulatory efforts had damaged their businesses; and the federal government
sued the City claiming that City regulations, intended to shield neighbors from adverse
Airport impacts, violated federal law;
0
WHEREAS, the controversies lasted for many years and were, eventually, temporarily
resolved through the adoption of 1984 Settlement Agreement between the City and the
federal government; it resolved all then - pending legal disputes and obligated the City to
continue to operate the Airport until 2015, when the settlement agreement will expire;
WHEREAS, in the last 25 years, as business jet, flight training, and other operations
increased, so did Airport neighbors' complaints about air pollution, noise, and safety
risks;
WHEREAS, in recent years, with expiration of the 1984 Agreement and other
contractual obligations approaching, growing numbers of residents have demanded
closure of all or part of the Airport; and their demands increased when a terrible
accident at the Airport claimed four lives last year, including the lives of two well -known
community members;
WHEREAS, the City has worked in various ways to address residents' concerns about
adverse Airport impacts, including through the adoption of policies and regulations and
the implementation of various voluntary programs, all intended to curtail noise and air
pollution and to enhance safety;
WHEREAS, the federal government and aviation community have strongly opposed the
City's regulatory efforts and litigation has ensued, calling into question the City's ability
to protect its residents and other Airport neighbors from adverse Airport impacts and to
protect itself against liability claims;
WHEREAS, in response to this dilemma, the City has undertaken a lengthy Airport
visioning process to identify the concerns of members of the local and aviation
communities and to explore all alternatives for the Airport's future, including alternatives
other than the extremes of maintaining the status quo, which is unacceptable to
community members, and Airport closure, which is unacceptable to the federal
government and the aviation community;
WHEREAS, despite the City's substantial efforts to identify a range of alternatives,
including any possible compromises, the community remains intensely polarized, with
many residents and other Airport neighbors demanding that the Airport be entirely or
partially closed and that the land be rededicated to another use which would protect and
promote public general health, safety and welfare;
WHEREAS, with the 1984 Agreement about to expire and other federal obligations at or
near expiration, the controversy has escalated; and the City Council has indicated that,
unless adverse impacts are substantially reduced, the City will have no alternative as
Airport proprietor and responsible owner other than closing to aviation use either the
entire Airport or a significant portion of the Airport, which was transferred to the City by
quitclaim deed after World War ll;
E
WHEREAS, in response to the Council's indication of concern that it may have no
choice other than closing all or part of the Airport to protect the health, welfare and
safety of residents and to protect the City from liability claims, aviation interests have
prepared and circulated an initiative measure that is intended to protect the status quo
and their interests;
WHEREAS, that initiative measure includes a preamble consisting of "findings" about
the Airport that many community members find incomplete, deceptive or simply untrue
WHEREAS, the substantive provisions of the measure proposed by aviation interests
would require voter approval to close the Airport, and also to change aviation uses at
the Airport, or even to impose additional restrictions on Airport lessees who provide
aviation services; thus the measure would serve the aviation community's interest in
preserving the status quo at the Airport but would severely limit the City Council's ability
to prudently manage the Airport and Airport land;
WHEREAS, because it would circumscribe the City Council's authority to regulate uses
of the Airport property through lease provisions and other means and would deprive the
Council of whatever authority it has to close all or part of the Airport, the aviation
interests' ballot measure would deprive the City Council of its current ability to protect
the health, safety and welfare of residents;
WHEREAS, the Council wishes to take all possible steps to preserve its ability to protect
the community;
WHEREAS, whatever the future of the Airport, the City is committed to basing decisions
about the future use of the Airport land on complete and reliable information and on an
inclusive public planning process that considers and appropriately balances all
competing interests;
WHEREAS, such a process would assess the costs and benefits attendant upon
various uses of the Airport land, including continuing the Airport use, reducing the
amount of land devoted to that use, or making a different use of all or part of the Airport
land;
WHEREAS, as part of this process the City would assess the environmental and
economic impacts of these options and, based on the results of that assessment will
develop a recommended specific plan for the Airport land;
WHEREAS, in order to ensure community support for the plan and also to preserve its
own ability to protect residents health, safety and welfare, it is necessary for the Council
to propose its own, competing amendment to the City Charter, which, if adopted by
more votes, would override and nullify the measure proposed by aviation interests;
Cl
WHEREAS, the Council intends that its measure should strike a balance between
preserving the Council's authority to protect the community against harmful airport
impacts but also assure the community that the Airport will not be overdeveloped in the
future;
WHEREAS, to accomplish these goals, the Council wishes to offer the voters a
competing measure that would require preparation of a specific plan for future use of
the Airport land, if and when the land is no longer devoted to aviation uses, and would
specify that the plan must be developed so as to ensure compatibility with surrounding
uses and preservation of residents' qualify of life;
WHEREAS, because this initiative measure addresses the same subject matter as the
initiative measure that has been circulated by aviation interests, it is the Council's
intention that if this ballot measure receives more votes than the their initiative, this
measure shall prevail and the other shall be nullified in all respects, even if the aviation
community's measure also receives a majority affirmative vote.
NOW, THEREFORE,
Section 1. The following section shall be added to Article VI of the Santa Monica City
Charter:
640. Regulation, Management and Closure of Santa Monica Airport and Future
Use of Airport Land.
Subject only to limitations imposed by law, the City Council shall have full authority,
without voter approval, to regulate use of the Santa Monica Airport, manage Airport
leaseholds, condition leases, and permanently close all or part of the Airport to aviation
use.
If all or part of the Airport land is permanently closed to aviation use, no new
development of that land shall be allowed until the voters have approved limits on the
uses and development that may occur on the land. However, this section shall not
prohibit the City Council from approving the following on Airport land that has been
permanently closed to aviation use: the development of parks, public open spaces, and
public recreational facilities; and the maintenance and replacement of existing cultural,
arts and education uses.
Section 2. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this measure is for
any reason held to be unconstitutional or otherwise legally invalid by a decision of any
court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity and force of the
remaining portions of this measure. The City Council hereby declares that it would have
placed this City Charter amendment before the voters, and the voters declare that they
would have adopted this Charter Amendment and each portion thereof regardless of the
fact that any portion may be subsequently declared invalid.
2
Section 3. This measure is intended to compete with, prevail over, and nullify all
provisions of any other charter amendment placed on the same ballot that relates to the
subject of the Santa Monica Airport, including the measure by proponents Lauren
McCollum, Nikos Kokotakis and Flora Yin, who requested a ballot title and summary on
March 26, 2014 for a proposed initiative which they stated would require voter approval
before the City could redevelop Airport land.
5
Adopted and approved this 22 "d day of July, 2014.
am O'Connor, Mayor
I, Sarah P. Gorman, City Clerk of the Cit� of Santa Monica, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution No. 10827 (CCS) was duly adopted at a meeting of the Santa
Monica City Council held on the 22nd day of July, 2014, by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers: Davis, McKeown, Vazquez, Holbrook
Mayor Pro Tern O'Day, Mayor O'Connor
NOES: Councilmember: None
ABSENT: Councilmember: Winterer
ATTEST:
A 11 ) `�
Sarah P. Gorman, City Clerk