Loading...
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