You are on page 1of 114
COPY MARSHA JONES MOUTRIE (SBN 69711) City Attorney Marsha Mouitrie@smgov net JOSEPH LAWRENCE (SBN 99039) Assistant City! Attorne at LANCE §. GAMS (SBN 125487) WAN. is Atom (SBN 216049) Deputy City Attorney 1685 Main Street, “Third Floor Santa Monica, California 90401 -3295 Telephot 310.458.8336 Facsimile: 310.393.6727 DON G. RUSHING. (SBN 87565) DRushing@mot JAMES aHOSION (SBN F526), WILLIAM V. O°CONNOR, JR. (SBN 216650) MORRISON & PORRSTER LLP. 707 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 6000 Los Angeles, California F 20017- 3543 Telephone: 213.892.5: Facsimile: 213.892. Bast Attorneys for Plaintiff CITY GF SANTA MONICA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT. CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CITY OF SANTA MONICA, " CaN, 4 3- -0 8 0 4 6) Plaintiff, COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND v. INJUNCTIVE RELIEF UNDER ne FOE TITLE ACT AND UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ES FEDERAL AVIATION, CONSTITUTION ADMINIS ISTRATION and MICHAEL P. HUERTA, in his Official Capacity as Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, Defendants. COMPLAINT Seocwryxwaueun a= 1 13 14, 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiff City of Santa Monica (“City” or “Santa Monica”) brings this action against Defendants United States of America (“United States”), the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”), and Michael P. Huerta, in his official capacity as the Administrator of the FAA. NATURE OF THE ACTION 1. This lawsuit stems from the FAA’s unsubstantiated claim that Santa Monica must operate the Santa Monica Municipal Airport in perpetuity. The City purchased most of the property, upon which a part of the Airport is situated, in the 1920s by grant deed and has retained its fee interest in the land ever since. In 1941, to assist in providing military protection for the Douglas Aircraft Company during World War Il, the City leased the Airport Property to the United States. At no point has the City’s fee interest to the Airport Property been alienated from the City. Yet the FAA contends that a 1948 Instrument of Transfer terminating the United States’ short-lived lease of the Airport Property obligates Santa Monica to run an airport on the property forever. The Instrument of Transfer, however, is not a deed. It is merely a surrender of the United States’ temporary leasehold interest back to the City. While the Instrument of Transfer contains “restrictions” and a “reversion. clause,” the only interests that could revert back are the then-existing property rights of the United States in 1948—that is, a mere right to possession under a temporary leasehold interest without title to the property. When the leases expired on their own terms in 1953, the United States’ interest in the Airport Property ceased entirely. 2. Santa Monica has clearly and repeatedly asserted its unencumbered title to the Airport Property and its ability, after certain contractual and legal obligations expire in July 2015, to use the Airport Property as it chooses in its, sovereign discretion, including for non-aviation purposes. Santa Monica has also attempted to negotiate with the FAA regarding options for the Airport Property after July 2015, but the FAA refuses to move from its arbitrary and unsupported i COMPLAINT position that the City must operate the Airport in perpetuity under the Instrument of Transfer, o the Airport Property will revert to the United States. 3. Santa Monica brings this lawsuit to establish the City’s rights to determine for itself and its citizens the future of the Santa Monica Airport. By this action, the City seeks to clear the City’s title to the Airport Property and establish its right to operate its property in the exercise of its police power for the benefit of its citizens. 4, Santa Monica brings a quiet title action against the FAA’s claim of a continuing interest in the Airport Property. The FAA’s asserted right of reverter should Santa Monica cease to operate the Airport Property as an airport clouds Santa Monica’s title to the Airport Property. Through this action, Santa Monica seeks to quiet title against restrictions on the property and the claimed right of reverter. The City further seeks a declaration and, if necessary, injunctive relief, preventing the FAA from interfering with the City’s fee interest, right to title, and unfettered use of the Airport Property as it sees fit in its sovereign discretion after present contractual obligations expire. 5. Furthermore, Santa Monica brings constitutional claims seeking a declaration that the FAA’s actions in taking the Airport Property from the City and commandeering the City to run the airport in perpetuity are unconstitutional under the Fifth and Tenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. a, First, the FAA’s demand that Santa Monica operate an airport in perpetuity at its direction and on its terms amounts to a taking by the United States without just compensation in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution. b. Second, the FAA’s command that Santa Monica run an airport on the Airport Property in perpetuity deprives Santa Monica of its right to use the property for other purposes. This deprivation amounts to a regulatory taking by the United States without just 2 ‘COMPLAINT 6. compensation in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution. Third, by forcing the City to run an airport at its direction, the FAA is commandeering the City and its officials to act for the purposes of the United States in violation of the Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. Additionally, the FAA has violated the Fifth and Tenth Amendments of the United States Constitution through conditioning the return of the Airport Property on the City’s relinquishing its inherent sovereign rights and its rights as a property owner to exercise control over its own land. Finally, by asserting that the City of Santa Monica must operate the Airport in perpetuity, the FAA is depriving Santa Monica of its sovereign right to control the Airport Property, in which Santa Monica has an established property right. The FAA’s assertion lacks factual and legal support, and impairs Santa Monica’s rights as a municipality and property owner. JURISDICTION AND VENUE This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question jurisdiction) and 28 U.S.C. §1346(f) (district court has exclusive jurisdiction of civil actions under section 2409a to quiet title as against a property interest claimed by the United States). Additionally, the action arises out of the Constitution of the United States, and the City seeks to redress violations of the Fifth and Tenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. The relief sought is authorized by 28 U. 7 Venue is proper in the Central District of California under 28 U.S. S.C. §§ 2201-2202, 2409a. .§ 1391(e), as the City is located in this district and the property that is the subject of this action is located within this judicial district. . COMPLAINT 8. There can be no doubt that there is a present and actual controversy between the parties. PARTIES Plaintiff 9. The City is a State of California Charter City and Municipal Corporation, organized and existing under and by virtue of the Constitution and laws of the State of California, located in the County of Los Angeles, California. The City owns and operates the Santa Monica Municipal Airport (“the Airport” or “SMO”) and the Airport Property is located within the political boundaries of the City.' Defendants 10. Defendant United States of America acts by and through its agencies and officers, including the FAA. Il. Defendant FAA is the agency responsible for federal oversight of airports. 12. Defendant Michael P. Huerta is the Administrator of the FAA. He is lity for sued in his official capacity. Administrator Huerta has statutory responsil all matters relating to the FAA. 13. Relief is sought against each defendant as well as his agents, assistants, successors, employees, attorneys, and all persons acting in concert or cooperation with them or at their direction or under their control. "A small portion of SMO is situated in the City of Los Angeles. All parcels referenced in and related to this Complaint (i.e. all of the Airport Property) lie within the borders of Santa Monica. COMPLAINT FACTUAL BACKGROUND The City’s Acquisition of the Airport Property 14, The site that is now the Airport (the “Airport Property”) was used as an informal landing strip beginning in 1917. In 1922, Douglas Aircraft Company ian aircraft on and (“Douglas”) began testing and producing military and around the Airport Property. 15. In 1926, the City acquired title to certain parcels of unimproved land that now constitute most of the Airport Property through a Grant Deed. This Grant Deed conveyed the entire Airport Property to the City “free of incumbrances” [sic] except taxes related to the year 1926-1927, and the terms of a five year lease that the former owner (Herbert Stanton) had made to the City of Santa Monica. The total purchase price for these parcels was more than $755,000, or approximately $10 million in today’s dollars. On August 30, 1926, the City passed a resolution accepting the 1926 Grant Deed. Between 1926 and before December 1941, the City acquired, through various other grant deeds that vested fee simple title in the City, additional smaller parcels that make up the Airport Property. 16. In 1929, Douglas expanded its operations and use of the Airport Property, ramping up production and testing of its early airliners, the DC-3 and DC-4. 17. When the United States entered World War II in 1941, Douglas became a major defense contractor, employing nearly 44,000 workers and supplying hundreds of aircraft in support of the war effort. The Douglas jobs transformed the City as new homes were built for the Douglas workers near the Airport Property. United States’ Lease of the Airport Property 18. On May 27, 1941, President Franklin D. Roosevelt issued Presidential Proclamation 2487, which declared that the United States was faced with an “unlimited national emergency” which required “military, naval, air and civilian 5 COMPLAINT eo) oo oe ens TT 13. 14 15 16 17 18 19 val 22 oe 24 oe 26 27 28 defenses be put on the basis of readiness to repel any and all acts or threats of aggression directed toward any part of the Western Hemisphere.” 19. In December 1941, the City leased the Airport Property to the United States to aid in the war effort and so that the United States could provide military protection for Douglas—a major military contractor—during the war. The United States’ leasehold interest was accomplished through two separate leases covering two adjoining parcels of land, which together comprised the Airport Property. 20. Lease No, W-04-193-ENG.4894 (the “Runway Lease”) leased approximately 86 acres on the northern portion of the Airport Property that consisted mostly of two runways laid out in an “X” configuration (see Figure 1, below (photograph of X-configured runway at SMO)). The Runway Lease term began on December 8, 1941 and was to end twelve months from the date of the termination of Presidential Proclamation 2487. The City charged the United States only $1 for the entire term of the lease.” Figure 1 ? The Runway Lease and its supplements are attached as Exhibit A to this Complaint. COMPLAINT 21. Lease No. W3460-ENt 549 (the “Golf Course Lease”) went into effect December 1, 1941, and leased to the United States for “[m]ilitary purposes” approximately 83 acres on the southern portion of the Airport Property that consisted ofa golf course. The Golf Course Lease terminated on June 30, 1943 with an option of renewal annually thereafter until June 30, 1947. Under the Golf Course Lease, the City required the United States to pay only $150 per month to the City? 22, In 1944, the Santa Monica City Council passed Resolution No. 3536, in which the City agreed to allow the United States the right to build a Project on the Airport Property. As a condition to this agreement, the Civil Aeronautics Administration “required that the City have certain property interests in the landing, area of the Airport and the lands to be improved.” Specifically, under Section 2 of Resolution No. 3536, the City, “[iJn order to satisfy the Government” that the City was “qualified to sponsor the Project,” warranted that it had “fee simple title to all the lands comprising the present airport.” The City noted that such lands were held in fee simple free from encumbrances, except for the City’s lease to Douglas, the City’s lease to a gas utility company, and the City’s December 1941 leases to the United States. Through Resolution No. 3536, the City reaffirmed its fee interest in the land. 23. In 1944 and 1945, respectively, Supplement Number I to the Runway Lease and the Golf Course Lease modified the leases to allow for the construction of a new runway to accommodate larger aircraft. (See Figure 2 below (showing a view of the new runway circa 1952).) Supplement Number | to the leases also released the United States from its obligation to restore the leased parcels to their original condition under the leases in exchange for the United States’ conveyance The Golf Course Lease and its supplements are attached as Exhibit B to this Complaint. ‘COMPLAINT of any improvements to the property and cash payments to the City. The payments to the City were then reinvested in the Airport Property in order to obtain additional land and fund the improvements. Supplement Number 1 to the Golf Course Lease also extended the lease term until twelve months after the termination of reduced the rent to $1 for the entire duration of the lease. Figure 2 Proclamation 2487 (i.e., to align the lease term with that of the Runway Lease) and | | | | | | | 24, In April 1945, the United States condemned a number of residential properties on approximately 20 acres of the west side of the airport. The properties were purchased by the United States using City funds in order to expand the Airport. 25. In November 1945, the Airport Property was further expanded when Douglas conveyed an approximately 15 acre parcel on the Airport’s south side to the City by grant deed. | COMPLAINT 26. Figure 3 below is an aerial view of the modern airport, including all acquired parcels, with overlays of the Runway Lease (yellow) and Golf Course Lease (red), Figure 3 Golf Course Lease (549) 27. The City made significant investments in the Airport Property from 1941 to 1946 to support the war effort and protect Douglas employees that lived and worked in the community. Furthermore, the City invested a significant amount of its own funds into the Airport and collected only nominal rent from the United States. 28. At the end of World War II, the United States determined that it was no longer necessary to maintain a presence at the Airport Property to protect, Douglas. Accordingly, the United States and the City modified both the Runway and Golf Course Leases through a Supplement Number 2 to each lease. In accordance with the language of these second supplemental agreements entered into on July 15, 1946, the United States stopped maintaining and operating the airport and paying rent. Thus, since 1946, the City has continuously maintained and operated the airport. COMPLAINT 27 28 29, Because the United States had not yet surrendered its leasehold interest and Proclamation 2487 had not been terminated, from July 1946 until 1948, the City operated the Airport under a right of entry from the United States. The City, as always, retained its fee interest in the land. The United States Surrenders Its Leasehold 30. On July 29, 1946, the War Assets Administration (“WAA”) issued Form SPB-5 Declaration of Surplus Real Property concerning the Airport Property, declaring as surplus the United States’ leasehold interest in the Runway Lease and Golf| that its 168 acre leasehold interest at the Airport Property, along wil se Lease. On January 9, 1947, the United States made the determination any improvements, should be disposed of under the Surplus Property Act of 1944 (“SPA"). By April 1948, the WAA had agreed to surrender its leasehold interest in the Airport to the City pursuant to the SPA and its implementing regulations. 31. On August 10, 1948, the United States officially surrendered its leasehold interest in the Airport Property to the City pursuant to a 1948 Instrument of Transfer. The Instrument of Transfer provided certain restrictions on the property, including non-discrimination restrictions and public use requirements. 32. In order to enforce these restrictions, the Instrument of Transfer included a “reversion clause,” which provides that, in the event any of the restrictions or conditions set forth in the Instrument of Transfer is not met, “the title, right of possession, and all other rights transferred by the instrument” to Santa Monica shall, at the option of the government, “revert” to the government “sixty (60) days following the date upon which demand to this effect is made in writing[.J” The reversion clause, which by its terms only applies to rights transferred pursuant to the Instrument, is set forth in its entirety in Figure 4 below." ‘The Instrument of Transfer is attached as Exhibit C COMPLAINT Figure 4 (2) That in the event that any of the aforesaid terns, conditions, reservations or restrictions is not met, observed, or complied with by the PARTY OP THE SECOND PART or any subsequent transferee, whether caused by the legal inability of oaid PARTY OF THE SECOND PART or subsequent transferee ‘within said sixty (60) days such default or violation shall have been oured and all such ‘terms, conditions, reservations and restrictions shall have been mot, observed or complicd with, in which event said reversion shall not oocur and title, right of possession, and all other rights transferred hereby, except such, if any, as shall have previously reverted, shall remain vested in the PARTY OF THE SECOND PART, its transferees, successors and assigns 33. A resolution of the Santa Monica City Council confirmed that the intent of the Instrument of Transfer was only to surrender the United States’ leasehold interest in the Airport Property. Through Resolution No. 183, the City confirmed that the United States of America “does surrender to the City of Santa Monica [its] lease-hold interest in and to the premises[.]” The Instrument of Transfer did not convey title in the land as the City always maintained its fee interest in the Airport Property. The Instrument of Transfer, therefore, is not a deed transferring title to real property; it is merely a surrender of the United States” leasehold interest back to the City. 34. The City Council never agreed to, or even considered, forfeiting its police powers over the Airport Property for all time. Nor could the City Council do so, because all governments must maintain their flexibility to protect the public welfare through unpredictably changing times and circumstances. The City Council could not have contracted away the right of future Councils to address emerging community needs. No such express or implied contract was created. u COMPLAINT 35, In 1949, the United States transferred to the City through quitclaim deed the 20 acres acquired through condemnation by exercise of federal war powers and paid for with City funds. ‘This property is not covered by the Instrument of Transfer. 36. On April 28, 1952, President Truman proclaimed that the national emergency declared in 1941 no longer existed and terminated Proclamation 2487. Accordingly, the already-surrendered Runway and Golf Course Leases expired, by their own terms, on April 28, 1953. The Pure Jets Nuisance 37. Inthe 1960s, the first civilian jets began using the Airport. These “pure jets” were ten times louder and more polluting than the present-day fan jets. The noise impact on adjacent neighborhoods was severe. 38. _ In 1967, a large group of City residents living near the Airport sued the City, claiming jet operations had damaged their property value and created a nuisance. The California Supreme Court held that, although the plaintiffs’ evidence failed to establish their case, the City could be sued by residents for Airport impacts on nuisance and other theories. (Nestle v. City, 6 Cal. 34 920 (1972)). Thereafter, the City considered a wide range of regulations to shield itself from liability, including a jet ban, jet curfew, and even Airport closure. A jet curfew was enacted. The City’s Plan for Airport Closure and the 1984 Settlement Agreement 39, Inthe late 1960s, there was a growth in general aviation nationwide, and Santa Monica Airport operations (takeoffs and landings) reached an all-time high of over 356,000 per year. Santa Monica residents began expressing their concern about the impact of the increased air travel on the City. 40. In response to the rising tide of resident apprehensions, various aviation associations also began expressing their concerns if the Airport operations were to end. The FAA recognized and responded to these aviation-related concerns in an April 1971 letter to the then Senior Vice President of the Aircraft Owners and ie COMPLAINT SC oe ee i aE 14, ab 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Zi 28 Pilots Association, Max Karant. The FAA stated its position that once the City’s grant assurance obligations ended, “Santa Monica Airport is vulnerable to being discontinued and used for non-aviation purposes.” The FAA characterized “the challenge” it faced with regards to the Airport as needing to convince Santa Monica residents of “the good things aviation offers[.” The FAA did not take the position that the City was obligated to operate the Airport in perpetuity. 41. In 1975, to alleviate the impact on Santa Monica residents, the City Council adopted ordinances to reduce aircraft noise, including a total jet ban, a ban on helicopter flights, a noise limit, a night curfew, and a weekend and holiday ban on touch-and-go, stop-and-go, and low approach operations conducted during fixed-wing flight training. 42. These ordinances led to litigation against the City by the Santa Monica Airport Association (“SMAA litigation”). ‘The FAA intervened in the case as amicus curiae on behalf of the Airport Association and argued against the City’s ordinances. Ultimately, the ordinances were upheld with the sole exception of the jet ban ordinance, which was struck down as disproportionately affecting newer aircraft when there was insufficient evidence to show that newer aircraft were more dangerous or noisier than older aireraft. Both parties appealed, but the Ninth Circuit affirmed the conclusion of the district court. ‘The Ninth Circuit recognized that Federal law does not preempt the City as “airport proprietor” from adopting ordinances intended to limit its liability and protect the City’s “human environment,” as long as those ordinances are not unconstitutionally discriminatory. 43. In 1979, while the appeal of the SMAA litigation was pending, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1137, which imposed a lower decibel limit at the Santa Monica Airport. 44, Ordinance No. 1137 also prompted litigation against the City, this time by the National Business Aircraft Association (“NBAA litigation”), which argued a COMPLAINT Seocwmrx sue wn i ve! 14 aa 16 17 18 19 20 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 that the decibel limit in Ordinance No. 1137 was a disguised jet ban, and thus was impermissibly discriminatory for the same reasons as the jet ban ordinance at issue in the SMAA litigation. The NBAA litigation was assigned to the same district court judge who heard the SMAA litigation. Again, the FAA intervened as amicus curiae on behalf of the Airport Association and argued against the Ordinance. In November 1979, the court enjoined the City from enforcing Ordinance No. 1137, and litigation of the case continued. 45. In June 1981, while the NBAA litigation was pending, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 6296 (CCS) declaring its intention to close the Airport when legally possible. In 1982, after Resolution No. 6296 was passed, the parties to the NBAA litigation agreed that the lawsuit would be conditionally dismissed provided the City adopted a new “Airport Master Plan” and “Noise Mitigation Project” by November of 1983. 46. Thereafter, in 1983, the City adopted a new Master Plan for the Airport Property that created two new Fixed Base Operators (“FBOs”) on the north (non-residential) side of the Property and released aviation land on the south side of the Airport Property for non-aviation purposes. The NBAA litigation was dismissed. 47. Although the adoption of Resolution No. 6296 and the creation of the new Master Plan led to the dismissal of the NBAA litigation, these actions also prompted several Part 13 (the equivalent of today’s Part 16) proceedings to be filed against the City by airport users. As a result of the multiple Part 13 complaints, the City engaged in negotiations with the FAA concerning the future of the Airport. These negotiations were intended to settle the then-pending Part 13 proceedings. 48. Ultimately, the negotiations between the City and the FAA culminated in the signing of a “Settlement Agreement” in 1984 (“the 1984 Agreement”). The 1984 Agreement provided that the City would operate and maintain the Airport COMPLAINT Property as an airport until July 1, 2015.* There is no mention in the1984 Agreement that the City must operate the Airport in perpetuity. Nor is there an assertion that the FAA had a property interest in the Airport Property. 49. The 1984 Agreement also recognized the City’s authority to mitigate aircraft impacts through the existing noise limit, jet curfew, helicopter ban, and pattern flying restrictions. It further limited the number of aircraft tie-downs, removed land from aviation use, and provided for the relocation of aviation facilities to the north side of the Airport, away from residential neighborhoods. 50. In June 1994, the City accepted its last federal grant for airfield improvements, in exchange for contractual promises to maintain the Airport for the use and benefit of the public for the useful life of improvements made with federal funds, but no more than twenty years from the date of execution of the federal grant agreement. As of June 2014, therefore, the Airport will owe no further obligations to the United States under any federal grant agreement contracts. 51. Until recently, and as reflected in the 1984 Agreement, the FAA has consistently recognized the City’s ability to reevaluate the future of the Airport. 52. For example, in a 1998 Part 16 administrative proceeding involving a dispute over the City’s refusal to offer long term leases to two airport tenants beyond 2015, the FAA issued a Director’s Determination discussing the 1984 Agreement and again demonstrating the FAA’s position that the City had the ability to reevaluate the future of the Airport. The Director states: “[The 1984] Settlement Agreement makes clear that the City is obligated to operate the Airport only for the duration of the [1984] Agreement (through July 1, 2015) . .. To the extent that Complainants and [the Airport Association] seek to prevent the future closure of the Airport or require the City to operate the Airport beyond July 1, 2015, that is a ® The 1984 Agreement is attached as Exhibit D. | | COMPLAINT we Caer anre 10 12 13 14 15 16 itd 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 28 local land use matter. ... When the City’s last grant agreement expires in approximately 2014, the AIP grant sponsor assurances will no longer require the City to operate the Airport as an airport.” (FAA Docket No. 16-99-21; Director’s Determination, pp. 22-23 (emphasis added).) 53. An appeal of the Director’s Determination resulted in the FAA issuing its Final Agency Decision on the issue in 2003. The Final Agency Decision affirmed the Director’s Determination regarding the City’s obligations to operate SMO as an airport only through July of 2015. While discussing the 1984 Settlement Agreement, the FAA Administrator concluded that the Settlement Agreement “provided a conceptual blueprint” by which the City was required to maintain “SMO’s role in the National Airport System as a general aviation reliever airport until July 1, 2015.” (FAA Docket No. 16-99-21; Final Agency Dec’ p.3.) This Final Agency Decision constitutes a “final agency action” under the federal regulations applicable to Part 16 proceedings. Litigation Regarding the City’s Aireraft Conformance Program 54. In 2001, to address the safety and liability risks inherent in the increase of Category C and D aircraft traffic at SMO', a study commissioned by the City Council recommended the “Aircraft Conformance Program” to promote safety and to conform airport usage to be consistent with the purpose of the 1984 Agreement.” 55. Among other things, the Aircraft Conformance Program called for expanding the distance from the runway ends to the airport perimeter in the interests of safety, which would require shortening the runway. The result would © §MO is an FAA-classified B-II airport. 7 Category C and D aircraft are large jets with landing approach speeds that exceed 140 miles per hour. Approach speed is determined at the point the aircraft passes over the runway threshold. ‘COMPLAINT be a runway that could not accommodate large Category C and D aircraft due to their need for a longer runway for takeoff and landing. 56. On December 10, 2002, the City Council unanimously approved the Aircraft Conformance Program in principle and directed staff to continue to seek a voluntary agreement with the FAA to implement it. The FAA refused the City’s efforts to reach a voluntary agreement despite several years of good faith negotiations by the City. 57. The City Council then asserted its airport proprietor’s rights in 2008 and promulgated an ordinance, intended to promote safety and protect adjacent neighborhoods from aircraft overruns, by prohibiting the generally larger, faster category C and D aircraft from using the Airport (‘*the Ordinance”) 58. On March 26, 2008, the FAA issued an Order to Show Cause to the City seeking to prohibit the City from enforcing the Ordinance, and—for the first time—claimed that the Surplus Property Act of 1944 and the 1948 Instrument of Transfer obligated the City to operate the Airport Property in perpetuity as an airport or ownership of the airport would revert to the United States. 59. In April 2008, the FAA issued a Cease and Desist Order, and later obtained a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction prohibiting the City from enforcing the Ordinance, claiming that the City’s attempt to conform Airport operations to federal runway safety standards violated federal law. 60. After the preliminary injunction was issued, the City and the FAA proceeded through the FAA’s administrative review process regarding the C and D jet ban, and on May 27, 2008, the FAA issued a Director’s Determination, in which the FAA found that the Ordinance unreasonably and unjustly discriminated between aircraft and thereby violated the grant assurances, the 1948 Instrument of Transfer, and the 1984 Agreement. 61. ‘The City then requested a hea days in March 2009, before the FAA Hearing Officer. In his Initial Decision, the 17 ing. The hearing was held over four COMPLAINT | Hearing Officer essentially affirmed the Director’s Decision, holding that the Ordinance was contrary to the City’s obligations under grant assurance 22 (economic non-discrimination), the 1984 Settlement Agreement, and the 1948 Instrument of Transfer. Both the City and the FAA appealed the Hearing Officer's Initial Determination to the Administrator of the FAA. 62. On July 8, 2009, the FAA issued its Final Agency Decision, holding that the City was bound under grant assurance 22, and that the Ordinance was contrary to non-discrimination requirements of grant assurance 22. Accordingly, the Final Agency Decision affirmed the Initial Decision with regards to the City’s obligations under grant assurance 22. However, the Final Agency Decision also held that the City’s “obligations under the 1984 Settlement Agreement are not a proper subject in a proceeding under [Part 16] because that Agreement was not incorporated in the Grant Assurances.” (FAA Docket No. 16-02-08, Final Agency Decision at 4.) Accordingly, the Final Agency Decision reversed the Initial Decision with regards to whether the Ordinance was contrary to the 1984 Settlement Agreement. (/d.) The Final Agency Decision also reversed the Initial Decision with regards to its holding concerning the Surplus Property Act and the Instrument of Transfer, noting that it was “not necessary to decide whether the Ordinance [was] contrary to the Surplus Property Act.” (/d.) 63. _ In September 2009, the City appealed the Final Agency Decision regarding the Ordinance to the D.C. Circuit. The D.C. Circuit, applying a highly deferential standard of review, concluded that the FAA did not “act arbitrarily or capriciously when it concluded” that the Ordinance was “contrary to grant assurance 22's requirement[s.]” (Case No. 09-1233, D.C. Cir. 2011.) 64. The D.C. Circuit declined to address whether the Ordinance violated the 1984 Settlement Agreement or the Instrument of Transfer. The D.C. Circuit also found it unnecessary to reach the issue of whether the City’s action to regulate safety at the Airport was preempted by federal law. The D.C. Circuit noted, io ‘COMPLAINT however, that the 1984 Settlement Agreement “would remain effective until July 1, 2015” and required the City to “operate and maintain SMO ‘as a viable functioning facility without derogation of its role as a general aviation reliever’ until that date.” (id.at 4 (emphasis added).) The City Evaluates the Future of the Santa Monica Airport 65. In December 2010, in anticipation of the expiration of the 1984 Settlement Agreement, the City Council directed staff to proceed with a comprehensive public process regarding the Airport’s future. The result was a March 2013 report outlining a three-phased “Visioning Process.” 66. Though the Visioning Process report did not take a position on whether the Airport should close at the expiration of the 1984 Agreement, it did conclude that the status quo at the Airport is not acceptable to City residents. 67. In an attempt to avoid litigation, City staff members met with FAA representatives several times in the last three years to convey community concerns about impacts and the City’s position about its authority to determine the Airport’s future, The FAA representatives willingly met and listened; however, the Agency ‘was unwilling or unable to agree to, or even to negotiate on, any compromise as to the Airport’s future operation. Notably, FAA representatives steadfastly maintained that the City is obligated to continue operating the Airport in perpetuity under the Instrument of Transfer, that the operational status quo must be maintained, and that no agreements to the contrary could be made outside of the context of litigation. FAA Guidance Concerning Reversionary Interests 68. The FAA’s inflexible position concerning the reversion clause is contrary to published FAA guidance on reversionary interests created by property conveyances under the Surplus Property Act. 69. The FAA has published an “FAA Airport Compliance Manual” through FAA Order 5190.6B (“Airport Compliance Manual”). According to the 9 COMPLAINT | ce aAHn rw " 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 FAA, the Airport Compliance Manual “sets forth policies and procedures for the FAA Airport Compliance Program.” The Airport Compliance manual also “provides basic guidance for FAA personnel” concerning certain issues, including interpretation of conditions related to the conveyance of property. 70. Chapter 23 of the Airport Compliance Manual addresses “Reversion of Airport Property.” Section 23.3 of that Chapter specifically sets forth how far—in the FAA’s view—reversionary rights extend. Specifically, Section 23.3 provides that the right of reverter “extends only to the title, right of possession, or other rights vested in the United States at the time the United States transferred the property described in the instrument to the grantee.” Section 23.3 is reproduced in full as Figure 5, below. Figure 5 09/30/2009 5190.68 Chapter 23. Reversions of Airport Property 23.3. Right of Reverter. The instrument of conveyance from the federal govemmment must specify the right to have interest revert to a federal agency and title revest in the United States. ‘The right may be exercised only at the option of the United States — with or without the cooperation of a grantee — against all or part of the property in question. 71. Pursuant to the Airport Compliance Manual, the reverter right contained in the Instrument of Transfer—if any—extended only to the United States’ temporary leasehold interest in the Airport Property as that interest existed at the time of the 1948 Instrument of Transfer; leasehold interests that would, by their own terms, expire upon the conclusion of the War, when Presidential Proclamation 2487 was terminated. ey) COMPLAINT N Secwmraanee i 12 13, 14 15 16 oe 18 id 20 21 ee 24 rh 26 27 28 72. Presidential Proclamation 2487 was terminated on April 28, 1952. Thus, on April 28, 1953, one year after Presidential Proclamation 2487 was terminated, the United States’ reverter right in the Airport Property ceased. 73. ‘The FAA cannot create greater property rights than it had in 1948 and there is no basis to claim that the FAA has any ability to disturb Santa Monica’s fee interest in the Airport Property under the Instrument of Transfer. RST CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Quiet Title Action under 28 U.S.C. § 2409a) 74. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs 14 to 73. 75. This is an action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2409a to quiet title to certain real property located within this judicial district in Los Angeles County, California and more particularly described in the Runway Lease (Ex. C) as follows: a. Parcel 1: A\ll that portion of the Santa Monica Municipal Airport lying between a line 700.13 feet southeasterly from and parallel to the south-easterly line of Ocean Park Boulevard, measured at right angles thereto, and a line 1600 feet southeasterly from and parallel to the said south-westerly line of Ocean Park Boulevard measured at right angles thereto and extending from 25th Street, in the City of Santa Monica, to Bundy Drive in the City of Los Angeles, California. b. Parcel 2: All of that certain parcel of real property adjoining the above described Parcel 1, on the southeasterly line thereof, having 100 feet of frontage on said 25th Street, in City of Santa Monica, California, being rectangular in shape and having a uniform depth of 765.87 feet. 2 COMPLAINT SeawuAunewn 76. This action also seeks to quiet title to certain real property located within this judicial district in Los Angeles County, California and more particularly described in the Golf Course Lease (Ex. D) as follows: a. That portion of the Santa Monica Municipal Golf Course, in the City of Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California, described as follows: Bounded on the Northwest by a line parallel to and distant 1800 feet southeasterly from the southeasterly line of Ocean Park Boulevard, measured at right angles to Ocean Park Boulevard; bounded on the northeast by the southwesterly line of Centinela Avenue, bounded on the southeast by the City Limit line of the City of Santa Monica, California, and bounded on the southwest by the northeasterly line of Twenty-seventh street in the said City, containing approximately 85 acres, together with the two-one story frame utility and repair shops containing approximately 2600 square feet and all of the one store stucco Club House, excepting the Golf Shop, restaurant and lobby, consisting of approximately 2400 square feet. Also Lot A of the George Tract, as per map recorded in Book 16, Page 21 of Maps, Records of said County, said lot being included in the above mentioned 85 acres. 71. The City of Santa Monica is the owner in fee simple of the property described above. (See supra, § 15.) 78. Under 28 U.S.C.§ 2409a, the United States has consented to be sued in civil actions to adjudicate disputes regarding title to real property in which the United States claims an interest. 79. This court has exclusive ju action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1346(f). diction over the subject matter of this COMPLAINT 80. The City of Santa Monica acquired fee simple title to the property described above from Herbert W. Stanton, Alice B. Stanton, Forrest Q. Stanton, Elizabeth P. Stanton, Edwin L. Stanton, and Evelyn C. Stanton, prior owners of such property, on August 30, 1926, at which time the City received a grant deed to such property. Certain additional property comprising the Airport Property was obtained in fee simple prior to December 1941 when the Runway and Golf Course Leases were executed. 81. ‘The United States has never challenged the City’s chain of title or Santa Monica’s right, title, and interest in fee simple absolute to the Airport Property that was leased to the United States during World War II. 82. The United States created by the Instrument of Transfer. The FAA has asserted that title to the aims a reversion fee interest in the property was Airport Property will revert to the United States if the purported airport use condition in the 1948 Instrument of Transfer is not met (i.e., if the City decides to close any portion of the Airport to aviation use). The FAA makes this assertion despite the fact that the only interest in the Airport Property by the United States was a World War II era lease, which expired by its own terms over sixty years ago. 83. Santa Monica first learned of the existence of the claim of reversion interest of full title to the Airport Property on or after March 26, 2008, through the FAA’s Order to Show Cause. 84. However, the United States never had any right, title or interest in the Airport Property other than the leasehold interests that were surrendered to the City by the 1948 Instrument of Transfer and which otherwise expired by their own terms in 1953. | 85. The reverter clause in the Instrument of Transfer does not vest title ction. The reverter only applies to the rights upon breach of a covenant or restri transferred under the 1948 Instrument of Transfer, a leasehold interest. This, leasehold interest expired by its own terms in 1953. The improvements to the COMPLAINT Airport Property were paid for with City funds, or were exchanged prior to execution of the Instrument of Transfer in return for the City’s release of the United | States from its obligation to return the property to its original condition and additional cash compensation to the City, or have exceeded their useful life | 86. There is no basis for the United States to receive title to the Airport Property if Santa Monica determines not to operate an airport after 2015. Under the Instrument of Transfer, the United States has no remaining interest that can revert. 87. To the extent the United States claims any interest remains to be reverted under the reversion clause of the 1948 Instrument of Transfer, the 1984 Agreement releases the City of any obligation to operate the Airport Property as an airport after July 1, 2015. 88. A declaration concerning the C' s rights to the Airport Property is necessary at this time due to the upcoming expiration of the 1984 Settlement Agreement. 89. The City requests a judgment by this Court declaring that the claims of defendant United States to the described real property are of no validity whatsoever, and that this Court declare that the City is the owner in fee simple of such real property and that defendant United States has no right, title, or interest in the property. SE iD CLAIM FOR RELIEF (For Violation of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution-Taking) 90. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs 14 to 73. 91, ‘The “Takings Clause” of the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution provides that “private property [shall not] be taken for public use without just compensation.” 92. Property taken by the United States from a state or local entity is considered “private property” for purposes of the Fifth Amendment. 24 COMPLAINT Rowen Sewra.] wu 12 13 14 15, 16 7 18 19 20 21 ae 23 24 25 26 27 28 93. The United States has constructively confiscated the Airport by requiring the City to operate the property as an airport in perpetuity. 94. Santa Monica purchased title to the Airport Property in fee simple in 1926. 95. To aid in the war effort, Santa Monica leased the Airport to the United States under the terms described above. 96. The United States never owned the Airport Property; it only had a leasehold interest in the property. 97. Despite lacking ownership of the Airport, the FAA has decided and proclaimed that Santa Monica is required to operate the Airport in perpetuity. 98. This is constructive confiscation of the Airport because Santa Monica is prohibited from using the property for other purposes required for the benefit of its citizens. Thus, the United States has effectively seized the Airport Property. 99. The damage that the City would incur from this illegal and unconstitutional taking is not compensable through monetary damages. The taking would prevent the City from using the land in its sovereign capacity and for whatever purposes it deems fit under the City’s inherent governmental and proprietary power. Further, this taking impinges upon the City’s police powers to protect the public, address emerging community needs, and enforce order within the City consistent with the City’s policies and the citizens’ priorities. The value that the City will lose if this illegal and unconstitutional taking is effectuated cannot be quantified in monetary terms. The United States cannot condition the ability of the City and its citizens to use the land on the City’s forfeiture of its inherent constitutional rights. 100. The U ited States did not and cannot provide just compensation for the loss of the City’s sovereign rights. The United States did not justly compensate Santa Monica in any way in exchange for the requirement that it operate the Airport in perpetuity. COMPLAINT. 101. The United States did not give Santa Monica title to the Airport Property because the United States never had title to convey. 102. Any improvements to the land were not just compensation, The improvements were previously passed to Santa Monica (along with additional compensation) in exchange for the release of the United States’ obligation to return the land to its original condition and cash compensation paid to the City. 103. This constructive confiscation constitutes a taking without just compensation in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution. 104. In order to resolve this controversy, the City requests that, pursuant to 28 US, § 2201, this Court declare the respective rights of the parties in this, matter. In particular, this Court should declare that the City is the owner of the Airport Property in fee simple, and that the United States” act of constructive confiscation of the Airport Property is violative of the Fifth Amendment’s protection against taking without just compensation. THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF (For Violation of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution- Regulatory Taking) 105. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs 14 to 73. 106. The “Takings Claus Constitution provides that “private property [shall not] be taken for public use ” of the Fifth Amendment of the United States without just compensation.” 107. The FAA’s stance that the City is required to use the Airport Property as an airport in perpetuity deprives the City of any other use of the property. 108. ¢ damage that the City would incur from this illegal and unconstitutional taking is not compensable through monetary damages. The taking would prevent the City from using the land in its sovereign capacity and for | 26 COMPLAINT | SeoweywAurwn Ml 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ae 23 24 25 26 27 28 whatever purposes it deems fit under the City’s inherent governmental and proprietary power. Further, this taking impedes on the City’s police powers to protect the public, address emerging community needs, and enforce order within the City consistent with the City’s policies and values, The value that the City will lose if this illegal and unconstitutional taking is effectuated cannot be quantified. The United States cannot condition the City’s and the City’s residents ability to use the Jand on the City’s forfeiture of its inherent constitutional rights. 109. The United States did not and cannot provide just compensation for the | loss of the City’s sovereign rights. The United States did not justly compensate Santa Monica in any way in exchange for the requirement that it operate the Airport in perpetuity. 110. The United States did not give Santa Monica title to the Airport Property because the United States never had title to convey. 111. Any improvements to the land were not just compensation, ‘The improvements were previously passed to Santa Monica (along with additional compensation) in exchange for the release of the United States’ obligation to return the land to its original condition. 112. The prohibition by the United States on Santa Monica’s use of the ‘Airport Property for any purpose other than an airport constitutes a regulatory taking without just compensation in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution. 113. In order to resolve this controversy, the City requests that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201, this Court should declare the respective rights of the parties in this matter and, in particular, this Court declare that the City is the owner of the Airport Property in fee simple, and that the United States’ act of requiring the City is violative of the Fifth Amendment's protection to operate an airport in perpetui against taking without just compensation. bts COMPLAINT Ro eo oe ol 10 i 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ae 28 FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF (For Violation of the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution) 114. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs 14 to 73. 115. The Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides “[tJhe powers not delegated to the United States by Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved for the States respectively, or to the people.” 116, Pursuant to the Tenth Amendment, the United States cannot commander or otherwise demand and require a state or local government, or their officials, to perform federal functions. 117. By requiring that Santa Monica operate the Airport in perpetuity, the United States has commandeered Santa Monica for its own purposes. 118. Santa Monica purchased title to the Airport Propert 1926. in fee simple in 119. Santa Monica used the property as an airport, but had no limitations on what it could do on the property in the future. 120, The United States never owned the Airport Property; it only had a brief leasehold interest in the property. Further, the United States’ leasehold in the Airport Property was released through the 1948 Instrument of Transfer and the leases expired by their own terms on April 28, 1953. 121. Despite lacking ownership of the Airport Property, the United States has attempted to place, as a condition of surrendering its temporary leasehold interest in the Airport Property, a requirement that Santa Monica agrees to surrender its sovereignty and to operate the airport in perpetuity even if Santa Monica does not wish to do so. This is coercion. 122. This coercive condition unconstitutionally forces Santa Monica to forfeit its constitutional rights and to operate an airport as the FAA determines and regardless of any contrary wishes of the City or its citizens. 28 COMPLAINT. ea ans 10 al 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 123. The condition is also contrary to stated FAA policy. Chapter 23 of the Airport Compliance Manual specifically addresses “Reversion of Airport Property.” Section 23.3 of the Airport Compliance Manual provides that the right of reverter “extends only to the title, right of possession, or other rights vested in the United States at the time the United States transferred the property described in the instrument to the grantee.” The United States government has never had a fee simple interest in the Airport Property. The United States government did not have a fee simple interest in the Airport Property at “the time the United States transferred the property” back to Santa Monica under the Instrument of Transfer. ‘The only interest the United States had in the Airport Property was a leasehold interest, which has since expired by its own terms. 124. The FAA’s acts and assertions will force Santa Monica to operate the Airport against its wishes. This is against stated FAA policy, and also violates the basic principal that the United States may not compel the states to enact or administer a federal regulatory program. 125. The FAA’s acts and assertions therefore amount to a violation of Santa Monica’s Tenth Amendment rights. Santa Monica is entitled to equitable relief enjoining the FAA and the United States from further attempts to commandeer Santa Monica to operate the Airport. 126. The City requests that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201, this Court declare the condition contrary to stated FAA policy, that the United States did not have a fee simple interest in the Airport Property at the time the United States transferred the property back to Santa Monica, and that the condition is violative of Santa Monica’s Tenth Amendment right not to be compelled to enact or administer a federal regulatory program. ‘COMPLAINT wv Seowywd) Hew i 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 pe) 23 24 25 26 27 FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF (For Violation of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constit 127. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in n-Due Process) paragraphs 14 to 73. 128. The Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution provides “{nJo person shall be . . . deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.” 129. Santa Monica has an established and protected property interest in the Airport Property; it has at all times owned the Property in fee simple. 130. By asserting a requirement that Santa Monica operate the Airport in perpetuity, the United States deprived Santa Monica of its right to control the Airport Property. 131. The FAA’s assertion that Santa Monica must operate the Airport in perpetuity or else the Airport Property will revert to the United States Government in fee simple is contrary to the FAA’s policy as set forth in the Airport Compliance Manual. Chapter 23 of the Airport Compliance Manual specifically addresses “Reversion of Airport Property.” Section 23.3 of the Airport Compliance Manual provides that the right of reverter “extends only to the title, right of possession, or other rights vested in the United States at the time the United States transferred the property described in the instrument to the grantee.” The United States did not have a fee simple interest in the Airport Property at “the time the United States transferred the property” back to Santa Monica under the Instrument of Transfer, or | at any other time. The only interest the United States had in the Airport Property | was a leasehold interest, which has since expired by its own terms. 132. The FAA’s assertions, which are contrary to the policy set forth in the Airport Compliance Manual, are arbitrary and capricious and will result in grave unfairness to Santa Monica and its citizens. 2 COMPLAINT RBz=Sewmraanunewne 13 15 16 sey 18 ae 20 21 22 23 24 phy 26 27 28 133. The FAA’s decision to act contrary to the policy set forth in the Airport Compliance Manual was made with the intent to coerce Santa Monica and unconstitutionally deprive Santa Monica of its substantive due process and sovereign rights related to the Airport Property. This decision was irrational, and trammels on both Santa Monica’s sovereign rights and established property rights. In this sense, the FAA’s assertion amounts to a deliberate flouting and abuse of power in violation of the Fifth Amendment. 134. The FAA’s assertion that, in transferring the United States’ leasehold back to the City, Santa Monica must operate the Airport in perpetuity, effectively requiring a forfeiture of the C *s rights as a sovereign and property owner, ‘amounts to an unconstitutional restriction and condition. 135. The FAA’s assertions and decision therefore amount to a violation of Santa Monica’s due process rights. Santa Monica is entitled to equitable relief enjoining the United States and its agency, the FAA, from further impairing Santa Monica's rights to control the Airport Property. 136. The City requests, pursuant to 28 U. .C. § 2201, that this Court declare the FAA’s assertion that Santa Monica must operate an airport in perpetuity is contrary to stated FAA policy, that the United States did not have a fee simple interest in the Airport Property at the time it surrendered its leasehold interest in the Airport Property to Santa Monica, and that the United States’ decision to act contrary to FAA policy was in violation of Santa Monica’s due process rights under the Fifth Amendment. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for relief as follows: 1. This Court render a declaratory judgment providing that the City of Santa Monica has unencumbered title to the Airport Property. 2. This Court render a declaratory judgment providing that the City of a (COMPLAINT De eNO kw i ars 13 14 15 16 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ae 28 Santa Monica is the owner in fee simple of the Airport Property and title to the Airport Property is quieted as against any interest of the United States. 3. This Court render a declaratory judgment providing that the claims of the United States to the Airport Property are invalid and the United States has no right, title, or interest in the Airport Property. 4. This Court render a declaratory judgment providing that the United States’ constructive confiscation of the Airport by prohibiting Santa Monica from using the property for whatever purpose it desires constitutes a taking in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the United States, 5. This Court render a declaratory judgment providing that the United States’ prohibition on Santa Monica from using the Airport Property for any other purpose than as an airport constitutes a taking without just compensation in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution. 6. This Court render a declaratory judgment that the United States’ act of placing a condition on the return of the Airport Property to Santa Monica was coercion and that such coercion is contrary to stated FAA policies; and that this coercion is violative of Santa Monica’s Tenth Amendment right not to be compelled to enact or administer a federal regulatory program. 7. This Court render a declaratory judgment that the United States” decision to act contrary to stated FAA policy and its Congressional mandate with respect to the City and the Airport Property is a deliberate flouting and abuse of power in violation of Santa Monica’s due process rights under the Fifth Amendment. 8. This Court enjoin the United States from taking any action affecting Santa Monica’s right, title, or interest in the Airport Property. 9. This Court enjoin the United States from demanding or asserting in any forum that Santa Monica must operate the Airport Property as an airport in perpetuity. COMPLAINT 10, This Court order that the United States shall cease and desist from taking any action to require Santa Monica to operate the Airport Property as an airport after the 1984 Agreement expires in July of 2015. 11. That this Court order such further relief as the nature of the case may require. Dated: October 31, 2013 Dated: October 31, 2013 OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP Tmleezry Attorneys for Plaintiff CITY OF SANTA MONICA By: 8 COMPLAINT EXHIBIT A . LESSOR ; f gf me e193. endg- SIF. LEASE ‘somata ude nynn i LW oF Bau oeege A AND ‘Tue UNroEp States OF AMERICA 1, THIS LIBASE, made and entered into this a day of peeonber in the year one thousand nine hundved andy 53.4.5 by and betweon ou ya cuigigud Sorporation of tage of unl) vars whose address is. 4, laaba vondea, Gedidorndas for tiuclt, 1 : paul minis successors, and assigns, hereinafter called Ro LRG tnd the WAR ORO SLICER thereat the Governrhent: Wrrnusseri: ‘The parties hereto for the considerations hereinafter mentioned covenant and agree as follows: 2, The Lessor hereby leases to the Government the following deseribed premises, viz: at property commonly xnow as "Sante vontea cuntelpol At situ portly within the eity of Santa vonten and portly within the city of Los hrucles, County of Loa Augeles, State af cullfornin, wove particvlorly deserlbed og follows: Varsel lz All thet portion of the Senta ‘oniea umielpal sivrort lyiny, between a line 7OC.13 feet aovtheasterly from and parallel to the south- easterly line of Yeenn fark bale messured ot richt ancles thereto, ang a line 1€00 fect southeasterly from sni perallel to the ee td southe westerly Line of Ocean Fare soulevard aeasvreG at pisht ancles thereto and ertonding, from 25th Street, im the Uity of Sate Janlea, to bundy Urlve in the city of Loa focelés, colifornia, Poreel @: S11 9£ that certatn parcel of real prop adjoining the ab- | 979 deserloed Parcel 1, on the southeasterly line thereof, hovine 100 rect} of frontsge on seid 28th Streot, in vity of Sante outer, California, bein rectoruler tn shape ana Aavine © uni rorm depth of 765.57 fect. Par eine oul public utilifies ensege ony. Bp GSAT aba Sa dob AG uRISREN' ital ed cod So a): SbsAY aeees.” sort, tacttonl jasttiona, barrrexs, or any use by milli tary of the United States of Auerica. 8, To Hav AND To HOLD the said premises with their appurtenances for the term beginning December 3, Lodi and ending yith twelve months from the uate of tho Atstted National Emery-ney, ss declared by the E dl seed States on say 27, 1041 (froclauatlon 2497 Exh nation of the une dent of the 4, The Government shall not assign this lease in any event, and shell not sublet the demised snemises except to a desirable tenant, and for a similar purpose, and will not permit the use of said remises by anyone other than the Government, such sublessee, and the agents and servants of the Jovernment, or of such sublossee. 5.(This lgogetmay, at the option of the Government; he.renewed:from year to.yoar aka Fantakos, sndcothevwfae upon: the terms, ani conditions exoin eneciied, provided motiga: ba given in writing ita Lessor at least. = case before thi as crete « ‘thenvdsac expitos (Provided thy: na. Fenewat taareak 9 Mee eran oremiisen beyondstha oC GUGCCKK BaNOe 6. The Lessor shall furnish to the Government, during the eccupaney of said premises, under the terms of this lease, as part of the rental consideration, the following: Nothing ‘1, Tho Government shall pay the Lessor for the premises rent at the following rate: ollae (1.60) gor the-temm harcof, reevint.of wich Ls hereby wLoGeec. joe ackn Rexmentshell be made aiiboendekeack eee ‘Tessox chalk give:nenitten: notice thoxens.tocthe Govemmenk « ccccrsnceuonice ae thetormination of the:leae.. nee Exh. A Ps gmaaia ria * [Lease] 9. The Lessor shall; eles barcin: specified ta: thecontranys maintain-the-xaid-peem isnt repalt an tenaneane ocalbae Ailing the continuance of ne face cape Wensoer anhees are ing trom tho act or the negligence of the Government's agents or employees, For the purposp:ot so Indintaining the premises, the Lessor reserves the right at reasonable times to enter and insbect the premises and to make any necessary repairs thereto. - IRIAN 10, If the said premises be destroyed hy. deg.oy other-exstihit{ this lease shall immediately tor- vainae! In cage of Darl destrogion- 0 “Shins to render tho premises untenantable, either aux may tonmimiate thé beave By giving written notice to the other within Aftaon days theveattor, SAG So forminated unrent shaliasere (a toe densotsdiex mebpartial.deshrnetion OF dames 11, No Member of or Delegate to Congress or Resident Commissioner shall be admitted to any share or part of this lense or to any benefit 1o arise therefrom, Nothing, however, herein contained shall be construed to extend to any incorporated company, if the lease be for the general benefit of such corporation or company. lopagraghs $, 2, 2 9) 10 deluteds jorsepayha 12 bo 1¥ inelus- fee, siod; nap of proafsos abtachods ALL prlor ta exeaution horeot. Ty wtNass waeRzoF, the parties hereto have hereunto subscribed their'names as of the date first above written. CWLY OY BAPE GOeCA, O unteteal, gorporation af the State of Colifornia, | Hacc eee ce LST TURK. saeor. 1 cpio Countsstoier'ot imlinatseye | and ox-offleto ayor of the City In presence of: City Clerk, ox-ortieio the City Sduneil of the & a ‘Sai ind BB i Santo teas b wf ka — oi (If Lessor is @ corporation, the following certificate shall be exceuted by the secretary or assistant seoretary.) Baan ALLA On oe nnnenneney COMtfy that Tam the Gomcigotonemof—— Lig. i : Bock grer SKS corporation named as Lessor in the attached lease; that Li f4Iurrag I , who signed said lease on behalf of the Lesoor, ‘fai then Domi selanep.of—ltnange-—.- of said corporation; that said lease was duly signed for and in bohialf of sald corporation Sy authority of its ggverning body, aad is willin the weope of is eor- porate powers, aw fT INSTRUCTIONS TO BE OBSERVED IN EXECUTING LEASE 1. This standard form of lease shall be used whenever the Government is tho lesses of real property; except that when the total eonsideration does not exceed $100 and the term of the lease does not exceed 1 year the uze of this form is optional. In all cases where the rental to be paid exceeds $2,000 per annum tho annual rental shall not exeeed 15 per centum of the fair market value of the rented promises at tho date of lease, Alterations, improvements, and repairs of the rented premises by the Government shall not exceed 25 per centum of the amount of the rent for the first year of the rental term or for the rental term if Jees than 1 year. 2 The lease shall be dated and the full namo and address of the lessor clearly written in paragraph 1. vf 8, Tho premises shall be fully deseribed, ani, in ease of rooms, the floor and room number of each room given. The language inserted at the end of article 2 of the lease should specity only the general nature of the use, that is, “office quarters," “storage space,” ete. 4, Whenever the lease is executed by an attorney, agent, or trustee on behalf of the lessor, two ‘authenticated copies of his power of attorney, or other evidence to act on behalf of tho lessor, shall accompany the lease. 5. When the lessor is a partnership, tho names of the partners composing the firm shall be stated in the body of the lease, . The lease shall be signed with the partnership name, followed by the name of the partner signing the same. 1G. Where the lessor is a corporation, the lease shall be signed with the corporate name, fol- lowed by the signature and title of the officer or other person signing the Tease on its behalf, duly attested, and, if requested by the Government, evidence of his authority so to act shall be furnished. 7, Under paragraph 6 of the lease insert necessary facilities to be furnishod, such as hat, light, janitor service, ete. 8 Thoto shall be no deviation from this form without prior authorization by the Director of Procurement, exeept— (a) Paragraph 8 may be drafted to cover a monthly tenancy or other period less than a year. (0) In paragraph 5, if a renewal for a specified period other than a year, or for a poriod optional with the Government is desired, the phrase “from year to year” shall be deleted and proper substitution made, If the right of renewal is not desired or eannot be secured para- graph 5 may be deleted. (c) Paragraph 6 may be deleted if tho owner is not to furnish additional faciitics. (d) Lf the premises are suitable without alterations, ete., paragraph 8 may be deleted. (c) Paragraph 9 provides that the lessor shall, “unless herein specified to the contrary, maintain the said premises in good repair, ete.” A modification or elimination of this requirement would not therefore be 2 deviation, ({) In case the premises consist of unimproved land, paragraph 10 may be deleted, (a) When exeonting leases covering premises in foreign countries, departure from the standard form is permissible to the extent necessary to conform to local laws, customs, or practices. (i) Additional provisions, relating to the particular subject matter mutually agreed ‘upon, may be inserted, #f not in conflict with tho standard provisions, including @ rutual right 1o terminate the lease upon a stated number of days’ notice, but to permit only the lessor so to terminate would be a deviation requiting approval as above provided, 8. Whien deletions or other alterations are permitted specifie notation thereof shall be entered in the blauk space following paragraph 11 before signing. 10. If the property leased is located in a State requiring the recording of leases in onder to protect the tenant's rightz, care should be taken to comply with all such statutory requirements, Attached to and a part of Lease dated December 8, 191, by and bebtoed CIRY OF SANA MONICA AND THE UNITED STATES OF ANBRIOA, 12. The Government reserves the right to cangel this Leage or say renew al thereof upon giving thirty (30) days advance written notice to the Legsor. 13, By reason of the previously existing contract. by and between the Lessor and the Douglas Airoraft Co,,. Inc., dated November 13, 1940, and that certain License Agreement dated Hovenber 10, 1943, the Jovernuent herety recog- nizes the right of sald Douglas Aircraft Co,, Inc., to the Joint use of the Airport a provided in aid contract and licen: 14, The Government, during the period that said premises are used ox clusively for military purposes, shall repair and maintain in serviceable con~ @ition the landing areas and improverenta, factlities and equipment thereon used by the Government: provided that during the period of this lease or any renewal, whenever said promises are not used oxclusively for military purpos the Government shall perform its proportionate share of the repairs and mainton~ ance of said premises to the extent made necessary by their use by the Govern~ ment, and the Lessor shall perform its proportionate share of additional repaire and, main tenano 15. Tho Governuentis granted the right, during the existence of this Lease, to camouflage the premises, and to construct or install in or upon the demiced promises such improverents on landing and take-off facilities, ronways, taxiways, fences, Landing and obstruction lights, revetmenta, barracks, or other structures or improvonents as may bo deened necessary by the Covernnent, all of yhich structures or improvenents shall be and romain the property of the Gover- ment and may be renoved by the Goverment at or prior to the termination of this lease. The Government shall not be required by Lessor to restore the premts to the condition existing at the date hereof, except for the removal of all camouflage structures and all rovetnonts thereon, which the Government will re wove at or prior to termination hereof, but the Government may leave other in~ provements or any portion thereof it desires, (excepting said camouflage struc~ ‘tures and revetnents) on the premises in lieu of restoration. In no event ahall the Government be held responsible for the reasonable and ordinary wear and tear, r damages by the elements, or by circumstances over which 1t has no control. 16, All provisions hereof requiring any act or expenditure of funds by the Government is mbject to appropriations being available for much purpoxe or purposes, 17. Tt 4s understood and agread by and between the partion hereto that, Af or when, during the tem of thie lease, the Governent should acquire fe title to.any adjacent lands, at either the Rasterly or Westerly ends of the airport for tho parpose ‘of extonding the airport runnays, the Government shall, upon completion of said extension or extensions, execute a lease to the City of Santa Monica on said parcel or parcels, on a joint use basis, for @ considera- tion of ($1.00) one dollar per anmm receipt Acknowledged, and to ran concur rently for the.romaining. term of this lea GF git ae Exh A Mise. 3979 . RECORD OF PusSTOAL SURVEY OF LAND AND/OR BULLD.uS TA MONICA, a sunioipal corpers (MERE, 01128 KOSODONAR Lon, of the State of Galifomia Henry Bauer ___Chief, Leasing Section (uaMe OF OFFICER) CHAN and ORGANT ZRITON) Senta Mentos, Califomia (LOCATION) jacember Sth, 19M (pars) This record 4s to be appended to and made a part of an agreement entered into between the United States and the above named par 1, IDBWDT?TY OF PROPERTY: "SANA MONICA MONZCIPAL ATRPORR® 0000 __OUSY OF SANTA HONTOM. _ 2. OM 3. DOTAL sRBA CONTRACTED FOR: 85.87 acres, more or lesa awn: 85.87 crops: (Including orchards) __ BUILDINGS: none BUILDINGS: (Condition). FLOUR WALLS: IBY: STAIRWAYS: 6. ONTENTS OF BUILDINGS (Condition) Use reverse side, mene 7+ FENCING (Condition, amount ana type) 8, ORHBR TMPROVENENTS (Condition of) One WBes ed by WPA and GML, paid for partly ty City and partly by the Government. 9. RAMARKS: OLTY OF SANA MONIGA, & municipal ration of the Sta _eznaftiots of cee ae i fv USING AGENCY) Bauer —Shief, Leasing Section — ave (akin aD ORGANT24T FOR) Santa Monion, OLty Hall, Samte Monica, California, | Commissioner of Patlio | | Exh. A 38 RUNWAY LEASE SUPPLEMENT NO. 1 CLOVER FIELD SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL ATRPORT SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA SPR-6 Basic Airport Lease Wo, W04~193~0ng~4594 and Supplenantal Agreonent fl BLOOK 6 SCHEDULE "F" Pages 1 to 8 & Map Bxhibit Exh. A at Fors Wo. 10 RAR DEPARTMERT Lasse No. RXOLER ENS: SUPPLEMENTAL ACPMEMBNT NO, 2 this suppleventel agroment entered into this 25rd day of July 1045, ty fant between the United States of Aneriot, horeinatter celled the Governments reprosmted by the contracting offiosr executing this arrements avd the CITT oy SANTA MONTOA, muntetpAl Corporation of the state of Gnlifomiay whose addvens Aa City Hall, Santa Menton, Onl ifornin, paretnafter celled the Leator, TITKEGSHTIT the tt ommanas, on the 6th day December 1941, the partion hereto entered tate Late Wo. W 04-198-eng-4854 covering property iow ne “Hants Wales Airports aituate partly within the Otty of genta Honice nd partly within the Glty of hos Anrelaa, County of Lon Angelory State of Calffornia, oon- tee narapproxinately 86.97 aoree All ax more par tloularly 4 jortbed in Waid deena ering term comanoing Tecenber 8, 1041, and ending, tral ve montht fro" tee gate of the temination of the uolinited Nett onal Prerge cy & declared by tha nresident of the Unttedstates on Way 27, 1041 (Proelavation 2487), and WWERRAS, 1¢ te fould advantageous ant in the best internets of the United states to modify the aid lecue for the following reasons a, te accept an ofter ty the lessor for © onsh sgttlawnt 12 tie of the covertzantta obligation to rarove rovetnante "AY and "B" from the Lenued pre- corrat to reatore the aite of aid revetunts to its original conditions and meee ve ny and all olaina for dmmages to those portions of the Lonned prenivos on which said rovetnents are lockteds be To relene the do-vernmont from any end ell Mabiiity artatng oot of tne obligation of the Goverment to rove camouflage tract’ from those portions of the lenses premiges upon stich anid revetment Are losated. o, To include & covenant aghinst contingent feos and emaAB under the torma of “arngraph 16 of anld Lessa, the Government fe obligated to restore the lesand promises by removal of conouflage structures and revetmentés and nenens, the anny face structures and revobsonte "AY and °D" wore clnred surploe by theo wrnmont on 10 April L066) ard "herenes She i faa glen notice that restoration of the prentees by the Coverinent In Rovere yo eeteh Parnpraph 1S of eaid Lsase will be reqiredy and Exh A 42 WIRRRAD thoee . aflage structures imtalled Aela revetmante hyve am romoved from the promises; 0. Govyarnnent up in TTERFAS, Lt hae boon determined to bo advantygeoun and in the interests of the dovernnent to negotiate a sattelmnnt in Liou of restoration of the portion of the pranines oscupled by sald rovetmente "A" and "3"; and Tharean, the Lensor in willing, tn lieu of performance by the Goverment of the resto~ ration of that portion of the lonend premixns oseupind by anid ravetanta, era réqutred by said Lonee, to ndgept the msi of TREN PO IAN wna mo/LOO POLLAPS (8,000.00) In consideration of the ralonse and discharge of the Goverment, ite offioers, arente, ani mployaes from any and all mannor of actions, Liability and olnina for aaa revtoratlon of the prenines or ari sing aut of the oonatrustion and loomtion of anid enmouflase structures and ramen mente on aid portions of the Leasdd prenisos by the Go vroment, NOK THHRERORRe the eald Leave 14 horely modified in the following parti- oulara, but in no other 1, The Government shall pay to the Lassor the eum of THREE THOUSAND tnd 10/100 DOLLARS (8,000.00) representing the cont of restoration of those portions of the lensed prenisas oaouplod by anid revetmente "A" and “p" and the cost of rexovl of sold revetmets "A" and "sR, 2. That tho Lessor herety renises, relenses, and forever dlechargen tho Government, ite officer, agents, and enployesr, of thd from say and all manner of actions, Mablitty, and elaine against the Govarnment, 1té offlaore and agents, which the Lessor now hee or aver will have for the Fostoration of those portions of sald leased promises ocoupled by seid revoteents "A" and "E" or by reason of any other matter, omse or thing weataoover partioularly arising out of the conatmation and location of watd onmouflage atfucturoe and revetoents "A" and "D" on the leased Preis S. That no member of or delegate to Songroaa or resident commissioner hall be admitted to any stare or part of thin agroaent or to any benefit to artae therefrom, bit this provision shall not he construed ta extend to this agreement if made with a corporation for the general benefit. 4. the Lessor mrrmts that ho hes not employed any person to aoli= Olt oF secure thiv lease upon any nsremuent for a commission, peroentace, brokerage, or contingent foe, Areach of thts warranty shall give the Government the right to annul tha longa, orth ite diseration, to deduot from the rentel the ansunt of much commission, peromtace, tokorage, or gontingmt fvor, This warranty shallnot aply to comtsatony payable by Lessors upon contracts or lenaen secured or made through bonafide eata~ blished commercial or welling agdnoing rmintatned by the Lessor for the purpose of neouring bueine: Exh. A 43 IM WITHESS WERWOP, the partion hersto hae» executed this egrecment ag of the day and year first ubove written. Mitnensy (WR UNITED GTATRS OF AOMICA Lal Oo ds Born George 4. Hart, dre ontractlng Offlaor Ortiaiat Hie ORTY OF SANTA MONICA fa/ De Os Prewmn malsvioner of Finnios, oxofflole Acting Mayor of the City of 5, ¥. EE Approved __/o/ We We MAldioan Bente onion Wate) ~ Commtesioner of Public works, ex-officte Street fuperintendant, of the City of Sante Kontos (If Lessor Ss « corporntion the following certifionte shall be exesuted by the soorotary or aasiatant seoretey). 1. ADA He MATTHEW + oertify that Tam a reputy city Clerk of the corporation naned As Leasor in the attached Supplemental Agrowment Wo. 1) that De Os FREEMAN + who ated watd Supplenental Agrowent Mo. 1 on behalf of the Lessor, wae then Aoting tayor of ania eity corporations that eaid Supplanmtal Agremet No. 1 war duly aigned for and in behalf of anid wrporation by sutherity of ite governing body, and fw within the scope of ite corporate powers, /of __ dia My Mortons (corporate ee RUNWAY LEASE SUPPLEMENT NO. 2 Exh A 45, Form 204 19 WROORTATRD AuiITMRN EAR. HEPARD! ‘RHOLEER: Negotiated Tease ioe WOd-10S-sngmdcine SUPPIEMBNTAL AORTA! HOe 2 ‘This supplenmnbal asrewment, enteited into thie 1th dey of July 1946, by und Letween nk UNITED S2APRS. a (ORIGA, horeinactor oalled tho Coverimant, represented vy the contraebing officer executing this agreement, and the GIYY OF SaWPA NORIGA, a political suidvision of the state of california, whose udorass te OLty Wall, Sante Yontea, calif= oroia, heveinuttien called the Lessor, RITMNYSHEH thats UIMNRAS, on the Sth day of Cocexbary 1942, the cartiea hereto anterad tnta Tayse ley x0seL9S~ongedane for that certain property Gommonly inown oa tie santa Nonsoe voutetpel Airport, eosprising 25,87 woxeasnove oF leds, aa nore partiovinrly deserived in Parayeash Lof vaid Lenco, wiioh aia lone vas formaly woditled vy supple fgpaanent toe 1'boteeen ho parbioa, dated 43 July 1048; and fcmieasy te 2 ungbas states to further modify the antd leuse for the Following reasoner Ls To relieve the dovernuont of all waintonanos end opsration costas 2, Yo relieve the Government of the payzent of routel under the tenus of eal eases ROK, NMG Whe anid Jepno te hereby modArted tn the following partioulars, out Inno otveray REfeotive 1 July P48, gud during the tora that certain Interia {ivense Le In effect between tho Government wid Use City of santa vontoa covering the une, maintenance and eperation by the Caty of Santa Sonton of the laning eres ortain eiryort fueititios on the Sate “ontoa wuntotiped ‘port, janta Honig, California, und in confornanas with tho temta thereof, tne “overoant ty hereby relseved of a2 nalntenmnas and overetion costa, and the paynact of rental required of the fovernuent vy sala Isaaa, covering that Vortign of the Imnling aved end edrport fuotlities exbrnced by auld Hloonaoy Een. ‘4 TH WITHKAS WGEREOR, the parbios hereto have exeouted this agreewnt ag of the day nac your Firat auove written. staat Nk TED aRATR OF ANERECA ay, eMRy OF swHRA HoNZaA SONBD) Do Os YESHUA oe {S1OMSD) 20x E. somone. Gonnivetoncr of Maanesy eavoFisio Fommsontoner of Public Safety, Chay Clerk of the City of Santa Montes TiWaroctiate sagas af the city ef Banta Monica. (esaress) Ty. De Se FRED comtity tat Tam the cowatestanen of SIMGHTS, “Sueoeticis giey Chen Kenisa naxed as foqaor tn the abtacked supplementary agreement Woy 23 of the politieal aub@ivision, OLty of vanta that _ BAY Be Soua me who signed sata supplenentary opant oe %, on baba: he iwsaor, wan then__Coumi sioner of public Apepergnt tos Bop behaae of the te is then__Coumisetoner of Publ woyor of sada poliGlosl vubdiviston, ofty of santa Nontoay that suld susplewentary Agroenont Noy 2 was duly siymed for und in bohale of saidy vrvoration by authority of ite yoverning body, ami is within the saope of Its corporate powers. (sean) (S1GMBD) D.C, PREWIAM, (OoRPORATE BME | | | Exh EXHIBIT B anand rors) ib tus” Mae Hh a LEASE che supplive and services to be obtained by this instrument are sutidrissd by, are'for BETWEEN tho purpose set Tosti i, 6/1 are chargeable Ofer OF SANTA BONIOK | to Procurement Auubori ive eek e C297 NW Gan Pet nD the abai lable balance © to eavar cost of sane /of rm DOF 1 Kae AND SofTigigPH® UNtimp STATES OF AMERICA whi 1. THIS LIBASE; matle and exitered into tls” « Airat day of > eownber in the year one thousand nine hundred and’ > ferty-on by and between Clty of Senta Honica, a Muntoipsl Corporation whose address is Clty Kail, Senté Monion, Low Angeles County, California for Mtaelt, Ate RRGNYEITRENGUAIMY, successors, and assigns, hereinafter called the Lessor, and ‘THE UNITBD STATES OF AMERICA, hereinafter called the Government: \Wimwessirm: The parties hereto for the considerations hereinafter mentioned covenant and agree as follows 2, ‘The Lessor hereby leases to the Government the following described premises, viz ‘That portion of the Hante Monioa Muntetpal dolf Course, in the City of ganta Monica, county of Lon Angelos, State of California, deseribed as follows: Bounded on the Northwest by a line parallel to and distant 1600 foot southeasterly from the southeasterly line of Ooonn Park Soulevardy woasured at right angles to said Qoean Park Boulevards bounded on the northeast dy the southwesterly Line of Centinela Avaaue, bounded on the southeast by the Oity Linit Line of the City of Santa Yontcr, clifornin, and bounded on tho southwest by the northeasterly Line of Tmnty-seventh atrest in the said city, containing approximntely 88 acres, together with the two-one-story frene utllity and regair shops containing approxinately 2600 equare fest and all of the one-story sbadeo Club Howe, éxvopting the Colf Shop, restaurant and Lodvy, sohaisting of approiaately 2400 square foot. Also Lot A of the Ceorge Tract, aa per map recordad in Book 16, Page 1 of Hope, Rooordd of said County, said lot boing included in the above mentioned @5 nores, to be used exclusively for the following putposes (see instruction No. 3).: Nts dat Uilitery purposes. 8°T6 HAvE!AND 50 HOLD the said pemidos With, their appurtenances for the term Beginning | Déoombss 1, 1BAL oi . inguin 2He BOy 1048 and qdine i ygor hereby consenta to the extension of thie Lease for the fiscal your beginning July 1, 1042, and ending Juno 30, 1948, cesta Exh. B 4. The Goyernment shall not assign this Iéase"In any event, and shall not-sublet the demised premises except to a desirable tenant, and for a similar purpose, and will not permit the use of said Promises by anyoue offer tan the Government, auch sublessoe, and the agents and Servants of the Wwernment, or of atich sublessee. 5. This lease may, at the option of the Govéhinieht; be bévewed from year to year'at a rental of One hundyed fifty and no/100 dollars (¢160.00) per month. and othersiso upon the terms and couditions herein specified, provided notieo be given in writing to the Lessor at least fifteen (18) ays before this lease or any renewal thereof would Mnatwise expire: Provided that no renéwal thereof shall extend the: périod of: occupancy of the premises beyond the Soth day of. dune, 1067 6. The Lessor shall furnish to the Government, during the occupancy of said premises, under the terms of this lease, as part of the rental consideration, the following: Rothing. Josawaarod adi ot and raid ode ites 11. The Goverment shall pay the Léésor for the premises rent at the foliowing rate: ‘One hundred and fifty and 0/100 dollave ($180.00) per month Finaned Offiedr, Us %- Aimy, 8876 Wilshire Sivd., Los Angeles, Sa designated te pay this wecount. Payment shall be mado at thé end of ena’ -AAASnMAN, aR 8, The Government shall have the right, during the existence of this lease, to make alterations attach fixtures, and erect additions, structures, or signs, in or upon the premises hereby Tease {provided aue alterations, additions, structures, or signs shall not be detrimental to or inconsistent TuiR'the rights granted to other tenants on the property or in the building in which said premises are located) ; witich fixtures, additfona, or structures s0 placed in or upon or attached to the said ses all be and remain tho property of the Government and may be removed therefrom by ernst eminent prior to tho termination of this leago, and the Goverament, if required by the Les. tor, shall, before the expiration of this leaae or renewal thereof, restore the premises to the sare Condition ae that existing at the time of entering upon the same under this leat Teasonable and coon Pear and wear aad daspages by the elements or by circumstances over whieh tho Govern- ment has no control, excepted: Provided, however, that ifthe Leasog reqylsys auch restoration, ten note thereot to the Government days before fon of tho lease, Hod eaSd auth stzeinmbaed bone ok Exh. B 49 (hase) 9. The Lessor shall; tnkéss herein specified to the contrary, shaintain the said premises in good repait anit tonantable condition during the continuance of this fease, except in ease of damage aris [aero the act or the negligence of the Government's agents or employees. |For the purpose of so ine etalning the premises, the Lessor reserves the right at reasonable times to enter and inspect the premises and to make any necessary repairs thereto. 10. If the said premises be destroyed by fire or other casualty this lease shall immediately tor- minate, In ense of partial destruction or damage, so as to render the premises imtenantable, either aatnay terminate the lease by giving written notice to the other within fifteex days thereafter, pat rao terminated no rent shall accrue to the Lessor after such partial destruction or damage, 11. No Member of or Délégate to Congress or Resident Commissioner shall be admitted to any shargor part of this feaso or to-any benefit to arise therefrom, Nothing, however, herein contained Spat be construed to extend to any incorporated company, if the Jeaso be for the general benefit of such corporation or company. : 12, The Governnent reserves the. right to cancel this lease at any time during its life or renewal thereof by giving thirty days written notice to the Loseor. Paragraphs Sa ond 2 added prior to execution hereof. {by wieis wuuisator, thé paitios hersto have heteunto subscribed their aaines as of the date first above writtett, OTRY OF SANTA MONICA, a municipal in presence of: Oorporation fa De Oo Proven. ~BYs_ /a/ La da Moray. Comnivaioner of Finance of the Gomitevioner of Public Safety _ exeoffisto Mayor of the City of _fty. of santa Monten. in) séntia Wonton Unita Bris oF AnaiICA, Ah es xeeeey . ei iat pulaa! ity OLby Choi 2 By Bay TR, Marah Lad Tada 6 * Bagi neors, tae ee onions (It Lediot i & corpormtion, the following, certficata shall be executed by'the seétetary or assistant ‘secretary. : Ty Dy. Oo Regen. —_..____,cerlify that am the Gammshad {enér.of Finanoe ex-officio Clerk of the City Kounoll ‘SgUFEBOEYTOT the corporation namméd as Lodaor in the attached Tease; that ea Murray... ~-Geckeaoag” Bt PAB LIS Bareeg "HA And Tass on behalf of the Lessor, was then poowonnemnaee Of Aid earporati station by authority of its governing body, and i that said Jeoso was duly signed for ahd within the seope of its cor- porate powers. et a a ROR nef REEL Exh. B GOLFCOURSE LEASE SUPPLEMENT NO. 1 Exh. B 51 Leave Now a-3h00-ang-5h9 Recieve) 322 PAY NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT se. 1591. ee jet oy surcusasieay AUREnSANT WOE t 28-4 Thin wupstenentul greene ancared intu thie 20h doy of Dacembar, L9ki, vy ene botweon the Clty of Sants Nondes, « wundelpel corporation, whose adidas Coieisatana cores ireaacalieesiendnecs taigtey erate end assigns, hersinugter gelled tnd Leow ry and the UNITKe orares DF adnaiea, honotnnfter auliod the Governsent, WITNSSSETH PEAT: AAuKinS, on the firat day of Becouber 191, Lace Bo.t~IhGd-eng=549 was enceres Inty vatwoon Une heaor and the Gavarnuant covering the cants denies “unletp i iaJT courae In tha nity of conte ‘oates, County of Woe Angels, State of cultfornis, eontaining spproximately 63 aurea, tog W1th Gort. ty gulidiays lvected tharson, 811 as wore partiauloriy dusersbed in the ecid Yeoae Tor the plod Decauber 141941 to June 30,1943, with ootion Of renewal agnustly the. sorter to June 30, 1947, whieh Lesa eae duly ronewad by Hin Guvernaont to June 30, 1445, and) Wiita®, 1¢ Ls Cound ndvantayeous and in the Rest inteveata of the Yovownsent Gu wodity tal auld laste far tha Pollowing sesaona; sethe supplies and services to a do obtained dy. tion of w mon runway at Clover Meld, Suntu onion, thie inetrumeat are authorized De Yo moULEy sutd Leuse Jn aonnaetion with the proposed gonatruc~ aie. yo gecupt on offur by the Lessor for uw eush settlement in Liou by, are for the fof the Goveraenus's obligntion to reatore the leased praaized purpose eet forth to thuip orAginul gondition, and to wud¥e any and ull elaine Thy are chergecble for future dunagen to sold preniecs, to Precurosent Authority 8, fo reduse che rents] for anid prawteoas Yo change th Purpoay Clauwe of gaid Leeves Fy Yo extana sha ters of aeld Loan ond jURKA, Lhe Lessor how given notiee that resterstien of the pre- loss by the governuont, In accordance Iti Poragrayh 8 of seid Ieuan, will be required; and S Wilbkbas, 1b new been deterainod to be advantageous and In tha Antoroat of the Governuent 9 relinguish, tonafer, und Jeliver to the Lessor the tivic tu eortot: laprovusente whieh ere no Longer Pequived by the Uovarnaent; und NiBRESS, tho Lossur ty aLl1Leg, tm 1teu of performence by the Govarnaent of tha rostorution rayulred by geld lowoo, vo aeeepe auch ta provuaonts and to acoopt a eus of one Hundred firey shoaagd end 19/100 (5150,000.u0) doziare Iu coneldaration of tho differences vetwean the vulue of sald Adprovensnte und tho eutisated goat of reetorn tions WO, TMARSPOAE, tn gonaddaratio of the pramiecs, the purttes do horaby autually egrae ae fvllows} aud she suid lease do horaby moditted An che following particuiurs, but in no othore: 1, Foragraph 2 of said lonae 48 hereby modified, effectn January 2, 195, to eltwinute that portion of the ong-atory stugeo cluunouse now undor lesa, constoving of 2400 aquare £ Bens te pond ag Pollowe: "2, The Luguor hereby Leceve co tha Povarnannt the following described prosives, vi ‘That portion of the Uynte Monten Monterpe1 Golf courve An the Sty of dunts “onten, Gouncy of Loo singel ety ae xn, 8 3 3b 5 1 bioue of Lelifornia, desertved a8 follows: Bounded on the Horthweat by Line psrallel ty und die~ tant 1000 feat southeasterly Crow tha aouthssterl. Tine of geen Park Blvd. ;aensured ot right angle to baie cous Fark plvdy Bounées o- tha Worthauet by the foutheeaterly 1ine of Cuntinels Ava} and bounded on the Southaaes vy the clty Llalt Line of the “tty of santa Houten, Saliforatss and doundadon the Southwest by the northoueteriy Iiee or 27th street An the cele Sit; Bing sot "a" of the Jeerge Trest, as par map reserded th Book 16, Page zi of ape Records of wold County; anid praneas containing eoproximetcly 53 woresy Rogerict (itll the tvo one-story froma Ubility and ropsir shops containing spproximutoly 2600 gouare Pnet; but R'okerind Thex DRO the one-story stueco Clubhouse how located on the Korthwost corner of the prowiecs harean deseribed bo used exelustvaly Cor the following purposes: Construetion ruawayy airport use, Wid Olver 2A1itury purposed.” poregraphe 3 and 5 of auld lowse ura delated, und shoes te fnacrtod An lieu thereof the following farcgraph 3: N3, 20 MAWE AND fH BUAD the aad promines with thelr appurtenances for tha tern beginning July 1, 1544 through Tone 30, 1545, pravided that unleos the Yoyernment shell five nobige Of tnemingtion In saoordonce with provisions 12 Rereot, this lesee anvil rowain in fave thorsafter from year Wo pour without further notes provided, furthor, thas Adequate eppraprintions ure avedlable frou your tO yaar for the pagwent of rente}a; and provided, further, Coot this Tease shail inno event extend beyond the twelve sonthy After thy offielal Cerminetion of the exiating energensy he deeinved by we Preelent of the dnived “tates on Jay 27, L94L (?roetomerion 2487) ." Persaroph 7 of sald Lease is hereby modified ao es to rosd ae Poliowe: "7. the Oovernaant shell pay the Lessor for the pronives ment alas the Following rate: vue Hundred Party and no/200 ($159.00) deliars per month to nad including Deceuber 31, 19k; thorestcery one fad no/i90 ({1-00) @@llare Cor the’ remainder of the tora hereot} cecol)t of whieh Une Dollar 1s hereby pekaoeledzed. Payment ehali, be sada et che and of gseh cvlendar aonth dy the Finance o¢fieer, vaulted states ray, USC #aaion obey San Froneineo, Calirorniast Paragraph 8 of suid lease Ls’ hereby modifled Bo ae to reed av Tollowat "Q. The Yovernmont etal tivo the right, during tha extetonce of thie lense, £9 make witerattune, attach fixtures, end Gast additions, sereeturae or sigs in of upon the preatses hereby leoned} puted Fixtures, wdditions or wiructures so plseed thor upon oF attached to sold premises aliell ne and foasin the property of the Jovernucnt ané sey ve renoved Therefrom by the Goverunent prior to the teraynauon of thi louse." The dovarnwont bi to the uesnor Khe Inprovenon by relunuuinebes, Eronsfera, and delivers Sehorh on Saheduie "a" abtocked nirote, heretofore undo and conatructed wy the dovernsent now in fie apsa tht Land Mad prenives nuove deneribad. be “he Oovernnent iil pay ve sho seusor the mum of One tlyndred Fifey Thousand (150,000.40) Polixra, in eonpiderstion of tne (iethrence betweun tha value of sald luprevenents sod tha Betinatad sool of Une reavoration meyuired by anid Loum -2- exh. 8 3 Witawe : een co spo ea Se ee Te Tho Lessor «111, we of January 1, 2945, assume custody ond gare af the clubhouse which 1u being deleted fros the pre= Alsee under Iyase ce provided heretofore In faragraph 1 of this Suiplonentel sgrovaeak. 1 fhe Leowar huraty vesiuas, seloueca, and forever disshargas the Government, itm offleera, nganea, und enployoss, of and fro ny and ull qanugr of aetione, Tieblitey, and elutes (excuse any anpadd rent Cor the period ending Decenber 31, 19h4) axotae She doveraent, its offivers eid agents, which che Loator hon hes OF aver wilinave for the rentorauton of anid leveod preaiasa ts choir original gond ition of by Teasonof uny otber Mutter, shee or thing wiataouver partioulurly ardaing ous of Wate Lease’ Gnd the Geeupntion by the vovernuoat of the ofors Suid pranised. i. fo autually Underatood and agread thot the pagaoni enlied fur ih Paragraph 6 of Eniy dupslenental wezec~ hont, némely tae sux Of one fundred Fifty Thousand vollars (3150,000,00) 48 full compensation Cor oil damogea ¢iselosod of undlelvsed ehich suy have been exused, or which msy ba Gaused in the CWlura, to the vesuor or @ny othr porson oli. ing en inteenot tn so3d Leased praniees by tha usa or oeoup ney af vents peenicou by the Jovornwent, and Lesser agrace to uecapt Budd as dn Lied of ony eight Co dewand the return of the preal by the Governnmit io 8# good eondition as thar existing at the Cine Of ontoring upon the caxe under void ionues and In furtnee donsiderstion of Enid auw, Lessor hereby waives any olnin Shieh 12 nag oF #ighe nave In the future for uny and wll domge Usolseod or andivelowed, of he nuture above deserdbadn wiutnar une Phoe relating to cush claim be now known to the Longer or whether ueh elas may arise in the fukure out of tuo now unkuown and ROE now BnELelpnteds Ye Go waver of or deLegete to Congrene of reaidont comitas toner shail be Admitted fo any hero or part of this agreement or to any Senofil to urine thersfrom, but this provisions shell hotvbe eoustrand to extend to this agrewnsat 1f odds with w forporstson for the Genaeut benefit. 10. the Leosur wurrante thu: ho has not eaployed uny parson to aoitelt op secure thi lecse upon any neravgent for a commie. Sion, percentage, brokeraga, of sontingent fee. Breach of Shin warranty shell give the governaunt tne might to annul the Inaes, or dn ite Wlseretion, to duduet from tne rontul The amount of gush comulsuion, pareentsge, brakeruge, oF contingent teen. Thin warrenty shall not apply tu sommte~ Biona payable vy Lessors upon sontracte or isanon segured ov Sede shrough bons ride ostabliuhed eoaseretal or alling Agoneia. salnzuiued by the Uessor Tor the purpose of seeuring basinesa. AN ATINGGH WHGNSOF Hho portion hereto Nave exeeused this Instrunent a of the Say end yeur Cirut above writtent witweos: seek GLYY OF sath MONICA, e aunsoorDsy De Gy eialnsan By be dy WUKKAY Cousisn ner af Pinascesox-olf tee Conaiuedoner of Fubite sofaty, ox- G1ey Slure aC the Vity Ol ee atfielo sugar of thr oy ty oF den. Rolly Sante Ryaten, Ostet. uS OF aMBHECA us UeupED Bra Gir. Frgnawuty certdelevtion thas «da durry wus boas sof fubile afety, follows.) I se Exh. 8 7 seucpyuK a doverniong-ouned Ixprovonmnte Transferred to Lessor Jader Sapplenenend ageersent tay 1 60 Benoe Sos ¥-3lU0-ung Hho aii rovatuente Loguted on the Lescnd preuines, exenpting one revs Solated Goush of the Covernpont. hangur batldings aned vy Ary Ase Poreseseaetern teehmienL Tuining Gowannd. Li vovernnent-oened stmetures, alterstions and additions in, aboak or eee eee eee tng anbeatory stuesd sluphouae Zosstod Ln the Horthesst corner deere toot sremiven, Ineiad tog aancarloge structures, matordnl sid Daeeing balle over oF attecknd vv ald Glubhous quiictng. em, 8 38 (12 Lessor se 9 ovrporation, the following sertificate Shall be exoouted by the Secretary or Assistant Seoretary) Ty De Ge PREGUAN certify that T am the Goumtéatoner of pioanoe of the ULE SF Bante Wonton, o municipal Co¥poration, naued ae eauor in the attach fey thet Le J, MURRAY who signed’ said Louse on behalf of the Lesser, war tion Conn. of Fublio Safety of said sree on tees eEone that dtd lence wer duly sTened Tor and In bohelt Be sala Municipal Corporation by authority of its governing body, and {a within the seope of its corporate powaray BEAL. s10NeD) Ds Ge PRERIAN (corporate, SAL) Exh. 8 36 “1. RPSOLUTION #353) sopys LESSOR PSWMTUAL JOTRE SURVEY AND CONDITION KEPORT This Terninol Joint Survey and Condition Report is made by the undersigned lessor and the undersigned reproventative of tho Governnent in connection with the enondaont of Lease Nos ii-3160-ong~5h9 by Supplo~ neutal Agroenont Wo. 1, which Supplonental Agroenout provides for payment of a oash settionens to the lessor in lieu of the Governnentts obligation to restore the Leased promises and which deletes from said lease any obligation by the Government to restore the leased proxisos at the ter- mination of said Leases ghe Collowing items of restoration are vonsidered by the lossor to be the only items which are the reaponsibility of the Gevernuent, take ing into conaideration (a) the original Joint Survey ond Statesont of Condition of Premisos ani (b) ordinary woar and tear baced on the purpose of the lease, and are the only itome fer whioh the lossor demands restora~ tone The following imprevounants and installations heve beon construct= od: barracks, Intrines, towers, sheds, hangars, reinforced concrete shale tors, ommoufln.6 buildings, roadways and streets, underground shelters, aonorete and dirt revetnontes gravel, macndam and agphalt stroote, run- ways, roads and parking arenes wood fonces, bridges and ealverts, Come munigation trenches, fox holes and building foundations have been ex- cavateds Couorate foundations, piers and slabs heve been constructed and a dump site eatablishode contour of practically the ontire area of the property has beon altered. Large areas have been treated with weed killing chewloals and ‘he top soil rendered tterile, All tune grass Ss doad over the antire propertye At lowst 260 trecs and 100 shrubs of aseorted oizes and vari. Bties have been destroyed. Approxinately 200 troe atunps ronein on the property. nightoon Greens, two putting Oroone and sixteen Fairways and toos havo boon obliterated. Two Fairways and Tees aro covered with dune ouflae bulldingss the water and sprinkling systom has been destroyed or danaged over the entire property. the top soil from largo arena hes been renoved from the property. A woven wire fonce hag been removed from south bound- avy line and gstarlished in a different locations The steel pipe handrail from the Clubhouse to the Starters booth has boon removed. jow panes have beon removed from One door and all windows and win the Starters booths SURVEY oF cLUMHOUS# Large quantities of roof tiles are broken. varte of the oxtertor walls aro @inted with camouflage paint aud other parts nre streaked with ataing A wooden frany has been attached to the walla and constructed acrous tho root to aupyort a cnggpijace nets Four light shades nnd globes 87 RESOLUTION $3537 copy Shoot are sissing Cron the west poreh and five light shades and globes are nieping fron the east porch. Ment Toilet Room (in Clubhouse) part of tile trim around window has been reaoveds Two toilot soata, one toilet tank. cover and fvur door knobs ara ateeings The origi- nal concealed hot and cold water pipes have boon disconnected and exposed pipes have heen inetallod. Paint 18 peeling from the ceiling and walls Master has been removed from balow the window and holes have been bored through the west partition wall, Tho tile floor {9 sotled and stained. one window screon fe misuings Mou's Shower Room (in GLlubhouge). xposed water pipes have ben installed and she origin} aystox Aisconnecteds Pipe holes have boon bored through the west wall. faint is peoling fron the coiling and walls. Pipe holes bored through tile Wainscot. Two panes of obscure glass are cracked in the west windows There are several nail holes in the plaster on the north wall. Mente Locker Room (im ¢lubhouse) Three panes of obscure glass are broken in wast windowsy Cast ivon frane on water heater is broken, partition has boen removed. Two wooden panels are split in outside doors Five knobs ani holts are aiss- Ine from d-ore, Swo Light shades and globes are missing, Large holea have boon cut in the plnster walle and seiiing near the wator hoators Menerous nail holes appaar in the plaster on the four walls. the west half of the south wall and a atrip of the selling have been damaged by wac ters The walls are soiled, Several holes have beon broken throuch the concrete. floors Hents Lounge Room (in clubhouse A mullion in the west window has been loosened and pushed inwards one pane af obsoure clack {s cracked. Moles have boon bored through the exterior wall and window onsings Ulaster has been renoved from above win- fowe, Thero are wator staine on the oiling and the walB are soiled, inw sulated wiring has boon attached to. the walls ant ceiling, A partition and chair rail hes been constructed. Repatr Shop (In C}ybhouse) one enameled steel sink of oloar slacs $a broken in south window, The oak floor in the sout! {is scarred, seratchod and has aoveral holes gouged in it. Ono wooden panel Look and night=loteh have been renoved fron the outside doors The bak floor in the north room has been satvrated with of1, There aro sov- eral small holon in the plastered walls. The walla and coiling are sotl~ ode Three Light globes aro uieaings waster trep ie afesings One pane room Exh. B 58 Sheet 5 of 5 shoots, GOLY SHOF(In Clubhouse, Two panes of clear glass fron enst door are missing, Ono pane of clear glace is missing from eaat window and one pane of clear glass above window is cracked. ‘the lock is miguing from the east door. One lamp shade and globe are missing. Two holes heve boon broken in the con= rete floor. ‘Tho walls and ceiling are soiled and there are nimorous small holes in the plaster on walls. Main Lounge Room or Restaurant (tn Clubhouse Hino panos of olear glass have been removed from the wast wall doors und one pave from the east doors Two window sashes and glass panos are missing fron east windows One partition with glass panels ha been removed. the wooden door toa uyply room hao been cut into two sections. Six glass doors and all suelvins from the trophy cases aro vissing. Four light fixtures, 15 upholotored stools and three door locks are misaing. one hardwood serving coumter has beon removed and lett autaide in the weather. Parts of two light fixturon are mizeinge One floor sink hae boon renoveds Four light shades and thirty-three 1Mjht globes are miasin, The walls ere soiled and there are several small holes in the plaster. ) Kitohon (In Clubhow two wood panel cupboard doors are missing. One skylight ts bro= ken, Shelves have boon installed across the east wall. Paint on walle, doors and cabinets is badly soorred and soiled. Paint on coiling is badly sofled aud is peoling off. The original water pipes have been disconneat= ed and now surface pipes installed. thers are many pipe and nail holes in the plastered walls. One pane of obscure glacs 1a broken in the sky= Lights One electric switch, one favoet kandle and one aupboard door latch are miasings Storage Room Nos 1(in cw e Shelving has bean installed across the north and west walls, The walls are goiled and the plastered walls have numerous nell holeas Moments Lounge Room(tn Clubhouse One outside d-or is misaing and the sereen door has beon detached. Five holes have been bored through tho window sashes, two holes through the Cutsid® door casings Plaster hac been removed from a small aroa below the enet window, tne holo hae beon dared through the south wall and there are many nitl holes in the walle. Paint on the inuide door is badly soiled and soarred. The wells are streaked and solled. ‘The ceiling is seiled. Paint on the floor border tv pealing off, Lubhouse, Four holes have boon bored through the window easing, vaint on doors dager and wollo is scarred and badly soilod, Une attachod wall air- ror is aissing and the epot where it wus ie paintod n different colors Theve aro neny nail holes tn the plastered walls. Exh. B 59 Sheot |) of 5 Sheets. Homon's Wash Showor and Toilet Room (In Clubhow One wall lovatory and one toilet have been renoved and installed in adjoining eteroroom, Surface water and drain pipes wore installed. duo stool shower parol kas been detached fron the wall. Pinster and steel jath heve been romoved fron a large area of the partition wall of adjoining storercene Ome shower head aud four sets of shower faucet handles are nissinge Paint on walls, doors, cofling, onbinet and shower cabinets to Dacly unrred and gotlod. Saint te pooling from walls and ceilings There are munerows nail holos in plaster on onct wall, Storeroon Nov 2 (in Glubhouse) A wood partition and platform have boon constructed, A toilet and wall lavatory have boon installed with surface water pipe and drei ngs There are peveral pipe and nail holes in the west wall. The walls are soilods SURVEY OF SHOP ATLDING Approximately 00 feet of partitions were installed, Eight window anshes and panes, one door and six door locks are missing. Two enamel sinke are missing, The original water and drain pipes have been discon- heoted and surface pines installed, The original electrical wiring has deen disconnected ond surface wiring inatalled. sight light fixtures are niswings SURVEY OF GROUNDS AUILDING atrine in Southeast Corner one Llowetunk toilet, one tollet seat, one toilet tunk cover, one soap dispenser, one lavatory trap, two swinging doors and two window gushes and panes are missinge Corrugated tron Storage Bublding one window sash and glace panes is missing. There in a large hole in the west walls Stovace Shack Wo changes Tool shed A loan-to ae boon constructed. Three window sashes and glase panes, and one wood panoled door are missings Latrine on West Boundary Two panel doors, one lowetank toilet, one wall lavatory, and one tank cover are missings ‘vo window panes are broken, Exh. B 60 Sheet 5 ov 5 Shoots ACSCELLANBOUS Elevon woodon bridges and culverts are miseings CITY OF SANTA MONICA, a munfoipal “corporation, by(stGunD) URRAY, thanteelon er of Publis Bat otyy \ officio Mayor of the City of Banta Monica. (SIGNED) be Gy FRYEVAN Conmissfoner of Finanoo, ox-officio City Clerk, ex-officio Clerk of the Oity Council of the City of Santa Monioa, WEINRES SIGNED) APA Hy ware pated 20 December lob. (SIGNED) Orval N, wail opr (Spt) Negotiator Used Real Estate 2 Tank, Organization, VOwier oF wuthorived Foprosentauive) ante oF TER Exh. B 61 GOLFCOURSE LEASE SUPPLEMENT NO. 2 Exh. 8 62 ym Nos 19 WEGOPTATRD AGREEMENT AR DEPARDT ‘BNOTNEERS Negotiated Leaso Ko. NSaGOmeng-549 SUPPLEMENTAL AGHBIMENT NO. 2 ‘Thie supplemental agreowent, onterad into this 1sto day of July, 1048, by end between HR UNITED STATRS OF AMRKIGA, hereinafter called ‘the Government, reprasented by the contracting officer executing this agreanent, and the GITY OF SANTA NOWICA, @ political subdivision of the state of Californie, whose addveus 39 City Hall, Senta Montes, Gelit- omnia, hereinafter called the Iassor, WITWESIRTH thats WEBKEAS on the lat day of Pecenber, 1941, the parties hereto ‘ontered Into Lease No» NG4G0~eng~540 for that’ certain proparty commonly known as the Santa Wontea thuntotpal Golf Gourse, comytsing 83 acres, more oF laa, ag more particularly desertued in’paragraph 2 of said Jease, which’ anid losses was formerly modified by Supplouental Agresnont No, 1 between the parties, dated 20 Decenbor 1944, and WAHSAS,4t ty found advantageous and in the vest interest of the United states to further modify he aald lease for the following reasons: 1s fo peldeve the Goveranont of all unintenance and operation costs; 2. fo relieve the Governmont of the payment of rental under the torma of said leases NOW, THRREKORE: The said lease ta hereby modified in the follontng partioulara, bub in no otnores Effective 15 July 1946, ané during the term that a vemtain Interin Licenge ts in éfrect betwon the Goverment and the city of Santa Monsoa covering the uso, maintenance and ovara- tion by the City of santa Monten of the landing area and certain airport facilities on the Santa Foniea Kunkotpal, Airport, Santa Yonica, California, and in conformance with the terns thereot, tho Governuent ts nereby relieved of al) maintenance and operation costa, and the payment of rental Paguired of the Goverment by aid lease, covering that portion of the lending area and airport fectiities eubraced by sold Lieanae. ean. Co Dy WrNHess WEKOR, the parties hereto have excouted this agreement aa of the duy and year fret above witten, ou ONIN py (StMED) PRED He JOHNSTON Contrasting Officer D STATES OP AURICA, WETNESS GPTY OF SANA MouTCA (srawso) pb, ¢. rman (Stew) wax v6. SemerERe Constasraner or Finanes, SEUPNCGTe Vomteatonst oF PUbIie 8 Oity Ghosh er tne Gity oF Santa Able offteta, Hayor of th fonica anER Wonton Gity Hall, Sance Wonton, Ga: (ema) iddress) u rEnewy _____y oertity that T anthe consissioner of Finsnoe, “exsaftioxe etry cu ____of the polittonl aubdivision, otty of santa Wontoa huned 28 Lessor in tine abtached supplemental Agreement No. 2; that RAY By Sena pyh, __—» Who signed sala supplemental agreesont No. 2 Conndassoner of Publis Safety, ox, on behalf of the Iessor, was then officio Mayors of sata ‘that a04a supptemental political mbdtvision, Otty of Sante Monte Agreonent to. 2 was duly. signed for and tn behalf of waid City of Santa vontoa by authority of Its geverning body, und ts within the scope of Ate corporate powers. (stan) (s1eo) De vanmman {oonronat rm) EXHIBIT C ck 25055 page 201 mwsmauent op manaren ‘olor ALL a oy mums reesmTs Dog 4 ccs That, the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, aoting by and through ‘the: WAR ASSETS AISURISORATION gnder and pursuant to Reorganization Plan One of 1947 (12 ¥.2. 4554), and the. Powore and eothority con ‘seined in the proviatone of the’ Surplus Property set of 1984, as sionded, and applicable rules, regulations, and orders, PARTY OF TUR PIRGT PART, in consideration of the assumption by the CITY OF SANTA HOVICA, & body corporate and politie under: tho lews of the State. of CAlitornsa, PARTY OF THE SECOKD:PART, of wll the oblige= ‘thous and ite taking subject $0 certain reservations, restrictions, fend onditions and its covenant to abide by and agrenuont to certain Other Teservatione, restrictions, end conditions, all ae set out horeinatter, hae renieed, released and forever qiiteleinoa, and by those ‘and forever quitelain to seid City of uovesaore ane assigns, Under and subject to the reservations, restrictions, and conditions, exceptions, and reservation fof rights horeiancter eot out, all ite right, title, interest, and oles {nm ane to the following described reui, personal, of mixed property sitiated in the County of Los Angeles, Stato of Californie, to wits (1) tract #1 - A temporary casement grented by Eaynond E, Wright and Lule Naney Mertor Wright, musband and wife to the United Gtatos of Anerict, by easenont dead dated 21 Octaber 1942, for right-of-way to leoste, relooste, conetruct, reconstruct, mal ‘tain, repair, operete, renew, enlarge, renove ond replace, incrence tna/or change the number and/or aise of condutte, pipes, pipe Lin ecescories end eppurtensnoae for the conveyance and dlepose! of fewage and/or efflvent under, over, along end upon that certain lend situated in the County of Lot Angeles, State of Celifernia, desersbed te follows: A etrtp of land 10 foot in width, eftvate in the city of Lot Angeles, Gomty of Loe Angeles, Stete of Galiroraia, being under fmnd acroc a portion of Lot 04, Tract No. 12450, as per map recorded fe Book 286, Pages 20 and 21 of Mepe, Records of Loe Angeles. County, Lying § fot on each side of the following described center Lue. Beginning at the intersection of the Gouthoasterly Line of seid Lot 96 with the oonter Line of Wesatch Avonse, (60 feet in width), fd point being Worth S2° Skt 40" Tost, w distance 190,61 feet fron ‘the interaeotien of the center Hine of Waenten Avenue ond the center Line of Woedgroon Street (60 foot in width)) thence Yorth 32° $4" 40" Tort slong. the Worthnesterly prolosgetion of the center line of Haeatch Avemie a dotence of 44,00 feet to a point in the Horthwesterly Line of eald Lot 98, containing 440 equare foot, more oF 1 (2) tract fa ~ & temporary oasonent granted by the ‘Southern Gelitornin Water Company, © corporation organized and sxioting under and ty virtue of the lave of the Gente of Caldfornie, to the United Of Anarion, by encemant doed dated 22 Ootcber 1042, for right~ fo locate, ‘relocate, construct, reconstruct, maintain, repair, operate, renex, enlarge, renove and replace, increnee ead/or’ change the sunber and/or size Of soudnite, pipen, pipe lines, acvossories, fund appertenenoes for the conveyence and Gleposel of cevage and/or striuent under, over, along and pon that cortain lend ettuated in Ge County of Lov Angolee, State of California, described az follows: A strip of 1nd 10 feet in width, situate in the City of Los sngelea, County of Lon ingeles, State of Geliferaie being under snd aorese portion of the Subdivision of the Lande of Samie2 Cripe 4in the Rancho Ge Balloua ee per mep recorded in Book 1, Page 6 ORIGINAL enc 08 fever 4 Book 2805 5page_212 LSgensed Surveyors Mapa, Revords of sai County lying § foot on each ‘sido of tho following dovoribed center Line: Boginaing at tho inter teetion of the Hortirosterly Line of Lot 94, Traot fio. 12450, a per map recorded in Book 285, Pages 20 tnd 21 of Uapu, Records of Bugeles County, mith the'yortbwostorly prolongation of the center Line of Wasatch Avenue, (50 feet im width) said point boing H 32° 541 40" Wort, a distance of 162,81 fact from the Intersection of the center Line of Wasaton Avenue and tho oonter line of Woodgraea Btroet, (60 fost in width); thonce North 82° S41 40" Wost along ‘the Hortiuasterly prolongation of the canter 2ino of Masstch Avenue, ndlstence of 16 feet to the lerthwosterly line of gaia Subdivision of the Leda of Sqnuol Crips im the Zancho Le Ballona, containing 160 equare foot, more or less. (3) Brack #5 = A tonporary onsonont granted by the Bank of Anericn National rust & Savings Association, « national banking Assooiation, omers, and Gore Broo. Inde, a corporation orgenizod and existing under and by virtue of tho lev of tho Stato of Gall. fornia, Vondeo, under a land purchase contract, to tho United States of anerton, by easenant dead Gated 21 Ootober 1962, for righteofeway fo Toonte, ‘relovate, construct, reconstruct, neintain, reprir, operate, renew, enlarge, remove and replace, inorsase and/or change ‘the number and/or size of conduits, pipes, pipe lines, accessories and appurtonanoes fer the conveyance and Slaposal of savage and/or ‘over, along end upon that oertain land eftuated i he County of Lon Angelle, State of California, decoribed ae follows: A etrtp of land 10 foot in width attunte in the Oity » County of Loe Angelos, State of Callforaia, being undr ‘ portion of the 10.70 heres of Fractional Jose De La Lux Machado 61,97584 Aorea in the Zyncho Le Bellona, (District Court amber 2722) ne por map redorded iu Book 8, Pages 20% to 200 Snplusive, Wsscollaivoe Records of Loe Angelee’ County, lying 5 feot (on each side of the following described oonter Lines eginning ab ‘the intersoetion of the Southoasterly line of said Fractional Jose De ine Machado 61,97354 hares wlth the Northmesterly prolongation of ‘the center Line of Nasatoh Avenuo (asateh Avenue. showa on Tract Nor 12450, 8 por map recorded in Bock 296, Pages 21 and 20 of Mage, Records of aasa County) said point being North §2° $4! 40" West along ‘the Horthwesterly prolongation of the canter line of Wasatch Avenue, a dletance of 199.61 foot from the interesotion ef the center Line of Wasstoh Avenin (50 feet in width) and the contar line of Woodgreen Stroet (60 faet in width); thonce North $2° S4" 40" Wost 11.19 fests jorth 65° 08" 45" Most 442.15 feet to a point in the Yorth= westerly Huo of anid Fractional Jose De Lut Machado 61.97834 Acres, vontaining 4588 aquare fest, more or Less. (4). Sract Ht ~ A temporary ousonent granted by dore Bros. Ines, & corporation organized and existing ander and by virtue of ‘the dare of the State of Callforata, to the United States of dnorioa, dy easement deed dated 20 Ootober 1842, for right-of-way to loont Felocate, conttruot, reconstruct, maintais, repair, operate, renow, mmlarge, Fenove end ‘and/or change the munber s0¢/or Five of consults, pipes, pipe lines, acceasories and appurtenances for the conveyance and dispoeal of serage and/or affluent wader, over, along and upon that certain lend situated in the Coonty of Los fugelee, Stabe of California, described as follows: ‘A strip of Jand 10 foot in width, ettuats in the Clty of los Angeles, County of Los Angoles, State of Galiternia, being under and eoroae a portion of Fractional Joso De La luz lachado 61.97854 Aoren in the Rynoho La Balloze (District Court Cexe No, 2722) 02 por 41 inp reoorded $8 Book 8, Pages 204 to 209 Snolustve, Wacellaneous Records ef Los ngalea County, lying 5 feet on each side of tho Following desoribed canter Lines Commencing at the interaoction of Book_ 28055 page 213 the center Line of Wasateh Avenue (50 feet im width) and Woodgreen, Street (60 feet in width), shown on Tract Wo. 12460, as per map Fevorded in Book 285, Pages 20 and 21 of uaps, Records: of Low Buceloe Countys thence North 32° 54! 40" West along the conter ine and prolongation of the center Line of ould esatch Avenso, f dhetanoe of 210.00 fects thence North 65° 09 4s" Woet 442.15 feet to the IRUE POINT OF BROINCING. Thence Yorth 65° 08" 4i oct 425.10 feats thence Horth $$° 88" 55" Wost 25.59 feet to the point of cormination im the Southoasteriy Line of Woodbine Avene (27 foot wide) shown on Tract Wo. 12867 as per nap recor ded in Book 249, Page 15 of aps, Records of Los Angeles County; seid point of termination being Worth 57° 11" $0" Eeet 25.80 feet fron the most Southarly corner of eid Tract Noy 2587. (5) traot #5 - A texporary right-of-way for construce ‘tion, operation, seiutamance, ronowal, and renoval of « sever line fiong, serone, Doneath end over the following described property, fo wits ‘he Soutiwoetorly ton (10) fost of Lot 62 of Tract 12507, in tho city of Los Angeles, County of Los Angeles, Siste of Califor~ ale, sq per map recorded 14 Sook 249, Pages 12 and 18 of Japs, re~ cords in the Office of the County Roserdor of said Gounty und’ Suate, granted by & leave entered into by and between the Bank of Anorice Hintional Trost and Savinge Aesooletion, « National Banking Assooka~ ‘cion, and the United States of Anrion, on 1 Septender 1942, aa modified by Supplenentel agreenente: #2, dasod 10 Janunry 1944, #,, cated $1 duly 1048, #8, daved 4 Auuet 1046) end ft, deted 50 Devender 1946, which wae duly transferred ond accigned to the Capital Conpaty, a California Corporation, oa 7 Septesber, 1945. (6) at oortain cower pipe Lino constrneted pursuant to and ali réghte aoquired by, that cortein Eosolution of 9 October 1042, in the Iimter of the Beard of Public Works, Clty of Loe Kugelen, Page 205, Book Nos 525, grenting perntecion to the Federal Government to Snetell a sanitery Sovor in Stewart Avenue betreen, Roce Avenue and Woodbine Sprocte. (7) Shore cortetn shattels enumerated in Sohedi attoched hereto end mide a part heroof as though fully set forth herests [BKORPYING, HOWEVER, from thie conveyance ali right, ttle, od Snterast im and to”all property in the nature of equipnent, fursiohing, sed other personel property located on the Land leased fron the Gity of Bata Hotton aa hereinafter set out, which can be renoved from the land wif out unterial injury to the lend or struc~ ‘tures located thereon, other than thoge chattels mmarated 13 Sehedale "A" attached hereto end made & part hereof ee though fly fet forth herent, and reserving to the PARTY OF THE Pins? PART for Ateelf end ite lessees, Leensees, s fhe right to wea the property excepted heraby in euch « manner ae will not materielly and adversely affect the development, ingrove= Tent, operation or maintenance of the airport and the right of re. oval fron seid preniees of auch property, all within a ressonable period of tine after she date liereof, which chall not be construed So mean ary period nore than one (1) yeur after the dete of this in Btrusont, ‘together with @ right of ingrece to and egress fron eatd premisne for such purposee. Purther, the PARTY OP THE FIRST PART, for the consideration hereinabove exprectod, dove hereby surrender, suv, fend conéitione of this instrament, to the PARTY OP TH SECOND "Clover Field, Seite Yorica lunicipal Airport", set forth and a eribed in Longe fio, M-Ot-193-Lng-4004, dated 8’ December, 1841, 4s Eth, © or fed ¢ Se 0S zo Book LER see 24 noGified vy Supplonental Agrossonter fl, dated July 28, 1045, end #2, Setad July 16, 1000) aad 1a Lecce Fo. WoB4sorbnge06s, aatod Decenber { Soei! Se outhsea ‘ny Supplenostal Agreeamnter $i, cated December 20, Tous, mid f2, uted suiy 1s, 1946, oth arom the Clty of Santa Noniee fo the United Stacos of Auerion, nd inoliding 166,87 acres, more. oF Tose of land ettunved in the county of Los Angeles, State of Californie, ‘SHR PARTY O ‘UIE SECOND PART doos hereby relosce the PARTY OP THE FIRST PARY from any and all olains which oxiet or my ariso under the proviesons of the aforesaid lense, except clains which may bo subaitted under Section 17 of the Federal Airport Act. Seda property transferred hereby was duly declared sur~ plus and wad assigied to the War Aegote ddnintctration for disposal, foting pureuant to the provisions of the above-nentioned Act, ae ‘anondad, Reorganization Plan ne of 1947 md applicable rule! regulations and orders. SHAT Ta PARTY OF THE FIRST PART has released and quite olained, snd by thie inatrunont doos release and quitolain to the PAREY OP EE SEOQND PART all of the structares aid improvements fon the lossod land, Including underground and overhead utility whioh were added thereto by PARTY OF TE FIRST PART. Tanb by the acceptance of this Instruxont or any rights herounder, the said PARTY OF THE SECOND PART, for Lteolt, ite iscessors, and aeeigns, agroos that the aforesaid surrender of Joutehold interent, ‘ranetor of structures, inprovenents and Ghatvols, asd aeaigment, shell be subject’ to the following rem Stricvions, ret forth in" subparagraphs (1) and (2) of Shis pares Ereph, wideh shall rua with tho lang, tmposed pursuant to the Githofity of Artiols 4, Gection 3, Clause 2 of the Constitution Of the United States of Anerion, the Surplus Propersy Act of 1944, 2 Anended, Reorgantantion Plan One of 1067 and applicable rules, Fegeletions snd order (2). That, oxoept ee provided in subparagraph (8) of the next sucovading ummuabored paragraph, ‘tio lend, buildings, etructures, Inorovenente end equipment da which thie Instrument transfers any {nterost ohall be eed for publio airport purposes for the use and bonotit of the public, on reasonable toras snd without unjust é Grimiantion and without grant or exercise of any extlusive right for uae of the airport within the mevaing of the terns "exclusive right" ee used in eubparagragh (4) of the noxt succeeding paragraphs he jaod dn thie Snetramont, the torm “airport” ghall be deonod to Include at least all auoh dead, buildings, structures, inprovenente fend equizmont. (a) Tat, oxoapt ag provided 4a subparagraph (6): of the next suscoading paragraph, che entire landing wron, ae defined in MAK Regulation 16, uted’ June 26, 1946, and all structures, improve nents, feoilibies ané equigncat in'whioh this instrument transfers feny interset ehgll be maintained for the uso and bonefit of the public at ali tines {a good sad eorvicesble condition, provided, forever, that auch maintenance shall be required ae to structures, Inprovenonte, facilities and equipaest only during the romainéer of Ghoir satiated 1ige, a0 determined by the Civil deronautlos sinine Lserator or hie auecseaor, In the event materials are required to fehabilitace or Fepeir cortain of the aforamentionad structures, [nprovonenta, facilitien or equipment, they any be procured by denolition of other eeracturee, inprovononte, facilities or equipnmt traneferred hereby and Loosted on the shove doaoribed premises wiioh have outlived ‘their ues a2 airport property iz the opinion of the Civil Asroneutics Adalusetretor oF sie suoceesor. Exh. °° dee 7% 3055 Book 28059 page 2EG tat by the asveptanoe of this instrument, or aay Flekte horoundor, the BEY OF 205 SHOUD PUlte for tse due cuceberese se tad cypase or ena ahr turrenders trtnatery‘andUenigmost is aad Magee, the tattegiag onornctione sed foreasetoge net soeeh ta subparagraphs (1) to 47) of this paragraph, which shall run with the Tages taal datas enorier or artiste dy dochion 8 thas WPef ea Gaunbientien of ts onaca Slatear"aessiae & Sufplce peeperty into iota, ca seaniols nesepnsiation Fina Gut OE TAY enalapplisabie ralee, fegriation’ ana Sranree a) That Aneofer as 45 Se-withssi-tew powers “the” PARTY OF I S00GHD PART ahall adequately olear and proteot the serial eppronches to the aizport by renoring, lovering, relocating, marking oF Lighting oF otherwise aitigeting existing airport hazards and by preventing Sho eotablishnont or creation of future airport haserd: (@ That the United States of anorica (hereinar ter sonstines referred to ae the Nlovermont") through any of 18 omployese or agente shal) at al) tinos heve tho right to mike nonexolusive use of the landing area of the airport at which auy of the property Sraniaferred by Uke instrument 1s Located or used, without charge: Provided, however, that tuoh use may bo Linited ea mey be dotornined at aty tine by tho Civil Aeronautics Adninistrator or iis, successor fo be necessary to prevent sndue interference with use by other authorised airerarts Provided, further, thet the Governnent shall be obligated to pay for damages ‘caused by such use, or if its use of the landing area is substantial, to contribute @ reasonable share fof the ost of maintaining and operating tho lending ares furate with the use mede by it @) That during any national exergency deolered by the Prosi Gent of the United States of Anerion or tho Congress thoreot, the Government ehall have the right to mike oxoluoive or novexclusive lise aad have exolarive or nonexclusive control and possession, with- Sut charge, of the airport st whieh any of the property transferred by tiie Instrument 1@ located or used, of of suoh portion thersot fag Lt may deeire, provided, however, that tho Government chall be Fespossible for the entire cost of maintaining such pert of the ‘izport as St may see exclusively, or over which 1t may Dave ox Slisive peeseseion or control, éuring the poriod of such use, poccosston, of control, and ahell be obligated to oonteibste w Teasonsble share, somonsurate with the use aide by it, of the oost of maintenance of even proporty af 4% may ueo nonexolusivaly or over whieh it may have nonexclusive control and possession} Provided, further, that the Goverment shell pay a fair rental for its use, Control, oF poraserion, exelueively of nonexcluaively of exy in provenente to the sirport mide without United States aid. (4) thet no exolusive right for the use of the eirport at sentsh she property treneferred by thle instrunont Le Located shel So voeted (eirectly of indirectly) Sn any poreon or persone to the exélucion of othors in She cana Slass, tho torm Mexolucive vlgho™ Being defined to moms (2) asy exelusive right to use the airport for con ducting eny pertioular aeronautical activity requir~ ng operation of eireratty (2), any exolueive right to ongage in the sale of oup- plying of airorert, eiroraft sococeorios, equipment, Or eupplicn (exoluding the sale of gasoline and oll), of aircraft services nesecaary for the oporation of aircraft (including the maintenance and repair of asrorett, aircraft engines, propellers, sd appli- xn. os deed 4 Book 2905S page 216 (s) ‘That, except ax provided in subparagraph (6) of this paren graph, the property trans: y may bo, suscesstvely trenaferred aly with the provigo thet aiy such subsequent transferee ecaumes all ho obligations imposed upon the PARTY OP Ti SECOND PART by the pro= ‘vintons of thie inetranext, (8), ‘That no property transferred by this instrument shall be ‘usnd, eased, sold, salvaged, oF aiepoeed of by the PARTY OF ‘IE SpOMD PART for other than airport purposes without the written oon sent of the CiyS1 Aeronautics dmini¢trator, which shall be grantod oily if said Adaintetrator deteraines that the property oan be used, Tented, sold, salveged or disposed af Zor other than eirport purpor without untorially and adversely effecting the cevelopment, Smprove- ment, oporaiion or maintenance of tho airport st which such property fe located Provided, ‘hat no structures disposed of bereunder shall be used az en industrial plant, factory, or similar facility within he noaning of Saotion 28 of the Surplus Property Ast of 1944, tmmended, unless the PARTY OF IMG SEOGND PAR? shail pay to tho’ United States guah sum co the Wor Ascote Aduinistrator or hit sucoossor in funotion shall determine to bee fair consideration for the rexoval ‘of the rortrdotion imposed by tke provieo. « ‘The PARTY OF THE SHOMID PART does hereby release the Government, and will take whatever action may be required by the War Assets Administrator to aasure the complete release of the Governaant from any and all 1iebility the Covaranent may be umter for Fertoration or ether dauagos under auy ioacé cr other agreenent covering the use by the Goverment of the eixpart, or part thereot, fomed, controlled or operated by the PARTY OF THR’ SHOOKD PART, upon whieh, adjacent so whieh, or im comection with which, any property Granaferred by thie instrument was located or used; Provided, thet no euoh release shell bo conetrued ae depriving the PARTY OP Ts SBCOKD PART of axy right 1t may othorwi¥e have to roosive reimburse mont under Section 17 of the Pedaral Mrport Aet for the necessary Fehabilitetion or repair of publie alrperse heretofore or hereafter substantially daaaged by eny Federal agency. By acceptance of this instrument, or any right hereunder, ‘the PARRY OP Tift SELOND PART further agrooa with the PARIY OF THE FIRST PART as follows: (2). That in the event that any of th aforesaid terns, conditions, resarvations or restrictions te not awt, observed, oF couplies with by the PARTY OP TEL SUCOMD PART or any subsequent Granaforen, whether causod by the Legal inability of oaid PARTY oP TIE SECOND PART oF subsequent ‘to perform any of the obligations herein set out, or othorwise, the title, right of pos ‘Session aad all other righte transferred by this instrusmt to the PARCY OP TAB SECOND PAAR, o7 eny portion thereof, shall at the option of the PARTY OF THR FIRST PART revert to the PARTY OF Ta HIRST PART sixty (60) days following the dato upon which deaaad to thie effect ta mada in writing by the Civil Asronautios Adminis trator or he tucceetor iz funotion, unless within said aixty (60) aye sash default or violation ebali have been oured and ell eush tera, conditions, reserrations and reevrictions shall have boon not, sbterved or somplied with, im wich event sald revercion shall et oacur end title, right of possession, and all other rights Gaueterred hereby, except soch, Af any, aa aball have previauely reverted, shall renain vested in the PARSY Of THE SE00ND PART, its ‘eraneforeea, suscscsors and assigns. (2) Bat 4 the construction ts covenants of any of the foregoing reservations and restrictions recited herein ce covenants or the appliostion of the anne es oovenante in any partioular in Stance 4e bold invalid, the particular reservations or restrictions Sn question shall be odustrued instond marely ee gout tions upon “fine 76 ee “the: broach of watch tho Govermont my exercise’ its option to’ cause “Gio tite, right of porsaneion and all other rights transferred to ‘ho PARPY OP [IE SECOID PANT, or any portion theracf, to revert to At, ana the appldoation of avoh reservations or restrictions covennnte-in any other inetanse and the construction of the renain~ der of sich reservations und rectrictions ee eovenaute shell no% ey be affected thereby % t 30 EAVE aND [0 HOLD the property traneferred hereby, under and subject to the aforesaid reservations, restrictions and eonditions, i ante the ssid PARTY OF IMG SBOOID PART, ite eueceneore ant assigns forever {IN WIRES WHEREOR, tho UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, acting ja Alninistration, has euueed thes pre= District Direstor, Mor Ascots Adaintetretion, and the city oF SANTA MOHICA, acting by’ end through ite OSty Counol, hey caused those prosents to be sxoouted 4m ite nao and on ite behalf by Ry Ms DORTON, Clty Moneser and attected by sy Clerk, Ete goal to be areuite affixed, all ae Toth aay of Bugust __, 1948. uurrep sTaTas oF AuERICA Acting by and through Wa -assets ‘WEMWESSES: 2A haala armestp es) ‘UTE oF BATA wourcA STATE OF OA IVORNIA bony on ORIGINAL Exh. "g60}568-1-1 eg sus 2681565-1-1, oe be Ls Ma Ms Le ur 1 Le 2eeise7-1-1 ve sos “oe 2601859-1-1, 2661870-1-1 ve ss 2ss1566— 265738754 WAkeZ1 #6 205733744 aaeat 3S 9009=11128-1-2 RPL scREDoLE "a" i Toe Choo oo Bor ‘Beeol Prune Fire Extinguisher Wire Cenoute Hoge Fibre Fir ek Barred Ping Pong Sable ‘Track fire, pamper ‘actor, Interantional, Mod.TUR 18 Bulldozer tractor, Fordson Gonder, Woterisod, J.D. Adams Mod. 202 Grane, Tractor, Hughos-Keenen, Model M02 ruck, Pire & Rosoue, International Exh. © ” het Hon, ant own to, ne to be tie Perse tnetrument on behalf of the Var lagets dal ta Imerica and acknonledged to mo that: te athe Anabrinent the nage of the! United Stated of " exoouted said instruments oIeTNHESS my hand and offend, 9eel. Ibtary Public in County snd State” Bok DROS Page AZO ype soars oF asentcs WAA Form 1241 War Assets Administration (u=12-48) ° CERELEIGATE ty the undersigned __1- 9, WRIGHT, Seoretary _The,Generel Board War Ansote Aininistrationy in my official capacity az such Secretary and duly authorized in the DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY INCIDENT [0 THE CARE, HANDLING AND CONVEYANCING dated Apr. 9, 1948, to make the following certification, do hereby certify: 1, Thet_ alter. Rover ie the District Director, Los Angeles District Office Yor Assets Adminietretion, duly oppointed, authorized and ating $x such copacity at the tine of the execution of the attached instrument, 2. That the attached DELEGATION OF AUTHDRITY INCIDENT 10 THE CARE, HANDLING AND CONVEYANCING is a true and correct sory of the original of said DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY, dated Apr. 9, 1948 Given undor wy nena this /O aay Ceaguals fered Sei The Genera) Boar TE Oigtea Po War Assote .dminfstration Glee ef Exh. C Book 205% Page. 22! DBLBGATION OF AUTHORITY WO. 15 (vornce) DELEQAPION OF AUTWORITY INCIDENT 70 THE CARE, HANDLING, AND COHVETANOING OF ‘SUNPLIG REAL PROPERTY AUD PERSONAL PHOPSRTT ASSIGNED FOR DISPOSAL THEREWITH ‘the Deputy Adainietrator, Offies ‘of Real Froperty Disposal, and otch Assool~ ato Deputy Adzintetrator, Office of Real, Property Dispostl, War Assets Ainin’ ‘rations the Regional Direotor, tho: Deputy Regional Director for Real Property Disposal, the Associate Deputy Regional Direotor for Real Property Disposal, and tthe Assistant Deputy Regional Direotor for Real Property Disposal, in each and ovory Tar Assets Adxinietration Regional Offiee; the Distriot Direstor and Doputy District Direotor fer Real Property Disposal, im each end every War Avsets Ad~ ainletration District Offiee, and amy person or persons designated to act, and Aoting, im any of the foregoing oapnoities, are hereby authorized, individually (2) t0 exsoute, acknowledge and deliver exy deed, leans, perait, contract, receipt, bill of aale, or other instruanta in writing in connection with the care, handling and disposal of surplus roel property, or persozal property a~ signed for disposition with real property, looated within the United States, its territories and posressions, (2) to accept axy notes, bonis, mortgagee, Geode of trust or other security instrimonte taken as coneideration in whole fof An part for the disposition of such durplus real or personal property, and > do all aote necessary or proper to release and discharge ay such inetrment or any Lien crested by euch inttrumont or therrise ereatod, and (3) to do or perform any other act neseaaary to effect the transfer of title to aay such urplus real or personal property Located ea above provided; all pursuant to the provisions of the Surplus Property Ast of 1944, as amended, (68 Stat. 765; 60 Uses Apps Supp. 1611); Publio Law 181, 79th Cong. (69 Stat, 985; 60 U.S.C. Apps Supp. L6l4n, 1614b)s Reorganisation Plan 1 of 1947 (12 F.R.4634); Public Law 289, Goth Gong. (61 Stat, 675); end Wr Assets Adniniatration Regulation Nor 1 (12 P, B. 6662), a2 anonted, ‘The Regional Director in each and ovory War Assets Adaintstration Regional oftioe 1s hereby authorized to redelegate to auch porcon or persons as he may Gonignate the authority dolegeted to him by this inatrments le 8 Metght, the Seorotery of Tho Ooneral. Board and Robert Whittet, Aaso= ciate Deputy Ainiatetrator, Office of Real Property Dispossl, Mar Assote Admini ‘tration, are hereby axthorized, individually, to certify true coples of this Delegation and provide such further cortifiontion as my be necessary to effectuate the intent of tiie Delegetion in fora for resording in any juris @iotion, as mty be required. his Delegation shall be effective as of the opening of busine: dpe 9 198. ais authority 4¢ in addition to delegations of authority previouly granted wider datos of May 17, 1948) Uay 29, 1946; July $0, 1946) Soptendor 16, 1046, October 81, 1948; Woveuber 22, 1946} January 15, 1947; June 6, 1987; and Deoonber 1; 1047) but shall not in acy mamor cp provisions of anid delegations ae do not conflios with the previsisiré of/tnis Delegation. (JRSS LARSON ‘Aaninistrator patedr __APR © BookAkOSS Page 222 xusowmeros ho. 185 (OLty GOUNGIL SERIES) A HSOOLUTION GF THE GITY GOUNOTL OF THR Gute OF SANTA HONIGA. AOGRPEING AN. IHSTAU. MENT OF PRANGPER FROMTHE UNITED Star OF AMERIOA. ‘UE QUTY GOUNOL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONTOA DOES RESOLVE AB FOLLOWS: SEORION 1, that that certain instrument of transfor from ‘the Undted states of Anerton, acting by and through the var Acsote | Administration, whereby aaid United statea of America does surrender \ ‘io the Oity of Sante Monica the former's leaae-hold interest in : and to the premises known at Gloverfield santa iontee Muntotpal Atm port ond certain casenents and tenporary rights of vay eppurtenant ‘thereto, be end the seme hereby 18 accepted, S20aT0H 8, that the GLty anager hereby Le authorized ‘to exooute said Anetrunont of teanafer on behslf of the city aid the Gity. Glerk shall attest his stgneture thereto, SROTLON 5, Tha’ the Gity Glark chal certify to the adope tlonoofthis resolution and thenoeforth end thereafter the same aghi-be 40° thd tovee and ef tect. GA AACRnowreD ond APPROVED this Loth dey of _iumuot., 1048, pei Tayor A Mate Counotimen: Barnard, Guercio, warkworth, Weilson, Tolmage, Sehimaer Councsimen: tone Counetiment Getes Clerk deed BY a4 Seb CAped 2 wee Me Pek pe mat Ce ASSOCIATED TELEPHONE COMPANY(LTRECEIVED 1914 SEVENTH STREET fay 10 1943 ciTy CLERK SANTA MONICA, CALIF. Santa Monica, CALIFORNIA April 22, 1948 Rae zm © . of - a 3a : 228 zee City of Santa Monica . ‘ bal City Hall i oie Santa Monica, California Gentlenen Attention of Mir. R. M. Dorton, City Manager There are ettaéhed for approval and execution by the City of Senta Monica original and two copies of a right-of-way agreement conveying to this company for underground telephone purposes en. easenent over a portion of Lots 164 and 169, Tract 10529, now part of the Senta Monice unicipal Airport, es shorn on maps attached to the docunerits. ‘The easement, covered hereunder is intended to enable us to increase telephone facilities to the eirport administration building and to eliminate the need for the city omned serial plent and its inherent hazards. Ur. Tyler, Airport Manager, already has expressed his favorable view toward this proposal. If eatisfactory to ihe City, we shell appreciate the approval and execution of these documents at your earliest convenience. Very truly yours LL. ELION 0, WaTSoN Manager attachments a Hef THE OBANDOR, CITY OF SANTA MONTOA, a muntoipal corporation, in coneideration of the sum of One Doller ($1.00), id other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which hereby 10 acknowledged, does by these prevents grant and convey unto the ASSOOIATED TELEPHONE GONPANE, LED,, 1ta qucceasors and assigns, an easesent and right of way for the construction, reintenanee and operation of a telephone line with wines, conduits, cebles and appurtenances by means of at underground eyetem, for the traneateston of electric snersy for telaghons end telegraph purposes together with the right of ingress and egress’ upon, over, in, under, across and along ‘thet certain real property, situated in the County of Los angeles, state of California, decribed as follows: A strip of land 4 feet in width lying within Lote Yea and 169 of Tract No, 10523, centerline of seid strip beginning ata point in the north easterly line of said Lot 164 a distance of © feet northwesterly from the east corner of sald Lot 164, thence southwesterly parallel with the southeaéterly lines of sald Lots 164 and 169 a. Aletance of 752 feet, thence northwesterly at right angles to the southeasterly line of Lot 169 a distance of 44 feet; A strip of land 4 feet in width lying within Lot 169 in Tract No. 10529, centerline of eatd strip beginning at & point’ in fhe northeasterly line of Lot 164, a distance of 6 feet northwesterly from the east corner of sald o Lot 164, thence southwesterly parallel with the southeasterly lines of sald Lote 164 and 169 a Gistance of 752 feet to the true point of degine hing thence gouthwesterly parallel with the south~ eacterly line of Lot 169 a distance of 180 feet, thenee northwesterly at right angles to the south~ easterly Line of Lot 160 2 Gtetanoe of 102.6 feet, thence southwesterly parallel with tae south eaaterly Line of Lot 160 a distance of 4 feet; All as per Map recorded 1n Book 160 at Page 26, ‘of Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of Los Angeles County, California, : DS Ta DaSenTON amici vy Exe ¢ THIS grant 16 made subject to any and all matters of record. Til WEPNESS WHIEREOF the grantor has caused its corporate seal to be hereunto affixed and these presents to be atgned by Abs duly authorized offtoers this 1th day of vey ass, CITY OF SANTA MONICA, a ‘muntotpal corporation ATTEST: City anager Approved as ty, form this~ iy aay of Lee 7 1948, P we Bae 78 rams op caizromita } comme OF Los acaas ) Om this 14th day of __Mev + 9B, before no, SCOTT A. MonENRY Notary Public in and for, said County and State, personally appeared Re M, DORTON 4 Imam to me to bo the _O2TY manson lof the City of Santa Wonton, and XK, 0, oRUBE , known to no to be the _GETY CLERK cf the Cty of Santa Monten, the muntstpal corporstion thet exeosted the irithin instant, and Imown to me to be the persons vo executed ‘the within instrument on behal€ of the corporation therein nanod and acknovtodged to me tat such corporation exeouted the sane. VEMRZES HY HAND and official aon, the day and your in thie certificate first atove written. Oe Couaty ana state. comsone ge i 88 Bes). Fee wuanases orsaroms ao ‘pao ave a O77 VSHGR vane SSW [scomMSOHNIs WUNLNS>_NoUYSoT] “GET '09 aNOHATTAL GHIVIDOSSY. OTS FIORE se ers enn072 LICR THADLIAPE VORIOHY went GESC/S CM OER esr £67 EXHIBIT D ( 3ACT NO, 4089(CCS) SANTA MONICA AIRPORT AGREEMENT section l. purpose. qhis Agreement resolves a series of disputes involving the santa Monica Airport (hereinafter “the Airport"). These disputes have taken various forms, including extensive complex litigation; In addition to expressing the mutual consent of the parties, including the City of Santa Monica (nereinafter “the City") and the Federal Aviation Administration hereinafter (“the FAA"), this Agreement responds to the concerns of local and national aviation interests ‘and residents of neighborhoods affected by noise fom the Airport. whe various Airport disputes have occurred over an extended period of time and have involved. a number of specific issues. In these disputes there have been two common factors: a. The impact on the community surrounding the Airport of noise from aircraft operating into and out of the Airport. b. Various restrictions and limitations imposed by tne city on the users of the Airport, and the effect of these restrictions on air traffic in the Los Angeles Metropolitan Region. By this Agreement the parties tnajeate ‘their willingness to approach the many varied Airport issues systematically and cooperatively. This Agreement describes Exh, D ene: specific points of agreenent between the Parties and provides © format within which issues arising in the future can be addressed and resolved.” A fundamental Purpose of this agreement is to expand and improve the communication, cooperation, and mutual understanding of the various perspectives of the parties, while recognizing and preserving their respective lege} rights. section 2. Basis for Agreement. “© ‘pis Agreement wast reached only after and“is the result of extensive study’and analysis of the many “aiggerent issues involving the Airport. The parties have had numerous meetings and extensive detailed discussions concerning the points which form the terms of this Agreement. There has been extensive involvement of Airport users and neighbors, including several public hearings and the participation of an Airport Working Group composed of representati es of a proad spectrum of interests and perspectives. ‘1a. Recognition of Legal principle: mis Agreement is based on a recognition of the legat rights and duties of the parties, a balancing of interests, and an awareness of facts indicating © resolution of conflict is practicable. tree underlying legal principles are the basis: for this’ Agreement: (4) The Airport is to be open and available to and for public use as an airport on fair and reasonable terms, Exh. D 83 without unjust discrimination, and without granting any exclusive rights prohibited by law. (ii) Pursuant to the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended, exclusive authority is vested in the FAA for the regulation of all aspects of air safety, the management and control of the safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace, and movement of aircraft through that airspace. under section 611 of that Act the FAA also has substantial responsibility for the reduction of aircraft noise. (iii) The City has the responsibility to manage the Airport, including the ability to take reasonable action designed to abate the impact of noise from aircraft operations on surréunding communities, in accordance with the principles of Santa Nonica Airport Association v. City of Santa Monica, 479 F.Supp. 927 (C-D+ Cal. 1979), affirmed, 59 p.24 100 (9th Cir. 1980); and British Airvays Board v. port Authority of New York, 558 F-2a 75 (2a Cir. 1977). 7 be Balancing of Factors. he fundamental basis for this Agreement involves the palancing of @ number of diverse factors- Studies and analysis have demonstrated and it is agreed that: (4) the Airport serves an important role in the regional and national system of air transportation and air commercey It has a vital and critical role in its function as a general aviation reliever for the primary airports in the area. AS @ reliever facility the Airport attracts and provides service to general aviation thereby diverting Exh. D 84 aircraft away from the air carrier airports and other heavily used airports located in the Greater Los Angeles area, study and analysis have confirmed this congestion and that other similar general aviation reliever airports in'the area are already heavily used and do not have the ability to accept oF absorb the service provides’ PY santa Monica Airport. (4k) The Airport is bounded on three sides Py densely populated residential areas, Noise from aircraft departing F——_=§=' operating within the Airport flight pattern, can have “an impact on ‘the quality of life of citizens of Sante Monica and Los Angel many residents in these areas have long complained to the city over the impact ‘of aircraft noise and demanded that the city take effective action with respect £0 aircraft noise. Factors Leading to Agreement ‘mre factors were critical to the achievement of this Agreement: (4) The willingness of the parties *° approach the Airport issues with an open mind and to consider imaginative and previously untried alternative concepts, with lL ——— the interests CS —=—C —=$™—s™——_—STC explore and consider many different alternatives was gritical in achieving compromises designed to balance che many factors involved. Exh, D 85 (4i) The recognition that the Airport is poorly designed and organized. “Consequently it is agreed that the airport can be redesigned s9 95 to maintain the current ever, quantity, and type of services provided by the Airport and to provide “residual” land which could be made available to the City for other uses compatible with Airport operations - (444) The recognition that any hoise problem at the airport can be adéressed. through & noise mitigation program focused on a cooperative effort to, reduce noise levels of aircragt using the Airport, by ‘careful design of Airport gacilities and ground buffers, and PY sensitive placement of flight paths. t achieve noiae ‘abatement consistent with safety: section 3. Scope and Duration. qhis Agreement states the principles and plans for the operation, of the Airport. All prior agreements between the parties. concerning the Airport, and all actions of the parties during the duration of this Agreement, .ghall be interpreted consistently with this Agreement. This Agreement shall be effective from the date of its execution until July 1, 2015+ nt_of Legal Dispu L section 4. S$ qnis ‘Agreement serves to resolve all existing legal aisputes among the parties. In this context it constitutes a gettienent Agreement applicable to all existing Litigation Exh, D and/or administrative complaints pending between the parties. Following its acceptance and execution by the parties, 8 copy may be filed with any court oF gaministrative body where any Litigation or complaint is pending as evidence of the resolution and settienent agreed to by the parties. section 5. Airport Layout Plan. qhe parties are aware that the City approved a Airport Planand Noise Mitigation Program for the Airport at the city Council Meeting of November 15, 1983. Airport it a a me Mrport Jayou Plap,submitted to and approxed by (city Map No.5! dy £8 the FAK on incorporated by reference into this Agreement’ © a shall guide the development and improvement of the Airport for the guration of this Agreement. .This Airport Layout Plan may be referred to herein as the “Airport Layout Plan." qhe Airport Layout Plan shifts a substantial portion of aeronautica: south side of the Airport to the north side. Some 1 services from their present location ‘on the aeronautical services will be maintained on the goush side of the Airport. Additionally, the Aizport Layout Plan makes Pe yore « aubatancisieportion of che: asa) los. o2 a oo southeast’ section of the Airport, generally along Bundy prive and Airport Avenue, and adjacent to Clover Park, for. uses compatible with Airport operations, This would provide an expanded employment and revenue base and increased Phe conten cieye @rhe penciss | aleve! bl ae Exh, D tayout Plan and noise abatement program described in this agreement provide a reasonable redesign of thé Airport which palances aeronautical needs and community concerns. section 6. Consent to Use of Land. ne FAA, as the successor to the Civil Aeronautics peministrator, approves the boundary of the Airport as shown in the Airport Layout Map, consents to the use of land designated ss parkland and residual land therein for other haa airport and aviation purposes, releases the City and tnis parkland and residual land from any and ali conditions, covenants, and restrictions imposed by the Instrument of qransfer dated August 10, 1948, Deed No. 4 (ccs), and agrees chat 'the City may develop such parkland and residual land in accordance ‘with the terms of this Agreement, ana in conformity-with State and local planning law and, noise compatibility standards. However, such development shall not occur prior to the execution of leases with full-service fixed base operators in accordance with Section 14 of this Agreement. section 7. Material Terms of Agreement. ghe parties agree that certain points were specifically bargained for and constitute material terms of this Agreement.’ These. terms shall not be altered without tne mutual consent of the parties, which shall not Pe unreasonably withheld. The material terms of this Agreement include: Exh. D 85 The City's obligation to operate the Airport tor the duration of this Agreement (section 8). b. The runway/taxiway configuration as shown on the Airport Layout Plan (Sections 9 and 10). ¢. Aircraft parking and tie-down space (Section 13). 4. Fixed base operator space (Section 14). e. The 95 4B Single Event Noise Exposure Level maximum noise limit (section 16). £. The development of a tiered noise level system based on the’ performance capability of particular aircraft (sections 17 and 18). g. The process for implementation of the City's Noise _ Mitigation Program (Section 19). h. The maintenance of the existing departure restriction (Section 22), the existing and possible future. limitation on helicopter operations (Section 24), and the existing and possible future limitation on pattern flying (Section 25). ° It is recognized and agreed to that the parties will cooperate with each other and rationally analyze issues as they arise, and that any teri of this Agreement may be modified by the terms of any future agreements between the parties, provided such future agreements. expressly indicate an intention to modify this Agreement. it is agreed that any future grant agreements between tne City and the FAA which are designed’ to implement the programs covered by this Agreement, defined as those Exh, D 89 agreements for the federal funding of programs OF improvements intended to further this Agreement executed Peior econ vars ae shall be consistent with this agreement and shall not extend or alter the obligation of the city to operate, the Aizport under this Agreement, except as may be Fequired by federal statute: section 6. Commitment’ to Operate Airport qe City will operate and maintain the Airport as a ytapre functioning facility without derogation of its role as a general aviation reliever airport as described in gection 2(b)(1) of thie Agreement oF $6 capacity in terms EO ergo hensdvicen conte! alae and runway weight bearing strength until guly 1, 2015. The Airport will be capable of accommodating most ‘kinds of general aviation aircraft, generally consistent with Group IT Design geandards set forth in FAA Advisory CiFeuhey 150/5300.48 gated Fepruary 24, 1983. ‘ me chty agrees to improve the Airport physical Layout as shown in the Airport Layout, Plan and maintain the Airport and the facilities located on. the Airport. "section 9. Runway/Taxiway configuration. At the present time. the Santa Monica Airport has one runway designated 3/21 which fs 5,000 feet long and 150 feet wide. This runway will be continuously maintained in good operating condition by! the City: R11 presently installed air navigation facilities and Airport lighting systems Exh. D 80 (izes, Ady Traffic Control Tower, VOR: VASI, runway, lagnts, etc.) will remain in their present location. It is recognized that the VASI lights may be relocated if the landing threshold is displaced pursuant £0 Section 12. Nothing in this Agreement prevents or precludes the replacement or upgrading of the present facilities and systems with new or technologically improved equipment, facilities or systems as necessary OF appropriate. At some future date new technology equipment euch as & microwave landing system (MLS) may be installed; .the city will be given priority for the installation of MLS equipment as it jis developed and becomes available. gection 10. Runway Exit System. mme runway/taxiway system wili be’ redesigned so as *° establish designated angled exits from the runway, also known as high speed exits, in lieu of the present system. in addition, # centrally located area adjacent So the runway will be established, designated, and maintained to permit aircraft to exit the runway without using @ désignated taxiway. Additional taxiway, Airport apron and aircraft parking facilities will be provided in accordance with the Airport Layout Plan. section 11. Airspace Protection Criteria. standard FAA airspace protection criteria will Pe applied to maintain clear zones at the ends of the runway as Srr——C—C——sEs—S—S be 10 Exh. D 91 permitted laterally from the center line of the runway for the full length and on either side of the runway for a Qistance of 150 feet. That constitutes the edge of the safety ares: Fron the edge of the runway safety area extending outward from the runway, structures will be permitted provided they meet the standard FAA 7 to 1 ratio (i.e. for every 7 feet of distance laterally there can be 1 foot of height added). section 12. Displaced Landing Threshold. qhe City has indicated a desire to modify the existing runway by displacing the threshold by 500 feet for airplanes landing at the Airport. There is some uncertainty regarding tne effect of such an action in. two areas: (1) whether this action would increase or decrease noise (2) what effect, if any, there would be on air safety and ‘he ability of the Airport to provide the level and type of service described in Sections 2(b)(i) and 8- tn order to analyze the potential effects of displacing the landing’ threshold by 500 feet, the parties agree to establish’ a trial program for & period not to exceed one (1). year during which the effects of displacing the landing threshold by 500 feet will be investigated. a preliminary test will be conducted f° determine if enreshold displacement is likely to increase OF decrease community noise impact. If it is determined that noise immct is likely to inerease, no further testing will be performed and the landing threshold will not be displaced. ul Exh. D 92 1g it is not determined that noise impact is likely to increase, the landing threshold will Pe displaced for a a rrC— @ displacement will be examined. and the various effects of threshol A final determination concerning this question of e py the City after ruaway displacement will be mad consultation with the FAA at the conclusion of this study pased on’ the results of the study. This final determination Mer ea wade acrany, poines)2) 2 ime ea the designated one-year period. The parties agree to cooperate in. the design and conduct of the tests and to consult concerning the data obtained. The full runway length of 5,000: feet yal} be available at all times for takeoff and will be SF ——r——C_==§se=s situation+ section 13. Aixeraft Parking Space and Fuel Service. ghe City will provide and maintain sufficient space to permit the parking or tie-down of at least 550 based aircraft and 40 transient aircraft. These aircraft tie-down or parking. facilities for based aircraft will: be allocated and made available by the City on reasonable terms to all Airport users includitg fixed base operators located on the Airport and individuals who wish to lease tie-down space parking for transient aircraft will also be from the Ci available on reasonable terms, In allocating this aircraft parking space the City will provide sufficient space to park Weer oe Gietercney-ypes) Roving ioc oe, ule aioe 12 Exh. D 93, different Lengths, and different power plants he mix of aircraft to be accommodated at the Airport shall be consistent with the present mix of aircraft now based at the airport and the-mix forecast fer the future 38 shown in chapter 121 of the Airport Master Plan study dated October, ioe3. Aireraft fuel service will be available at the Airport: section 14. Fixed Base Operators. qhe City will provide sufficient’ space for the location and operation of three (3) full service fixed base operators (FBO). The City will lease to each full service FBO sufficient space to provide a full range of aeronautical services including but not limited to: aircraft and avionics sales; aircraft and avionics maintenance, service and repair facilities: flight school and training service: and charter and air taxd service. It is recognized that the needs of each FRO may be different in terms of total space or acreage required. FBO leases will Pe consistent with the terms. of this Agreement, and contingent on compliance with the City's non-discriminatory policies and regulations. The City will provide access to sufficient space at reasonable rental rates to enable each FBO to conduct a4 viable business, including space for an office structure, training facilities, aircraft and automobile parking and an aircraft maintenance hangar. tn addition, the City will provide sufficient space for the location and operation of limited oF specialized 13 Exh. D 94 fixed base operators, It is recognized that these FBOs do Be eat a) of mocts space) oc|@ ruil) sotvice coo bance say generally provide limited aeronautical service (e.g-, avionics maintenance, repair or installation; airplane propeller repair, maintenance or installation). In order to permit all FBOs, whether full service or engaged in specialized aeronautical activity, to conduct their business activity on a reasonable basis, the City wilt lease sufficient space to them consistent with the approved Airport Layout Plan on fair and reasonable terms on @ financial basis comparable to those used at other ‘similar airports in the region for a sufficient term of years to enable them to amortize their costs and have the opportunity to make @ profit. whe parties recognize and agree that it is appropriate for the City to exercise its proprietary authority to ‘adopt ordinances and regulations applicable to, lessees and users of the Airport consistent with the terms of this Agreement. section 15, Noise Abatement Principles. qhe parties recognize and acknowledge that the achievement of the abatement of aircraft noise to the extent technologically practicable and consonant with air safety is consistent with the function, role, and, service provided by the Airport. To this end the parties agree to cooperate and work toward the abatement of aircraft noise by the following described methods. va Exh, D 95 ine parties are aware that the City has adopted a noise Mitigation Program as an integral part of its Airport Plan. The City's Noise Mitigation Program is intended to abate aircraft noise tothe extent technologically practicable and consonant with air safety, and to meet a noise reduction goal equivalent to an approximate 4 4B reduction in the Community Noise Equivalence Level (CNEL) from the 1982 levels attributable to aircraft no Within the framework of and consistent with the material terms of tenis Agreement, the City expects to meet this noise goal by tne application of the material terms and concepts set out in this Agreénent. ‘the parties agree that progress toward achieving noise reduction goals through implementation of the Noise Mitigation Program will be carefully studied and analyzed. Alternative measures to abate noise consistent with this Agreement will be evaluated for their effectiveness in reducing noise, effect on air safety and air traffic, and effect on the utility of the Airport: Section 16. Maximum SENEL Limit. qhe current SENEL aircraft noise limit of 100 4B as measured at the existing noise monitoring sites established by the city Will be established and maintained at 95 43. the parties believe that substantially all of the currently based or transient aircraft which have used the Airport in recent years can be operated safely using safe noise abatement operating procedures and meet this reduced SENEL Limitation. 1s Exh. D section 17. Performance Based Noise biMIs: qe parties believe that many of the aircraft. using the Airport can be operated more quietly using safe noise apatement flight operating procedures. Consequently the parties agree to cooperate in the development of a program designed to establish tiered noise levels for different types of kinds of aircraft (rather than a single specified maximum noise level limit) to encourage all aircraft operators to use safe noise abatenent operating procedures in order to minimize. the noise impact of their aircraft use. ‘he parties believe this performance-based noise reduction program is ‘capable of resulting in reduced community Noise Equivalence Level (CNEL) from the operation of aircraft. he expectation of achieving such noise reduction is pased on the City's analysis of actual measured aircraft flights at the Airport. The actual results to be obtained from implementation of a performance-based noise program will depend on various: factors, including the degree to which all Airport users and governmental entities cooperaté in implementing ahd complying with procedures and practices established pursuant to this Agreement. section 18. Experimental Nature of Noise Progrs! qne parties recognize and acknowledge that the concept of tiered noise level limits based on the demonstrated noise performance capabilities of different types and kinds of aircraft is unique. Application of this concept has, to the unowleage of the parties, never been attempted pricr te this 16 Exh. D time anywhére; it will require the difficult task of eetaplishing ‘valid and reliable data base for analysis and classification. Its application also requires creating = classification system which identifies the performance based noise levels for the wide range of diverse aircraft types operating at this Airport as well as the process of placing particular individual aircraft ine particular noise performance category for this Airport. while the parties believe this tiered concept they also acknowledge that it The parties agree to work reasonably applied can Work, is experimental in nature. cooperatively to develop this program. To this end the City agrees to provide ‘co the FAA the data developed by and Gime rice e cgrem: 7 ThoqeM\) cctcet nce Dacca cc) aoa assistance to the City including but not limited to review of the data provided, review. of any data. analysis obtained py the city, and the FAA may conduct and make available to the City its own analysis of the data collected. The FAA iil make its Integrated Noise Model Computer Program available to the City. section 19. Implementation of Noise Abatement Program. qhe parties agree that the process of implementing the noise abatement program should proceed in stages, with regular measuring and analysis, full communication and cooperation, and adjustment as analysis progresses: This Exh. D { } | process will generally conprise four (4) phases, to be lemented as follows: a. Commencement. of Program execution of this Agreement, the City will imp! upon commence implementation of the noise abatement Program: The first implementation phase will include: the adoption of regulations instituting the noise abatement program: the establishment of @ system to promote communications and yoluntary compliance; the definition of the terms of scientific analyses and experiments to be performed; the gathering of data using the City’s existing noise monitoring equipment; and the design, procurements and installation of new noise equipment necessary to conduct the full program. bp. Experimental Test Period- commencing from the date the new noise equipment #6 operational, there will be a one-year ‘est period wherein appropriate operating procedures and categorical noise Linits are developed and analyzed, and the effect of other noise mitigation measures ané factors is evaluated. At the conclusion of this experimental period, the regulations would be adjusted in accordance with the results of the atudy+ c. Evaluation Test Period. Aer Ce wit) Ge in Light of the results of the Experimental Tes Period, there will be @ one-year period. in which the noise abatement program as adjusted is evaluated in order to determine 18 Exh. D 99 progress, toward achievement of the City's Noise Goal. There will also be a periodic evaluation of the program by all parties in terms of its relationship to and measurement of progress toward achievement of noise ebatement generally and aviation noise asa specific contributor to community noise. Included in this review will be an analysis of the extent to which the ability of the City to achieve its noise reduction goals is affected by noise sources other than aircraft noises Q. Adjustment of Program. the results of the Evaluation Test Period will be analyzed by the’ parties. If the city's. noise goal is not mot and analysis indicates that eircraft noise exceeds noise from other sources in the community, the City will-analyze alternative noise mitigation measures designed to assist in the achievement of the City's aircraft noise reduction goal, including possible regulations intended to reduce aircraft noise attributable to the volume of pattern flying. That analysis will consider the effect of these alternative measures in terms of both: noise abatement results expected and the role, function, and service provided by the Airport. before the City implements any such alternative measures, it will consult with the FAA and other interested parties, it peing explicitly agreed, however, that no material terms of this Agreement can be amended or modified without the agreement of the parties to this Agreement. 19 Exh. D 100 Section 20, Enforcement During Implementation. qhe noise abatement program will emphasize pilot education and communication with individual pilots regarding effective and safe noise abatement “operating: procedures. whe cooperation and advice of pilots, FBOs, and interested members of aviation and neighborhood communities willbe sought qhe 95.4B maximum SENEL limit will be enforced by the city using civil sanctions varying according, to the willfulness, severity, and frequency of violations. with respect to pilots who repeatedly operate an aircraft in Yiclation of this limit, the City may after investigation, to assure that ‘a violation was not related to extraneous factors beyond the pilot's control such as loss of power, action to avoid other aircraft, or unusual weather conditions; take actions such as formal warning, imposition of ‘civil penalties, or, after informing the FAA, exclusion from the Airport. The parties recognize that certain types of aircraft are.estimated to be unable to meet the 95 dB maximum limit under any condition or procedure. Operators of such aircraft, upon violation of maximum noise limits, may be requested not to return to the Aiport. If such aircraft do return and violate the noise limits after such request, they may be excluded from the Airport through formal administrative action. It is recognized that disobedience 20 Exh, D 701 of a formal City administrative action +s subject to additional sanctions. puring the, initial implementation phase described in section 19(a), the City will, establish two performance-based noise limits at 95 dB and 90° dB, based on initial noise measurements and data analysis. During *he secorid phase of the noise abatement program described in section 19(b). aircraft will be placed into particular noise Limit categories based on the demonstrated noise performance history, of Hhat ,aircragt and advice provided to the city by its consultants, the FAA, and users of the Mrport: it is expected that noise categories will be initially established at 95 ab, 90 4B, end 87 dB, consistent with the measurements ana analysis performed in conjunction with the noise abatement program. qhe parties expressly ‘recognize that there is 8 need to collect @ substantial amount of additional gata on all types of aircraft which operate at “ene Airport. When that “data base is developed the parties recognize that additional or different categories.may be created a well as the identification ané placement of various specific aircraft jnto a particular category, or the adjustment of the noise level categories. puring the phases of this program described in Section fey cra Panels (necoopetation wie one Ca.Ys aa. oo other interested person or persons, make reasonable efforts to Mend (mcora) and ounce) (piccce: oem 28 ee ar Exh.D 102 operate their aircraft so as £0 eliminate unnecessary noise jn the communities adjacent to the Airport. Similarly, during the implementation phases of this program described in sections 19(a), (b), and (ce), the City will not take formal administrative action against pilots who operate eneir aireraft to or from the Airport in a manner which exceeds either the 90 GB or 87 4B SENEL Limit but does not exceed the maximum 95 ab SENEL limit. section 21. Cooperation in Enforcement. ne City and the PAA ‘acknowledge and agree that vis-a-vis third, parties each of them is responsible for the enforcement of their own respective regulations and that nether of them has any responsibility for oF authority to enforce any regulations established by the other: However, poth the City and the FAA recognize ‘hat it is in their mutual interest to cooperate and exchange relevant information necessary to the successful implementation of this Agreement. section 22. Night Departure Restriction qhe parties recognize that the City has established = prohibition on takeoffs from the Airport between 11:00 p.m, ang 7:00 &-m. on Nonday through. Friday, and between 11:00 p.m, and, 6100 a.m. on Saturday and Sunday This prohibition jg not applicable in emergency situations. This regulation js included as a material term of this Agreement and is expected to remain in effect. It is agreed that it will not 22 Exh. D 103 pe anended of nodified without the prior agreement Of tne parties section 23. Golf Course Turn: As a noise abatement measure FAA will establish a y 21 which will route standard departure procedure for runval aircraft approximately 10 degrees south of the present y alignment routing so as to route air traffic over the Additionally, FAA will study the runwa: golf course area. possibility of establishing an offset localizer’ approach to runway 21+ If approved by the City and installed the offset peooiieer: would erst i 0tertn) neon until a microwave landing system can be installed at the Airport. Before establishing such an offset localizer approach PAA will analyze and advise the City of wnat effect, if any, that facility would have in terms of providing some noise abatement + me effect of the Golf Course Turn on aircraft noise impact in. Santa Monica and Los, Angeles neighborhoods will be analyzed “dueing the implementation of the noise abatement prograin. section 24. Helicopters. qne parties recognize that noise from helicopters can have an impact on residential communities around the Ritrere: imciuding: neighoot Nees. sate not significantly ted by noise from fixed-wing aircraft. The parties agree to develop and implements @ designated helicopter 23 Exh, D 104 janding, area, a preferred helicopter flight path, and a helicopter flight altitude that provides maximum noise abatement consistent with safety. qne parties recognize that helicopters are an important part of the general aviation fleet, and are used for military, law enforcement and medical purposes, and will be permitted to use the Airport consistent with noise regulations. me parties agree that the current ban on helicopter pattern flying will remain in effect. whe parties recognize that the Airport is not currently used as a base for helicopter sales, training or maintenance. The’ parties agree that helicopter noise will pe evaluated as part of the noise abatement program study. pependent on the results of that study the City may, after consultation with the parties, deny access to the Airport to ah FBO, “@ substantial portion of whose activity involves heticopter operations. During the pendency of that study, the City is not required to leasé space on the Airport to ari Fao, a substantial portion, of whose activity involves helicopter operations. Section 25, Pattern Flying Restrictions the parties recognize that the City has established a prohibition on touch-and-go or stop-and-go operations at the Airport after sunset and before 7:00 a.m, on Monday through priday as well as all day on Saturday, Sunday, and legal holidays. Exh. D 105 qhis restriction ts expectea to remain an eases pending the results of the noise abatement study described in section 19. The parties agree that the pattern flying restriction described above may bé modified by the City, after consultation with the FAA, following the completion and based on the results of the noise abatement study. section 26. Design for Noise Abatement. he Airport Layout Plan includes several design features intended to provide mitigation of aircraft noise. qhese include designated, engine run-up areas and noise buffers to mitigate ground noise, designated helicopter operation areas, and the establishment of a touch-and-go line. Structures constructed under the Airport Plan will be designed to assist in mitigating noise impacts. section 27. Analysis of Future Alternatives. he parties recognize and acknowledge that there may be other feasible noise abatement aétions possible but not described in this Agreement. Programs to acquire homes and resell them with easements or to provide insulation of pujlaings may provide additional means to achieve the City's noise abatement goals. New or improved flight operating techniques or aircraft modification technology may be developed. The parties agree to keep each other informed of progress in the area of noise.abatement technology and techniques which beconé available as means of reducing the impact of aircraft noise on the community. 25 Exh, D 108 Section 28. Federal Funding. qhe parties recognize and acknowledge that the accomplishment of the program described in this Agreement, including but not limited to the redesign of the Airport and thé implementation of the noise abatement program will require the expenditure of funds. The FAA agrees that it will, consistent with this Agreement and its nationwide program, provide: financial assistance to the City for those Airport. projects-eligible for such essistance pursuant ‘to the Airport and Airway Improvement Act’ of 1962 and other funding sources, and will accord the City a high priority for such financial assistance. These funds will be made available for many different purposes including Airport planning, Airport improvement, “and A{Fport noise abatement projects consistent with the terms of this Agreement. Section 29. Commitment to Future Cooperation. the parties anticipate that from time to time in the future this Agreement may be supplemented and/or modified in order to accomplish its purposes. The parties agree to work cooperatively and consult: with each other and other interested persons to resolve any differences between them which may arise in the future and in particular to work cooperatively and consult with each other with respect to implementation of the tiered noise level concept based on demonstrated aircraft noise performance classification as well as any other proposal designed to effect noise abatement at the Airport. 26 Exh, D 107 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the/parties have caused this py, fa. Agreement to be executed this gay of January, 1984. CITY OF SANTA MONICA, a municipal’ corporation HN He City Manager APPROVED AS TO: FORM: Dart na ROBERT MW. MYERS City Attorney FEDERAL AVIATION: ADMINISTRATION HOLL. MICHAEL 3.” FENELLO Deputy Administrator wT HOMER C. McCLURE Director, Western Region | Exh. D 108 Exh. D 109

You might also like