The Pinocchio Chronicles #7: Palomar, County & FAA, #294

Crawling through politicians minds is not for the faint of heart. But that is what ethics and election lawyers do. My UCLA law school classmate, Tony Alperin, mined their minds many years ago as the LA Ethics Commission senior adviser.

We talked occasionally when a conflict question arose involving a Board of Harbor Commissioner member. Here’s what I learned.

The Way It Should Work

Ethics lawyers advise politicians how to comply with ethics laws. What political donations politicians can accept. When actual conflicts of interest exist. When their vote on a matter will result in a direct or indirect financial benefit.

Even when no actual conflict exists, when should the appearance of a conflict require politicians to disqualify themselves from acting on a matter.

The politicians do not have to guess. Before voting, they can request an opinion from lawyers – city attorneys, county counsels, or the California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC). But very often the politicians do not want to ask for an opinion. And act at their peril.

How It Does Work

The FBI recently completed a Los Angeles sting operation resulting in a guilty plea by a city council member who apparently accepted a bribe to push a real estate deal. (City Watch, April 26, 2020, “The LA Corruption-Buck Stops with Garcetti, Wesson, and Martinez” by Jack Humphreville).

Ethics issues are not new to the San Diego Board of Supervisors either. In 2015, the FPPC told former Supervisor Bill Horn – who pushed a 900-foot McClellan-Palomar Airport (Palomar) runway extension as does Jim Desmond - that Horn was disqualified from acting on a proposed North County large Lilac Hills housing development not far from a Horn property.

The Lilac Hills case shows that a supervisor does not have to immediately benefit from a vote to have a conflict of interest.

Tony would be saddened about the LA corruption. He spent his life coaxing and cajoling LA politicians to request opinions, to provide the facts, and to live by the City Attorney conflict of interest rulings.

Should Supervisor Jim Desmond (JD) Vote on Matters Affecting Palomar Airport?

Long before JD arrived on the scene, questions should have arisen about the way the Board of Supervisors and the Palomar Airport Advisory Committee (PAAC) controlled Palomar Airport.

In part, Palomar gets its revenues from tariff charges aircraft operators incur when using Palomar, such as aircraft landing fees. These tariff fees should be adjusted at least every five years to account for inflation. Yet it appears that some Palomar tariff fees went unchanged for 20 to 30 years.

Is it a coincidence that over time several PAAC members have had business interests at Palomar and that former Supervisor Horn appointed and now Supervisor Desmond appoints the PAAC members?

We don’t yet have enough facts to know if Supervisor Desmond should disqualify himself from voting on Palomar matters. He has said that he is a commercial airline pilot. Presumably he has made hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, from that job.

We don’t know if he ever piloted corporate aircraft or has an interest in doing so. We don’t know if he piloted while he was the San Marcos Mayor, whether he pilots now, or intends to in the future. A Board of Supervisor vote to promote high-end corporate aircraft using Palomar will benefit any commercial pilot who wants to work for a corporation.

All the foregoing facts would be relevant to a county counsel or the FPPC deciding whether Supervisor Desmond would benefit financially from his Palomar related Board of Supervisor decisions or would appear to benefit.

The honorable thing for Supervisor Desmond to do would be to request a conflict of interest opinion and provide all the facts needed.

What would ethics attorney Tony Alperin say? We don’t know. He died of a heart attack at 56 after dealing with the politicians.