Former Huntington Beach Mayor Kim Carr said she feels “100% vindicated” after a lawsuit against her related to the Pacific Airshow was dropped earlier this month.
Pacific Air Show LLC filed for dismissal of a lawsuit against Carr in federal court on Nov. 4.
The lawsuit was related to the cancellation of the final day of the 2021 air show, following an oil spill off the coast of Surf City.
It alleged in part that Carr, the mayor at the time, unilaterally canceled the air show, motivated by her personal feelings toward air show operator Kevin Elliott and a need for personal attention in furtherance of her political career.
Carr has repeatedly said she did not unilaterally cancel the air show and in fact did not have authority to do so as mayor.
“As I said all along, it was a frivolous, baseless lawsuit,” Carr said Thursday. “I knew I was in the right all along, and it’s unfortunate that this lawsuit was used as a mechanism to defame me, smear me, and it was all done for malicious intent.”
Elliott, the owner of Pacific Airshow LLC and executive director of the air show, did not return messages seeking comment Thursday.
Huntington Beach City Atty. Michael Gates announced in May 2023 a multimillion-dollar settlement with Pacific Airshow LLC due to the cancellation, with the full settlement finally being released to the public last summer.
However, the lawsuit against Carr remained.
Orange County Superior Court Judge Jonathan Fish ruled in Carr’s favor on June 11. His ruling stated that even if Carr had unilaterally canceled the last day of the air show, it “qualifies as a discretionary act within the meaning of [government code].”
On June 26, Pacific Airshow LLC submitted an amended complaint.
Another demurrer hearing had been scheduled for Tuesday, but Pacific Airshow LLC filed for dismissal on Nov. 4.
“We were ready to go, and I am 100% confident that we would have been victorious again,” Carr said. “At the end of the day, I think the judge was pretty clear that elected officials acting in their official capacity are immune from private lawsuits. I really did not see a path to victory for [Pacific Airshow LLC], nor did my attorney, and I think that [Elliott] must have felt the same way at this point.
“I think the bigger question is, why did he continue to sue me after getting this sweetheart settlement from the majority council? … I think it was mean and vindictive.”
Carr said she believed it wasn’t coincidental that the lawsuit coincided with her 2022 run for state Senate. Carr, a Democrat, lost the District 36 race to Janet Nguyen, a Republican.
Carr also said that Pacific Airshow LLC had no case against the city, just like it had no case against her. She called the settlement a “sham” that should be investigated.
She said she had been looking forward to that year’s air show, especially coming out of COVID-19.
“I think we can all agree, the air show is cool,” Carr said. “We all like the air show. I like the air show, but you don’t subsidize it through a settlement of a frivolous lawsuit and then try to hide behind that lawsuit and not disclose all of the details to the public. You need to be open and transparent when you’re giving the public taxpayer dollars away to a private entity.”
The California Joint Legislative Audit Committee voted in May to approve an audit of the Pacific Airshow settlement. Last month, state auditor Grant Parks sued the city to try to get it to hand over records and comply with the audit.
Gates has evoked charter city protections and called the audit “another example of state overreach.”
Gates previously has characterized negotiations with Pacific Airshow, LLC as tense, prior to the settlement being released. He has also repeatedly stated that the reason the full settlement was not made public was possible litigation against Amplify Energy, which owns the pipeline that broke in 2021.
The city recently announced a $5.25 million settlement with Amplify, reached without litigation.
On Thursday, Gates called Carr’s claim that the lawsuit was dropped because it didn’t necessarily have merit “a real stretch,” although he added that he hasn’t spoken to Elliott or his attorney about the lawsuit being dropped or the reason why.
Gates said he plans to present to the public, likely at a future City Council meeting early next year, a complete timeline of everything that happened to put things into a better perspective.
“It’s nice to see that conflicts are going away so we can move forward,” he said. “I think her drawing attention to it is pretty peculiar because at this point, it is old news. At this point, too, her voice in the community is pretty irrelevant, especially after the latest election results. It just seems like she’s attention-hungry and trying to stay relevant … I think Huntington Beach has sent a pretty clear, loud message that they want to move on, that they embrace the air show.”
Carr responded that the lawsuit being dropped was not old news, as it just happened last week.
“[Pacific Airshow’s lawsuit against Huntington Beach] never, ever should have been settled by the city,” she said. “The way it should have been done was to dismiss the lawsuit, bring the item back to the council, have a discussion about it and then talk about what sort of government subsidies you’re going to provide so that Kevin can continue to have the Pacific Airshow in Huntington Beach. That’s the proper way to do it.
“Whoever devised this scheme really didn’t think it through, but here’s where we are now. The California state auditor will have their opportunity to open the books and disclose exactly what’s going on. But, in the meantime, the residents have to pay for this.”
In a statement made when the full settlement was released, Mayor Gracey Van Der Mark maintained that the settlement represented good judgment “in order to avoid lengthy litigation and the risk of trial, and also to ensure the return of the annual air show to Huntington Beach, and the over $100 million in economic benefit that the air show brings to the region every year.”