Legal Opinions of the Attorney General -
Search for Opinions (1980 - Current)

Search for opinions by:
    1. Opinion Number (e.g., 12-301);
    2. Official Citation (e.g., 95 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 1); or
    3. Word or Phrase from the text of the Opinion's Question or Conclusion.

Opinion Question Conclusion
24-701 SANDRIDGE PARTNERS, L.P., has applied for leave to sue MICHAEL SULLIVAN in quo warranto to remove him from public office on the Board of Trustees of the Tulare Lake Reclamation District No. 761 (Reclamation District). The application asserts that Sullivan, while serving as a Reclamation District Trustee, assumed a second and incompatible public office on the Board of Directors of the Tulare Lake Basin Water Storage District (Water District), in violation of Government Code section 1099, and by doing so forfeited his seat on the Reclamation District Board. We conclude that there are substantial legal issues as to whether Sullivan’s two Board seats are legally incompatible, and as to whether he can be removed from the Reclamation District Board even though he recently resigned from the Water District Board. We further conclude that the public interest will be served by allowing the proposed quo warranto action to proceed. Consequently, the application for leave to sue is GRANTED.

Issued on October 31, 2024
Official Citation: 107 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 132
23-1101 May the same individual lawfully serve as a member of both the San Benito County Planning Commission and San Benito County Board of Education? No. Under Government Code section 1099, which prohibits the same individual from holding incompatible public offices, the same individual may not lawfully serve as a member of both the San Benito County Planning Commission and the San Benito County Board of Education.

Issued on May 1, 2024
Official Citation: 107 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 71
23-602 The San Joaquin Delta Community College District has applied to this office for leave to sue KATHLEEN GARCIA in quo warranto to remove her from serving as a member of the San Joaquin Delta Community College District Board of Trustees. The application asserts that Garcia, while serving on that board, assumed a second and incompatible office as a member of the Eastside Rural Fire Protection District Board of Trustees in violation of Government Code section 1099, and by doing so forfeited her seat on the College District board. We conclude that there is a substantial legal issue as to whether Garcia is simultaneously holding incompatible offices. Consequently, and because the public interest will be served by allowing the proposed quo warranto action to proceed, the application for leave to sue is GRANTED.


Issued on November 30, 2023
Official Citation: 106 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 112
23-302 1. Under state law, may an appointed public member of the City of San Diego Audit Committee concurrently serve as: (a) an appointed public member of the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) TransNet Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee; (b) an appointed public member of the SANDAG Audit Policy Advisory Committee; or (c) the Internal Auditor of the San Diego Metropolitan Transit System?

2. Would the City Council of San Diego violate state law by appointing a member of the public to the City Audit Committee if doing so would result in the appointee holding incompatible public offices in violation of Government Code section 1099? 		1. As to (a) and (b), an appointed public member of the City Audit Committee may not serve concurrently as an appointed public member of either the SANDAG TransNet Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee or the SANDAG Audit Policy Advisory Committee. Such concurrent service would violate Government Code section 1099, which prohibits serving in legally incompatible public offices.

As to (c), an appointed public member of the City Audit Committee may serve concurrently as the Internal Auditor of the San Diego Metropolitan Transit System without violating section 1099, because the Internal Auditor position is not a public office. Such concurrent service also would not violate Government Code section 1126’s prohibition against engaging in incompatible outside activities, unless the City Council determines that serving as the System’s Internal Auditor is inconsistent with the duties of a City Audit Committee member. Other state laws prohibiting financial and personal conflicts of interest would not prohibit the concurrent holding of these positions either. Those laws generally apply to particular government transactions or decisions, not the simultaneous holding of government positions, and, in any event, the request does not reference any type of financial or personal conflict.

2. No. The City Council would not violate state law by appointing a member of the public to the City Audit Committee if doing so would result in the appointee holding incompatible public offices in violation of Government Code section 1099. Although section 1099(b) provides that a public official who accepts a second, legally incompatible public office thereby forfeits the first office held, neither section 1099, nor any other authority we are aware of, provides that an appointing authority violates or is subject to any sanction under state law by making such an appointment.

Issued on November 30, 2023
Official Citation: 106 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 79
23-203 The City of California City has applied to this office for leave to sue KAREN MACEDONIO in quo warranto to remove her from public office as a member of the City Council. The application asserts that Macedonio, while serving on the City Council, assumed a second and incompatible public office as a member of the East Kern Health Care District Board of Directors, in violation of Government Code section 1099, and by doing so forfeited her seat on the City Council. We conclude that there is a substantial legal issue as to whether Macedonio is simultaneously holding incompatible public offices. Consequently, and because the public interest will be served by allowing the proposed quo warranto action to proceed, the application for leave to sue is GRANTED.

Issued on May 18, 2023
Official Citation: 106 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 26
22-1001 The DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY has applied to this office for leave to sue DAVID ARGUDO in quo warranto to remove him from his public office as a member of the La Puente City Council. The application asserts that Argudo, while serving on the La Puente City Council, assumed a second and incompatible public office as a member of the La Puente Valley County Water District Board of Directors, in violation of Government Code section 1099, and by doing so forfeited his seat on the La Puente City Council. We conclude that there is a substantial legal issue as to whether Argudo is simultaneously holding incompatible public offices. Consequently, and because the public interest will be served by allowing the proposed quo warranto action to proceed, the application for leave to sue is GRANTED.

Issued on January 26, 2023
Official Citation: 106 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 10
80-814 Would it be a conflict of interest for a county supervisor of a county which is included within the Mountain Counties Air Basin to contract with the air basin to provide it with air pollution consulting services if the supervisor does not participate in any transaction or decision of his own board relating to air pollution? It would not be a conflict of interest for a county supervisor of a county which is included within the Mountain Counties Air Basin to contract with the air basin to provide it with air pollution consulting services if the supervisor does not participate in any transaction or decision as either supervisor or consultant which would further his “financial interests” within the meaning of section 87100 of the Government Code or which would further other “personal” interests within the common law doctrine concerning such conflicts. However, such contract could, and very well may be “incompatible” with his duties as an ex officio county air pollution control district board member under the proscriptions of section 1126 of the Government Code.

Issued on December 30, 1980
Official Citation: 63 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 916
22-802 The application alleges that Keefer’s service on the County Board violates (1) Government Code section 1099, which prohibits holding incompatible public offices, and (2) Education Code section 1006, which makes school district employees ineligible to serve on a county board of education with jurisdiction over their district. We conclude that there are substantial issues of fact or law as to whether Keefer is (1) simultaneously holding incompatible public offices in violation of Government Code section 1099, and (2) serving on the County Board while an employee of a school district within the Board’s jurisdiction in violation of Education Code section 1006. Consequently, and because the public interest will be served by allowing the proposed quo warranto action to proceed, the application for leave to sue is GRANTED.

Issued on February 29, 2024
Official Citation: 107 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 20
80-308 May a deputy district attorney in Ventura County simultaneously hold either the elective office of recreation and park district director or school district trustee in that county? The elective offices of recreation and park district director and school district trustee are incompatible with the office of deputy district attorney of Ventura County. Accordingly, a deputy district attorney may not simultaneously hold either of those offices.

Issued on September 3, 1980
Official Citation: 63 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 710
80-516 In determining whether the offices of mayor of a general law city and director of an airport district with overlapping territory are incompatible offices, must actual clashes of duties and loyalties be found to exist, or is the potential for such clashes sufficient to render the offices incompatible? In determining whether the offices of mayor of a general law city and director of an airport district with overlapping territory are incompatible, it is not necessary to find that actual clashes of duties and loyalties presently exist, as the potential for such clashes is sufficient to render the offices incompatible.

Issued on July 22, 1980
Official Citation: 63 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 623
80-601 Are the offices of county planning commissioner and city councilman incompatible offices so that an individual may not simultaneously hold both offices? The offices of county planning commissioner and city councilman are incompatible offices; accordingly, an individual may not simultaneously hold both offices.

Issued on July 10, 1980
Official Citation: 63 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 607
22-403 May a member of the Nevada County Board of Supervisors concurrently serve as general manager for the Truckee Tahoe Airport District?
 No, a member of the Nevada County Board of Supervisors may not concurrently serve as general manager for the Truckee Tahoe Airport District because these are incompatible public offices.

Issued on June 17, 2022
Official Citation: 105 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 121
22-302 MARK TARDIF, a registered voter and resident of the Orange County Department of Education’s First Trustee District, has applied to this office for leave to sue REBECCA “BECKIE” GOMEZ in quo warranto to remove her from her public office as a member of the Orange County Board of Education representing the Department of Education’s First Trustee District. The application asserts that Gomez, while serving her term on the County Board of Education, assumed a second and incompatible public office as a member of the Tustin City Council, in violation of Government Code section 1099, and by doing so forfeited her seat on the Board of Education. We conclude that there is a substantial legal issue as to whether Gomez is simultaneously holding incompatible public offices as a member of both the Orange County Board of Education and the Tustin City Council. Consequently, and because the public interest will be served by allowing the proposed quo warranto action to proceed, the application for leave to sue is GRANTED.

Issued on May 5, 2022
Official Citation: 105 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 69
21-103 MELISSA LOUDEN has applied to this office for leave to sue TIM SHAW in quo warranto to remove him from his public office as a member of the Orange County Board of Education. The application asserts that Shaw, while serving his term on the County Board of Education, assumed a second and incompatible public office as a member of the La Habra City Council, in violation of Government Code section 1099, and by doing so forfeited his seat on the Board of Education. We conclude that there is a substantial legal issue as to whether Shaw is simultaneously holding incompatible public offices as a member of both the Orange County Board of Education and the La Habra City Council. Consequently, and because the public interest will be served by allowing the proposed quo warranto action to proceed, the application for leave to sue is GRANTED.

Issued on October 29, 2021
Official Citation: 104 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 58
21-201 THE CITY OF LANCASTER has requested our permission to sue proposed defendant MICHAEL RIVES in quo warranto to oust him from his public office as a member of the Board of Directors of the Antelope Valley Healthcare District. The City alleges that ouster is required on the ground that Rives also holds a second, incompatible, public office as a member of the Board of Trustees of the Antelope Valley Community College District, in violation of Government Code section 1099. There are substantial questions of law and fact as to whether membership on the Antelope Valley Healthcare District Board of Directors and the Antelope Valley Community College District Board of Trustees are incompatible public offices, thus requiring Rives to forfeit his first-held office on the Healthcare District Board of Directors. Consequently, and because the public interest would be served by allowing the action to proceed, the application for leave to sue in quo warranto is GRANTED.

Issued on July 15, 2021
Official Citation: 104 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 15
21-101 The IMPERIAL COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION requests leave to sue ANNETTE GONZALEZ-BUTTNER in quo warranto to oust her from her public office as a trustee of the Imperial County Board of Education. The quo warranto application alleges that ouster is required on the ground that Gonzalez-Buttner also holds a second, incompatible public office as a trustee of the Imperial Community College Board. We conclude that whether the doctrine of incompatible public offices precludes Annette Gonzalez-Buttner from simultaneously serving as a trustee of both the Imperial County Board of Education and the Imperial Community College Board presents substantial questions of law and fact that would ordinarily warrant a judicial resolution. Because Ms. Gonzalez-Buttner no longer holds the offices in question, however, we deny this quo warranto application as moot.

Issued on September 24, 2021
Official Citation: 104 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 47
80-815 Does the California National Guard have the authority to prohibit recreational uses on that portion of the Salinas River flowing through Camp Roberts? The California National Guard has the authority to prohibit recreational uses on that portion of the Salinas River flowing through Camp Roberts whenever such use would be incompatible with its use of Camp Roberts for military purposes.

Issued on June 9, 1981
Official Citation: 64 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 463
82-901 Are the offices of city councilman and school district board member incompatible where the city and the school district have territory in common? The offices of city councilman and school district board member are incompatible where the city and the school district have territory in common.

Issued on December 7, 1982
Official Citation: 65 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 606
83-103 1. Are the offices of trustee of a school district and city attorney of a city which is located within the school district incompatible under common law principles?

2. Under section 1128 of the Government Code, what circumstances, if any, would produce such incompatibility as between these offices so as to result in a forfeiture of the first office assumed? Is any such forfeiture automatic? 		1. The offices of trustee of a school district and city attorney of a city located within the school district are incompatible under common law principles.

2. Under the provisions of section 1128 of the Government Code, no forfeiture of either office ensues under any circumstances. Actual conflicts which may arise between the two offices held are to be dealt with by the officer on a transactional basis through appropriate abstention.

Issued on October 27, 1983
Official Citation: 66 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 382
82-705 1. Are the offices of county planning commissioner and city planning commissioner of a city in the same county incompatible offices?

2. May a county board of supervisors and city council of a charter city within the county provide by coordinate legislation for the simultaneous holding of these incompatible offices? 		1. The offices of county planning commissioner and city planning commissioner of a city in the same county are incompatible offices.

2. A county board of supervisors and city council of a charter city within the county may provide by coordinate legislation for the simultaneous holding of these incompatible offices.

Issued on September 29, 1983
Official Citation: 66 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 293
82-1207 1. Are the positions of fire chief of a county fire protection district and member of the board of supervisors of the same county incompatible offices?

2. If the fire chief were to waive his compensation as fire chief or were to act merely in the capacity of an uncompensated volunteer firefighter, would either of such actions obviate the incompatibility of office problems?

3. Would the incompatibility of office problems be avoided where the district board becomes an elective body? 		1. The position of fire chief of a county fire protection district and member of the board of supervisors of the same county are incompatible offices.

2. Waiver of salary by the fire chief would not obviate the incompatibility of office problems. However, resignation as fire chief and acting in the capacity of an uncompensated volunteer firefighter would obviate such problems.

3. Incompatibility of office problems would not be avoided where the district board becomes an elective instead of an appointive body.

Issued on May 27, 1983
Official Citation: 66 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 176
18-301 Proposed relator, Miguel Sanchez, requests leave to sue proposed defendant Leticia Prado in quo warranto to remove her from the public office of member of the Governing Board of the Vineland School District (School District trustee) on the ground that she has assumed a second, incompatible public office as a director of the Lamont Public Utility District (Utility District trustee), in violation of the ban on simultaneously holding incompatible offices set forth in Government Code section 1099. Leave to sue is granted because we find that a substantial issue of fact or law exists as to whether the offices of School District trustee and Utility District trustee are incompatible and cannot be held at the same time under Government Code section 1099, and therefore whether proposed defendant Leticia Prado has forfeited and must vacate her office of School District trustee.

Issued on April 19, 2019
Official Citation: 102 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 31
84-503 Do the positions of general manager of a county water district, the greater portion of which is located within county territory, and member of the board of supervisors of the same county constitute incompatible offices? The positions of general manager of a county water district, the greater portion of which is located within county territory, and member of the board of supervisors of the same county constitute incompatible offices.

Issued on September 13, 1984
Official Citation: 67 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 409
83-1008 1. May a county supervisor, who serves ex-officio as a director of the Yuba County Water Agency, and who owns land within a California water district, a component unit of the water agency, lawfully participate in agency matters which directly affect the water district?

2. May a director of the Yuba County Water Agency, who serves on the agency board as an elected representative of the agency's advisory council, and who derives his position on the council from his position as a director of a California water district and a landowner therein, lawfully participate in agency matters which directly affect that water district. 		1. Whether the described County supervisor-director may lawfully participate in agency matters which will directly affect the water district in which he owns land will depend upon a proper application of sections 87100-87103 of the Political Reform Act of 1974, as implemented by regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission. Also, the agency's conflict of interest code should be consulted.

As to agency matters involving contracts, whether the agency board may even act at all will depend upon a proper application of section 1090 et seq. of the Government Code. An initial application of those sections to the facts may be determinative with respect to contractual matters and preclude any need for further analysis under the Political Reform Act of 1974.

The common law doctrine concerning conflicts of interest may also be relevant.

2. Insofar as the common law doctrine against holding incompatible offices is concerned, it has been abrogated with respect to the offices involved, and the described agency director may act in agency matters which directly affect his water district. The described agency director should, however, follow the same basic analysis with respect to personal conflicts of interest as the supervisor-director.

Issued on August 1, 1984
Official Citation: 67 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 369
16-702 Does Elections Code section 10515, subdivision (a), require a board of supervisors to appoint a director to a water district if to do so would result in the appointee holding incompatible public offices under Government Code section 1099? Elections Code section 10515, subdivision (a), requires a board of supervisors to appoint a director to a water district without regard to whether the appointment might result in the holding of incompatible offices under Government Code section 1099. Nonetheless, an individual so appointed may not lawfully hold incompatible public offices; thus, if the particular offices are incompatible, the appointee and would-be dual officeholder will be deemed to have forfeited the first-held office upon accepting appointment to the second.

Issued on August 23, 2018
Official Citation: 101 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 49
15-401 Does the doctrine of incompatible public offices preclude Albert Robles from simultaneously serving as a director of the Water Replenishment District of Southern California and as city council member and mayor of the City of Carson? Whether the doctrine of incompatible public offices precludes Albert Robles from simultaneously serving as a director of the Water Replenishment District of Southern California and as city council member and mayor for the City of Carson presents substantial questions of fact and law warranting judicial resolution. Accordingly, the application for leave to sue is GRANTED.

Issued on December 21, 2015
Official Citation: 98 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 94
14-401 Does the doctrine of incompatible public offices preclude Kimberly R. Olson and Roger J. Gifford from simultaneously serving on both the Board of Directors of the Hornbrook Fire Protection District and the Board of Directors of the Hornbrook Community Services District? Whether the offices of director of the Hornbrook Fire Protection District and director of the Hornbrook Community Services District are incompatible, such that Kimberly R. Olson and Roger J. Gifford are precluded from simultaneously holding both offices, presents substantial questions of fact and law warranting judicial resolution. Accordingly, the application for leave to sue is GRANTED.

Issued on October 9, 2014
Official Citation: 97 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 50
13-1002 Are the positions of fire district chief and town council member incompatible public offices? Answered by Letter on January 10, 2014
93-112 Does the doctrine of incompatible public offices preclude a person from holding simultaneously the offices of director, San Gorgonio Pass Water Agency, and director, Beaumont-Cherry Valley Water District? The doctrine of incompatible public offices precludes a person from holding simultaneously the offices of director, San Gorgonio Pass Water Agency, and director, Beaumont-Cherry Valley Water District.

Issued on May 4, 1993
Official Citation: 76 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 81
93-111 Is the position of Fire Chief of the Hesperia Fire Protection District a public office? If so, is the holding of that office incompatible with concurrent membership on the board of directors of the Hesperia Fire Protection District and memberhip on the Hesperia City Council? Whether the position of Fire Chief of the Hesperia Fire Protection District is a public office presents a substantial question of fact and law. Leave to sue in quo warranto is granted to test the right of defendant to hold concurrently the positions of Fire Chief of Hesperia Fire Protection District, director of the Hesperia Fire Protection District, and member of the Hesperia City Council.

Issued on March 23, 1993
Official Citation: 76 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 38
92-408 John E. Duckworth has requested that this office grant leave to sue John C. Davis in quo warranto pursuant to section 803 of the Code of Civil Procedure to test the right of Mr. Davis to hold the office of trustee of the Rim of the World Unified School District. Leave to sue is granted to test whether the offices of trustee of the Rim of the World Unified School District and director of the Lake Arrowhead Community Services District are incompatible.

Issued on July 9, 1992
Official Citation: 75 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 112
91-906 Does the doctrine of incompatible public offices preclude a person from holding simultaneously the position of director of the Elsinore Water District and the position of city council member of the City of Lake Elsinore? Whether the doctrine of incompatible public offices preclude a person from holding simultaneously the position of director of the Elsinore Water District and the position of city council member of the City of Lake Elsinore presents a substantial question of law. It is determined, however, that an action in quo warranto would not serve the public interest and, therefore, leave to sue is denied.

Issued on February 4, 1992
Official Citation: 75 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 10
91-404 1. May a person who is elected or appointed to the position of county superintendent of schools continue to serve as a member of the State Board of Education?

2. If not, what is the legal effect of the person's vote as a member of the State Board of Education once the person assumes the position of county superintendent of schools? 		1. A person who is elected or appointed to the position of county superintendent of schools has accepted an office which is incompatible with membership on the State Board of Education, and has automatically vacated the board membership.

2. The person's vote as a member of the State Board of Education after the assumption of the office of county superintendent of schools would be valid since the officer would still be a de facto member of the Board.

Issued on July 18, 1991
Official Citation: 74 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 116
91-306 1. May a local agency prohibit personal watercraft on all navigable waters within its jurisdiction?

2. Is a local agency required to provide the Department of Boating and Waterways with a justification for a proposed ordinance or regulation relating to vessels? 		1. A local agency may prohibit personal watercraft on all navigable waters within its jurisdiction if the use of personal watercraft is incompatible with one or more other public uses on such waters and the ban is nondiscriminatory as a personal watercraft.

2. A local agency is not required to provide the Department of Boating and Waterways with a justification for a proposed ordinance or regulation relating to vessels.

Issued on September 26, 1991
Official Citation: 74 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 174
91-203 Does the doctrine of incompatible public offices preclude a person from holding simultaneously the appointed position of deputy district attorney of San Bernardino County, and the elected position of member of the city council of the City of Ontario in the County of San Bernardino? The law is settled that service on a governmental board by an attorney employed in a local nonelected position does not violate the doctrine of incompatible public offices. Since that issue does not present a substantial question of law for judicial resolution, leave to sue in quo warranto is denied.

Issued on June 4, 1991
Official Citation: 74 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 86
91-101 Is the position of Fire Division Chief of the City of Ontario a public office? If so, is that office incompatible with membership on the city council of the City of Ontario? The position of Fire Division Chief of the City of Ontario is not a public office; consequently, no substantial issue of law is presented as to whether that position is incompatible with membership on the City Council of the City of Ontario. Accordingly, leave to sue in quo warranto is denied.

Issued on June 4, 1991
Official Citation: 74 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 82
90-892 Hector Varela, President of the Board of Education, Bassett Unified School District, relator herein, has requested this office to grant leave to sue Edward L. Chavez in quo warranto pursuant to the terms of Code of Civil Procedure section 803. The principal issue presented is whether the offices of school district trustee and city council member are incompatible, so that upon his assumption of the later office, the proposed defendant in this action forfeited the former. It is concluded that leave to sue should be GRANTED.

Issued on October 31, 1990
Official Citation: 73 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 354
90-691 Wesley Davis has requested this office grant leave to sue Michael Alan Davis pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 803-810. The issue presented is whether the offices of School District trustee and Water District director are "incompatible" so as to cause a forfeiture of office for Mr. Davis as a School District trustee. Leave to sue is granted.

Issued on August 30, 1990
Official Citation: 73 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 268
90-491 Request to sue proposed defendant Ellwood D. Munger in quo warranto whether the office of school district trustee and the office of community services district director are incompatible, and whether upon his assumption of the latter office, Munger forfeited the former. It is concluded that leave to sue should be GRANTED.

Issued on June 13, 1990
Official Citation: 73 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 183
96-910 Does the doctrine of incompatible public offices preclude a person from simultaneously holding the offices of trustee of a high school district and trustee of an elementary school district which is wholly within the geographic boundaries of the high school district? The doctrine of incompatible public offices precludes a person from simultaneously holding the offices of trustee of a high school district and trustee of an elementary school district which is wholly within the geographic boundaries of the high school district.

Issued on December 2, 1996
Official Citation: 79 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 284
96-407 May an eligibility technician employed by a county department of social services, a county chief probation officer, and a juvenile court judge be licensed as foster parents for children who are wards of the juvenile court and receive placement of such children in their homes if they do not participate in any licensing or placement decisions with respect thereto? An eligibility technician employed by a county department of social services and a county chief probation officer, but not a juvenile court judge, may be licensed as foster parents for children who are wards of the juvenile court and receive placement of such children in their homes if they do not participate in any licensing or placement decisions with respect thereto, provided that the appointing power for the technician and officer has not adopted an incompatible activity rule prohibiting licensing or placement.

Issued on December 13, 1996
Official Citation: 79 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 288
13-301 Are the offices of General Manager of the Cabazon Water District and a member of the Banning Unified School Board incompatible for purposes of the common law doctrine of incompatible offices, as codified in Government Code section 1099(a)? Withdrawn on August 6, 2013
13-201 Are the offices of city council member and school board member incompatible? Answered by Letter on April 16, 2013
09-403 Is the elective office of the City Clerk incompatible with the elective office of trustee of an elementary school district located within the same city? (Compare Govt. Code section 1099 with 21 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 117 (1953).) The elective office of city clerk is not incompatible with the elective office of trustee of an elementary school district located within the same city.

We are informed that a trustee of the Jefferson Elementary School District, who had served in that capacity since her election to office in 2003, stood for and was elected to the office of City Clerk of the City of Daly City in 2008, taking office in January, 2009, and holding both offices for a period of time. She has since resigned from the school district board. Although the resignation eliminated any immediate potential for conflict, the issue has continuing relevance because it may recur. Additionally, because we last gave an opinion on this issue in 1953, the question affords us an opportunity to bring our analysis of the relevant issues up to date.

Issued on December 17, 2010
Official Citation: 93 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 110
09-306 1. May a person serve simultaneously on the Board of Directors of the North Highlands Recreation and Parks District and on the Board of Directors of the Sacramento Suburban Water District?

2. If the Park District and Water District offices are incompatible within the meaning of Government Code section 1099, does a person's assumption of the Water District office result in a forfeiture of the Park District office? 		Answered by Letter on May 4, 2010
10-506 Does the doctrine of incompatible public offices preclude Dennis Waespi from simultaneously serving on both the board of directors of the Castro Valley Sanitary District and the board of directors of the Hayward Area Recreational and Park District? Whether the offices of director of the Castro Valley Sanitary District and director of the Hayward Area Recreational and Park District are incompatible, such that Dennis Waespi is precluded from simultaneously holding both offices, presents substantial questions of fact and law warranting judicial resolution. Accordingly, Relators’ application for leave to sue is granted.

Issued on December 31, 2010
Official Citation: 93 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 144
10-903 1. Does Government Code section 1099 apply to members of the California High-Speed Rail Authority?

2. If so, are the offices of Mayor of the City of Anaheim, member of the board of directors of the Orange County Transportation Authority, member of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, or member of the Southern California Regional Rail Authority incompatible with the office of member of the High Speed Rail Authority?

3. What are the remedies available to address the holding of incompatible offices? 		1. Government Code section 1099 applies to members of the High-Speed Rail Authority.

2. The offices of Mayor of the City of Anaheim, member of the board of directors of the Orange County Transportation Authority, member of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, and member of the Southern California Regional Rail Authority are incompatible with the office of member of the High-Speed Rail Authority.

3. Under section 1099, the holder of incompatible offices is deemed to have forfeited the first office upon acceding to the second. In the event that one holding a presumptively forfeited office refuses to relinquish that office, an action in quo warranto may lie to resolve claims regarding the disputed office.

Issued on November 30, 2010
Official Citation: 93 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 104
11-701 Are City Council members Doug Tessitor, Sam Pedroza, Ed Reyes, Keith Hanks, John Fasana, Michael Cacciotti, Mary Ann Lutz, and Mayor William Bogaard holding incompatible offices by serving at the same time on the Pasadena Metro Blue Line Construction Authority? Withdrawn on November 18, 2011
12-602 May Jim Fitzpatrick simultaneously serve as a member of the Board of Directors of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District and as a member of the Planning Commission of the City of Costa Mesa? Whether the offices of director of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District and commissioner of the Costa Mesa Planning Commission are incompatible, and whether Jim Fitzpatrick has therefore forfeited his office as sanitary district director, present substantial questions of fact and law warranting judicial resolution. Accordingly, the application for leave to sue is GRANTED.

Issued on December 18, 2012
Official Citation: 95 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 67
97-206 Does the doctrine of incompatible public offices preclude a person from holding simultaneously the positions of South Gate City Treasurer and Central Basin Municipal Water District Director? The holding simultaneously of the positions of South Gate City Treasurer and Central Basin Municipal Water District Director presents substantial questions of fact and law concerning the application of the incompatible public offices doctrine that warrants the granting of leave to sue in quo warranto.

Issued on September 29, 1997
Official Citation: 80 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 242
98-107 Does a violation of the San Francisco Charter proscribing conflicts of interest and incompatible activities by an officer of the City and County of San Francisco work a forfeiture of office? A violation of the San Francisco Charter proscribing conflicts of interest and incompatible activities by an officer of the City and County of San Francisco does not work a forfeiture of office.

Issued on June 12, 1998
Official Citation: 81 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 207
97-1102 When a school district is reorganized and a trustee of the reorganized district is elected to the board of trustees of the newly formed district, does the common law doctrine of incompatible public offices prohibit the trustee from continuing to serve on the board of the reorganized district until it is dissolved, even though a statutory prohibition against such dual office holding has been waived by the State Board of Education? Granting leave to sue in quo warranto in the present circumstances would not serve the public interest in determining whether a trustee of a newly formed school district may continue to serve as a trustee of a reorganized district until it is dissolved where a statutory prohibition against such dual office holding has been waived by the State Board of Education and only a matter of months remain before the reorganized district is dissolved.

Issued on January 16, 1998
Official Citation: 81 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 51
98-707 Are the positions of police chief and city manager of the City of San Jacinto incompatible public offices? The positions of police chief and city manager of the City of San Jacinto are incompatible public offices.

Issued on September 30, 1998
Official Citation: 81 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 304
99-1213 1. If the City of Elk Grove is incorporated on March 7, 2000, will the offices of director of the Elk Grove Community Services District and city council member of the City of Elk Grove constitute incompatible public offices?

2. If so, what will be the consequences for a district director who is elected to the Elk Grove City Council?

3. May such newly elected city council member participate in filling by appointment the vacancy on the district board created by his or her election to the city council? 		1. If the City of Elk Grove is incorporated on March 7, 2000, the offices of director of the Elk Grove Community Services District and city council member of the City of Elk Grove will constitute incompatible public offices.

2. A director of the community services district who is elected to the Elk Grove City Council will immediately forfeit his or her office on the district board upon commencement of the term of office on the city council.

3. A newly elected city council member may not participate in filling by appointment the vacancy on the district board created by his or her election to the city council.

Issued on February 25, 2000
Official Citation: 83 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 53
99-801 May a person serve simultaneously as the City Administrator and Fire Chief of the City of Oroville? A person may not serve simultaneously as the City Administrator and Fire Chief of the City of Oroville unless a city charter provision or ordinance is adopted that abrogates the common law prohibition against holding incompatible offices.

Issued on October 13, 1999
Official Citation: 82 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 201
99-303 1. Does an incompatible activities statement adopted by the Board of Administration of the Public Employees' Retirement System pursuant to Government Code section 19990 apply to the members of the Board of Administration?

2. May a person who has declared bankruptcy serve on the Board of Administration of the Public Employees' Retirement System? 		1. An incompatible activities statement adopted by the Board of Administration of the Public Employees' Retirement System pursuant to Government Code section 19990 does not apply to the members of the Board of Administration.

2. A person who has declared bankruptcy may serve on the Board of Administration of the Public Employees' Retirement System.

Issued on June 4, 1999
Official Citation: 82 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 120
99-207 Does the doctrine of incompatible public offices preclude a person from holding simultaneously the positions of director of the Victor Valley Water District and city council member of the City of Victorville? The holding simultaneously of the positions of director of the Victor Valley Water District and city council member of the City of Victorville presents substantial questions of fact and law concerning the application of the incompatible public offices doctrine that warrants the granting of leave to sue in quo warranto.

Issued on April 13, 1999
Official Citation: 82 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 74
99-206 Does the doctrine of incompatible public offices preclude a person from holding simultaneously the positions of planning commissioner of the City of Victorville and director of the Victor Valley Water District? The holding simultaneously of the positions of planning commissioner of the City of Victorville and director of the Victor Valley Water District presents substantial questions of fact and law concerning the application of the incompatible public offices doctrine that warrants the granting of leave to sue in quo warranto.

Issued on April 13, 1999
Official Citation: 82 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 68
00-815 1. Would it be a violation of Government Code section 1090 for the sole shareholder of a corporation that operates an ambulance service under a certificate of public convenience and necessity issued by a city to hold the office of mayor of the city?

2. Would it be a violation of Government Code section 1090 for a city council to modify the terms of an ambulance service rate schedule where the ambulance service is operated by a corporation of which the mayor of the city is the sole shareholder?

3. Would it be a violation of Government Code section 1090 for a city council to modify the terms of an agreement allowing interruption of the traffic signals of the city in exchange for payment of an annual fee, where the agreement is made with a corporation of which the mayor of the city is the sole shareholder?

4. Do the offices of Mayor of the City in Bakersfield and Director of the 15th District Agricultural Association constitute incompatible public offices? 		1. It would not be a violation of Government Code section 1090 for the sole shareholder of a corporation that operates an ambulance service under a certificate of public convenience and necessity issued by a city to hold the office of mayor of the city.

2. It would not be a violation of Government Code section 1090 for a city council to modify the terms of an ambulance service rate schedule where the ambulance service is operated by a corporation of which the mayor of the city is the sole shareholder.

3. It would be a violation of Government Code section 1090 for a city council to modify the terms of an agreement allowing interruption of the traffic signals of the city in exchange for payment of an annual fee, where the agreement is made with a corporation of which the mayor of the city is the sole shareholder.

4. The offices of Mayor of the City of Bakersfield and Director of the 15th District Agricultural Association do not constitute incompatible public offices.

Issued on February 27, 2001
Official Citation: 84 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 34
03-1006 1. Does the common law prohibition against holding incompatible offices cause a county officer to forfeit his or her office when accepting a standby appointment for the office of county supervisor?

2. Would the common law prohibition against holding incompatible offices cause a county officer to forfeit his or her office by temporarily filling the standby office of county supervisor during a state of emergency? 		1. The common law prohibition against holding incompatible offices does not cause a county officer to forfeit his or her office when accepting a standby appointment for the office of county supervisor.

2. The common law prohibition against holding incompatible offices would not cause a county officer to forfeit his or her office by temporarily filling the standby office of county supervisor during a state of emergency.

Issued on April 29, 2004
Official Citation: 87 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 54