???? allow lease holders to exclude people via unconstitutional stance?????????????????????
Such allowing has the City culpable for damages wrought by such allowance, one would think, unless I am missing something.
Someone wrote:
What are the four types of unlawful discrimination?
There are four main types of discrimination.
Direct discrimination. This means treating one person worse than another person because of a protected characteristic. ...
Indirect discrimination. ...
Harassment. ...
Victimisation.
Maybe the City of San Diego is guilty of discrimination via its allowing a leaseholder to discriminate among pilots over reasons that are protected by state and federal law. Maybe the City is setting itself up for huge losses of reputation and other damages. Maybe there are organizations that exist to help cities tow the constitutional line.
=============================================
Must check: the lease agreement probably asserts that the leaseholder must uphold laws. And I bet that the lease agreement allows the City to stop the lease when the leaseholder breaks the law. If the City does not act to protect persons who are damaged by any breaking of the law by the leaseholder, then, I would guess, the City becomes partners in the damages; the City's deep pockets might become a source of restitution, I am guessing; I am not knowing these things for sure; maybe some lawyer could make things clearer.
It seems to me that the City is partner in damaging one or more hang glider pilots; and injuring one person knowingly is probably hurting all people in the
world; we are family. I ache because a family member is aching.
I am guessing that most citizens of San Diego City would not like their City to be partners in hurting people. I had considered selling my Los Angeles home and buying a home in San Diego, but what I see happening at the gliderport discourages me from such a move. The City of San Diego could blossom by better treatment of those who recreate on their parklands.
