C.A. 2nd;
B262850
The Second Appellate District affirmed a judgment in part, reversed in part, and remanded the action with directions. The court held that a school district’s lease-leaseback agreements for the construction of schools and school buildings did not require competitive bidding under the plain language of an exception to the governing competitive bidding requirement. The court held further that a plaintiff stated a claim for conflict of interest in violation of Government Code §1090 by alleging that the construction contractor’s program and construction management services filled roles occupied by officers and employees of the school district.
