Residents
Urge City to Keep Fighting FAA |
By Jorge Casuso
November 13 – Don’t trust federal aviation
officials and keep fighting them in court, even if the legal battle
takes several years.
That was the message delivered by residents to the City Council Tuesday night
during a public briefing before the City and the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) try to settle a lawsuit that challenges Santa Monica’s ban on larger
faster jets.
Residents who live near the airport said they don’t trust FAA officials
after they yanked a previous offer to enhance safety measures at the 62-year-old
municipal airport, leaving neighboring residences vulnerable to runaway jets.
Residents are “suspicious of what their true goals are,”
said Cathy Larson, who chairs the Airport Committee for Friends
of Sunset Park (FOSP), which represents the Santa Monica neighborhood
abutting the airport.
“Obviously, we don’t think it’s safety based on past behavior,”
Larson said. “We also have a lack of faith in them following through on
a deal.
“Even if there might be some sort of palatable option offered, would
we end up getting it?”
The council session to gather public advice comes one week after a hearing
examiner called on the two parties to enter into mediation in an effort to avoid
a lengthy and costly legal battle.
But from the tenure of Tuesday’s meeting, it appears unlikely a settlement
will be reached before an appeals court hears oral arguments in the City’s
challenge to a U.S. District judge’s preliminary injunction barring Santa
Monica from imposing the ban.
“We would be fools not to consider the history of this dispute,”
said City Attorney Marsha Moutrie. “We’re not advocating any position.”
But Moutrie cautioned that “we can’t take any comfort on how a
court of law will rule” when it hears the City’s “novel arguments.”
Moutrie added that a settlement -- which likely would involve installing a
costly concrete bed to stop jets from over-running the runway --
would give greater assurance the safety measures would be implemented.
“A settlement would be more certain,” Moutrie said. “Their
ability to do another U-turn would be eliminated.”
If such a settlement was reached, the City should not pick up the cost of installing
an Engineered Materials Arresting System (EMAS) to slow the C and D aircraft
covered by the ban, residents said.
Instead, airport users should pick up the tab, which would be $3 million for
a 175-foot bed with a 25-foot setback and $8.5 million for a 500-foot bed.
“How the heck do we pay for this without going into hock?” Larson
said.
Moutrie said that installing the EMAS “could be done within a year.”
Fears that installing the safety enhancements could draw more air traffic are
not borne out by what has happened at least at one nearby airport.
In fact, the faltering economy has taken a huge toll on jet traffic at Santa
Monica Airport, resulting in an “unprecedented” and “dramatic”
28 percent drop in October, compared to last year, according to airport officials.
In ordering the City to suspend the ordinance approved by the council in April,
the FAA argued that the measure -- --which bans C and D aircraft with approach
speeds of between 139 and 191 mph -- is unnecessary and would harm jet operators.
The City has called the federal government’s challenge a “legal
assault” on an ordinance responding to increasing concerns that soaring
jet traffic -- from 4,829 jet operations in 1994 to 18,575 last year -- is putting
neighboring homes, as well as pilots, in danger.
In a brief filed in August, the City argued that the ordinance approved by
the council is legal because the City is merely trying to implement federal
runway standards.
The City also contends that the FAA’s interim cease and desist orders
were issued illegally without a hearing, that as airport proprietor it has the
legal right to protect public safety and limit its own liability and that the
Tenth Amendment protects the City from federal coercion.
Council members cautioned that any settlement would likely displease some.
“I don’t want anyone to get the impression there is a perfect solution
anywhere down the line,” said Council member Richard Bloom.
|
