|
Ken Genser
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 5:15 AM
1. Are you familiar with the 1984 “Santa Monica Airport Agreement”?
Yes, I have read it many times over the years.
2. Do you know who the parties are who
signed it?
Yes, the City and the FAA.
3. Do you
know that air quality isn’t mentioned in the 1984 Agreement?
Yes.
4.
Would you support a Santa Monica request to the FAA to review the 1984 agreement?
Yes,
but it is unrealistic to think that the FAA would respond positively to such an request. The FAA fights most of the
city’s efforts — enacted for legitimate reasons — that could also make the airport a better neighbor. For
example, the FAA is or has opposed increased fines for noise violations, weight-based landing fees, and shortening the runway
to create buffers in compliance with the FAA’s own safety standards. So, to be successful, any attempt to reopen
the 1984 agreement must include a carefully thought out strategy.
5. Do you feel that the
City of Santa Monica as owners of the Santa Monica Airport have a responsibility to take a pro-active stance in looking into the potential negative health effects
that are a direct result of airport operations?
Yes.
6. Because
the Santa Monica Airport borders Los Angeles to the east and to the south, do you believe that
the City of Santa Monica shoulders a responsibility to safeguard these residential
communities from negative health impacts due to airport operations?
Yes,
to the maximum extent possible under existing laws and regulations that control our operation of the airport.
7.
Would you support an ad hoc committee whose sole purpose would be to deal with the airport’s impacts
on surrounding communities?
I’m open to considering it. However, I believe we have
an Airport Commission that is capable of this function, and is comprised of members who care about the surrounding residents.
Also, the last time such an ad hoc committee was formed, the effort was weakened due to alleged conflicts between some
residents of Los Angeles.
8. Would
you be in favor of the Santa Monica City Council holding a Town Hall Meeting to fully ascertain how the
Santa Monica Airport impacts its neighboring communities?
Possibly, but this
is the function of the Airport Commission. I think such a meeting would be more effective if conducted by the Commission
who can forward any recommendations to the Council. The Commission would have the time — and knowledge —
to look at issues in depth.
9. Knowing that the surrounding communities (both Santa Monica and
Los Angeles) are deeply concerned about the potential negative health effects from Santa Monica Airport operations; would you work to put the issues that are
being focused on, here tonight, as a high priority item during your term as a Santa Monica City Councilperson?
I would continue to do so. Please remember that the 1984 Agreement — entered into
before I, or any of the current council members were elected — severely limits our options. Any effort to reopen
the Agreement or work around its limitations must be through carefully thought out strategy.
Additional comments that you have to offer:
Kathryn Morea
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 3:01 PM
1. Are you
familiar with the 1984 "Santa Monica Airport
Agreement"?
Yes.
2. Do you know who are
the parties who signed it?
City Manager & City Attorney, as well as FAA.
3. Do you know that air
quality isn’t mentioned in the 1984 Agreement?
It appears that noise, not air quality, was a primary concern.
4. Would you support
a Santa Monica request to the FAA to review the 1984 agreement?
Yes.
5. Do you feel that the
City of Santa Monica as owners of the Santa Monica Airport have a responsibility
to take a pro-active stance in looking into the potential negative health effects that are a direct
result of airport operations?
Yes.
6. Because the Santa
Monica Airport borders Los Angeles to the east and to the south, do you believe that the City of Santa
Monica shoulders a responsibility to safeguard these residential communities from negative health
impacts due to airport
operations?
Yes.
7. Would you support
an ad hoc committee whose sole purpose would be to deal with the airport’s impacts on surrounding communities?
Yes.
8. Would you be in favor
of the Santa Monica City Council holding a Town Hall Meeting to
fully ascertain how the Santa Monica Airport
impacts its neighboring communities?
Yes.
9. Knowing that the surrounding
communities (both Santa Monica and Los Angeles) are deeply concerned about the potential negative health effects from Santa
Monica Airport operations; would you work to put the issues that are being focused on, here tonight,
as a high priority item during your term as a Santa Monica City Councilperson?
Yes. It seems to me that the current city council is more concerned with special interests and pet projects than doing
anything proactively to protect our own residents.
Comment:
I'd also like to add that one of my comments made during the candidate forum was misunderstood, and perhaps taken out
of context. I had mentioned that "nothing takes place between elections" because my impression is that our city leaders do
nothing (or next to nothing) to truly address the issues surrounding the airport. This was a criticism of our leaders - not
the residents themselves. It's clear to me that residents are involved in all sorts of activity and have worked hard trying
involve city leaders to help them get relief. Unfortunately, our current city council members appear perfectly willing to
wait until 2015 to even begin to address the concerns of those residents impacted by the airport.
Kathryn Morea
Robert Shriver
Sent:
Friday,
October 01, 2004 10:06 PM
1. Are you familiar with the 1984 “Santa
Monica Airport Agreement”?
Yes, I have read it. It seems to represent
a great deal of thought, except perhaps for this sentence in section 5: “This Airport Layout Plan may be referred to
herein as the ‘Airport Layout Plan.’”
2. Do you know who the parties are who signed it?
The Santa Monica City Manager, the Santa Monica City Attorney, and two Federal Aviation
Administration officials.
3. Do you know air quality isn’t mentioned in the 1984
agreement?
Yes.
4. Would you support a Santa Monica
request to the FAA to review the 1984 agreement?
Yes. The agreement itself says three
times (in sections 1, 7, and 29) that it may be modified to address “issues arising in the future.” Interesting
choice of words, since what now needs to be addressed is the exhaust issued by jet planes. Eight years ago jet takeoffs
and landings averaged about 480 a month. Today we have1,500 a month. At this rate, by 2015, there will be 3,000 a month. We
can’t allow the jet fumes spewing out on Santa Monica and West Los Angeles to double in the next 11 years.
5. Do you feel that the City of Santa
Monica as owner of the Santa Monica
Airport has a responsibility to take a pro-active
stance in looking into the potential negative health effects that are a direct result of airport operations?
Yes.
6. Because the Santa Monica Airport
borders Los Angeles to the east and to the south, do you believe that the City of Santa Monica
shoulders a responsibility to safeguard these residential communities from negative health impacts due to airport operations?
Any city that operates a facility
potentially harming people’s health is morally and ethically responsible—regardless of geographical boundaries—to
investigate the extent of the damage and mitigate it if necessary. Because the airport is part of the federal transportation
system, the City should call for the FAA to ask the Environmental Protection Agency to measure the pollution in the air around
the airport and determine any danger to people’s health. (Special attention should go to the air quality in the area
on airport land where soccer fields are proposed. I’m told these are to be the smaller fields for younger players, whose
lungs are even more vulnerable to pollutants.) The EPA can then report its findings to the FAA and recommend steps it needs
to mandate to reduce the pollution.
7. Would you support an ad hoc committee whose sole purpose
would be to deal with the airport’s impacts on surrounding communities?
I would favor a
committee that included both Santa Monica and Los Angeles residents.
8. Would you be in favor of the Santa
Monica City Council holding a Town Hall Meeting to fully ascertain how the Santa
Monica Airport impacts its
neighboring communities?
Yes. In addition to residents’
testimony, the EPA’s findings about the pollution levels and health risks could be presented. City officials could report
on the progress (if any) of the Aircraft Conformance Program, which the Council adopted in 2002.This plan was supposed to
prevent the larger jets from using Santa
Monica Airport. Two years later, 50% of the jets using our airport are the ones that pollute the most and were deemed
too large to take off and land safely. Plans to create safety zones at each end of the runway haven’t been implemented,
even though people’s homes lie within 300 feet of the runway. (Firefighters shudder at the thought of a fully fueled
large jet crashing on takeoff.) Apparently, the City’s safety, noise, and pollution plan has not yet taken off. At the
September 2004 Airport Commission meeting, City staff reported it has just finished addressing issues about the large jets
that the FAA requested be addressed one year ago. Whether this represents true progress or just more talk (exhaust)
remains to be seen.
Santa Monica’s Airport Commissioners,
our local Congressman, and the Los Angeles City Councilmember for this area should also be included in this meeting.
9. Knowing that the surrounding communities (both Santa Monica
and Los Angeles) are deeply concerned about the potential negative health effects from Santa Monica
Airport operations, would you work to put the issues that are being focused on as a high priority
item during your term as a Santa Monica City Councilperson?
The airport’s effects would
be a high priority for me, because people’s health and safety are involved.
Additional
comments:
For the short term, we need to make
Santa Monica Airport less of a noise and air polluter now. For the long term, the Santa Monica City Council must begin a
dialogue with residents about what should happen at the airport after July 2015. If another agreement between the city and
the FAA is not adopted, the city could lose its right to control noise or exhaust fumes (if such a provision were to be added
to the present agreement). Some city officials seem to believe that we can just live with the airport and close it in 2015,
but many federal laws could make that impossible. To protect residents, the City needs to get as much control over the airport
as it can.
Maria Loya
Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2004 11:17 PM
1.
Are you familiar with the 1984 “Santa
Monica Airport Agreement”?
Yes. The purpose of the agreement was to address the disputes involving the impacts
of the SM Airport on the surrounding communities.
2.
Do you know who the parties are who signed it?
Yes.
The City Manager, John H. Alschuler, Jr. and the City Attorney, Robert M. Myers signed the agreement.
3. Do you know that air quality isn’t
mentioned in the 1984 Agreement?
Yes,
there is no reference to air quality in the entire document.
4. Would you support a Santa Monica
request to the FAA to review the 1984 agreement?
Yes,
I would support an official request from our City to the FAA to review the 1984 agreement.
5. Do you feel that the City of Santa Monica as owners of the
Santa Monica Airport have a responsibility to take a pro-active stance in looking
into the potential negative health effects that are a direct result of airport operations?
Yes,
I think the City of Santa
Monica needs to be responsive
to the health impacts and needs of residents living in close proximity to the Santa Monica Airport. If elected I will advocate for a health survey to be conducted
targeting residents living in near the SM Airport.
6. Because the Santa Monica
Airport borders Los
Angeles to the east and to the south, do you believe that the City of Santa
Monica shoulders a responsibility to safeguard these residential communities from negative health
impacts due to airport operations?
Yes.
I believe that we must work with the City of Los Angeles to develop ways to address the impact of the Santa Monica Airport in a collaborative manner and develop a proactive approach
to safeguard the residential communities.
7.Would you support an ad hoc committee whose sole purpose would be
to deal with the airport’s impacts on surrounding communities?
Yes.
8. Would you be in favor of the Santa Monica
City Council holding a Town Hall Meeting to fully ascertain how the Santa
Monica Airport impacts its
neighboring communities?
Yes.
9.Knowing that the surrounding communities (both Santa Monica and Los
Angeles) are deeply concerned about the potential negative health effects from Santa Monica Airport
operations; would you work to put the issues that are being focused on, here tonight, as a high priority item during your
term as a Santa Monica City Councilperson?
Yes.
I believe that it is our responsibility as City leaders to protect the well being of our residents. If I am elected to the
City Council I will work to address the issues that residents face living near the SM Airport and develop advocacy tools that
we can use to influence the FAA, such as a health study.
Richard Bloom
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 5:09 PM
1.
Are you familiar with the 1984 “Santa Monica
Airport Agreement”?
Yes.
2. Do you know who the parties are who signed it?
I
believe the parties are the City of Santa Monica and the F.A.A.
3. Do you
know that air quality isn’t mentioned in the 1984 Agreement?
Yes. I have heard this.
4. Would you support a Santa
Monica request to the FAA to review the 1984 agreement?
I support any step that would lead
to reduction in the number of jet take offs and landings at Santa Monica Airport.
5. Do you feel that the City of Santa Monica as owners
of the Santa Monica Airport have a responsibility to take a pro-active stance
in looking into the potential negative health effects that are a direct result of airport operations?
Yes.
6. Because the Santa Monica Airport
borders Los Angeles to the east and to the south, do you believe that the City of Santa Monica
shoulders a responsibility to safeguard these residential communities from negative health impacts due to airport operations?
Santa Monica understands that we are part of a region and that we all need to be good neighbors.
7. Would you support an ad hoc committee whose sole
purpose would be to deal with the airport’s impacts on surrounding communities?
I
support ongoing discussions regarding airport issues, including concerns of airport neighbors in Santa Monica and Los Angeles.
8. Would you be in favor of the Santa
Monica City Council holding a Town Hall Meeting to fully ascertain how the Santa
Monica Airport impacts its
neighboring communities?
I support ongoing discussions regarding
airport issues, including concerns of airport neighbors in Santa
Monica and Los Angeles.
9. Knowing that the surrounding communities (both Santa
Monica and Los Angeles) are deeply concerned about the potential negative health effects from Santa
Monica Airport operations; would you work to put the issues that are being focused on, here tonight,
as a high priority item during your term as a Santa Monica City Councilperson?
I have done
so during my current term and will do so in the future.
Additional
comments that you have to offer:
I will continue to champion the goal
of reducing and eliminating jet traffic at Santa
Monica Airport.
David Cole
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 6:51 PM
1. Are you familiar with the 1984 “Santa
Monica Airport Agreement”?
YES
2. Do you know who the parties are who signed it?
YES
3. Do
you know that air quality isn’t mentioned in the 1984 Agreement?
YES
4. Would you support a Santa
Monica request to the FAA to review the 1984 agreement?
YES
5. Do you feel that the City of Santa Monica as owners of the Santa Monica Airport have a responsibility to take a pro-active stance
in looking into the potential negative health effects that are a direct result of airport operations?
YES
6. Because
the Santa Monica Airport borders Los Angeles to
the east and to the south, do you believe that the City of Santa Monica shoulders a responsibility to safeguard these residential communities from negative health impacts due to airport
operations?
WITHOUT QUESTION
7. Would you support an ad hoc committee whose sole purpose would be
to deal with the airport’s impacts on surrounding communities?
NO I BELEIVE THE CITY COUNCIL
SHOULD DEAL WITH THE ISSUE IN AN OPEN FORUM WITH THE PUBLIC. THIS MEETING WOULD BE ONE OF IMFORMATION GATHERING PURPOSE WITH
NO ACTIONABLE ITEM ON THE AGENDA. SO THE ENTIRE SESSION COULD BE WITHOUT RULES AND DESIGNED TO INFORM THE COUNCIL WHICH THEN
COULD AGENDIZE THE ISSUE AND CONSIDER AN APPROPRIATE ACTION.
8. Would you be in favor of the Santa
Monica City Council holding a Town Hall Meeting to fully ascertain how the Santa
Monica Airport impacts its neighboring communities?
YES
9. Knowing that the surrounding
communities (both Santa Monica and Los Angeles) are deeply concerned about the potential negative health effects from Santa Monica Airport operations; would you work to put the issues that
are being focused on, here tonight, as a high priority item during your term as a Santa Monica City Councilperson?
YES, HOWEVER THERE EXIST MANY ISSUES THAT THIS CITY MUST DEAL WITH ON AN EMERGENCY BASIS.
Herb Katz
Sent:
Thursday, October 07, 2004 10:32 AM
1. Are you familiar with the 1984 "Santa Monica Airport
Agreement"?
Yes (have not read it lately)
2. Do you know who
the parties are who signed it?
City of Santa Monica, and
I believe the FAA
3. Do you know that air quality
isn't mentioned in the 1984 Agreement?
Yes
4. Would you support
a Santa Monica request to the FAA to review the 1984 agreement?
Yes
5. Do you
feel that the City of Santa Monica as owners of the Santa Monica
Airport have a responsibility to take a pro-active
stance in looking into the potential negative health effects that are a direct result of airport operations?
Yes
6. Because
the Santa Monica Airport borders Los Angeles to the east and to the south, do you believe that the City of Santa Monica shoulders a responsibility to safeguard these residential communities from negative health impacts due to airport
operations?
Both cities have responsibility, as the users
come from both.
7.
Would you support an ad hoc committee whose sole purpose would be to deal with the airport's impacts on surrounding
communities?
It would depend on who was on the committee
and how it was formed.
8.
Would you be in favor of the Santa
Monica City Council holding a Town Hall Meeting to fully
ascertain how the Santa Monica Airport impacts its neighboring communities?
Yes
9. Knowing that the surrounding communities (both Santa Monica and Los Angeles) are deeply
concerned about the potential negative health effects from Santa Monica Airport operations; would
you work to put the issues that are being focused on, here tonight, as a high priority item during your term as a Santa Monica
City Councilperson?
Yes
Additional comments that you have to offer:
The airport needs to be a healthy, sound, sensitive
neighbor and must co-exist properly.
Linda Armstrong
October 10th, 2004 2pm
1. Are you familiar with the 1984 "Santa Monica Airport Agreement"?
Yes, this is the agreement
that allowed jets into the airport.
2. Do you know who the parties are who signed it?
No
3. Do you know that air quality isn't mentioned in the 1984 Agreement?
Yes
4. Would you support a Santa Monica request to the FAA to review the 1984 agreement?
Yes,
definitely.
5. Do you feel that the City of
Santa Monica as owners of the Santa Monica Airport have a responsibility to take a pro-active stance in looking into the potential
negative health effects that are a direct result of airport operations?
Yes, that is their duty and obligation.
6. Because
the Santa Monica Airport borders Los Angeles to the east and to the south, do you believe that the City of Santa Monica shoulders a responsibility
to safeguard these residential communities from negative health impacts due to airport operations?
Yes, since the airport
abuts the city of LA, the health and welfare of the neighbors should be taken into consideration.
7. Would you support an ad hoc committee whose sole purpose
would be to deal with the airport's impacts on surrounding communities?
Yes definitely
8. Would you be in favor of the Santa Monica City Council holding a Town Hall Meeting to fully ascertain how the Santa Monica Airport impacts its neighboring communities?
Yes, and there should be a series of them, with the first one being held before the election.
9. Knowing that
the surrounding communities (both Santa Monica and Los Angeles) are deeply concerned about the potential negative health effects
from Santa Monica Airport operations; would you work to put the issues that are being focused on,
here tonight, as a high priority item during your term as a Santa Monica City Councilperson?
Yes, definitely. I would also push for the Town Hall meetings to be held.
Additional comments that you have to offer:
There should be a moratorium on jet traffic until their long term studies are finished.
Questions from Friends of Sunset Park
|
|
|
|
Candidates answer questions about SUNSET PARK ISSUES
|
|
SANTA MONICA AIRPORT
Some facts:
a.
Population in our zip code, 90405 (which includes Sunset Park and part of Ocean Park) is 28,535. About one third of these
residents live under the flight path of S.M. Airport.
b. The City doesn't realize any income from the Airport. Income
from leases, fuel flow taxes, and fines goes into an enterprise fund, which can only be used to pay for airport operations
and expenses.
c. The 1984 Agreement between the FAA and Santa Monica obligates the City to operate S.M. Airport. This
agreement expires in 2015.
d. Between 1999 and 2003, jet traffic at S.M. Airport increased 69% to 16,000 operations
per year. The growing popularity of fractional share jet companies ("time share" jets) is largely responsible for this
increase.
e.
In 2003, jet traffic comprised 11% of total operations at S.M. Airport, but was responsible for 80% of noise violations.
f.
S.M. Airport has homes closer to the runway (250 ft.) than any other airport in the nation. Currently, the airport has no
"safety zones" at the ends of the runway and is not in compliance with FAA safety standards. Only the width of a street (23rd
on the west, Centinela on the east) separates the runway from family homes.
g. In May 2002, airport staff proposed
the "Aircraft Conformance Program" to the City Council. This program would prevent the larger
"safety inappropriate" C
and D Class aircraft, which do not comply with the airport's design standards, from using the airport. Currently, 50% of the
jet traffic at S.M. Airport consists of large C and D Class aircraft.
h. In addition, the proposed Conformance program
would implement declared distances (300 ft.) at either end of the runway as "designated safety zones." City Council approved
this plan in concept in December 2002. [Add footnote with Airport Commission agenda items, staff reports, and Council agenda
staff report.] Residents are STILL WAITING for this Conformance program to be implemented.
i. The most comprehensive
S.M. Airport air quality study to date was conducted by a Sunset Park resident, Jake Bloch, who was a student at John Adams
Middle School at the time. His study is available on our web site <www.FriendsofSunsetPark.org>
QUESTIONS:
7.
What steps would you take to speed up implementation of the Aircraft Conformance Program?
Laticia Anderson: No Response
Linda Armstrong: No Response
Bill Bauer: The City council can initiate this process at any time. I don’t
think the incumbents care. I would start the process, immediately.
Richard Bloom: I have kept
the pressure on city staff to move with all deliberate
speed on implementing this program. The slow speed of implementation
is frustrating. However, there are forces at work, including the FAA, that make it extremely important that the city not act
hastily and err in the implementation process.
David Cole: No Response
Matt Dinolfo: I would support the city staff’s position first proposed in 2002 which would prohibit larger Class C & D
aircraft since they do not meet the airport’s design standards. I would work with state and federal authorities to compel
the FAA to implement this program.
Mike
Feinstein: No Response
Ken Genser: I feel as frustrated at the length of time this is taking to implement
as anybody. However, successfully working with (or around) the FAA is tricky and requires careful thought and strategy. I
am committed to seeing the Conformance Program implemented.
Patricia Hoffman: No Response
Herb Katz: First,
the City Council should enact stricter Airport noise ordinance that would have the pragmatic effect of inhibiting use of the
Airport by C and D class aircraft. We also need to establish a committee that will research our most effective approaches
to the air pollution concerns. And we should make clear that commercial air passenger service should not be allowed at S.M.
Airport.
Maria Loya: The Santa Monica City Council needs to make the Conformance program a priority and
direct resources to implement it. If I am elected I will ensure that the S.M. City Council develop a plan to implement the
Conformance program.
Jon Mann: Close Down The Airport!
Kathryn Morea: We could start with increasing fees and penalties to those pilots and/or commercial aviation companies causing the
abuse. Additionally, we could lobby other elected officials, such our local Congress person or Senators, to get their help
in working with the Federal agencies who have jurisdiction over the airport.
Bobby Shriver: At this September’s Airport Commission meeting, staff announced
it had completed written answers about the large jets using Santa Monica Airport—answers the FAA had requested one year
earlier. (The Program itself was passed by City Council almost a year before that.) What is the reason for this huge delay?
Some leadership and commitment from the City Council is needed here. I would ask the City Manager to have staff move faster.
Staff members must have gotten the message that the Council is not particularly serious about reducing noise and jet exhaust
at the airport, or making take-offs and landings any safer, or staff would have made a lot more progress over the past two
years.
8.
Would you support a study of S.M. Airport’s environmental impact on the community – residents, school children,
property owners?
Laticia Anderson: No Response
Linda Armstrong: No Response
Bill Bauer: Yes. This is one way to determine what the environmental hazards
really are.
Richard Bloom: Environmental concerns have been and will always be investigated
carefully.
David Cole: No Response
Matt Dinolfo: Yes, I would be in favor of an environmental impact study of the airport, particularly in view of the recent increases
in noise levels and jet fuel pollution. Areas of concern include any possible association with increased incidence of diseases,
hearing problems, stress-related illnesses, and learning disabilities/attention issues in children. As a physician specializing
in Internal Medicine and Infectious Diseases I am also uniquely qualified to analyze the data, interpret it to the community,
and make sound recommendations to the City Council.
Mike Feinstein: No Response
Ken Genser: Yes.
Patricia Hoffman: No Response
Herb Katz: Yes.
Maria Loya: Yes. I am aggressively pursuing a health study to investigate the environmental and health impact of
residents living near the S.M. Airport.
Jon
Mann: Yes, but we already know it is
Kathryn Morea: Yes, absolutely.
Bobby
Shriver: Yes. We know from other studies how loud
noise affects people, but we need to know exactly how much our airport’s noise affects its neighbors. To study the effect
of jet fumes, I will request the FAA to bring in the federal Environmental Protection Agency to measure levels of jet fumes
in the surrounding neighborhoods, and in the area of airport land where new soccer fields are planned. I understand these
fields will be the smaller ones used by younger players, whose lungs are more vulnerable to air pollution. If the EPA concluded
the airport is endangering people’s health, the FAA would be much more receptive to amending its 1984 agreement with
the city to restrict or ban the heavily polluting jets from using the airport.
9.
What is your commitment to the residents of Santa Monica who are impacted by noise, air pollution, safety and security
issues caused by S.M. Airport?
Laticia Anderson: No Response
Linda Armstrong: No Response
Bill Bauer:
Almost everything in the community contributes to somebody else’s pollution, noise, safety and security —such
as my neighbor’s barbecue that fills my apartment with acrid smoke almost every evening. We need to determine the extent
of the negatives, determine an appropriate course of action to mitigate them and take care of the problems if they exist.
Richard Bloom: I have been resolute on this issue since I became active in Sunset Park: I will do whatever it
takes to reduce and eliminate the impact of jet traffic at Santa Monica airport.
David Cole: No Response
Matt Dinolfo: I am fully committed to the residents of Santa Monica to improve their quality of life, ensure the safety of their
children, and work towards long-term solutions that protect health and welfare.
Mike Feinstein:
No Response
Ken Genser: I will do whatever I can to lessen the impacts. Some of our options
are limited by the 1984 Agreement.
Patricia Hoffman: No Response
With Richard Bloom, I introduced the voter-approved Charter amendment that allowed the city to impose
significant fines for noise violations. I have also supported weight-based landing fees and the shortening of the runway to
create buffers (to comply with the FAA's own standards) that will also limit the size of planes that use the airport.
Herb Katz: The safety and security of city residents must ALWAYS be to top priority for city leaders – with
regard to the Airport or any other issue. That is and has always been my commitment
Maria Loya:
I am committed to aggressively advocating for an environmental and health study for impacted residents, I will work with the
City of Los Angeles to develop a shared plan to address the impact of the airport and create a working group made up of S.M
City officials, S.M residents and the FAA to develop an exist strategy for the S.M. Airport.
Jon Mann:
TOTAL - I am one of them!
Kathryn Morea: I believe strongly that appropriate action must be taken by the
City Council to support those residents who are actively seeking redress. They should not be stalled or waylaid in their desire
to find reasonable solutions to these airport related issues. These issues cause an unfair burden on those residents living
in close proximity to the airport. There has been a movement to make people aware of "Environmental Justice". There are grant
programs available to help fund mitigation to those neighborhoods adversely impacted by environment factors especially pollution,
noise and health issues. For more info on the environmental justice grants, please go to this website http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/opar/titleVIand%20EJ.htm
This is something I would look into as your city council person.
Bobby Shriver: To reduce those
impacts as much as legally possible.
10.
When there is a conflict between a) protecting residents from the environmental impacts of the airport and b) supporting
aviation interests, what do you feel the role of the City of Santa Monica should be?
Laticia Anderson: No Response
Linda Armstrong: No Response
Bill Bauer:
Although I’m not a pilot, I volunteer for EVAC which is an "Angels of Mercy" type organization affiliated with the Fire
Department. These small plane, private pilots are good neighbors – but I understand the larger commercial aircraft including
business jets have very different and negative impacts on the area around the airport. We need to find out how serious environmental
impacts are and if they are negative, then, of course, the City should support its residents and determine a remedy.
Richard Bloom: The interests of residents always take priority.
David Cole: No Response
Matt Dinolfo: I believe that the role of the City of Santa Monica should be, first and foremost, to protect public safety.
Mike Feinstein: No Response
Ken Genser: Obviously, to protect residents.
Patricia Hoffman: No Response
Herb Katz: Again, the safety and security of residents – including environmental
safety – MUST be the deciding factor in any such conflict. In situations where the conflict can be resolved or mitigated,
I believe the city should explore such options but in the end the safety of residents is paramount.
Maria Loya: As a leader who has a track record of upholding a family-centered approach to policy making, I will ensure
that the City protects the interest of its residents. I will not compromise our community’s right to enjoy their homes
without intrusive noise, air pollution or excessive traffic.
Jon Mann: RESIDENTS FIRST!
Kathryn Morea: I believe our priority must be the residents.
Bobby Shriver:
The City’s priorities should be in that order—residents first, aviation second.
11.
When the 1984 Agreement expires in 2015, what do you propose for the future use of the S.M. Airport property?
Laticia Anderson: No Response
Linda Armstrong: No Response
Bill Bauer: I personally don’t think that the FAA is not going to give
up the airport property. It is too important for defense and for use in emergencies. However, if the FAA relinquishes control
of the site, I’d like to see a large park and limited low rise and low intensity mixed use development. The key for
me would be to not allow anything that would contribute substantially to additional traffic, congestion and pollution. I would
fight a Playa-Vista type development tooth and nail.
Richard Bloom: The future use of the airport
property is not for me, alone, to
determine. I have successfully moved the council to instruct city staff to begin the
development of a process to review options and engage the community in the discussion of what the future of the airport property
will be. Virtually any option will have benefits and drawbacks. It is ultimately the community that must decide this important
issue. Because Sunset Park is the neighborhood that will be most affected by the ultimate choice, it must be a key player
in the
process.
David Cole: No Response
Matt Dinolfo: I believe it is unlikely that the FAA will allow closure of the airport unless scientifically proven health hazards
are determined. Doing so is a priority. If the airport could be closed I would convert this area to parks and recreational
space. If this does not occur I would support a redesign of the airport to optimize fuel particle dispersal patterns and minimize
noise pollution. I would vigorously advocate for the removal of jet traffic.
Mike Feinstein:
No Response
Ken Genser: Future use of the airport parcel must be the product of a meaningful
public discussion. I am very, very unlikely to support continued operation of the airport beyond 2015 unless we are able to
ban jet traffic.
Patricia Hoffman: No Response
Herb Katz: City staff, elected leaders and residents adjacent neighborhoods
should be working closely together NOW to outline the options that make sense for the community, maximize benefits of future
use and minimize negative impacts. Personally, I would like to see any plan include open space, parks and landscaping of which
there is far too little in Santa Monica and which would benefit Sunset Park residents as well as residents of the entire city.
Maria Loya: When the 1984 Agreement expires in 2015 we have an opportunity to increase open space and affordable
housing in that area of our City.
Jon Mann: CLOSE DOWN THE AIRPORT!
Kathryn Morea: I think we should poll the residents and find out what the people of Santa Monica wish to do.
Bobby Shriver: I would not propose anything without hearing from the community first. We need to begin a dialogue
on that subject right away, because we may need to craft another agreement with the FAA that allows the City to continue controlling
pollution from noise and jet fumes. Otherwise, the legal battles that resulted in the 1984 agreement may begin all over again.
I know that the federal government will have a lot to say about the use of the airport after 2015, because it is part of our
national transportation system. |
To read the candidates answers to questions about other issues that were asked by Friends
of Sunset Park click HERE.
|
