jetairpollution.com
Candidates for SM City Council: Answers to Airport Questions
OLD Homepage
About our "Panel of Experts"
NEW Homepage
AQMD's Airport Air Quality Study for Santa Monica and Van Nuys Airports
Fume Event Graphs
February 2, 2005 -Teterboro, N.J.- corporate jet skids over highway.
SM Airport Commission Meeting Report and Letters
AQMD Multiple Air Toxins Emissions Study-(MATES II)
Candidates for SM City Council: Answers to Airport Questions

In September, I submitted a series of questions to all of the candidates running for the four open Santa Monica City Council seats. These questions were designed to point out residential concerns about Santa Monica Airport impacts on the health, safety and well being of those living in the surrounding Santa Monica and Los Angeles communities. I want to thank those candidates that took this opportunity to respond and let the voters and others who are concerned know where they stand on this very important and ongoing topic.

 

Please take the time to read each candidate’s response and also the answers to the questions submitted to the candidates by the Friends of Sunset Park, immediately following.

 

I urge all of you to forward this information to your friends in Santa Monica, so that they can make a better informed decision at the ballot box.

Just copy and paste the following link to them in your e-mail message.

 

Candidates for SM City Council: Answers to Airport Questions

 

I will make my recommendations with my reasons, and post them in about a week (mid-October).

As of October 11, 2004, we have not received a response from the following candidates:
 
Michael Feinstein
Patricia Hoffman
Laticia Anderson
Bill Bauer

 
 
The following candidate replies to our questions are listed in the order that they were received.

 

 

Matt Dinolfo, MD
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 10:14 PM

1.     Are you familiar with the 1984 "Santa Monica Airport Agreement"?

Yes, I have read it in its entirety.

2.     Do you know who the parties are who signed it?

John Alschuler, SM City Manager

Robert Myers, SM City Attorney

Michael Fenello, Deputy Admin., FAA

Homer McClure, Dir West Region, FAA

3.     Do you know that air quality isn't mentioned in the 1984 Agreement?

Yes, for the most part it considers noise levels as the sole impact of the airport on the surrounding communities.

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?

I believe the city has a responsibility to advocate for public health in all aspects of its decision-making.  Approaching the airport issue from the perspective of its effects on the health of residents is the single most powerful tool available to affect change.

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, particularly if its charge was to oversee a study of the health effects of the airport on the community.  As a council member I would encourage the ad hoc committee to develop clear, measurable outcomes and a distinct time-line for achieving them.

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.  The Council's responsibility is to ensure the health and well-being of its citizens.  Under my leadership items affecting public health will be given a high priority.

 

Additional comments that you have to offer:

Long term, my concern is that the 1984 agreement that the City has entered into with the FAA, as part of the National Aviation Transport System, leaves the airport vulnerable to the possibility of being solely under FAA control.  I believe the City should anticipate this eventuality and that any actions taken by the City Council must be supported by rigorous environmental study and health data.  As a physician I am uniquely qualified to evaluate this information, to interpret it to the community, and to use it effectively to protect our citizens.  I would appreciate your support.

 

Matt Dinolfo, MD

September 27, 2004      

 

Jon Mann
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2004 4:30 PM

1.     Are you familiar with the 1984 “Santa Monica Airport Agreement”?

YES

2.     Do you know who the parties are who signed it?

City Attorney - Bob Myers  City Manager - Al Schuler or Jalilli?

FAA and City Council

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?

ABSOLUTELY!

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?

ABSOLUTELY!

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?

ABSOLUTELY, I WOULD ALSO SUPPORT CREATING A SPECIAL INTEREST, (SIG), GROUP COMPOSED OF RESIDENTS, (INCLUDING FOSP), AND HAVING AN ONLINE ELECTRONIC DISCUSSION RUNNING 24/7

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?

OF COURSE, I LIVE IN SUNSET PARK!

Additional comments that you have to offer:

Thank you for putting on the best forum so far!   I look forward to purchasing the DVD and contributing to jetairpollution.  In 2015 let’s make the airport into a park, get rid of the SMCC extension and put in some low cost housing and parking.  Maybe consolidate all the Farmer’s markets in that location every day of the week!  I have lots of ideas what we can do with that land!  In the meantime increase the fines for noise violations so it will be too costly to ignore and raise the fees!

 

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.