SR 08-23-2016 11A
Ci ty Council
Report
City Council Meeting : August 23, 2016
Agenda Item: 11.A
1 of 20
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Rick Cole, City Manager , City Manager's Office, Administration
Subject: Resolution Regarding Local Control and Closure of the Santa Monica Airport;
Policy for Eliminating Private Provision of Aeronautical Services and
Es tablishing Exclusive Public Proprietary Fixed Based Operations With City
Provision of Aeronautical Services Required By Law; Consideration of Other
Lawful Means of Curtailing Adverse Airport Impacts, Including, Among
Others: Applying to the FAA for Runway Alterations; Enforcing Local, State &
Federal Laws Relating to Airport Operations; Transitioning From Leases to a
Permit System for Certain Airport Uses; Eliminating Lead Fuel; and
Enhancing Airport Security
Recommend ed Action
Staff recommends that the C ity Council :
1. A dopt a R esolution declaring that it shall be the policy of the City to close the
Santa Monica airport to aviation use s, as soon as legally permitted, with the goal
of on or before July 1, 2018 , and directing the City Manager to implement all
necessary admin istrative measures accordingly; and
2. Adopt a Policy for Establishing Exclusive Public Proprietary Fixed Based
Operations (FBO) Services with City Proprietor Services and directing the City
Manager to implement all steps necessary or advisabl e to implement that policy .
Executive Summary
The passage of Measure Local Control (Measure LC ) in November 2014 and the
subsequent expiration of the City’s 30 year agreement with the FAA to continue to
operate the Airport a s well as the disputed expirati on of the 20 year Grant Assurances
in 2015 have set the stage for the City of Santa Monica to definitively re -exert local
control over 227 acres of land owned by the City for more than a century. During that
time, it was the site for the making of aviatio n history and performed a vital function in
peace and war. In recent years, however, an airport originally established for biplanes
has become an ever -more - active jetport for personal and corporate jet traffic. The
adverse impacts of noise, pollution an d safety hazards of Airport operation have long
been documented. At the unanimous direction of the City Council, the staff
recommends adopting a Resolution and policy to move forward decisively to exert and
test our local authority by officially asserting the City’s intention to close the Airport as
soon as legally permitted with the goal of doing so by June 30, 2018 or sooner if
possible.
2 of 20
Acknowledging the many legal challenges regarding that authority now pending, the
City should continue to exercise its legitimate authority to enforce its recently adopted
leasing policy; replace the existing FBOs with exclusive City operations; consider
removal of the Western Parcel from aviation use; and take other such steps for an
orderly transition as are appropriate ly within its legal jurisdiction.
Finally, the Council expressed a commitment to initiate the lengthy and complex
process of planning and environmental review for transition to a complete park campus
containing uses consistent with the terms of Measure LC. The recommended resolution
authorize s the commencement of that future planning to establish and fund a n array of
natural, recreational and cultural resources and amenities to serve the residents and
neighbors of the City of Santa Monica for generations t o come .
On July 26, 2016, the City Council agreed to consider a resolution expressing the City
Council’s intention to close the Santa Monica Airport to aviation use, as soon as that is
legally permitted with a goal of June 30, 2018 and earlier if possib le, and, authorizing
the City Manager to initiate all administrative measures necessary to implement the
resolution.
The land currently occupied by the Airport consist s of 227 acres of multiple parcels,
much of which has been under exclusive City ownership since 1926 when Santa
Monica voters approved a park bond ballot measure. Beginning in the late 1950s, with
the advent of jet aircraft, the relationships among Douglas Aircraft, the City of Santa
Monica, and the residents soured and became adversarial.
In 1981, the City Council declared its intention to close the Airport when legally possible.
After a series of negotiations, FAA and the City reached a 30 year comprehensive
settlement that expired in 2015. Despite the settlement, the adverse impacts of airport
operations continue, and in some respects accelerated, due to the significant increase
in jet aircraft operations, continued use of leaded fuel, and the fear and actuality of
accidents.
In June 2014, Santa Monica voters were presented with two op posing Airport ballot
measures. Measure D was supported by aviation interest and Measure Local Control
(Measure LC) was backed by community residents; Measure LC received 60% of the
vote and Measure D was defeated when it earned only 40% of the vote. Mea sure LC
reads:
Subject only to limitations imposed by law, the City Council shall have full
authority, without voter approval, to regulate use of the Santa Monica Airport ,
manage Airport leaseholds, condition leases, and permanently close all or part of
the Airport to aviation use.
If all or part of the Airport land is permanently closed to aviation use, no new
development of that land shall be allowed until the voters have approved limits on
the uses and development that may occur on the land. However, t his section
shall not prohibit the City Council from approving the following on Airport land
that has been permanently closed to aviation use: the development of parks,
public open spaces, and public recreational facilities; and the maintenance and
replace ment of existing cultural, arts and education uses.
There are multiple reasons to transition the land currently occupied by the Airport into
uses consistent with Measure LC: c losing the Airport w ould s top adverse i mpacts of
Airport o perations ; effectuate M easure LC ; and g reatly i mprove the q uality of l ife . I t
would be a major transformative event .
3 of 20
The City is involved in two legal proceedings that have material effects on when the City
can close the airport. First, the federal lawsuit regarding the effect of the Instrument of
Transfer (IOT) is hugely determinative. The case is scheduled for trial August 2017.
The second case is a Part 16 administrative proceeding. This case involves the date
when Federal grant obligations expire, thus freeing Santa Monic a from the need to
comply with key federal regulations regarding the Airport. On August 15, 2016, as
expected, the FAA upheld its previous determination that the City is obligated until
2023. The City should appeal the FAA determination to the federal co urts.
If the resolution and policy are adopted the City Manager intends to implement a series
of actions that may include all of the measures below but is not necessarily limited to
these actions:
1. Commencing the park planning process, including conductin g an environmental
analysis as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the
National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA).
2. Investigating whether certain fractional jet operators are operating as scheduled
airlines.
3. Submitting an application to FAA which would alter the Airport runway by
removing the 1949 Quit Claim Parcel, also known as the “Western Parcel” from
aviation use.
4. Ceas ing forbearance of lax enforcement of the Santa Monica Airport noise
ordinance and apply enforcemen t as written.
5. Transition ing aircraft hangar uses from lease agreements to permits.
6. Creat ing a City of Santa Monica Fixed Based Operation and eliminate the current
providers.
7. Eliminati ng lead fuel.
8. Enhanc ing airport security.
BACKGROUND
Few issues have as long, contentious or significant a history as the struggles over the
future of the Santa Monica Airport. “Exerting Local Control” over the City -owned land
occupied by the Santa Monica Airport is one of the City Council’s top five Strategic
Goals.
On July 26, 2016, at the request of Mayor Tony Vazquez and Mayor Pro Tem Ted
Winterer, the City Council agreed to consider a resolution (1) expressing the City
Council’s intention to close the Santa Monica Airport to aviation use, as soon as that is
legall y permitted with a goal of June 30, 2018 and earlier if possible, and, upon
compliance with applicable legal processes, to transition the land currently occupied by
the Airport to uses consistent with Measure LC (Local Control), and (2) authorizing the
Cit y Manager to initiate all administrative measures necessary to implement the
resolution, including commencement of planning and environmental review processes
4 of 20
required by the California Environmental Quality Act and the State Planning Act. The
motion pass ed by unanimous consent.
The subject resolution is a clear acknowledgement by the City Council to implement
Measure LC and it intends to close the Airport as quickly as legally permitted and by
lawful means.
Evolution of the City and Airport Relationship
According to Cloverfield.org, as early as 1922 the land currently occupied by the Airport
was used as a landing field. In 1926 Santa Monica voters approved a park bond ballot
measure to purchase the land currently occupied by the airport. Below is an exc erpt of
the 1926 ordinance.
The property has been under city ownership from that time to present , having
undergone expansion during and after World War II. Since its establishment over 90
years ago, the Airport has played an important part in the evoluti on of Santa Monica.
For instance, the Douglas Aircraft factory at the Airport produced more than 6,000 DC -3
and other fighter/bomber aircraft to help the United States win World War II.
Beginning in the late 1950s, with the advent of jet aircraft, the rel ationships among
Douglas Aircraft, the City of Santa Monica, and the residents soured and became
adversarial. The City (responding to residents’ protests) refused to extend the SMO
runway even at the cost of losing local jobs to avoid “locking in” noise f rom the DC -8
jetliners that Douglas proposed to build in 1958. In 1962 a public hearing was held at
the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium to discuss the impacts of airport operations on
residents. In 1967, a large group of residents sued the City, claiming j et operations had
5 of 20
damaged their property values and their quality of life. Five years later, the City
adopted an ordinance designed to reduce aircraft noise and ban jet aircraft.
In 1981, the City Council adopted Resolution 6296 declaring its intention to close the
Airport when legally possible. After a series of negotiations, FAA and the City reached
a comprehensive settlement in 1984. “The 1984 Agreement” recognized the City’s
authority to mitigate aircraft noise, impose curfew limits, ban helicopter t raining, limit the
number of aircraft tie -downs, and remove certain land on the south side of the airport
from aviation use. In return, the City agreed to: 1) operate the airport until June 30,
2015 and 2) permit fixed base operators (FBOs) to serve passe nger s , service and
maintain aircraft, and sell avgas and jet fuel.
Fractional a ircraft is a common term for fractional ownership of aircraft where multiple
owners share the costs of purchasing, leasing and operating the aircraft. Commercial
programs for la rge aircraft include LuxJet Group, NetJets, Flexjet, Flight Options,
PlaneSense, Executive AirShare, AirSprint and Autumn Air. Fractional jet operations
transformed business jet operations nationally and ushered in the escalating jet
operations at SMO tha t continues today. The bar chart below clearly shows the trend in
the growth of jet aircraft at the expense of piston aircraft.
6 of 20
By 1999, increased jet traffic caused Los Angeles City residents to sue the City of Santa
Monica based on adverse health impa cts and nuisance caused by the Airport. By 2008,
the City Council passed an ordinance banning (larger and faster) Category C and D
aircraft from using SMO due to their adverse environmental impacts and increased
safety hazards resulting from faster landin g speeds coupled with the short (4,970 foot)
SMO runway length. The FAA enjoined enforcement of this ordinance and later
prevailed in Federal Court.
A common theme in th is long -running issu e centers on the environmental impacts of jet
operations, particu larly the loud noise of jets that residents nearby the Airport find
intolerable. According to the City noise violation database from May 1, 2013 to April, 30
2016 – jet operations account for 92 % of all the (95 decibel) SMO noise violations. For
context , a 95 decibel jet noise seems as loud as a jackhammer at 50 feet. T he Santa
Monica Municipal Code imposes a 75 decibel maximum five -minute noise exposure limit
for the community.
7 of 20
As shown below, total operations have decreased sig nificantly since the 1999 peak.
However, jet operations continue to increase at SMO, thus exacerbating and increasing
noise pollution and the potential for a significant large scale accident. Because jets are
typically much larger and carry far more fuel (a Gulfstream IV w eighs as much as
75,000 pounds and carries 15 tons of jet fuel), jets pose far greater risks to residents
than do propeller aircraft , should an accident occur.
8 of 20
Aircraft accidents, noise, and air pollution are not the only risks that the Airport poses to
nearby residents. For nearly 25 years, California has banned lead as an additive for
automobile fuel because of its toxic effects on humans, particularly children. Leaded
auto gas was banned because of the highly adverse environmental impacts it has on
people and the environment. Since 2008 the EPA found there is no safe lead
particulate exposure level (especially for infants) and it recommended limiting the use of
lead in aviation fuel because the lead particles from avgas comprise more than 50% of
the total US lead emissions.
Unlike jet aircraft, piston aircraft utilize leaded fuel. In 2009, the EPA studied SMO lead
emissions (totaling 800 pounds in 2002) and estimated the lead particulates had been
roughly halved due to the decrease in piston aircra ft traffic by 2009. At the Airport, two
FBO vendors combine to sell approximately 260,000 gallons of leaded fuel each year.
Each gallon of avgas fuel contains about two grams of lead. Thus, SMO generates
260,000 x 2 = 520,000 grams, or about 1,160 poun ds of lead particles. If SMO were to
close, more than half a ton of lead particles that impact this region would cease to be
generated .
The Office of Environmental Health Assessment, (OEHA) which is a department within
the California Environmental Protect ion Agency (CalEPA), produces a pollution burden
map. According to OEHA, the census tract in which the airport lies, ranks in the 79 th
percentile of most pollution burden census tracts in all of California. The OEHA
9 of 20
pollution burden index consists of var ious pollutants, including diesel, PM2.5 and toxic
releases. In the case of diesel, PM2.5 and toxic releases, the census tract that houses
the Airport has the highest reading for diesel, PM2.5 and toxic releases in all Santa
Monica.
In summary, all the afo rementioned trends and impacts of noise, pollution, and dangers
have a wide -reaching adverse impact on a l arge area around SMO today. O ver 1,800
residents as far as three miles away from the runway (Santa Monica, West Los
Angeles, Venice, Mar Vista and Ma rina d el Rey ) articulated these negative impacts in
personal letters to Congressional Representatives Ted Lieu and Karen Bass. These
personal testimonials were presented to the FAA on July 8, 2015 in Washington, D.C.
The map below indicates where a port ion of the residents are located.
A Geospatial Analysis of the Distribution of Westside Residents
Negatively Impacted by the Santa Monica Airport
10 of 20
There are over 130,000 residents within two miles of Santa Monica Airport. Red
markers indicate a partial sample of documented complaints by residents that were
presented to the FAA by Congressional Representatives.
Adoption of Measure Local Control (Measure LC)
In June 2014, Santa Monica voters were presented with two opposing Airport ballot
measures. Measur e D was sponsored and supported by the National Business Aircraft
Association, (NBAA), the Aircraft Operators and Pilots Association (AOPA), and the
Santa Monica Airport Association (SMAA) – entities presently suing the City to keep
SMO open for business. Measure D, funded by almost $1,000,000 from the NBAA and
other Washington DC special interests, can only be described as a pro -aviation
measure designed to change the City Charter and thereby ensure the continuance of
11 of 20
airport operations at SMO. Measure D , which had no local community support or
endorsements, lost 40 percent to 60 percent .
Measure LC was supported by virtually all local Santa Monica groups, neighborhood
associations, and organizations. Measure LC passed 60 percent to 40 percent ; it
clearl y presents an electoral mandate to the City. Measure LC reads as follows:
Subject only to limitations imposed by law, the City Council shall have full
authority, without voter approval, to regulate use of the Santa Monica Airport ,
manage Airport leasehold s, condition leases, and permanently close all or part of
the Airport to aviation use.
If all or part of the Airport land is permanently closed to aviation use, no new
development of that land shall be allowed until the voters have approved limits on
the u ses and development that may occur on the land. However, this section
shall not prohibit the City Council from approving the following on Airport land
that has been permanently closed to aviation use: the development of parks,
public open spaces, and publi c recreational facilities; and the maintenance and
replacement of existing cultural, arts and education uses.
While residents did not vote to close the Airport, they clearly intended that City Council
limit/reduce airport operations and specified that if t he Airport closes, the land currently
occupied by the Airport must be used for the development of parks, public open spaces,
and public recreational facilities; and the maintenance and replacement of existing
cultural, arts and education uses, unless there is a vote of the people to the contrary.
The voter turnout in the Sunset Park and Ocean Park neighborhood precincts (those
residents most impacted by SMO operations) approached 75 percent with LC approval
rates of over 80 percent.
Post Measure LC Actio ns Taken by the City
Since Measure LC passage, the City has taken various steps to regain local control
over the property now occupied by the Airport. On March 22, 2016, the City adopted a
new leasing policy. Only uses that are compatible with surroundi ng neighbors are
permitted per this policy, unless the use is required by law. Second, the City has
continued its legal battles, both in the federal courts and through ongoing FAA
administrative proceedings. Third, the City did not extend the lease of th e largest
12 of 20
Airport master tenant, Gunnell Properties. The City is in the process of bringing
Gunnell’s former sub -tenants into compliance with the Council’s adopted Leasing
Policy . Fourth, City staff has begun the process of eliminating the remaining mast er
tenants while maintaining an orderly transition. Fifth, t he City and Justice Aviation
reached an agreement, and Justic e Aviation voluntarily vacated. Sixth, consistent with
Measure LC, the City Council approved hiring a park planning consulting firm in order to
expand Airport Park from 8 acres to 20 acres. In a related action, the City removed all
aircraft from the southeast parcel to clear the way for the park expansion. Last, the City
required the Airport Fund to repay the General Fund $1.2M in FY 1 5 -16 in order to
reduce the Airport’s debt obligation to the City.
DISCUSSION
Closing the Santa Monica Airport Would Be Transformative
The Santa Monica Airport, located in a highly urbanized and densely populated region ,
occupies 227 acres consisting of multiple separate parcels. While many transient
aircraft transit SMO, only 310 aircraft are based at the Airport. Thus, the benefit of
dedicating a vast track of valuable land for the tiny number of aviation users comes at
the expense of precluding an i ncreased quality of life for tens of thousands of residents
(and visitors) who would otherwise enjoy greatly improved park, recreational, cultural,
and community amenities. It should be noted that in Los Angeles County there are 3.3
acres of park for ever y 1,000 residents. Santa Monica falls fall below the County
average at only 1.4 acres for every 1,000 residents. If the parcels of land currently
dedicated to aviation are converted to park space, the City of Santa Monica would reach
parity with Los Ange les County. Moreover, closing the Airport represents perhaps the
greatest and last opportunity to create a “great park” in Santa Monica, or perhaps the
entire West Los Angeles area, analogous to Central Park in New York, Golden Gate
Park in San Francisco, or Millennium Park in Chicago. Transforming this precious
property into uses consistent with Measure LC may well become the greatest
transformative event of this century for the City of Santa Monica, equal to or surpassing
the pier or extending the Expo Rail line to the beach.
In March of this year, the City Council adopted a leasing policy. The leasing policy
authorizes the City Manager to enter into lease agreements at the Airport, provided the
13 of 20
term of the agreement s do es not exceed June 30, 2018. T he Council selected June 30,
2018 as the longest lease term because by said date , or perhaps sooner, the c ourts are
expected to resolve the leg al matters in favor of the City thus allowing the City to close
the Airport.
Should the City Council elect to pas s this resolution and adopt the policy , it can cite the
reasons below:
1. Closing the Airport Would Eliminate Adverse Impacts of Airport Operations . Santa
Monica and indeed, all of Southern California has become increasing ly urban. The
Santa Monica populati on exceeds 11,000 persons per square mile –greater than
surrounding Los Ang e les communities while our park acreage trails that of Los
Angeles. Land uses that were once prominent such as drive -in theaters have closed
due to economic pressures, and land -use s such as land -fills have been relocated to
more appropriate locations in order to stop their adverse impacts on large highly
urbanized communities.
While an airfield may have been an allowed use, and perhaps even innovative in
1926 at the time of the bon d measure, as the City has evolved the harmful
environmental impacts of SMO operations have increased to the point where the
Santa Monica Airport is no longer a community benefit. From December 1928 to
August 1939 there was an aver age of only 70 flights p er year, hence the airfield was
not incompatible with the semi -rural nature of the city at that time.
In addition to removing the threat of a catastrophic jet aircraft accident, closing the
Santa Monica Airport w ould halt ongoing adverse environmental i mpacts of airport
operations, e.g.: 1) noise pollution, 2) fine particulate air pollution, and 3) lead
particle pollution. Closing the Santa Monica Airport may be the single most
important, immediate, and locally achievable environmental protection measur e
available to the City Council.
2. Transitioning the Airport to Be Consistent with Measure LC Would Greatly Improve
the Quality of Life. In 2014, Santa Monica residents approved Measure Local
Control. Per Measure LC, only “parks, public open spaces, and p ublic recreational
14 of 20
facilities; and the maintenance and replacement of existing cultural, arts and
education uses are permitted on the land currently occupied by the Airport without a
vote of Santa Monica residents.” The transition of property currently us ed for aircraft
operations at the Airport to uses permitted under Measure LC would dramatically
improve the surrounding conditions for Santa Monica and West Los Angeles
residents by replacing highly dangerous environmental threats with desirable
surroundin gs that will greatly enhance residents’ quality of life.
3. Closing SMO Is A Matter of Local Control and Property Rights . The City owns the
land now occupied by the Santa Monica Airport. Property owners, including cities,
have legal right to exercise thei r property rights within the constraints imposed by the
authorized land use regulator. The Federal Government is not a local land use
regulator, thus, FAA does not have jurisdiction over land use decisions in Santa
Monica. Using its municipal powers, inc luding its property rights and land use
authority in 1926, the City created an airfield and park and in 1941 lease d the land to
the Federal Government during a time of national emergency. Now after 90 years of
transformative change, if the City Council de termines that the negative
environmental impacts of airport operations outweigh the benefits that SMO
provides, the City has the sole authority, as the property owner and as the land use
regulator, to make that decision, not the FAA.
4. Legal Liability . As owner/operator of the Airport, the City is legally responsible and
potentially liable for injuries resulting from Airport operations. In contrast, the federal
government has no liability because it is immunized by the Doctrine of Sovereign
Immunity. Thus , according to the FAA, the City has all the responsibility and
potential liability for Airport operations and impacts, but none of the authority to
control them. This places the City in a position that is both untenably risky and
grossly unfair.
The Cur rent Legal Environment
The City is involved in two legal proceedings that have material effects on when the City
can close the airport. First, the federal lawsuit regarding the effect of the Instrument of
Transfer (IOT) is hugely determinative. The IOT p rovided the mechanism by which the
Federal Government (a) surrendered the land it leased from the City and, (b) transferred
15 of 20
the buildings and improvements on the leased land to the City after using it during
World War II. The attached documents from the N ational Archives Offices in Riverside,
California demonstrate that the Federal Government agreed to surrender the 168 acres
of runway land and transfer the buildings and improvements to the City.
16 of 20
17 of 20
The FAA claims the 1948 Instrument of Transfer requires the City to operate the airport
in perpetuity; the City rejects this FAA claim. The federal trial will be next August.
Earlier this year, the City won a preliminary victory in this case when the 9 th District
Circuit Court of Appeals determined the facts o f the case are so intertwined that the
Court could not separate the statute of limitations from the merits of the case and thus a
trial was warranted. The Court of Appeals returned the case to District Court and
ordered the case be tried on its merits.
Th e second case is a Part 16 administrative proceeding. This case involves the date
when Federal grant obligations expire, thus freeing Santa Monica from the need to
comply with key federal regulations regarding the Airport. The City argues that these
obli gations expired in 2014 but the FAA claims the obligations remain valid until 2023.
On August 15, 2016, as expected , the Associate Director for Airports, upheld the
previous FAA determination. The City should appeal the FAA determination to the
federal c ourts.
Post Airport Closure Resolution Actions of the City Manager
The subject resolution states: “A resolution of the City Council of the City of Santa
Monica making findings regarding the adverse environmental, health and safety effects
of the Santa M onica airport; declaring the policy of the City to close the Santa Monica
airport to aviation uses as soon as legally permitted, and directing the City Manager to
implement all lawful administrative measures consistent with these findings and
declarations”. Therefore, the City Manager intends to implement all measures listed
below, or other measures should he determine that said measures would be consistent
with the findings and declaration:
1. Commenc e the park planning process, including conducting an env ironmental
analysis as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the
National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA). Transitioning the land currently
occupied by the Airport into a “great park” may require the City to comply with
certa in planning and environmental laws and that will take considerable time and
energy. Hence, in order to coordinate the construction of a great park with the
closure of the airport, the time to commence the planning and environmental
analysis is now.
18 of 20
2. Inves tigat e whether certain fractional jet operators are im permissibly operating as
scheduled airlines . It should be noted that both FAA and the City of Santa
Monica prohibit scheduled airline operations out of SMO.
3. Submit an application to FAA which would alter the Airport runway by removing
the 1949 Quit Claim Parcel, also known as the “Western Parcel” from aviation
use . As noted above, the Western Parcel is not subject to the IOT; the only
tenuous hold the FAA may have on the Western Parcel for aviation use is the
1994 Grant Assurance. The City will appeal the recent grant assurance
determination by the FAA to the federal courts. Thus, it makes sense to file the
application to close the Western Parcel to aviation as part of the City’s appeal of
the gran t assurance.
4. Cease forbearance of lax enforcement of the Santa Monica Airport noise
ordinance and apply enforcement as written . The City’s enforcement practice of
its noise ordinance pre -dates the advent of fractional ownership and jets on
demand service s. Hence, enforcement should be adjusted to reflect the current
state of airport operations.
5. Transition aircraft hangar uses from lease agreements to permits . There is a
great uncertainty regarding whether FAA has legal rights to impose control over
C ity land in order to accommodate aviation uses. Until those legal questions are
resolved, the City seeks to avoid binding real estate commitments that would
preclude the City from swiftly ending aviation uses as soon as legally permitted.
A permit system is a reasonable accommodation until the City prevails in court
and expeditiously close s the Airport per the subject City Council Resolution. The
proposed permit system provides an important step forward toward greater local
control over the property now occupied by aviation users.
6. Create a City of Santa Monica Fixed Based Operation . If the City is required to
operate the airport and if FBO services are required, the City would have greater
19 of 20
local control by establishing a municipal FBO. FAA regulation s permit cities to
operate an FBO provided the operation is done with city employees and
resources. Hence, it is legally permitted and there are examples of city run
FBOs, including the City of Naples , Florida. As part of our due diligence, staff will
ex amine issues related to: fuel farm operations, employee recruit ment , training
and retention, equipment, costs and revenue, and liability. The two private FBO
providers will be eliminated when C ity staff are ready to assume the duties.
7. Elimination o f lead fuel . Despite the known dangers of leaded fuel and a viable
alternative, FAA has yet to phase it out. Therefore, because there is a viable
alternative that could service an estimated 65 percent of the propeller aircraft
fleet based in SMO, the sal e of leaded fuel should be phased out completely as
soon as legal ly possible. In place of leaded fuel, staff would recommend the sale
of unleaded fuel and would request that the City Council authorize the City
Manager to enter into contract negotiations f or the provision of said fuel.
8. Enhanced Security . In accordance with previous direction of the City Council,
staff is in the process of selecting a highly qualified airport security firm. Staff
expects to recommend the contract in September or October 2 016
Resolution’s Impact on the City Council’s Airport Strategic Goal
On August 23, 2015, the City Council adopted five strategic goals. One goal was to
regain local control of the land occupied by the Santa Monica Airport. If the City Council
adopts thi s resolution, staff will revise the Airport strategic goal to reflect this resolution,
develop performance measures that correspond to this resolution, and present those
performance measures first to the Airport Commission and then to the City Council.
Al ternatives to an Airport Closure Resolution
The Council may elect to not approve the proposed resolution and maintain the status
quo. However, as explained in this staff report, the status quo is inconsistent with
Measure LC, produces adverse environmenta l impacts, creates the possibility of
hazards, and does not improve the overall quality of life. Hence, if the optimal public
20 of 20
policy goal is to eliminate noise and air pollution from all aircraft and to maximize park,
open space, cultural and education fa cilities, the City Council should adopt the
proposed resolution.
Fiscal Impacts
Adoption of the resolution does not have a direct fiscal impact. The fiscal impact of
creating a city FBO service and hiring consulting services in connection to the planning
process and environmental analysis will be determined when more information is
available and proposals have been submitted.
Prepared By: Nelson Hernandez, Senior Advisor for Airport Affairs
Approved
Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. Resolution
B. Pol icy
C. Written comments
D. Powerpoint Presentation
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
POLICY FOR ESTABLISHING EXCLUSIVE PUBLIC PROPRIETARY “FIXED
BASED OPERATIONS ” AND PROVIDING OTHER AERONAUTICAL SERVICES AT
THE SANTA MONICA AIRPORT
Pursuant to the findings, declarations, policies and directions of the
“RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
MAKING FINDINGS REGARDING THE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL, HEALTH
AND SAFETY EFFECTS OF THE SANTA MONICA AIRPORT; DECLARING THE
POLICY OF THE CITY TO CLOSE THE SANTA MONICA AIRPORT TO AVIATION
USES AS SO ON AS LEGALLY PERMITTED, AND DIRECTING THE CITY
MANAGER TO I MPLEMENT ALL LAWFUL ADMINISTRATIVE MEASURES
CONSISTENT WITH THESE FINDINGS AND DECLARATIONS ” the City Council now
sets forth the following policies which shall govern the provision of Fixed Base
O perations and related aeronautical services at the Air port as long as it remains open:
1. The City Manager shall replace all current private fixed base operators
such as Atlantic Aviation and American Flyers, (each an “FBO” and
collectively the “Airport FBO s”) with fixed base operations provided by the
City on an exclusive proprietary basis, on or before December 31, 2016,
or as soon as practicable thereafter.
2. The City Manager, in order to ensure an orderly transition, shall initiate
such legal action as are necessary and appropriate to cause the removal
of the Airport FBOs (which currently occupy space at the Airport under
expired leases), including any legally required “Notice to Vacate”, by
September 15, 2016, or as soon as practicable thereafter.
3. The City Manager is authorized and directed to take whatever steps he
deems appropriate for the City to offer some or all of the same
aeronautical services as were offered by the Airport FBOs. The
aeronautical services offered shall include only those FBO services
required by law, as may be determined by the City based upon written
communications with the FAA, the California Department of Aeronautics,
and other federal and state agencies.
4. The City shall use some or all physical assets owned by the City, in cluding
those which may currently be being used by the Airport FBOs, including
real property, fuel tanks, hangars, tie -downs, tarmac areas and other City -
owned physical assets. The City Manager is further authorized to engage
City personnel and/or contra ctors to support the provision of such
aeronautical services.
5. The City will also allow individual aircraft owners to hire aeronautical
service providers located off the Airport premises to provide aeronautical
services within the Airport, on fair and re asonable terms, but only to the
extent legally required, as the same may be determined by the City
Manager based upon written communications with the FAA, the California
Department of Aeronautics, and other federal and state agencies.
6. This policy shall re main in effect through March 31, 2017. The City
Manager is further directed to return to this City Council prior to March 31,
2017, to allow this City Council to renew, enhance or modify this policy.
1
Anne Samartha
From:Jonathan Stein <jstein@jsteinlaw.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 06, 2016 9:26 AM
To:<,ksklarin@verizon.net>,; Jack Abdallah (saadzzes@hotmail.com); Stacey Abrams-
Sherick (sjaconsulting@gmail.com); Cathy Larson - FOSP Airport
(fospairport@rocketmail.com); James Allala (jamesallala@gmail.com);
<,cyamaya@mac.com>,; Paula Bambic ; Cindy Bendat (cbendat@gmail.com);
Warren Berghoff; ncisbinder@icloud.com; Brian Bland (blandcbhs@aol.com); Barbara
Blankenship (blankens@humnet.ucla.edu); inoah@me.com; Judy Blume
(judy.blume@verizon.net); David and Stepha nie Body (dbodydelange@ca.rr.com); Ellen
Brennan; Suzanne Robertson and Barry Brewer (suzanne4455@aol.com); Phil Brock
(commissionerbrock@gmail.com); Michael Brodsky (mbrodsky@lmu.edu); Robert
Brown (rcbee44@verizon.net); <,danielbunt ing@gmail.com>,; Kerry Candaele; Alex
Capron (acapron@law.usc.edu); Sandra Casillas; Dorothy Chapman
(da.chapman@hotmail.com); tom.charchut @gmail.com; <,njdhope@gmail.com>,;
Sharon Commins (smcommins@marvista.org); Barry Conley (beautifulrek@yahoo.com);
Tricia Crane (triciacrane@gmail.com); Karen Croner (Kcroner@mac.com); Karolyn Cruz
(karolync@hotmail.com); Carlos and Gl oria Cuadra (gncuadra123@gmail.com);
<moonballoon@roadrunner.com>; cyamaya@ma c.com; danielbunting@gmail.com;
Patrick Davenport (patrick@davenport.tv); godin.david@gmail.com; mrsd17@aol.com;
Lisa and Jason Detamore (wclisa2000@yah oo.com); Djjc123@earthlink.net; Peter
Donald (pad45@mac.com); njdhope@gm ail.com; edenmurals@hotmail.com;
alice@elliscasting.com; Ken Erickson (cbrown56@verizon.net); Virginia Ernst CRAAP
(ernst@usc.edu); John Fairweather and Vivian Flitton (Johnfairweather@earthlink.net);
frisco fayer (friscofayer@gmail.com); Mike Feinstein (mfeinstein@feinstein.org);
epum@me.com; Vivien Flitton (vflitton@earthlink.net); Taryn Fordes
(tfordes@mac.com); William Fordes; Franni e Einberg (effieacct@att.net); Jim Redden
(reddenfx@aol.com); Eleanor and Gregory Fr y (fry.elly@gmail.com); Eric Garner
(eric.garner@bbklaw.com); andrew @agledhill.com; David Goddard x124
(david_e_goddard@yahoo.com); godin.da vid@gmail.com; roberta goldfarb
(robinatsm@aol.com); dianagordo n5@gmail.com; Whitney Green
(mom1whit@gmail.com); Frank Gruber (fra nkgrubersm@gmail.com); Barbara Goodson
Gustafson (babs1617@hotmail.com); char din2349@gmail.com; Joseph Hardin
(joehardin@earthlink.net); Susan Hartley (susanhartleylaw@gmail.com);
hartofhearing@yahoo.com; Dian a Hedges (hedgesdiana@gmail.com);
hendrickson1965@gmail.com; Sue Himmelrich - Western Center on Law and Poverty
(suehimmelrich@suehimmelrich.net); Ping Ho (pingho@ucla.edu); Bruce Horowitz
(bruce@limestudios.tv); Young.Howie@gmail.com; Kristine Hunter (kristinesue22
@verizon.net); Nick Ingram (nickingram@verizon.net); Mike Jerrett (mjerrett@ucla.edu);
Laura Gideon and Dennis Jimnez (bamboobalance@yahoo.com); Joe
(joemusicman@yahoo.com); Karen Jones (k hjones1949@yahoo.com); Jacquie Jordan
(jacqjordan@aol.com); zina josephs (zinajosephs@aol.com); dave kang
(davekang@gmail.com); Kevin Katz (vinkman@earthlink.net); Samantha Kinnon;
ksklarin@verizon.net; Daklass1; Norman Kulla; hek@hekassoc.com; Lois Banner and
John Laslett (LBanner@usc.edu); alan@alanl evenson.com; micah@micahlinton.com;
Joanna Lipari (jolipari@mac.com); sister@brotherlab.com;
<,alisonlopez@yahoo.com>,; alis onlopez@yahoo.com; Paul Mabley
(pmbley@gmail.com); colinmaduzia@gmail.com; Reza Marashi (rezmash@verizon.net);
<,natalie@namevents.com>,; jason mc bride (jasonmcbride@la.twcbc.com);
lordfountainglen@gmail.com; Richard Mc Kinnon (richard@richardmckinnon.com);
Armen Melkonians (amelkonians@yahoo.com); Tobin Mills (tobin.mills@botw.com);
2
To:mimws@verizon.net; mimws@verizon.net; Ingrid Mueller; natalie@namevents.com;
Patrick Ney (patdmelt@verizon.net); Rob Nokes; Bill and Pauli Nuttle
(bnuttle@ca.rr.com); Mike Pellettieri (m ike900@verizon.net); Roy and Dana Rico
(royrico@aol.com); Bob Rigdon (bobrigdon@roadrunner.com); Patrick Roberts
(patrickaroberts@outlook.com); CRAAP Martin and Joan Rubin
(jetairpollution@earthlink.net); Deirdre (deirdre.r2012@gmail.com);
WSadler@pubdef.lacounty.gov; <,WSadle r@pubdef.lacounty.gov>,; Mike Salazar
(mikedsalazar@gmail.com); Joe the Pilot; Gavin Scott (gavin.scott@verizon.net); Nicola
Scott; Patrick Seeholzer (f ur.boom@verizon.net); Laura S ilagi (LRSILAGI@GMAIL.COM);
Jonathan Stein; Jonathan Stein; Braden Stephens; Geoffrey Sure
(janetbumpo@gmail.com); Lou Sutu (LSAPC@aol.com); Rahm Tamir
(rahmtamir@gmail.com); Mindy Taylor-Ro ss (mindytr101@gmail.com); Matt Thaler
(mthaler@detroitspotters.com); Roberts Th ane (robertsthane@gmail.com); Maureen
Tomlin (Maureen.Tomlin@macmillan.com); tr aciwallace@earthlink.net; janet tunick
(janetrt3@hotmail.com); Kathleen Un ger; Stephen Unger; bcwang@yahoo.com;
ken_ward; waveskiboy@me.com; Krista Wegener (krista_wegener@yahoo.com); E&H
Weingarten (weinga@ca.rr.com); Andrew Wilder; Robert Dirk Beving and Sheila Wilson
(dirkbeving@verizon.net); Mark Zubuchen (mark_z@mac.com)
Cc:Ben Allen (senator.allen@senate.ca.gov); Melinda Amato
(mamato@nationbuilder.com); Tina Andolina (t ina.andolina@sen.ca.gov); Cindy Bendat
(cbendat@gmail.com); Mike Bonin (mike.bonin@lacity.org); Kate Bransfield
(kate@santamonicalistings.com); Ivan Campbell; Landsberg Carol; Cline, Theodate;
Tricia Crane (triciacrane@gmail.com); Sheila Maas (sheilam@politicallawnsigns.com);
Gleam Davis; Ashley Fumi ko Dominguez (ashley.dominguez@mail.house.gov);
CommunityEvents Mailbox; Victor Fresco an d Joyce Barkin (v.fresco2@verizon.net);
CityTV; dianagordon5@gmail.com; Clerk Ma ilbox; jay.greenstein@lacity.org; Nita
Lelyveld (nita.lelyveld@latimes.com); Marcia Hanscom (wetlandact@earthlink.net);
Nelson Hernandez; Sue Himmelrich - We stern Center on Law and Poverty
(suehimmelrich@suehimmelrich.net); Randy Hirt (randyhirt@gmail.com);
Young.Howie@gmail.com; Jed (jed@walkingmaninc.com); Maral Karaccusian
(maral@mail.house.gov); Jenn K; Paul Koretz (paulkoretz@earthlink.net); Terence Later
(TLater@mac.com); Debbie Lee; Tom Lee (justyardsigns@gmail.com); Steve Macon
Lessinger (macon@winvotes.com); Samuel Liu; Esterlina Lugo; Jonathan Mann
(net_democracy@yahoo.com); Laura Matth ews (nfo@richardmckinnon.com); Kevin
McKeown Fwd; Richard McKinnon (richard@r ichardmckinnon.com); Armen Melkonians
(amelkonians@yahoo.com); Marsha Moutrie; Zoe Muntaner
(compassionatesantamonica@gmail.com); Len Nguyen (len.nguyen@lacity.org); Terry
O’Day; Pam OConnor; Alex Olvera (aolvera@rrcc.lacounty.gov); Chuy Orozco
(jesus.d.orozco@lacity.org); Thomas Pacci oretti (tpaccioretti@gmail.com); Martin
Pastucha; Lisa Pinto (Lisa.pinto@mail.house.gov); Elaine Polachek; polygraphics and
SignRocket.com (sales@signrocket.com); Price, Megan; Omar Pulido
(omar.pulido@lacity.org); Maral Karaccusian (maral@mail.house.gov); Rick Cole; Bob
Rigdon (bobrigdon@roadrunner.com); Tyler Root; Jerry Rubin
(jerrypeaceactivistrubin@earthlink.net); Sandra Santiago; Serge Sarkissian x4715
(serge@corprg.com); Jeff Segal; John Cyru s Smith (johncysmith@gmail.com); SMRR
(smrrinfo@smrr.org); Michael E. Soloff - Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP
(Mike.Soloff@mto.com); Jonathan Stein; Info@TinaOgata.com; Tony Vazquez
(tvazquez1516@yahoo.com); former SPAA Sunset Park Anti-Airport website
(help@nationbuilder.com); Dan Weikel (dan iel.weikel@latimes.com); Chris West or
Kimberly or Laura (chris@mailingprosinc.com); David Willis; Ted Winterer
(tedwinterer@gmail.com); Samuel Liu x108 (s amuel.liu@sen.ca.gov); Glenn x11 or x13
(colbyposter@earthlink.net); Craig Zund x4710 (craig@corprg.com); Paige Austin
(paige.austin@patch.com); Brian Bland (blandcbhs@aol.com); Niki Cervantes
3
Cc:(ncervantes@santamonicalookout.com); Joa nna Clay; PegClf@aol.com; David Ganezer
(editor@smobserver.com); paloma.esquivel@ latimes.com; Brenton Garen x107 - Santa
MOnica Mirror (brenton@smmirror.com); Ci tyTV; aglee@cbs.com; Nita Lelyveld
(nita.lelyveld@latimes.com); Matthew Hall (editor@smdp.com); Jason Islas
(jason@santamonicalookout.com); fred krueger; Debbie Lee; Joe Piasecki
(joe@argonautnews.com); KCRW Radio (mail@ kcrw.com); Parimal Rohit; Louis Sahagun
(Louis.Sahagun@latimes.com); Rob Schwen ker (schwenker@smdp.com); Jonathan
Serviss (jonathan.serviss@cb sradio.com); Judy Swartz x 134 (judy@smmirror.com); Gary
Walker x112 (Gary@ArgonautNews.com); Da n Weikel (daniel.weikel@latimes.com)
Subject:Airport mailer for Aug 23 City Council meeting
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
All, the following mailer was sent to all registered voters in 90405:
4
Jonathan Stein
Law Offices of Jonathan Stein
1999 Avenue of the Stars, Ste. 1100
Los Angeles, CA 90067 ‐4618
off: 310 ‐587 ‐2277
cell: 310 ‐968 ‐4455
Jstein@jsteinlaw.com
www.jsteinlaw.com
THIS COMMUNICATION IS ONLY FOR THE INDIVIDUAL(S) OR ENTITY TO WHICH IT IS ADDRESSED AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS
CONFIDENTIAL, PRIVILEGED OR EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER APPLICABLE LAW. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR,
PLEASE NOTIFY THE SENDER IMMEDIATELY AND THEN DELETE. IF YOU ARE NEITHER AN ADDRESSEE NOR SOMEONE RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERY
TO AN ADDRESSEE, BE AWARE THAT DISCLOSURE, COPYING, DISTRIBUTION OR USE OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. THANK
YOU.
1
Anne Samartha
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, August 09, 2016 11:58 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Atlantic Aviation
Add ‐to for 8/26 meeting
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: debbie travis [mailto:travalato@yahoo.com]
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2016 2:16 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Atlantic Aviation
Please stop showing favoritism to special interests like Atlanta aviation. Put the interest of residents first!!
Please keep your resolution to evict Atlantic aviation before December 31, 2016.
Thank you, Debbie Travis ‐Chet Badalato
1248 Pearl St
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Sent from my iPhone
2
Anne Samartha
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, August 09, 2016 11:58 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: SM Airport and Atlantic Aviation
Add ‐to for 8.26 mtg
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: John Ziaukas [mailto:johnziaukas@verizon.net]
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2016 6:29 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Gleam Davis <Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET>; Ted Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>; Terry O’Day
<Terry.Oday@smgov.net>
Subject: SM Airport and Atlantic Aviation
Dear Ms. Davis, Mr. Winterer and Mr. O’Day:
While I appreciate the Council’s resolution to close the Santa Monica Airport even if it required the stimulus of a court
action, I am frustrated and disappointed that the closure is not likely to happen soon. Meanwhile, even after the Council
has been in control of the Airport for a year, I gather that jet flight operations have increased by 10% during that time.
I’m not sure why that would be unless the Council is beholden to aviation interests.
I urge you to evict Atlantic Aviation at your meeting on August 23, just as in the past you’ve evicted Justice Aviation.
Please follow the Airport leasing policy which the Council has adopted and stop permitting Atlantic Aviation to violate
that policy every day. I assume that none of you has been given large political contributions by Atlantic Aviation or its
affiliates or are otherwise in the back hip pocket of the aviation lobby. Please instruct your staff to begin a landlord ‐
tenant eviction proceeding now, because Atlantic has no lease and the City has already given Atlantic written notice to
leave.
I am baffled at your continuing show of favoritism to these special interests in defiance of the views of a majority of the
residents who elect you. My wife and I and our 18 year old son, who all live in Ocean Park, will be watching your actions
closely and they will have a great impact on the decision we make at the ballot box this coming November 8.
regards,
John Ziaukas
3rd Street, Santa Monica
3
Anne Samartha
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, August 09, 2016 11:59 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Stop the corruption
Add ‐to for 8/26 mtg
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Mary [mailto:naughtonmary511@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2016 8:57 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Stop the corruption
Evict Atlantic Aviation now!
Mary Naughton
2812 6th Street SM
Sent from my iPhone
4
Anne Samartha
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, August 09, 2016 11:59 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Evict Atlantic Aviation NOW!
Add ‐to for 8.26 mtg
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: JORDAN ELLIS [mailto:jordanrellis@me.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2016 10:42 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Evict Atlantic Aviation NOW!
Council members,
Please evict Atlantic Aviation from the SM Airport on august 23rd! The people of Santa Monica will no longer tolerate
inaction on this issue. Vote to evict or suffer the consequences on election day.
Jordan Ellis
Resident of Santa Monica
5
Anne Samartha
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, August 09, 2016 11:59 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: SM Airport and Atlantic Aviation
Add ‐to for 8/26 mtg
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Loren Segan [mailto:lorensegan@verizon.net]
Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2016 1:03 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Gleam Davis <Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET>; Ted Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>; Terry O’Day
<Terry.Oday@smgov.net>
Subject: SM Airport and Atlantic Aviation
Dear Ms. Davis, Mr. Winterer and Mr. O’Day:
While I appreciate the Council’s resolution to close the Santa Monica Airport even if it required the stimulus of a court
action, I am frustrated and disappointed that the closure is not likely to happen soon. Meanwhile, even after the Council
has been in control of the Airport for a year, I gather that jet flight operations have increased by 10% during that time.
I urge you to evict Atlantic Aviation at your meeting on August 23, just as in the past you’ve evicted Justice Aviation.
Please follow the Airport leasing policy which the Council has adopted and stop permitting Atlantic Aviation to violate
that policy every day. Please instruct your staff to begin a landlord ‐tenant eviction proceeding now, because Atlantic
has no lease and the City has already given Atlantic written notice to leave.
I am baffled at your continuing show of favoritism to these special interests in defiance of the views of a majority of the
residents who elect you. Your actions will have a great impact on the decision Santa Monica voters make at the ballot
box this coming November 8.
Sincerely,
Loren Segan
3rd Street, Santa Monica
6
Anne Samartha
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, August 09, 2016 11:59 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: What can we do about these planes?
Add ‐to for 8/26 mtg
From: Niles Harrison [mailto:niles_x@yahoo.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2016 3:44 PM
To: Gleam Davis <Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET>; Ted Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>; Terry O’Day
<Terry.Oday@smgov.net>; Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: jstein@jsteinlaw.com
Subject: What can we do about these planes?
Hello,
If you were sitting in my home at 753 Ozone St. in Santa Monica right now, we would have to wait for
airplanes to pass before we c ould finish our conversation.
I received a flyer that says tr affic has actually increased : (
What can we do about this situation?
Thanks,
Niles Harrison
Concerned Citizen
7
Anne Samartha
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, August 09, 2016 12:00 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Atlantic Aviation
Add ‐to for 8/26 mtg
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: laurence glasser [mailto:laurenceglasser@yahoo.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2016 9:57 PM
To: Gleam Davis <Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET>; Ted Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>; Terry O’Day
<Terry.Oday@smgov.net>; Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Atlantic Aviation
Dear Councilpersons,
I am a SFH owner in Santa Monica and vote in every election. Please do the right thing and get the jets out of SM Airport
ASAP. I could care less about Atlantic Aviation and the special interests groups that support them. What ever benefit
your getting is not worth the harm to my family and community.
Thanks,
Laurence Glasser, MD
25th street 90405
Sent from my iPad
1
Anne Samartha
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, August 09, 2016 1:44 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Please Keep The Santa Monica Airport And Atlantic Aviation Open
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
Add ‐to for 8/26 mtg
From: murrayk@kalisinc.com [mailto:murrayk@kalisinc.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2016 9:43 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Please Keep The Santa Monica Airport And Atlantic Aviation Open
Thank you.
Murray Kalis
Santa Monica resident
2
Anne Samartha
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, August 09, 2016 1:44 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Santa Monica Airport
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
Add ‐to for 8/26 mtg
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: David Guyette [mailto:davideguyette@icloud.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2016 8:31 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Santa Monica Airport
You elected leaders should be ashamed of yourselves. The city of Santa Monica preaches clean air and safety, but still
allows the airport to stay open. Since everyones effort to close the airport, it has actually caused even more jet traffic
flying out of the Santa Monica airport, and additional LAX trafic through our city and neiughborhood.
I was at the Santa Monica high school graduation in June, and could not hear the ceremony because of a large (300
passenger) jets at 7,000 feet up flew over the school on route to LAX. These very large jets also fly over my house, just
west of the Santa Monica runway on Marine Street every 15 minutes 24 hours a day 7 days a week.
When the City started presuring the FAA and the Obama administration to close the Santa Monica Airport, the FAA
changes the air traffic routes to LAX. The large passenger jets use to fly over the Santa Monica mountains to
donwntouwn LA, to east LA and then south to LAX. Now the passenger jets fly over the City of Santa Monica and over
my house every. At first it was not that noticable becuse they flew at 10,000 feet up. When the pressure to close Santa
Monica airport increased, the FAA change the altitue to 7,000 feet. It is now very noisy and the jets are dumping more
pollution on us and the city of Santa Monica. This is more polution than any reduction from bicycles or alternative fuels
will provide in a 100 years.
This is typical behavior of the Obama administration to punish anyone that gets in their way. The Santa Monica city
governament is probably not even aware of this problem or do not even care. The elected officials only care about
getting reelected and satisfying the companies like "Atlantic Aviation" that will help fund their campaign.
Again you elected officials should be ashamed of yourselves for saying one thing and doing another or nothing at all.
The problem with the Santa Monica Airport has grown even larger with the tremenous amount of traffic from LAX that
flys over our city and neighborhoods at 7,000 feet every 15 minutes, 24 hous a day seven days a week.
Sent from my iPad
3
Anne Samartha
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, August 09, 2016 1:44 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Santa Monica Airport
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
Add ‐to for 8/26 mtg
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: BARBARA JEAN [mailto:bj422@me.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2016 12:56 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Santa Monica Airport
Please act on August 23rd to evict Atlantic Aviation like you successfully evicted Justice Aviation. Follow the airport
leasing policy which you adopted which Atlantic Aviation operations violate every day.
Get Atlantic out before Dec.31. 2016. Please stop showing favoritism to special interests like Atlantic Aviation.
Barbara Jean
Barbara Jean
43 Sea Colony Drive
Santa Monica, CA 90405 ‐5496
310 ‐392 ‐9127
BJ422@me.com
4
Anne Samartha
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, August 09, 2016 1:45 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Santa Monica Airport-Jets
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
Add ‐to for 8/26 mtg
From: Thixton, Trent [mailto:TThixton@mednet.ucla.edu]
Sent: Monday, August 08, 2016 9:30 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Santa Monica Airport ‐Jets
Dear Council members,
As a 20 year resident of Suns et Park, my family and I urge you to help in this matter!
We appreciate your resolution to clos e the Airport after court action, but this will take many years. In the
meanwhile, after a full year of local control by City Council, jet flight ope rations have increased by 10%!! The
City Council should act on August 23rd to evict Atla ntic Aviation, which accounts for 90% of jet flight
operations. Follow the Airport leas ing policy which you adopted, and which Atlantic’s jet f light operations
violate every day!! Instruct staff to begin a landlord -tenant court action now because Atlantic has no lease and
the City already gave them written notice to leave. Get Atlantic out before December 31st, 2016. Put the
interests of the residents first!!
Sincerely,
Trent Thixton
UCLA HEALTH SCIENCES IMPORTANT WARNING: This email (and any attachments) is only intended for the use of the
person or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. You, the
recipient, are obligated to maintain it in a safe, secure and confidential manner. Unauthorized redisclosure or failure to
maintain confidentiality may subject you to federal and st ate penalties. If you are not the intended recipient, please
immediately notify us by return email, and delete this message from your computer.
1
Anne Samartha
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Wednesday, August 10, 2016 3:37 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW:
Add ‐to for 8/23 mtg
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Ginger PahiaMurakami [mailto:gingermurakami@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 2:18 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject:
We appreciate your resolution to close the Airport after court action, but this will take many years. In the meanwhile,
after a full year of local control by City Council, jet flight operations have increased by 10 percent. We think that you are
trying to change the subject. You want increased jet flight operations for the present and that's why they increased by
10%.
Instead, City Council should act on August 23 to evict Atlanta Aviation, which accounts for 90% of jet flight operations.
The FAA agrees that the City possesses 100% control over Airport leases as "proprietor" of the airport. FAA decisions in
2000 and 2003 specifically applied to Atlantic Aviation!
So evict Atlantic Aviation now, like you successfully evicted Justice Aviation. Follow the Airport leasing policy which you
adopted, and which Atlantic's jet flight operations violate every day. Instruct staff to begin a landlord ‐tenant court action
now, because Atlantic has no lease and City already gave them written notice to leave.
Get Atlantic out before December 31, 2016, Please stop showing favoritism to special interests like Atlantic Aviation. Put
the interest of residents first for a change!
Sincerely,
Ginger Pahia ‐Murakami
James Murakami
Sent from my iPad
2
Anne Samartha
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Wednesday, August 10, 2016 3:38 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Thank you.
From: Therese Senasac [mailto:tsenasac@yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 8:51 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; Gleam Davis <Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET>; Ted Winterer
<Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>; Terry O’Day <Terry.Oday@smgov.net>; Kevin McKeown Fwd <kevin@mckeown.net>;
pamoconnor@smgov.net
Subject: Thank you.
Thank you for helping to resolve to cl ose the Santa Monica Airport!! It has been a point of contention for years
as bigger jets have flown off small ai rstrips, as air pollution worsens as f light schedules incr ease... thank you for
your vote to close the airport at la st. Thank you for helping to evict Ju stice Aviation! Now I'm asking as a
resident of and homeowner in Sant a Monica that you follow up with strict eviction notices (and reinforcement
of) as well as progress report to the residents of Sant a Monica - with regards to the eviction of Atlantic
Aviation.
I have read that on August 23, 2016 you will vote on a resoluti on. We need Atlantic Aviation evicted! (Not just
on paper, but physically!) They have a large facility at LAX that can legally support their planes. As a resident
who owns a home directly under the f light path, I have noticed an increas e in plane take offs and landings!
Earlier morning flights and ni ght flights at 10:20 pm!! I'm curious as to the increase ra ther than a decrease?? I
am greatly upset by the increase of fli ghts and flight times - the house shaking as my family tries to sleep! The
house shaking now as a jet rumbles past. I'm horribly upset by the black residue on my foliage - particularly my
organically grown vegetables that my family and neighbors eat! As a cancer survivor, th is deeply troubles
me. I'm sure you know that these particulates droppe d by said planes have chemicals that are known
carcinogens.
I know you have the intelligence and power to do the right thing for the resi dents that voted you into office
(me). I believe you all can get this done! Please feel free to email a response with your plan and progress.
Thank you,
Therese Kaplan
1
Anne Samartha
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 15, 2016 7:48 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Airport Closing
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
Add ‐to for 8/23 mtg
From: Ron Rabatsky [mailto:rrabatsky@verizon.net]
Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2016 5:28 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Airport Closing
To the Santa Monica City Council:
When I purchased my home in Santa Monica back in 1981, I kn ew that I was buying a house in the flight path of small
planes taking of from Santa Monica airport. I also knew that the lease was to expire in so me 20 years, and that by the
time I would be retired that I would live in a quiet neighborhood.
Alas, that time frame is long since passed, and the ai rport remains open - with loud jets now flying overhead.
In November, I will be voting for Council members who are firm ly committed to an action plan to shut down the airport -
now.
Ron Rabatsky
1743 Robson Ave
Santa Monica
1
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Thursday, August 18, 2016 4:03 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Jets and SMO and August 23rd
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Mark Logan [mailto:mark.logan@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2016 3:01 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Jets and SMO and August 23rd
Please act to reduce jet traffic at SMO on August 23. Please evict Atlantic Aviation.
Mark Logan
2410 Euclid St
Santa Monica CA 90405
2
Esterlina Lugo
From:Amanda Bird Malko <amanda.bird@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 17, 2016 10:26 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Item 13B - Airport
Hello
I live and work in the area (working on Main Street) and am growing incr easingly concerned about the effects
of jet traffic.
The planes land into the night and both the noise and air pollution are of a concern to me and many others in the
area.
I support any measures that severely limit flights from this location. Fu rthermore, I would appreciate any
information that the council can provide on what is bei ng done to reduce the volume of traffic and contain the
hours allowed for planes at this airport.
Amanda Malko
3
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Thursday, August 18, 2016 4:03 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Atlantic Aviation
From: elizarmac [mailto:elizarmac@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2016 3:35 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Eliza Gold <elizarmac@yahoo.com>
Subject: Atlantic Aviation
To City Council Members:
We appreciate your resolution to clos e the Airport after court action, but this will take MANY years. In the
meantime, after a full year of local control by City Council, jet flight operations have INCREASED by 10%.
We think you are just trying to change the subject. You WANT increased jet flight operations for the present
and that’s why they INCREASED!
Instead, City Council should act on August 23 to evict At lantic Aviation, which accounts for 90% of jet flight
operations. The FAA agreed that the City Possesses 100% control over Ai rport tenants such as Atlantic
Aviation. FAA decisions in 2000 anD 2003 SPECIFI CALLY applied to Atlantic Aviation!
SO EVICT ATLANTIC AVIATION NOW, like you successfu lly evicted Justice Aviation. Follow the Airport
leasing policy which you adopted, AND which Atlantic’s je t flight operations viol ate EVERY DAY! Instruct
staff to begin a landlord-tenant cour t action NOW, because Atlantic has NO lease and the City already gave
written notice to leave.
Get Atlantic out before December 31, 2016. P LEASE STOP SHOWING FAVORITISM TO SPECIAL
INTERESTS LIKE ATLANTIC AVIATION.
PUT THE INTERESTS OF THE RESIDENTS FIRST!
Thank you,
a concerned resident & family
4
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Thursday, August 18, 2016 4:03 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: ATLANTIC AVIATION
From: Eliza Gold [mailto:gold.eliza@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2016 3:38 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Eliza Gold <gold.eliza@yahoo.com>
Subject: ATLANTIC AVIATION
To City Council Members:
We appreciate your resolution to clos e the Airport after court action, but this will take MANY years. In the
meanwhile, after a full year of loca l control by City Council , jet flight operations have INCREASED by 10%.
We think you are just trying to change the subject. You WANT increased jet flight operationsfor the present and
that’s why they INCREASED!
Instead, City Council should act on August 23 to evict At lantic Aviation, which accounts for 90% of jet flight
operations. The FAA agreed that the City Possesses 100% control over Ai rport tenants such as Atlantic
Aviation. FAA decisions in 2000 anD 2003 SPECIFI CALLY applied to Atlantic Aviation!
SO EVICT ATLANTIC AVIAT ION NOW, like you sucessfully evicted Justice Aviation. Follow the Airport
leasing policy which you adopted, AND which Atlantic’s je t flight operations viol ate EVERY DAY! Instruct
staff to begin a landlord-tenant cour t action NOW, because Atlantic has NO lease and the CIty already gave
written notice to leave.
Get Atlantic out before December 31, 2016. P LEASE STOP SHOWING FAVORITISM TO SPECIAL
INTERESTS LIKE ATLANTIC AVIATION.
PUT THE INTERESTS OF THE RESIDENTS FIRST!
Thank you,
a concerned resident
5
Esterlina Lugo
From:Michael Brodsky <mbrodsky@lmu.edu>
Sent:Friday, August 19, 2016 1:14 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Airport Resolution - Agenda Item 11.A
Dear Mayor Vazquez and City Council Members,
By 2023 if the Santa Monica Airport remains open, jet traffic (at the current rate) will INCREASE by 105%.
This is on top of a 50% incr ease during the last 5 years. Can you imagine what a 105% increase in jets would be
on our community and our environment?
_ I fully support ALL of the staff recommendations for Agenda Item 11.A to close Santa Monica Airport and
begin environmental planning fo r a transformative grand park.
_ I fully support ALL of the efforts by the City Manage r to implement this resolution especially: Removing the
Western Parcel, Creating a City of Santa Monica FBO and Ending lead fuel sales.
I would go one important stuff further and end ALL fuel sales.
I also would like to commend City Manger Rick Cole and Nelson Hernandez on this powerful staff report and
on the important and clear solutions th at are proposed and recognize the dedi cated work - that is yet to come.
I want to thank the City Council for thei r leadership and support on this issue.
Sincerely,
Michael Brodsky
Santa Monica Airport2Park Foundation Board Member
6
Esterlina Lugo
From:Lauren <hrcountess@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 2:22 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Item 11 A
Residents of Santa Monica,
West Los Angeles, Venice, and Mar Vista
August 8, 2016
Santa Monica City Council
1685 Main Street, Room 209
Santa Monica, California 90401
E-mail: council@smgov.net
RE: The Community’s Request for Interim Actions Prior to Closure of Santa Monica Airport
Dear Santa Monica Mayor a nd City Council Members:
We thank you for your efforts to close Santa Monica Airport. While the closure process proceeds, gaining
“local control” of the Airport is one of the 5 Strategic Priorities of the City . Today, multiple fixed base
operators (FBOs) provide aeronautical services and have significant co ntrol of the Airport. These FBO
operations include fueling and maintena nce, as well as many extra services, such as limousine service, aircraft
washing, baggage handling, catering, concierge serv ices, rental cars, and hotel arrangements.
Beginning July 2015, these FBOs have had no right to continue d leases at the Airport. Their leases are expired,
but they remain at the Airport and continue to perpetuate harmful im pacts on the community. There are no
agreements, laws, or regulations that prohibit the City from evicting the FBOs. In fact, the 1984 Settlement
Agreement that obligated the City to “provide sufficien t space for the location and operation of 3 full service
fixed base operators” expired on July 1, 2015. Furt hermore, the FAA Director’s Determination dated
November 22, 2000 which was affirmed by the FAA Final Decision dated February 2, 2003 confirmed (a) that
7
FBO leases were not 30-year leases, but were actually 29-year leases timed to expire on July 1, 2015, (b) that it
would be unreasonable for the City to be required to enter into FBO lease agreements beyond July 1, 2015, and
(c) that beyond July 1, 2015, the Ai rport is “a local land use matter”.
The City, as the owner and proprieto r of the Airport, should legally a nd immediately remove the FBOs and
assert the City’s “proprietary exclusiv e right” to be the only ex clusive service provider at the Airport. As the
sole service provider, the City would achieve de facto “local control” of these Air port services and be able to
directly manage them in line with the interests of the local community.
The Proprietary Exclusive Right
The FAA Airport Compliance Manual, which provides gui dance on an airport sponsor’s commitments when
they accept federal grants, explains the Proprietary Exclusive Right as follows:
“The owner of a public-use airport (public or private owner) may elect to provide any or all of the
aeronautical services needed by the public at the airport. In fact, the statutory prohibition against
exclusive rights does not apply to th ese owners. However, while they may exercise the exclusive right to
provide aeronautical services, they may not grant or convey this exclusive righ t to another party. The
airport sponsor that elects to engage in a propr ietary exclusive must use its own employees and
resources to carry out its venture. An independent commercial enterprise that has been designated as an
agent of the airport sponsor may not exerci se nor be granted such an exclusive right.”
“Aircraft fueling is a prime example of an aerona utical service an airport sponsor may choose to
provide itself. While the airport sponsor may exercise its propriet ary exclusive to provide fueling
services, aircraft owners may still assert the right to obtain their ow n fuel and bring it onto the airport
to service their own aircraft, but only with thei r own employees and equipment and in conformance with
reasonable airport rules, regul ations, and minimum standards.”
Even if we assume the 1994 grant commitments extend to 2023 (which is activel y being disputed), the
“proprietary exclusive right” is still in comple te compliance with all obligations of the City.
We strongly but respectfully request you take the following actions:
1. Give Notice to Vacate to all FBOs at the Airport, including Atlantic Aviation and American Flyers, before September
1, 2016.
8
2. Authorize the City to assert its “proprietary exclusive right” and provide minimal levels of service while continuing
to evaluate and periodically adjust service levels until Airport closure is legally cleared.
3. Rent or buy equipment and employ staff that may be required to operate fuel services and to park aircraft.
These steps are the most direct path to help the City achieve its Strategic Priority of local control at the
Airport. Meanwhile, the remaining le gal issues with the FAA rela ted to the 1994 Grant and the 1948
Instrument of Transfer should continue to be aggressively pursued.
Santa Monica is an extremely capable city that mainta ins and operates many services efficiently and effectively,
including fire, police, Big Blue Bus, waste co llection, recycling, cemetery, CityTV, and parks and
recreation. With the addition of FBO services we can also safely operate the Airport with the local control
necessary to reduce the Airport’s impact on our surrounding communities.
Sincerely,
Residents and Representatives of the
Santa Monica, West Los Angeles, Venice, and Mar Vista Communities
9
Esterlina Lugo
From:Rob Nokes <robnokes@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 2:45 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:Ted Winterer
Subject:Dear Santa Monica City Council please close the airport
Aside from the airport being a pristi ne property capable of providing benef its to the citizenry, let's close the
airport because it is detrimental to 99.9% of our neighbors. Excessive lo ud noise, leaded gas pollution, fine
particle jet fuel emissions, crashes, and historic fina ncial losses for tax payers.
A Park or a Technology / Movie Studio Campus would do good for everyone.
PS - I am leaving for my quiet home in Punta Ballena, Uruguay.
Please do the right thing for us all.
Rob Nokes
2428 3rd St. Santa Monica
310-963-6177
10
Esterlina Lugo
From:Colin Summers <colin@mightycheese.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 2:46 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Our Lifeline
Dear City Council Members,
I live just north of Montana on 21 Place.
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport provides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to residents of
the City of Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During times of natural disaster or
national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding communities that
cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and future generations.
Millions of taxpayer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise must come to a close.
The idea that tax payers continue to foot the bill in the efforts to close the airport, while closing it would benefit real
estate developers to the tune of billions of dollars is madness.
Thank you for your time,
—Colin Summers
310 ‐600 ‐7247
11
Esterlina Lugo
From:Martin <m3@mcube.us>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 2:47 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Keep the SM Airport open & stop wasting my taxpayer money on efforts to close it
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport provides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to residents of
the City of Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During times of natural disaster or
national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding communities that
cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and future generations.
Millions of taxpayer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Martin M Monti, PhD
Santa Monica CA Resident
12
Esterlina Lugo
From:Michael Sedrak <mike_sedrak@sbcglobal.net>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 2:49 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Michael Sedrak
13
Esterlina Lugo
From:Larry Hermann <lhermann@roadrunner.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 2:50 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Item 11 on 8/23 Agenda
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Lawrence J. Hermann, Ph.D.
21 Village Pkwy.
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Thank you,
14
Esterlina Lugo
From:Michael Sedrak <mike_sedrak@sbcglobal.net>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 2:51 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:info@santamonicaairport.info
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Michael Sedrak
15
Esterlina Lugo
From:Brenda Anderson <brendaanderson3942@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 2:52 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Santa Monica Airport and Agenda Item 11: Aug. 23 meeting
Dear Council Members:
I urge you to vote against Item 11 at the Tuesday, Aug. 23rd meeting. As a member of the Santa Monica community, I
want to see SMO remain open and viable. It is a valuable resource for our town. It is a reliever airport for LAX and
allows local businesses to provide convenient access for clients/customers from far away places.
I also do not want to see you spend more money fighting a surely ‐losing battle with the FAA. Already, millions of our
taxpayer tax dollars have been spent on this fruitless effort to appease a small, but vocal, segment of the community,
many of whom do not even live in Santa Monica.
Brenda Anderson
475 24th Street
16
Esterlina Lugo
From:John Linson <johnlinson@me.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 2:55 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
John Linson
17
Esterlina Lugo
From:Daniel Wood <dwood@nuper.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 2:56 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Keep the Airport OPENED
Dear council members,
I am writing in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Keep the airport OPEN!! During times of natural disaster or national emergency our ai rport is an indispensable
asset with value to Santa Monica and surroundi ng communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Daniel Wood
18
Esterlina Lugo
From:Rich Sugden <rsugdenmd@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 2:56 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Closure of Santa Monica Airport
Sent from my iPhone
Please pardon my I ‐Spell errors!
19
Esterlina Lugo
From:Bahman Engheta <engheta@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 2:59 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Resolution Regarding Local Control and Closure of the Santa Monica Airport
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport provides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to residents of the Cit y
of Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During times of natural disaster or national
emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding communities that cannot be
overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and future generations. Millions o f
taxpayer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Bahman Engheta
521 Montana Avenue
Santa Monica, CA 90403
20
Esterlina Lugo
From:Nathalie Demirdjian <nathaliedemir@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 3:02 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Santa Monica City Airport
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Nathalie and Kathryn Demirdjian
21
Esterlina Lugo
From:Rich Sugden <rsugdenmd@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 3:02 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Proposed closure of Santa Monica Airport is bad idea.
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. The airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
I have flown in/out of the Santa Monica airport man times in my 50+ years of flying, and can personally attest
to its value to your community and surrounding area. Don't let a selfish vocal minority destroy a vital asset to
city.
Sincerely,
Richard Sugden M.D.
22
Esterlina Lugo
From:Gina Maslow <gina.maslow@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 3:04 PM
To:councilmtgitems; editor@smmirror.com; joe@argonautnews.com; editor@smdp.com
Subject:Santa Monica Airport
We live in Venice, just ea st of Rose Avenue. And ri g ht under the SMO fli g ht path. Tryin g
to enjoy our backyard deck, especially in summer, is frequently interrupted by loud
small airplanes and very loud jets. I can't a dd any more to why I would like to see the
airport closed, except for the periodical plane crashes too close for comfort.
Gina Maslow
234 Bernard Ave
Venice, 90291
310-387-2152
My mission in life is not merely to survive, but to thrive; an d to do so with some passion, some compassion, some humor,
and some style.
~Maya Angelou
23
Esterlina Lugo
From:Talar T. <talartop@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 3:05 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Santa Monica Airport
Hello, I live near the airport, about 2 miles away and would love to see it closed. All the noise from the airplanes flying
overhead is very stressful, not to mention the pollution.
I hope my opinion gets heard since I can't make it to the council meeting in person.
Sincerely,
Talar Toprakjian
24
Esterlina Lugo
From:stuart bloom <strtbloom@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 3:05 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Airport operations
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Dr. Stuart Bloom
25
Esterlina Lugo
From:David Stiller <tuneupds@aol.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 3:06 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Ksmo
Please keep all our airport open. It is a wonderful asset to our community.
Dave stiller
26
Esterlina Lugo
From:Angela Cerniglio <angelacerniglio@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 3:10 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:In support of Santa Monica airport
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Angela Cerniglio
Sent from my iPhone
27
Esterlina Lugo
From:art is the answer <shineshuge@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 3:10 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Agenda Item 11 "Resolution R egarding Item 11 :Local Contro l and Closure of the Santa
Monica Airport;". We
-------------------
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August
23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our air port provides a multitude of real and tangible
b enefits to residents of the City of Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, St ate of California and to
our Nation. During times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable
asset with value to Santa Monica and surroundi ng communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a lo ss to both current and
future generations. Millions of taxpayer dollars ha ve already been wasted and the efforts seeking
the airport's demise must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Danielle Charney
424-238-5470
28
Esterlina Lugo
From:Bryan <bryan@fitscape.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 3:11 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Santa Monica airport support and oppositi on to item 11 on th e August 23rd agenda
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Bryan rosencranntz
29
Esterlina Lugo
From:Chris Giordano <c_m_giordano@hotmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 3:16 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Heritage > traffic & ugly mixed use
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Regards,
Chris Giordano
30
Esterlina Lugo
From:Graham Gitlin <bonzerdoc@yahoo.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 3:19 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Santa Monica Airport
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Graham Gitlin
31
Esterlina Lugo
From:Todd Henry <n8702v@verizon.net>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 3:19 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:SMO
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport provides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to residents of the Cit y of
Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During times of natural disaster or national emerge ncy
our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and future generations. Millions o f
taxpayer dollars have already been wasted and the effort s seeking the airport's demise must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Todd Henry
n8702v@verizon.net
32
Esterlina Lugo
From:John Homstad <jmhomstad@yahoo.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 3:29 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:STOP CLOSURE ATTEMPTS. KEEP SAN TA MONICA AIRPORT OPERATIONS!
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
John T. Homstad
Sent from my iPhone
33
Esterlina Lugo
From:Marc Loftin <mtl767@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 3:30 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:KSMO
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport provides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to residents of the Cit y of
Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During times of natural disaster or national emerge ncy
our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and future generations. Millions o f
taxpayer dollars have already been wasted and the effort s seeking the airport's demise must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Your Name
Marc Loftin
Owner/Manager
1080 Park Blvd.
San Diego CA, 92101
(858) 254-0570
34
Esterlina Lugo
From:Riccardo Tossani <riccardo@tossani.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 3:46 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Agenda Item 11 "Resolution R egarding Local Control and Cl osure of the Santa Monica
Airport"
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Riccardo Tossani
1118 3rd Street #202
__________________________________________________
riccardo tossani
riccardo @tossani.com
riccardo tossani
a r c h i t e c t u r e
T+ Building, 3 ‐17 ‐7 Aobadai
Meguro ‐ku, Tokyo 153 ‐0042, Japan
T 81(0)3 5457 1032 F 81(0)3 5457 1030
TOKYO + NISEKO
BEIJING + LOS ANGELES
www.tossani.com
__________________________________________________
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This e ‐mail and any file transmitted with it may contain material that is confidential, privileged
and for the sole use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient of this e ‐mail, please do not read this
e ‐mail and notify us immediately by reply e ‐mail or by telephone (+81 (0)3 5457 1032) and then delete this message and
any file attached from your system. You should not copy or use it for any purpose, disclose the contents of the same to
any other person or forward it without express permission.
35
Esterlina Lugo
From:Don Lawrence <donlawrence826@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 3:51 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:AIrport Closure
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely
Donald Lawrence
36
Esterlina Lugo
From:Ken Marsh <kmarsh@ca.rr.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 3:55 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:jetairpollution@earthlink.net
Subject:Item 11.A
RE: The Community’s Request for Interim Actions Prior to Closure of Santa Monica Airport
Antonio Vazquez, Santa Monica Mayor and City Council Members,
Epidemic domination by the private interest over public rights and responsibilities is corrupting and crippling our
political and economic systems. Our democracy is on life ‐support. It is imperative we act in recognition of our
interdependence so that community, not cabal, becomes the greater ‐weighted voice in disputes about any and all
continued operations of SM Airport which has become a detriment to the health and quality of life of the greater
community.
In response to the FAA’s 2023 extension of SM Airpot operations, I am writing to add my support of the Community’s
Request for Interim Actions re: SM Airport, echoing your staff recommendations:
Adopt a Resolution declaring that it shall be the policy of the City to close the Santa Monica airport to aviation uses, as
soon as legally permitted, with the goal of on or before July 1, 2018, and directing the City Manager to implement all
necessary administrative measures accordingly; and
Adopt a Policy for Establishing Exclusive Public Proprietary Fixed Based Operations (FBO) Services with City Proprietor
Services and directing the City Manager to implement all steps necessary or advisable to implement that policy.
This should result in the following actions:
1. Giving Notice to Vacate to all FBOs at the Airport, including Atlantic Aviation and American Flyers, before September
1, 2016;
2. Authorizing the City to assert its “proprietary exclusive right” and provide minimal levels of service while continuing to
evaluate and periodically adjust service levels until Airport closure is legally cleared; and
3. Renting or buying equipment and employing staff that may be required to operate fuel services and to park aircraft.
I hope this finds you with the courage and commitment to take these very decisive and assertive actions and to lead the
way forward and toward an eventual outcome that will stand among the lighthouses showing the way through the
troubled waters of sustaining a democracy in our times.
Thank you.
Ken Marsh
Mar Vista Community stakeholder
Grand View Fine Art Studios (GVFAS)
3871 Grand View Blvd
LA, CA 90066
37
38
Esterlina Lugo
From:Armando <goldnland@aol.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 3:58 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Santa Monica Airport
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport an d in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd
agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport provides a multitude of real and tangible
benefits to residents of the City of Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our
Nation. During times of natural disaster or nation al emergency our airport is an indispensable asset
with value to Santa Monica and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and
future generations. Millions of taxpayer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the
airport's demise must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Your Name
Armando Ruvalcaba
Voting Citizen
Thank you,
SantaMonicaAirportAssociation
39
Esterlina Lugo
From:Kyle Kendrew <kskendrew@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 4:10 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:KSMO stays open
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Additionally, we all know this is a land grab and that developers are drooling to get their hands on this land and
that parks are NOT part of the agenda. You lose this airport and the protected airs pace above Santa Monica is
gone with it. If you all hate the litt le private jets now, wait till the heavies landing at KLAX are flying 3,000'
lower above Santa Monica 24 hours a day. Food for thought.
Sincerely,
Kyle Kendrew.
Sent from my iPhone
40
Esterlina Lugo
From:steven j schwartz <sjs1969@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 4:18 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Santa Monica Airport
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport provides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to residents of the Cit y
of Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During times of natural disaster or national
emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding communities that cannot be
overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and future generations. Millions o f
taxpayer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Steve Schwartz
41
Esterlina Lugo
From:Joe Capra <joe@scientifantastic.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 4:19 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Opposition to Item 11
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Joe Capra
42
Esterlina Lugo
From:Lenny Primak <lprimak@hope.nyc.ny.us>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 4:24 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Supporting keeping the airport open
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Lenny Primak
43
Esterlina Lugo
From:Jen Rich <jennifer_Rich@rocketmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 4:44 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Santa Monica City Council Meeting
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to an end.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Rich
Sent from my iPad
44
Esterlina Lugo
From:Mindy Taylor-Ross <mindytr101@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 4:44 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:Mike Bonin; Mike Feuer
Subject:Santa Monica City Council meeting - Agenda item 11 A
Dear Mayor Vasquez and Council Members:
As you know jet flights are way up si nce the 1984 agreement ended and the passage of voter mandated LC.
My family and I urgently request that you vote on Tuesday to:
1. Close Santa Monica Airport to avia tion interests as soon as possible.
2. Immediately stop selling fuel and ev ict the Fixed Base Operators, including Atlantic Aviation and American
Flyers. They service jets and planes that spread toxic ultra fi ne particulates, lead, and incessant noise over our
homes and schools in Venice.
3. End your "Fly Neighborly" program immediately. Th is program is mandated to spew SMO's toxic waste
over your neighbors, thereby avoiding the community of Santa Monica.
I know there are fears that getting rid of aviation tenants and fuel sales will produce lawsuits and FAA action,
but failing to do so will continue enda ngering the health and lives of the people who voted you into office, as
well as others like me and my family who live in Veni ce. SMO inflicts untold damage on us all, including
children and the elderly, and this must stop.
Don't let the recent FAA ruling stop you fr om doing the right thing and closing the airport to av iation interests.
Santa Monica is a green city, and should not have an airport spewing toxins over neighboring communities.
I ask you to fulfill your responsibility by taking the above three actions on Tuesday, August 23 without further
delay.
Sincerely,
Mindy Taylor-Ross
Venice
mindytr101@gmail.com
(310) 592-0742
45
Esterlina Lugo
From:Jennifer Rich <jenniferreichle@aol.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 4:48 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:SM City Council Aug 23rd Meeting
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August
23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport provides a multitude of real and tangible
benefits to residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and
to our Nation. During times of natural disast er or national emergenc y our airport is an
indispensable asset with value to Santa M onica and surrounding commun ities that cannot be
overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource woul d be a loss to both current and
future generations. Millions of taxpayer dollars ha ve already been wasted and the efforts seeking
the airport's demise must come to an end.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Reichle
46
Esterlina Lugo
From:ZinaJosephs@aol.com
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 5:06 PM
To:Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems; Clerk Mailb ox; Rick Cole; Nelson Hernandez; Tony
Vazquez; Gleam Davis; Sue Himmelrich; Kevin McKeown Fwd; Pam OConnor; Terry
O’Day; Ted Winterer
Cc:zinajosephs@aol.com
Subject:FOSP: Council 8/23/16 item 11.A -- Airport resolution -- SUPPORT
August 20, 2016
To: Mayor Vazquez and members of th e City Council (cc: Rick Cole, Nelson Hernandez)
From: Board of Directors, Friends of Sunset Park (FOSP)
RE: 8/23/16 agenda item 11.A. -- R esolution Re g ardin g Local Control and Closure o f the Santa Monica
Airport ; Policy for Eliminating Private Pr ovision of Aeronautical Services and Establishing Exclusive Public
Proprietary Fixed Based Operations With City Provision of Aeronaut ical Services Required By Law;
Consideration of Other Lawful Me ans of Curtailing Adverse Airpor t Impacts, Including, Among Others:
Applying to the FAA for Runway Alte rations; Enforcing Local, State & Federal Laws Relating to Airport
Operations; Transitioning From Leases to a Permit Syst em for Certain Airport Uses; Eliminating Lead Fuel;
and Enhancing Airport Security
Council 8/23/16 agenda: http://santamonicacityca .iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=1070
The FOSP Board thanks the City Council and City Staff, in particular City Mana ger Rick Cole and Senior
Adviser to the City Manager on Airport Affairs Nels on Hernandez, for moving these items forward and for
continuing to make progress.
We support agenda item 11.A. In particular, we urge the City Council to direct the City Manager to proceed
with all due haste with resp ect to the following actions:
1. Commence the park planning process, including conduc ting an environmental analysis as required by
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Protection Act
(NEPA). – As noted in the staff report, the FOSP Bo ard agrees that the time to commence planning and
environmental analysis of the conversion of the airport to a park is now.
47
2. Investigate whether certain fractional jet opera tors are impermissibly operating as scheduled
airlines. Newspaper and other advertisements circulat ed to the general public are increasingly supporting
the impression that this is, in fact, the case. As th e staff report has noted, bot h the FAA and the City of
Santa Monica prohibit scheduled air line operations out of SMO. Fractio nal jet operators who operate at
SMO should be required to provide the City with su fficient documentation and records to establish that
their operations do not amount to surreptitious scheduled service.
3. Submit an application to FAA, which would alter the Airport r unway by removing the 1949 Quit Claim
Parcel, also known as the “Western Parcel,” from aviation use. The FOSP Board agrees that, given the
pending legal action, and in order to place the City of Santa Monica in a pos ition to capitalize on its
upcoming legal victories, it makes sense to now file the application to close the Western Parcel to
aviation, as part of the City’s appeal of the grant assurance.
4. Cease forbearance of lax enfor cement of the Santa Monica Airport noise ordinance, and apply
enforcement as written. As noted, the City’s enfor cement practice of its noise ordinance pre-dates the
advent of popular fractional ownershi p and jets-on-demand services at the airport and thus is outdated
and overly lax. Enforcement should be adjust ed to reflect current airport operations.
5. Transition aircraft hangar uses from lease agreements to permits. A permit system is a reasonable
accommodation until the City prevails in court and expe ditiously closes the Airport per the subject City
Council Resolution. The proposed permit system provi des an important step toward greater local
control over the property av iation users now occupy.
6. Create a City of Santa Monica Fixed Based Operation. If the City is required to operate the airport and
if FBO services are required, the City would have greater local control by estab lishing a municipal FBO.
The two private FBO providers should be eliminated as soon as City staff is r eady to assume the duties,
which should in no case be later than December 31, 2016.
7. Elimination of leaded fuel. The sale of leaded fuel should be phased out completely, as soon as
legally possible, even before the City could begi n operation of a municipal FBO. There is a viable
alternative fuel that could service an estimated 65 percent of the prope ller aircraft fleet based at SMO.
8. Enhanced Security. The FOSP Board urges the City to ensure that wh atever contract is signed with a
private airport security firm, that the City retain maximum local contro l over security operations and that
those operations be conducted in a manner that aligns completely with all local concer ns, including but
not limited to ensuring that SMO is not used to transport contraband or illegal persons at any time or by
any user of the SMO facilities, incl uding but not limited to clients of the privately run FBOs, so long as
those FBOs are operating at SMO.
The ongoing negative health effects of air and noise po llution, not to mention safety concerns, created by
ongoing airport operations, dictate that the optimal publ ic policy goal of the City should be to close the
airport and repurpose the area to maximize park, open space, and cultural facilities. All of these goals
can be addressed by adopting the proposed resolution, which the FOSP Board supports.
48
Esterlina Lugo
From:Alex Gárdos <gardos123@yahoo.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 5:06 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:jetairpollution@earthlink.net
Subject:Fw: Important action item - ASAP
I am in full support of the letter (below), addressed to Santa Monica Mayor Antonio Vazquez and City Council Members;
regarding: The Community’s Request for Interim Actions Prior to Closure of Santa Monica Airport .
Alex Gardos
Residents of Santa Monica,
West Los Angeles, Venice, and Mar Vista
August 8, 2016
Santa Monica City Council
1685 Main Street, Room 209
Santa Monica, California 90401
E-mail: council@smgov.net
RE: The Community’s Request for Interim Actions Prior to Closure of Santa Monica Airport
Dear Santa Monica Mayor a nd City Council Members:
We thank you for your efforts to close Santa Monica Airport. While the closure process proceeds, gaining
“local control” of the Airport is one of the 5 Strategic Priorities of the City . Today, multiple fixed base
operators (FBOs) provide aeronautical services and have significant co ntrol of the Airport. These FBO
operations include fueling and maintena nce, as well as many extra services, such as limousine service, aircraft
washing, baggage handling, catering, concierge serv ices, rental cars, and hotel arrangements.
Beginning July 2015, these FBOs have had no right to continue d leases at the Airport. Their leases are expired,
but they remain at the Airport and continue to perpetuate harmful impacts on the community. There are no
agreements, laws, or regulations that prohibit the City from evicting the FBOs. In fact, the 1984 Settlement
Agreement that obligated the City to “provide sufficien t space for the location and operation of 3 full service
fixed base operators” expired on July 1, 2015. Furt hermore, the FAA Director’s Determination dated
November 22, 2000 which was affirmed by the FAA Final Decision dated February 2, 2003 confirmed (a) that
FBO leases were not 30-year leases, but were actually 29-year leases timed to expire on July 1, 2015, (b) that it
would be unreasonable for the City to be required to enter into FBO lease agreements beyond July 1, 2015, and
(c) that beyond July 1, 2015, the Ai rport is “a local land use matter”.
The City, as the owner and proprieto r of the Airport, should legally a nd immediately remove the FBOs and
assert the City’s “proprietary exclusiv e right” to be the only ex clusive service provider at the Airport. As the
sole service provider, the City would achieve de facto “local control” of these Air port services and be able to
directly manage them in line with the interests of the local community.
49
The Proprietary Exclusive Right
The FAA Airport Compliance Manual, which provides gui dance on an airport sponsor’s commitments when
they accept federal grants, explains the Proprietary Exclusive Right as follows:
“The owner of a public-use airport (public or private owner) may elect to provide any or all of the
aeronautical services needed by the public at the airport. In fact, the statutory prohibition against
exclusive rights does not apply to th ese owners. However, while they may exercise the exclusive right to
provide aeronautical services, they may not grant or convey this exclusive righ t to another party. The
airport sponsor that elects to engage in a propr ietary exclusive must use its own employees and
resources to carry out its venture. An independent commercial enterprise that has been designated as an
agent of the airport sponsor may not exerci se nor be granted such an exclusive right.”
“Aircraft fueling is a prime example of an aerona utical service an airport sponsor may choose to
provide itself. While the airport sponsor may exercise its propriet ary exclusive to provide fueling
services, aircraft owners may still assert the right to obtain their ow n fuel and bring it onto the airport
to service their own aircraft, but only with thei r own employees and equipment and in conformance with
reasonable airport rules, regul ations, and minimum standards.”
Even if we assume the 1994 grant commitments extend to 2023 (which is activel y being disputed), the
“proprietary exclusive right” is still in comple te compliance with all obligations of the City.
We strongly but respectfully request you take the following actions:
1. Give Notice to Vacate to all FBOs at the Airport, including Atlantic Aviation and American Flyers, before September
1, 2016.
2. Authorize the City to assert its “proprietary exclusive right” and provide minimal levels of service while continuing
to evaluate and periodically adjust service levels until Airport closure is legally cleared.
3. Rent or buy equipment and employ staff that may be required to operate fuel services and to park aircraft.
These steps are the most direct path to help the City achieve its Strategic Priority of local control at the
Airport. Meanwhile, the remaining le gal issues with the FAA rela ted to the 1994 Grant and the 1948
Instrument of Transfer should continue to be aggressively pursued.
Santa Monica is an extremely capable city that mainta ins and operates many services efficiently and effectively,
including fire, police, Big Blue Bus, waste co llection, recycling, cemetery, CityTV, and parks and
recreation. With the addition of FBO services we can also safely operate the Airport with the local control
necessary to reduce the Airport’s impact on our surrounding communities.
Sincerely,
Residents and Representatives of the
Santa Monica, West Los Angeles, Venice, and Mar Vista Communities
50
Esterlina Lugo
From:Adrian <aharewood@verizon.net>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 5:12 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Item 11. A
Importance:High
Dear the Santa Monica Mayor, the City Council, and City Staff:
As a longtime resident in the position of renter and homeowner in Santa Monica (whi ch equates to tax payer), I am in full
support of the letter (copied below), addressed to Santa Monica Mayor Antonio Vazquez and City Council Members;
regarding: The Community’s Request for Interim Actions Prior to Closure of Santa Monica Airport . I expect you to
act in accordance with the reasons that I have voted for measures over the year s to limit the airport’s activities, and
frankly, for the positions of the offices that you now hold. My real concerns are why these seemingly obvious actions are
taking so long to enforce.
Regards,
Adrian Harewood
2437 Pier Avenue
Santa Monica, CA 90405
(310) 210-8561
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Residents of Santa Monica,
West Los Angeles, Venice, and Mar Vista
August 8, 2016
Santa Monica City Council
1685 Main Street, Room 209
Santa Monica, California 90401
E ‐mail: council@smgov.net
RE: The Community’s Request for Interim Actions Prior to Closure of Santa Monica Airport
Dear Santa Monica Mayor and City Council Members:
We thank you for your efforts to close Santa Monica Airport. While the closure process proceeds, gaining “local
control” of the Airport is one of the 5 Strategic Priorities of the City . Today, multiple fixed base operators (FBOs)
provide aeronautical services and have significant control of the Airport. These FBO operations include fueling and
maintenance, as well as many extra services, such as limousine service, aircraft washing, baggage handling, catering,
concierge services, rental cars, and hotel arrangements.
Beginning July 2015, these FBOs have had no right to continued leases at the Airport. Their leases are expired, but they
remain at the Airport and continue to perpetuate harmful impacts on the community. There are no agreements, laws,
or regulations that prohibit the City from evicting the FBOs. In fact, the 1984 Settlement Agreement that obligated the
City to “provide sufficient space for the location and operation of 3 full service fixed base operators” expired on July 1,
2015. Furthermore, the FAA Director’s Determination dated November 22, 2000 which was affirmed by the FAA Final
Decision dated February 2, 2003 confirmed (a) that FBO leases were not 30 ‐year leases, but were actually 29 ‐year leases
51
timed to expire on July 1, 2015, (b) that it would be unreasonable for the City to be required to enter into FBO lease
agreements beyond July 1, 2015, and (c) that beyond July 1, 2015, the Airport is “a local land use matter”.
The City, as the owner and proprietor of the Airport, should legally and immediately remove the FBOs and assert the
City’s “proprietary exclusive right” to be the only exclusive service provider at the Airport. As the sole service provider,
the City would achieve de facto “local control” of these Airport services and be able to directly manage them in line with
the interests of the local community.
The Proprietary Exclusive Right
The FAA Airport Compliance Manual, which provides guidance on an airport sponsor’s commitments when they accept
federal grants, explains the Proprietary Exclusive Right as follows:
“The owner of a public ‐use airport (public or private owner) may elect to provide any or all of the aeronautical
services needed by the public at the airport. In fact, the statutory prohibition against exclusive rights does not
apply to these owners. However, while they may exercise the exclusive right to provide aeronautical services,
they may not grant or convey this exclusive right to another party. The airport sponsor that elects to engage in a
proprietary exclusive must use its own employees and resources to carry out its venture. An independent
commercial enterprise that has been designated as an agent of the airport sponsor may not exercise nor be
granted such an exclusive right.”
“Aircraft fueling is a prime example of an aeronautical service an airport sponsor may choose to provide itself.
While the airport sponsor may exercise its proprietary exclusive to provide fueling services, aircraft owners may
still assert the right to obtain their own fuel and bring it onto the airport to service their own aircraft, but only
with their own employees and equipment and in conformance with reasonable airport rules, regulations, and
minimum standards.”
Even if we assume the 1994 grant commitments extend to 2023 (which is actively being disputed), the “proprietary
exclusive right” is still in complete compliance with all obligations of the City.
We strongly but respectfully request you take the following actions:
1. Give Notice to Vacate to all FBOs at the Airport, including Atlantic Aviation and American Flyers, before
September 1, 2016.
2. Authorize the City to assert its “proprietary exclusive right” and provide minimal levels of service while
continuing to evaluate and periodically adjust service levels until Airport closure is legally cleared.
3. Rent or buy equipment and employ staff that may be required to operate fuel services and to park aircraft.
These steps are the most direct path to help the City achieve its Strategic Priority of local control at the
Airport. Meanwhile, the remaining legal issues with the FAA related to the 1994 Grant and the 1948 Instrument of
Transfer should continue to be aggressively pursued.
Santa Monica is an extremely capable city that maintains and operates many services efficiently and effectively,
including fire, police, Big Blue Bus, waste collection, recycling, cemetery, CityTV, and parks and recreation. With the
addition of FBO services we can also safely operate the Airport with the local control necessary to reduce the Airport’s
impact on our surrounding communities.
Sincerely,
Residents and Representatives of the
Santa Monica, West Los Angeles, Venice, and Mar Vista Communities
52
Esterlina Lugo
From:Laura Silagi <lrsilagi@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 5:14 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Closing Santa Monica Airport, Agenda item 11 A
Dear Mayor Vasquez and Council Members
I was the chair of the Venice Neighborhood Council's committee on Santa Monica airport for years. We know that jets an spread
toxic ultra fine particulates, and prop plan es used leaded fuel. There is noise over our homes and schools in Venice caused by planes
flying in and out of SMO. There have been ample studies and expert testimony showing the harmful health effects from SMO. It is
time to close the airport.
In the meantime, your "Fly Neighborly" program encourages props to fly over Venice and Mar Vista, thereby avoiding most of Sant a
Monica. SMO inflicts untold damage on us all. My husband and I urgently request that you vote on Tuesday to close Santa Monica
Airport to aviation interests now. It should have been done July 1, 2016. Please stop selling fuel and evict the Fixed Base Op erators,
including Atlantic Aviation and American Flyers.
Sincerely,
Laura Silagi
Dennis Hathaway
Venice
--
LRSILAGI@GMAIL.COM
53
Esterlina Lugo
From:ROBERT DICKSON <ROBERTDICKSON2@msn.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 5:21 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:MVCC Airport Committee
I fully support interim actions prior to the closure of Santa Monica Airport.
Robert G. Dickson
54
Esterlina Lugo
From:Oppenheim, William M.D. [OIC] <WOppenheim@mednet.ucla.edu>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 5:32 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:SMO
It is your obligation under the law to keep this historic airport operating. Do your duty. And stop wasting scarce funds.
UCLA HEALTH SCIENCES IMPORTANT WARNING: This email (and any attachments) is only intended for the use of the
person or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. You, the
recipient, are obligated to maintain it in a safe, secure and confidential manner. Unauthorized redisclosure or failure to
maintain confidentiality may subject you to federal and st ate penalties. If you are not the intended recipient, please
immediately notify us by return email, and delete this message from your computer.
55
Esterlina Lugo
From:ROBERT DICKSON <ROBERTDICKSON2@msn.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 5:36 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:MVCC Airport Committee
Subject:Fw:
From: ROBERT DICKSON
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2016 5:21 PM
To: councilmtgitems@smgov.net
Cc: MVCC Airport Committee
Subject: 11.A 23 August, 2016
I fully support interim actions prior to the closure of Santa Monica Airport.
Robert G. Dickson
56
Esterlina Lugo
From:Gerald Zelinger <zapzip@gte.net>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 5:42 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Airport closure
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Gerald Zelinger
847 Twelfth Street
Santa Monica, CA 90403
57
Esterlina Lugo
From:Dorab Patel <dorabpatel@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 5:46 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Item 11 on the agenda for th e August 23 2016 council meeting
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain ope n. Our airport provides a variety of ta ngible benefits to residents of the
City of Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During times of natural
disaster or national emergency our ai rport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding
communities that cannot be overstated. The commerce enabled by the airport co ntributes directly and indirectly
to the local economy.
The airport is an irreplaceable and invaluable public resource, and its closure woul d be a loss to both current
and future generations. The continuing waste of millions of taxpayer dollars seeking the airport's demise must
come to a close.
Sincerely,
Dorab Patel
58
Esterlina Lugo
From:Juergen Lindlahr <jlindlahr@verizon.net>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 5:59 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:"Resolution Regarding Local Control and Closure of the Santa Monica Airport;".
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport provides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to residents of the Cit y of
Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During times of natural disaster or national emerge ncy
our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and future generations. Millions o f
taxpayer dollars have already been wasted and the effort s seeking the airport's demise must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Juergen Lindlahr
59
Esterlina Lugo
From:Jon Karkow <jkarkow@yahoo.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 6:11 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Support for Santa Monica Airport
Santa Monica City Hall
1685 Main Street
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Dear Council Members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda. I have been a
pilot all my adult life and have lived and worked in this area fo r 30 years. Aviation has been my source of livelihood and
pleasure for all this time. As you know, airports are a huge so urce of value for a community, but this value can be difficult
for non aviation people to understand. Airports create jobs, support businesses, form critical links for emergency
response, support healthy community diversity and recreation, and can create opportunities for education and inspiration
of youth. Our airport provides a number of real and tangible benefits to residents of the City of Santa Monica, County of
Los Angeles, State of California and to the Nation. Squander ing our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be
a loss to both current and future generations. Millions of taxpayer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts
seeking the airport's closure must end. The key to all of th is, lies in the support of local government. Please keep the
Santa Monica Airport open and in line with its most valuable purpose -- aviation. Please vote no to Item 11 on the August
23rd agenda.
Sincerely,
Jon Karkow
2141 Icon Way
Vacaville, CA 95688
661-619-6144
60
Esterlina Lugo
From:Martha Joachim <drmjoachim@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 6:16 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:CRAAP
To Whom It May Concern:
I am in full support of the letter addressed to Santa Monica Mayor Antonio Vazquez and City Council Members; regarding: The
Community’s Request for Interim Actions Pr ior to Closure of Santa Monica Airport .
Sincerely,
Martha Joachim
Mar Vista resident
61
Esterlina Lugo
From:PAUL MARKOVITS <paulgm@mac.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 6:22 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:SM Airport
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Paul Markovits
62
Esterlina Lugo
From:Kelly Bakst <kelly@volcanicstar.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 6:22 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Santa Monica Airport
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Kelly Bakst
63
Esterlina Lugo
From:Paul Weinberg <paulnweinberg@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 7:24 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Santa Monica Airport / Opposition to Item 11
Dear Council Members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
One final thought: ask yourself, in you r heart of hearts, if you truly belie ve that closing down the airport
would be a good thing, and why a clear minority is so voc al about destroying a facili ty that is an asset not
only to Santa Monica but also to the surrounding area?
Put another way, do you really think th at closing the airport really in the best interest of the Los Angeles
area?
Sincerely,
Paul Weinberg
Private Pilot
Paul Weinberg
paulnweinberg@gmail.com
310-259-2828
64
Esterlina Lugo
From:Jennifer Mccaffrey <mccaffreyjennifer@yahoo.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 7:47 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:jetairpollution@earthlink.net
Subject:Item 11 A
I am in full support of the letter addressed to Santa Monica Mayor Antonio Vazquez and City Council
Members; regarding: The Community’s Request for Interim Actio ns Prior to Closure of Santa Monica
Airport .
Concerned Residents Against Airport Pollution (CRAAP) joins with the Mar Vista Community Council
(MVCC), as well as other Santa Monica and Los Angeles co mmunity leaders and activists , are also in
support of the letter below.
CONCERNED RESIDENTS AGAINST AIRPORT POLLUTIONSUPPORTS
NOTICE TO VACATE BE GIVEN TO ALL FIXED BASE OPERATORS
BEFORE SEPTEMBER 1, 2016
Concerned Residents Against Airport Pollution (CRAAP) joins with the Mar Vista Community Council
(MVCC), as well as other Santa Monica and Los Angeles co mmunity leaders and activists , in support of
the letter (at the bottom of this email), addressed to Santa Monica Mayor Antonio Vazquez and City Council
Members, from residents of Santa Monica, West Los Angeles, Venice, an d Mar Vista regarding: The
Community’s Request for Interim Actions Pr ior to Closure of Santa Monica Airport .
With almost twenty years of involvement regarding Santa Monica Airport (SMO), CRAAP Director Martin
Rubin strongly believes that it is the res ponsibility of the City of Santa Monica as owner and operator of SMO
65
to address the issue of toxic jet em issions that blow over Los Angeles re sidents and Santa Monica residents who
live beginning less than 300 feet from the jet blas t. Rubin, who is also the President of the North Westdale
Neighborhood Association, states that "The amount of pollution th roughout the day from jet blast as well as
emissions from the dirtiest idling je t stage has put the Los An geles neighborhood of North Westdale at the top
of the list for bad air quality in Lo s Angeles County. Adding to the unhealthful amount of toxic air pollution
that surely our bodies are not supposed to breathe in, is the extreme unhealthful noise pollution, especially over
the homes adjacent to the airport and under the flight pa th." Rubin echoes the chant of thousands who want
SMO closed, that enough is enough.
The resolution to be put forth at the August 23, 2016 City Council meeting is encouraging because it does
reference the negative environmental air quality impact to SMO neighbors; an issue CRAAP has reiterated over
the past 15 years. It is a critical ar gument that is not speculative and should be at the top of the City's list when
arguing its case for the airport's cl osure. CRAAP supports passage of the Council Resolution. However, the
actual value of the resolution will be determined by how quickly toxic air pollution relief to the downwind
communities will be achieved.
66
Esterlina Lugo
From:Kenneth Young <kenyoung1@sbcglobal.net>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 7:50 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:PLEASE Keep Santa Monica Airport OPEN.
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport provides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to residents of the Cit y of
Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During times of natural disaster or national emerge ncy
our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and future generations. Millions o f
taxpayer dollars have already been wasted and the effort s seeking the airport's demise must come to a close.
ThankYou,
Kenneth Young
128 Georgina Ave. #3
Santa Monica, CA 90402
67
Esterlina Lugo
From:Hunter Horvath <hunterairak@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 8:23 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Airport Meeting
Dear council members,
I am a Certified Flight Instructor, both aircraft and instrument, Certificate
N umber 3052926 CFII, exp 04/2017.
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item
11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should rema in open. Our airport provides a
multitude of real and tangible benefits to residents of the City of Santa
Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our
N ation. During times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport
is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding
communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceab le and invaluable public resource would be a
loss to both current and future gene rations. Millions of taxpayer dollars
have already been wasted and the effo rts seeking the airport's demise must
come to a close.
Sincerely,
Hunter Horvath
Hunterairak@gmail.com
208-946-1950
Thank you.
Sent from my iPad
68
Esterlina Lugo
From:Hanna Hartnell <hanna@hannahartnell.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 8:58 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:info@santamonicaairport.info
Subject:resolution - Santa Monica Airport
Dear Council Members,
I chose to write my own letter as opposed to the one suggested by the Santa Monica Airport Association.
I agree with their defense of maintaining the airport, but have this to say to you ‐ personally.
It will be on your backs if a single person is seriously harmed after a major event where we need a staging area and
airport in the case of a major disaster ‐ man made or act of nature. You yourselves will also be without aid from the lack
of air support.
Are you really so short sighted and vote driven to put your name on this proposal to kill off our only means of major
support if roads are closed or so damaged as to be unusable?
As a Red Cross volunteer, we will need this vital base to provide the services necessary in a major disaster. It will be the
fastest ingress and egress for supplies and urgent care.
Santa Monica is a small center of national attention these days…Silicon Beach, etc. but if you believe your own press and
see our ‘village’ as invincible, you are fooling yourselves. Your names will be remembered as shortsighted and naive
instead of what your true responsibilities are…to plan and keep safe the citizens of this community.
Sincerely,
Hanna
Hanna
HARTNELL
1410 Fifth Street ‐ Studio 112
Santa Monica CA 90401
Studio 310 393 6587
Cell 310 393 6587
hanna@hannahartnell.com
www.hannahartnell.com
69
Esterlina Lugo
From:Joe Bates <josebates@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 9:30 PM
To:councilmtgitems; Mike Bonin
Subject:Keep Santa Monica Airport open!
Dear Councilmembers,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to Item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport provides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to residents of the Cit y of
Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During times of natural disaster or national emerge ncy
our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and future generations. Millions o f
taxpayer dollars have already been wasted and the effort s seeking the airport's demise must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Joe Bates
Venice, CA
70
Esterlina Lugo
From:Giovanna Galligani <giagalligani@me.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 9:50 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Don't close the airport
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Giovanna Galligani
Gia Galligani
The information in this electronic message, including a ny attachment(s), may contai n proprietary, confidential
or privileged information for the sole use of the in tended recipient(s). You are hereby notified that any
unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribu tion, or use of this message is pr ohibited. If you have received this
message in error, please immediately notify Gi a Galligani by reply e-mail and delete it.
71
Esterlina Lugo
From:valentina Galligani <aquinnahent@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 9:53 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Santa Monica Airport
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Valentina Galligani
Gia Galligani
The information in this electronic message, including a ny attachment(s), may contai n proprietary, confidential
or privileged information for the sole use of the in tended recipient(s). You are hereby notified that any
unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribu tion, or use of this message is pr ohibited. If you have received this
message in error, please immediately notify Gi a Galligani by reply e-mail and delete it.
72
Esterlina Lugo
From:Andrew Brooks M.D. <andrew@tigertext.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 10:04 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Santa Monica Airport
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to
item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
I founded and run a Santa Monica based company which employs
about 150 people. The airport has been a vital part of our companies
growth as multitudes of our cust omers on a weekly basis visit our
office using the airport as a way to fly in and out conveniently. The
airport would be a major blow to our companies's growth should it be
closed.
I personally believe the airport is irreplaceable and an invaluable and
important business resource for companies like mine. I'm not a
politician and don't know all the othe r considerations you face. I can
certainly understand shutting down tr aining operations in an area like
SM but please don't hurt businesses li ke mine who have benefited so
much by its proximity to the airport.
If you would like to speak further or visit my direct cell is 310 986-
7345.
Sincerely,
Andrew Brooks MD
Founder and Chief Medical Officer
Tigertext
73
Esterlina Lugo
From:Thunder Levin <tlevin@stormfrontfilms.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 11:18 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Resolution Regarding Local Control and Closure of the Santa Monica Airport
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport provides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to residents of
the City of Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During times of natural disaster or
national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding communities that
cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and future generations.
Millions of taxpayer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise and harassing its
aviation tenants must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Thunder Levin
Thunder Levin
Stormfront Films
2407 Fourth St.
Suite 7
Santa Monica, CA 90405
310 ‐392 ‐8331
310 ‐999 ‐1831 cell
TLevin@stormfrontfilms.com
Right-click here to downloa d pictures. To help protect your privacy, Outlook prevente d automati c downloa d of this picture from the Internet.Avast logo
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
74
Esterlina Lugo
From:Philip G. Scruggs <PScruggs@aercap.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 11:28 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Santa Monica Airport
Honorable Councilman:
I am a long time resident of the area. The planes of Santa Monica airport fly over my house at the beach.
The airport is part of the history and fabric of the community. I recognize that the forces of today's real estate market
and the investors that support it create pressure to change the use of this land.
I ask you to resist that pressure. The airport is our history. Beyond its historical importance, it serves an important
transportation purpose.
Philip Scruggs
President and Chief Commercial Officer
AERCAP
Philip Scruggs
President and Chief Commercial Officer
AerCap
La Touche House
IFSC
Dublin 1
Ireland
Tel: +353 1 636 0916
Email: pscruggs@aercap.com
http://www.aercap.com
This communication is intended only for use by the addressee. It may contain confidential or privileged information. If
you are not the intended recipient, please contact us immediately and then delete this message from your system. You
should not copy, read, disseminate, distribute or otherwise use this communication or disclose its contents to any other
person. Thank you.
75
Esterlina Lugo
From:Liz DeStaffany <lizdestaffany@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 11:32 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Liz DeStaffany
76
Esterlina Lugo
From:Philippe Lesourd-Héliclass <as350ba@yahoo.com>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 11:42 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Sant a Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd
agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open.
Our airport provides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to resi dents of the City of Santa Monica,
County of Los Angeles, State of Ca lifornia and to our Nation. During times of natural disaster or
national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding
communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceabl e and invaluable public resource w ould be a loss to both current and
future generations. Millions of taxpayer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the
airport's demise must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Right-click here to download pictures. To help protect your privacy, Outlook prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Philippe Lesourd
"Training the World"
Tel: 06 69 16 88 62 France
Tel:+1 (661) 253-1437
email: phil@heliclass.com
http://www.heliclass.com
Right-click here to download pictures. To help protect your privacy, Outlook prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.photo
"To most people, the sky is the limit. To t hose who love aviation, the sky is home."
Right-click here to downloa d pictures. To help protect your privacy, Outlook prevente d automati c downloa d of this picture from the Internet. Get a signature like this: Click here!
77
Esterlina Lugo
From:Neal Current <n.current@cox.net>
Sent:Saturday, August 20, 2016 11:47 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Saving Santa Monica Airport
20 August 2016
Dear council members,
We citizens need the airport badly and will need it more in any emergency like some in the past. LAX won't
meet some of the needs.
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a sad loss to both current and future
generations. Please consider that millions of taxpayer dolla rs have already been wasted and it is our opinion that
the selfish and NIMBY efforts seeking the airport's demise must come to a close. Nearby residents knew where
they were settling and their votes count no more than ours. Let our security and safety prevail over the financial
interests of the oppone nts of the airport.
Please do your job and act accordingly. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Neal F. Current
Santa Monica Airport Association
78
Esterlina Lugo
From:Michael Biagini <jetsetpilot@yahoo.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 4:54 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Closure of Santa Monica Airport
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Michael Allen Biagini
Sent from my iPhone
79
Esterlina Lugo
From:Doug Weitman <flydoug@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 6:14 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Santa Monica Airport
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Doug Weitman
Doug Weitman
80
Esterlina Lugo
From:Harvey Karlovac <karlovacharvey@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 6:37 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:airport vote Tuesday
Hello, I am a homeowner and voter in Santa Monica. I urge you to support the airport, as it is a unique, critical
resource for Santa Monica, that once lost to developmen t (privatization of land), will be forever lost to our
residents. (And Santa Monica doesn't need more parks with all of the beautiful mountains and beaches and other
green space it already has) Thank you, Harvey
310.266.1353
81
Esterlina Lugo
From:PWNelson <nelcat61@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 6:56 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Santa Monica Airport
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Paul W. Nelson
323-691-9590
Sent from my iPad
82
Esterlina Lugo
From:Scott <viper1060@sbcglobal.net>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 8:43 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:Sharon Bateman; Mr. Cameron Sc ott Bateman; Bateman Brandon
Subject:Item 11 on the August 23rd
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indisp ensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future g-
enerations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Scott Bateman
--
Sent from my sbcglobal account
83
Esterlina Lugo
From:Greg Klinger <dilbert@earthlink.net>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 8:53 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Save Santa Monica Airport
Dear Council Members:
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda. As an aviator
and longtime Westside resident, I see Santa Monica Airport as a vital part of a the national transportation and airspace
system and needs to remain open. It is an important reliever airport for air traffic that would instead be sent to LAX or
other airports, thereby increasing flying costs, local air traffic, and ground traffic. Additionally, the airport generates
revenue and jobs for the city. Finally, the city needs to remember that the airport has in the past served as an important
asset in natural disasters and other emergencies (and would obviously continue to do so in the future).
I find it disgraceful that a city that has such an important transportation asset as a well ‐known and used as SMO wants
to waste its taxpayer dollars trying to find efforts to close it. Many other cities in the country see their airports as an
important assets and actually support them. While it is true that the airport can be considered a source of pollution
(noise and otherwise), so too could other transportation assets that we depend upon every day, such as major roadways
and freeways. Is the City Council going to try to close those next? The Santa Monica city council needs to recognize that
the airport is important asset that needs to be protected instead of eliminated.
Respectfully
Greg Klinger
84
Esterlina Lugo
From:Zachary Toews <z.toews@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 9:58 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Airport closure
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Zachary P Toews
85
Esterlina Lugo
From:Larry Smith <hollywooddog@hotmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 10:03 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Santa Monica Airport
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport provides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa
Monica and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpayer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's
demise must come to a close.
Sincerely, Jack Smith
86
Esterlina Lugo
From:Lisa Fetchko <lisafetchko@hotmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 10:09 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:jetairpollution@earthlink.net
Subject:Airport Closure
Dear City Council,
I'm writing to strongly offer my support for the work you are doing to close the Santa Monica airport. As a resident of
Westdale who is forced numerous times a day to breathe massive gusts of jet fuel while small jets idle on the runway, I
am concerned about my own health and the health and well ‐being of my neighbors as well as the ability of a vital city
like Santa Monica to make choices about issues that affect the lives of its citizens. To this end, I wholeheartedly support
the letter included below.
Thanks for all you do,
Lisa Fetchko
2825 Stoner Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90064
Residents of Santa Monica,
West Los Angeles, Venice, and Mar Vista
August 8, 2016
Santa Monica City Council
1685 Main Street, Room 209
Santa Monica, California 90401
E ‐mail: council@smgov.net
RE: The Community’s Request for Interim Actions Prior to Closure of Santa Monica Airport
Dear Santa Monica Mayor and City Council Members:
We thank you for your efforts to close Santa Monica Airport. While the closure process proceeds, gaining “local
control” of the Airport is one of the 5 Strategic Priorities of the City . Today, multiple fixed base operators (FBOs)
provide aeronautical services and have significant control of the Airport. These FBO operations include fueling and
maintenance, as well as many extra services, such as limousine service, aircraft washing, baggage handling, catering,
concierge services, rental cars, and hotel arrangements.
Beginning July 2015, these FBOs have had no right to continued leases at the Airport. Their leases are expired, but they
remain at the Airport and continue to perpetuate harmful impacts on the community. There are no agreements, laws,
or regulations that prohibit the City from evicting the FBOs. In fact, the 1984 Settlement Agreement that obligated the
City to “provide sufficient space for the location and operation of 3 full service fixed base operators” expired on July 1,
2015. Furthermore, the FAA Director’s Determination dated November 22, 2000 which was affirmed by the FAA Final
Decision dated February 2, 2003 confirmed (a) that FBO leases were not 30 ‐year leases, but were actually 29 ‐year leases
timed to expire on July 1, 2015, (b) that it would be unreasonable for the City to be required to enter into FBO lease
agreements beyond July 1, 2015, and (c) that beyond July 1, 2015, the Airport is “a local land use matter”.
87
The City, as the owner and proprietor of the Airport, should legally and immediately remove the FBOs and assert the
City’s “proprietary exclusive right” to be the only exclusive service provider at the Airport. As the sole service provider,
the City would achieve de facto “local control” of these Airport services and be able to directly manage them in line with
the interests of the local community.
The Proprietary Exclusive Right
The FAA Airport Compliance Manual, which provides guidance on an airport sponsor’s commitments when they accept
federal grants, explains the Proprietary Exclusive Right as follows:
“The owner of a public ‐use airport (public or private owner) may elect to provide any or all of the aeronautical
services needed by the public at the airport. In fact, the statutory prohibition against exclusive rights does not
apply to these owners. However, while they may exercise the exclusive right to provide aeronautical services,
they may not grant or convey this exclusive right to another party. The airport sponsor that elects to engage in a
proprietary exclusive must use its own employees and resources to carry out its venture. An independent
commercial enterprise that has been designated as an agent of the airport sponsor may not exercise nor be
granted such an exclusive right.”
“Aircraft fueling is a prime example of an aeronautical service an airport sponsor may choose to provide itself.
While the airport sponsor may exercise its proprietary exclusive to provide fueling services, aircraft owners may
still assert the right to obtain their own fuel and bring it onto the airport to service their own aircraft, but only
with their own employees and equipment and in conformance with reasonable airport rules, regulations, and
minimum standards.”
Even if we assume the 1994 grant commitments extend to 2023 (which is actively being disputed), the “proprietary
exclusive right” is still in complete compliance with all obligations of the City.
We strongly but respectfully request you take the following actions:
1. Give Notice to Vacate to all FBOs at the Airport, including Atlantic Aviation and American Flyers, before
September 1, 2016.
2. Authorize the City to assert its “proprietary exclusive right” and provide minimal levels of service while
continuing to evaluate and periodically adjust service levels until Airport closure is legally cleared.
3. Rent or buy equipment and employ staff that may be required to operate fuel services and to park aircraft.
These steps are the most direct path to help the City achieve its Strategic Priority of local control at the
Airport. Meanwhile, the remaining legal issues with the FAA related to the 1994 Grant and the 1948 Instrument of
Transfer should continue to be aggressively pursued.
Santa Monica is an extremely capable city that maintains and operates many services efficiently and effectively,
including fire, police, Big Blue Bus, waste collection, recycling, cemetery, CityTV, and parks and recreation. With the
addition of FBO services we can also safely operate the Airport with the local control necessary to reduce the Airport’s
impact on our surrounding communities.
Sincerely,
Residents and Representatives of the
Santa Monica, West Los Angeles, Venice, and Mar Vista Communities
88
Esterlina Lugo
From:Bob Cleaves <bob@wildcon.org>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 10:53 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Item 11 on August 23 agenda
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport provides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to residents of
the City of Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During times of natural disaster or
national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding communities that
cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and future generations.
Millions of taxpayer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Dr. Robert N. Cleaves
Thank you,
89
Esterlina Lugo
From:Affonso Beato <abeato@me.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 11:30 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Santa Monica Airport > opposition to item 11
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
_______________________________
Affonso Beato, ASC, ABC
Director of Photography
924 5th Street unit 10
Santa Monica, CA 90403
310 ‐351 ‐6263
www.affonsobeato.com
90
Esterlina Lugo
From:Wolf Sonnenberg <wolfsnbg@hotmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 12:04 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Regarding Agenda Item 11 "R esolution Regarding Local Co ntrol and Closure of the
Santa Monica Airport"
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in expressed opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd
agenda. In this context I particular wish to appeal to the council's sense of reason and desire to act in best
public interest.
Closing Santa Monica airport, however, is NOT in the best public interest and hence I have real difficulty to
comprehend why the council for so many years has expended so much energy and immense amount of
financial resources to try to close this airport. The community would be much better served if this energy and
funds would instead be directed toward causes that are truly in the public interest such as better school
funding.
Looking at this logically one cannot see why closing this airport can in any way benefit the community when
this means loss of well over$200M annual revenue plusjobs for the city, possibly followed by an even or higher
non ‐recoverable expense to turn the area into a park, while at the same time allowing LAX to take over the
airspace in turn resulting in low flying airliner traffic 24/7 over our city which would result in much higher
noise problem (and pollution) than is cited as a reason for Santa Monica airport closure right now. In addition,
much of the helicopter traffic now flying along the beach will be flying over our houses. Why would any of us
want this?
Santa Monica Airport thus MUST remain open. Our airport provides a multitude of real and tangible benefits
to residents of the City of Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa
Monica and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
We need to all be proud of having such a great airport as part of our city with such a great history
and potential and benefit for our future.
Consequently I ask the council to not proceed with item 11.
I thank you very much for your sincere consideration in this matter.
Wolf Sonnenberg
91
Esterlina Lugo
From:Andrew Pomerantz <iflyseaplanes@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 12:45 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:santamonicaairportcommission@yahoo.com; SantaMonicaAirportAssociation; ・
Andrew Pomerantz; Council Mailbox
Subject:RE: Preserve The Santa Monica Airport!
Dear Most Honorable Mayor and Council Members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in strong oppos ition to Item Number 11 on the August 23,2016 City Council a genda.
Santa Monica Airport must remain remain open and the recent decision by the Federal Aviation Administration confirms this notio n yet once
again.
Our airport provides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to residents of the City of Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of
California and to our Nation as an intricate part of our air travel system.
During times of natural disaster or national emergency our airpor t is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and the surrounding
communities that cannot be overlooked or overstated.
The recent wild fire events in California show how valuable and airport really can be to the community
Wasting our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and future generations. Millions of ta xpayer dollars
have already been wasted and the continued efforts seeking the airport’s demise and closure MUST come to an end once and for al l.
Your support is greatly appreciated in insuring that Santa Monica airport remains an open and viable part of the community
Sincerely,
Andrew
Andrew S. Pomerantz
Right-click here to download pictures. To help protect your privacy, Outlook prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected by the
Electronic Communications Act, 19 U.S.C. §§2510-2521. Th e contents are confidential
and subject to privilege, including but not limited to the attorney -client privilege. The
information contained in this message is intended only fo r the use of the above-named
recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, y ou are hereby notified t hat any dissemination,
disclosure or copying of this communication, including any and all attachments, is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communicat ion in error, please: (1 ) notify us immediately
92
by return email and telepho ne at (310)-415-5629; and,(2) pl ease immediately destroy the
original message.
93
Esterlina Lugo
From:LSAPC@aol.com
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 2:34 PM
To:Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems; Clerk Mailb ox; Rick Cole; Nelson Hernandez; Tony
Vazquez; Gleam Davis; Sue Himmelrich; Kevin McKeown Fwd; Pam OConnor; Terry
O’Day; Ted Winterer
Cc:lsapc@aol.com
Subject:SMO ---- Airport Resolution
We thank the City Council and City Sta ff, in particular City Manager Rick Cole and Senior Adviser to the City
Manager on Airport Affairs Nelson Hernandez, for movi ng these items forward and for continuing to make
progress.
We support agenda item 11.A. In particular, we urge the City Council to direct the City Manager to proceed
with all due haste with resp ect to the following actions:
1. Commence the park planning process, including conduc ting an environmental analysis as required by
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Protection Act
(NEPA). – As noted in the staff report, the FOSP Bo ard agrees that the time to commence planning and
environmental analysis of the conversion of the airport to a park is now.
2. Investigate whether certain fractional jet opera tors are impermissibly operating as scheduled
airlines. Newspaper and other advertisements circulat ed to the general public are increasingly supporting
the impression that this is, in fact, the case. As th e staff report has noted, bot h the FAA and the City of
Santa Monica prohibit scheduled air line operations out of SMO. Fractio nal jet operators who operate at
SMO should be required to provide the City with su fficient documentation and records to establish that
their operations do not amount to surreptitious scheduled service.
3. Submit an application to FAA, which would alter the Airport r unway by removing the 1949 Quit Claim
Parcel, also known as the “Western Parcel,” from aviation use. The FOSP Board agrees that, given the
pending legal action, and in order to place the City of Santa Monica in a pos ition to capitalize on its
upcoming legal victories, it makes sense to now file the application to close the Western Parcel to
aviation, as part of the City’s appeal of the grant assurance.
4. Cease forbearance of lax enfor cement of the Santa Monica Airport noise ordinance, and apply
enforcement as written. As noted, the City’s enfor cement practice of its noise ordinance pre-dates the
advent of popular fractional ownershi p and jets-on-demand services at the airport and thus is outdated
and overly lax. Enforcement should be adjust ed to reflect current airport operations.
5. Transition aircraft hangar uses from lease agreements to permits. A permit system is a reasonable
accommodation until the City prevails in court and expe ditiously closes the Airport per the subject City
94
Council Resolution. The proposed permit system provi des an important step toward greater local
control over the property av iation users now occupy.
6. Create a City of Santa Monica Fixed Based Operation. If the City is required to operate the airport and
if FBO services are required, the City would have greater local control by estab lishing a municipal FBO.
The two private FBO providers should be eliminated as soon as City staff is r eady to assume the duties,
which should in no case be later than December 31, 2016.
7. Elimination of leaded fuel. The sale of leaded fuel should be phased out completely, as soon as
legally possible, even before the City could begi n operation of a municipal FBO. There is a viable
alternative fuel that could service an estimated 65 percent of the prope ller aircraft fleet based at SMO.
8. Enhanced Security. The FOSP Board urges the City to ensure that wh atever contract is signed with a
private airport security firm, that the City retain maximum local contro l over security operations and that
those operations be conducted in a manner that aligns completely with all local concer ns, including but
not limited to ensuring that SMO is not used to transport contraband or illegal persons at any time or by
any user of the SMO facilities, incl uding but not limited to clients of the privately run FBOs, so long as
those FBOs are operating at SMO.
The ongoing negative health effects of air and noise po llution, not to mention safety concerns, created by
ongoing airport operations, dictate that the optimal publ ic policy goal of the City should be to close the
airport and repurpose the area to maximize park, open space, and cultural facilities. All of these goals
can be addressed by adopting the proposed resolution, which we support.
Thank you.
Louis Ssutu
Deanna Ssutu
Residents of Sunset Park
95
Esterlina Lugo
From:Dave Hopkins <dhopkins@hopkinsaviation.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 2:53 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Santa Monica Airport
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda. This resolution
is a waste of tax ‐payer times and funds. The City has far higher priority items to deal with than needless and wasteful
efforts to close an airport designated by the Federal Government as an indispensable local and national transportation
asset.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport provides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to residents of
the City of Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During times of natural disaster or
national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding communities that
cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and future generations.
Millions of taxpayer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise must come to a close.
Sincerely,
David Hopkins
17 ‐year resident of Ocean Park
Santa Monica
96
Esterlina Lugo
From:Trevor Grayson <rovertus@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 2:56 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Agenda item 11
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda. The
airport was one of the key things that caused me to move to Santa Monica years ago. It makes this area a unique
lovely place to live.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Trevor Grayson.
97
Esterlina Lugo
From:russell/kraal <boaconstruction@ca.rr.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 2:57 PM
To:judi russell; Eduardo.Angeles@faa.gov
Cc:Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems; CRAAP; Patty Hynes; David McAuliffe; Chris Teuber;
Roxanne Steinberg; Peter Kirby; Steve De Witt; Eve Montana; Oguri; Nancy Evans;
McCarren /Fine; Linda & Bruce Porter; Kare n Carson; Judith Davies; Laura Silagi &
Dennis Hathaway; Jan Simonovic; Conny Leder er; Martin & Joan Rubin; Tom & Jan
Krumpak; Greg and Dinah Colson; Angie /Steve DeWitt; Mike Bonin; Eleanor & Michael
Lerner; Tom Vinetz; Daniel Rothman; Nelson Hernandez
Subject:Item 11.A
To the FAA
August 21, 2016
Dear Mr. Angeles,
I find it so hard to believe that such a noble institution as the FAA would become the puppet of lobbyists. That the selfish
whims and indulgences of so few are allowed to very negatively impact the physical and mental health and lifestyle of
the American people is a disgrace to your organization and to our forefathers.
For some reason I’ve always felt that compassion and empathy were important in our government agencies, same as in
our daily lives. This is part of what makes us humans instead of just primates. (The other part is intelligence…). These
pilots, aviation companies and their rich clients operating out of SMO are in my opinion sociopaths and they have hired
sociopathic lobbyists to influence the FAA.
There is no way that any sane person would want to ruin people’s daily lives and health as they do ours. They are all well
aware of the dangers, fear, anxiety and pollution they impose on us, yet their adolescent needs override any possible
compassion or empathy.
From the dictionary: Sociopath: a person with a personality disorder manifesting itself
in extreme antisocial attitudes and behavior and a lack of conscience.
Sociopath is just a euphemism for “psychopath”. These pilots and their rich clients are living in that world. And their
attitudes are violent. Their hollow nostalgia belongs in the beautiful Aviation Museum at SMO.
The people living right near the airport are suffering greatly as the air traffic has grown. I don’t know how they stay sane.
And even though we ourselves live 2 miles southwest of SMO, we also suffer from the noise of small planes and jets
going over our house day and night. When we moved here in 1993, there were maybe 2 or 3 jets per week. Now there
are at least 10 ‐12 daily. Plus all the small, lead fueled single engine “lawnmowers” that fly over our house. It is really
unbearable. And on top of it all, of course, is the fact they all fly over Venice and West Los Angeles and not over Santa
Monica!
We’ve again and again invited the pilots all to lunch in our garden, but no one has taken us up on it!
Wonder why? Would you like to come Mr. Angeles?
98
Even just one day in the shoes of a resident here could change even the most callous bureaucrat.
There is no way you can make an informed decision about such an important issue without experiencing it yourself
(empathy) or at least looking at it with a compassionate mind instead of listening to the lobbyists. The American people
expect and deserve that from our government.
All your “public meetings on the issue” are laughable to us now. They meant nothing to you and were obviously just
held to make you look good. Our needs were not considered in your decision.
Please don’t be a sociopath!
Sincerely,
Lies Kraal and Judi Russell
Milwood at Shell Avenue
Venice, CA
99
Esterlina Lugo
From:Deidre Powell <deidrewla@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 4:50 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:I support Santa Monica Airport
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Deidre Powell
310.850.1069
DeidreWLA@gmail.com
Follow me on Instagram
https://instagram.com/deidre_powell
100
Esterlina Lugo
From:Sara Sherman Drapkin <saraslowfood11@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 5:06 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Close the Santa Monica Airport to planes!!!
To All the Members of the Santa Monica City Council:
Please follow the law. Planes of any kind no longer belong there legally.
Sara Sherman Drapkin
101
Esterlina Lugo
From:Jim Gates <red.lancair@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 5:46 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:Anne O'Brien; Barry Jay; Bill Tymszcysm; Da vid Bentley; Jennifer Perdigao; Jim Gates;
Jordan Denitz; info@santamonic aairport.info; Edward Story
Subject:Item 11, August 23rd Council meeting
DATE: August 21, 2016
TO: Santa Monica City Council
FROM: Jim Gates
SUBJECT: Plans to close Santa Monica Airport
Like freeways, highways and streets, Santa Monica Airport is a public trans portation facility se rving the entire
Westside area. Furthermore, Santa Monica Airport is a valuable local "on-ramp" to an extensive general
aviation transportation system that includes 95% of all aircraft and 75% of all takeoffs and landings in the
nation--connecting the Westside to si milar airports throughout the hemisphe re. Business-related flights make up
2/3 of the 31 million hours flown nationally by these gene ral aviation aircraft every year. Many of these flights
begin or end at the Santa Monica airport. They suppor t many Santa Monica businesses and provide valuable
emergency services to the community.
After conducting a successful large-scale disaster drill, the Federa l Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
concluded that general aviation pilots, aircraft, and airports (such as Santa Monica Airport) are key resources in
event of a national or regional disast er emergency. Santa Monica Airport w ould play a key role in such an
event.
Among the specious arguments presented in the sta ff report for the 8/23 resolution are the following:
Santa Monica residents are adversely impacted by the airport because the City solicited 1,800 complaints
for the FAA study. Your argument that this is representative of the 130,000 Santa Monica residents is false. It
means only that 98.6% of Santa Monica residents are did not file complaints and t hus may not be impacted.
The airport property can become a "G reat Park" for the city residents . The City has already stated that it
does not have enough tax money to build and maintain a "Great Park" on the property. As the L A Times noted,
In the 14 years since Orange County voters decided they w ould rather have a public park on the site of the old
El Toro Marine base than a large ci vilian airport, the size an d scope of the Great Park have shrunk, along with
public faith in the civic leaders who touted the park so loudly. The El Toro property is still mostly vacant with
102
almost no "parkland" development. Instead, it has become a parking area for RVs and is being nibbled away by
residential development. The Meadowlark Airport property became a shopping center with terrific traffic
increases and 18-wheelers delivering goods at all hours of the night. Reside nts now wish they had their quiet
airport back.
The City will be able to close the "Western Parcel" to aviation use and convert it to use as park land.
Unfortunately, that area would still be at the end of an active runway and would be designated by the Los
Angeles County Airport Land Use Commission as a Runway Protection Zone (RPZ). Any land use which will
cause a concentration of people (such as a park or recreation area )is not permitted in a RPZ. Of course, the
high-rise condos that developers plan to build in that area would si milarly be prohibited.
Closure of the airport will make Santa Monica residents sa fer from aircraft accidents . On the contrary,
aircraft will continue to us e the LAX flight corridor and fly directly over the city--but without a safe place to
land in case of a problem.
Closure of the airport will reduce noise from aircraft over flights . Without the Class D airspace of SMO,
the FAA will likely lower the floor of its Class B airs pace over Santa Monica from 5,000 feet to 2,500 feet to
match adjacent areas of the LAX complex. Arriving jumbo jets will still fly direc tly over the SMO VOR, but a
much lower altitude. Aircraft transiting the LAX co rridor will still do so, but at even lower altitudes.
Nowhere in the discussion of the reso lution is there any hint of how th e City would replace the jobs and
revenue currently generated by the ai rport AND pay for the operation of a "Great Park." How many Santa
Monica residents have expressed agr eement with increased taxes that w ould result from your "Great Park?"
Nowhere in the discussion of the resolu tion is there a revelation that the w hole idea of closing the airport is
being funded by developers who desire to develop the property with high-ri se condos as they did in Century
City. How many Santa Monica residents have expressed agreement with the traffic nightmare that will result
from this development?
I urge the City Council to r econsider their short-sighted actions to close the Santa Monica Airport. As Jim
Smith (PhD, P.E., American Public Universi ty System) stated in "AVIATION CRITICAL
INFRASTRUCTURE, AIRPORTS & CATASTROPHES":
“In a disaster, an airport can substitute for almost anything else, but nothing can substitute for an
airport.”
103
Esterlina Lugo
From:david bentley <davidbentleybmg@yahoo.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 5:57 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Santa Monica Airport
As a businessman and business consultant, I fly into Santa Monica Airport and other smaller regional airports on a routine basi s
to conduct important business. Airports like this are invaluable to the business community and take pressure off LAX. I urge
you to not close this important airport.
David Bentley, PMP, CCM, CCE, LEED AP Professional Project Manage r and Construction Consul tant President, Bentley
Management Group LLC
104
Esterlina Lugo
From:Anthony Nichols <anthony.t.nichols@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 6:30 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Save the airport!
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Anthony Nichols
105
Esterlina Lugo
From:Phil Kellman <kellman@cognet.ucla.edu>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 7:13 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:re: Santa Monica Airport
Dear
C
ouncil
M
embers,
I
write
in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
As a scientist, citizen, and pilot, I find much of th e opposition to the airpor t to be puzzling. I don't
really know how much reasoned analysis is relevant , as the opposition to the airport may very well
simply reflect the influence of real estate developers on local politics. However, in case analysis
matters, I want to underscore the following. As a hu man factors expert, I would argue that there is
no serious safety case to be made relating to ai r traffic and flight training. For concern about our
fellow citizens, we could do much better by worry ing more about motorcycle s, pedestrian safety,
or cheeseburger consumption in Santa Monica. The ai r quality "study" that ha s been circulated is a
bit of a joke and it's own data show clearly that air quality impact is minimal past a few hundred
yards away from an aircraft taking off; the effe cts are not clearly discriminable from freeways; and
LAX must have a thousand times the impact. Air quality impact of this airport probably lags
barbecues and leaf blower s in the big picture.
Should the airport opponents ever succeed in closing this airport, please be aware of the following.
Politicians who have been co-opted by real estate developers always say that a departed airport
will become a park, but it always ends up being condos! Such development would add a suffocating
amount of new auto traffic (pot entially 10,000 new traffic events a day), and the stress, time
wasting, and dysfunction, not to mention air polluti on, from cars stuck in traffic in Santa Monica
and West LA, is already our number one problem in th is area. Finally, and I really can't believe that
this issue is not made clear to every resident of the region, the existence of this airport limits the
heights of buildings in the area. Th is is an issue not just for the gr ound that would be developed if
the airport closed but for miles around! Approach paths and traffic patterns (in the air) make this
community more habitable and more neighborly on th e ground than it would be if it turned into
106
skyscrapers like Westwood. (And please don't say th at local political action will protect us; again,
the developers simply have too much clout. It will be skyscrapers.) I wonder if anyone has honestly
posed this issue to all the reside nts of the area. Please do your jo b and include this issue in every
discussion about opposing the airport.
The airport is an invaluable regional security and safety asset, an historic al treasure, and a haven
for beneficial and diverse aviation activities th at are life-enriching, adding to our community
something important, inspiring and uplifting. It makes our community better, and it contrasts with
an otherwise seemingly inevitable progression toward a stultifying, monotono us life consisting of
ever more condos and restaurants.
Squandering
this
irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and future generations. Millions of
taxpayer dollars have alrea dy been wasted and the e fforts seeking the airport's demise
should
come to a close.
Sincerely,
Phil Kellman
_______________________________________
P HILIP J. K ELLMAN
D ISTINGUISHED P ROFESSOR AND C HAIR , C OGNITIVE A REA
D EPARTMENT OF P SYCHOLOGY
A DJUNCT P ROFESSOR OF S URGERY
UCLA D AVID G EFFEN S CHOOL OF M EDICINE
U NIVERSITY OF C ALIFORNIA , L OS A NGELES
405 H ILGARD A VENUE
L OS A NGELES , CA 90095 ‐1563
Right-click here to downloa d pictures. To help protect your privacy, Outlook prevente d automati c downloa d of this picture from the Internet.
UCLA H UMAN P ERCEPTION L ABORATORY
http://kellmanlab.psych.ucla.edu
_______________________________________
107
Esterlina Lugo
From:Allan Scott Burgess <allansburgess@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 8:37 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Item 11 on the August 23rd agenda 2016
Dear Council Members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport provides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to residents of
the City of Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During times of natural disaster
or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding communities
that cannot be overstated.
Wasting our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpayer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise must
come to a close.
Sincerely,
Allan Scott Burgess
310 ‐962 ‐1078
953 Fourth Street
Santa Monica, CA 90403
108
Esterlina Lugo
From:Jill Rosen <jillrosen@ymail.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 8:44 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:NO JETS
Dear Council Members,
Please save our sanit y and protect our h ealth. No Jets. Eve ry day we hope
you will help.
Jill Rosen
109
Esterlina Lugo
From:Alan Levenson <alan@alanlevenson.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 8:54 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Airport Resolution item
Dear Mayor and Council,
Please pass the resolution to close the airport as well as the accompanying directions to staff.
The FBOs need to go and be given notice by September 1, 2016. The city needs to step it up a few notches and set up
their own FBO ASAP. Where there is a will, there is a way.
Please dig deep and find the will and pass it on to staff to find the way to make it happen.
The airport is currently a crisis in this city. The time has come to end the crisis and the conflict. As the police respond to
crime, and the fire department responds to fire and accident, the city must respond to the residents and get the city FBO
up and running because lives depend on it happening. Every day those planes fly harm is being done to those on the
ground. And every day that goes by without an accident is a blessing.
I will not be able to make the meeting, so you may all go home two minutes earlier!
Thank you for doing the job we elected you to do.
In good faith,
Alan Levenson
110
Esterlina Lugo
From:Jeffrey Felz <jeffreyfelz@yahoo.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 9:07 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:No jets
Please end our suffering
111
Esterlina Lugo
From:MAUREEN LYNCH <mrlynch@ucla.edu>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 9:20 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Item 11 on the August 23, 2016 Agen da-SM Airport Should Remain Open
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda. I have
been a resident of Santa Monica for over 40 years.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open ! Our airport provides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Maureen Lynch
Santa Monica resident for over 40 years
112
Esterlina Lugo
From:Chris Stousland <chris@stousland.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 9:24 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Item 11 on the August 23, 2016 Agen da-Please Keep the SM Airport
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda. I have
been a resident of Santa Monica for over 40 years.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Chris Stousland
Santa Monica resident for over 20 years
113
Esterlina Lugo
From:Yahoo <bigskyaviator@yahoo.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 9:35 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Keep SMO Open!
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Since flying out of SMO since 1980 I have personally seen how the airport has created jobs and commerce that
has benefited the city while providing recr eational and career opportunities for Many.
Respectfully
Jeffrey J. Gutovich, ATP
Sent from my iPad
114
Esterlina Lugo
From:Inge <inge_mueller@msn.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 9:42 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:jetairpollution@earthlink.net
Subject:Item 11. A
Dear Santa Monica City Council Members:
I am writing to you to express my full support of t he CRAAP letter (below), addressed to Santa Monica Mayor Antonio
Vazquez and City Council Members; regarding: The Community’s Request for Interim Actions Prior to Closure of
Santa Monica Airport .
I am urging you to take action!
Sincerely,
Inge Mueller
226 6 th Avenue
Venice, CA 90291
CONCERNED RESIDENTS AGAINST AIRPORT POLLUTION SUPPORTS
NOTICE TO VACATE BE GIVEN TO ALL FIXED BASE OPERATORS
BEFORE SEPTEMBER 1, 2016
Concerned Residents Against Airport Pollution (CRAAP) joins with the Mar Vista Community Council (MVCC), as well as
other Santa Monica and Los Angeles community leaders and activists , in support of the letter (at the bottom of this
email), addressed to Santa Monica Mayor Antonio Vazquez and City Council Members, from residents of Santa Monica,
West Los Angeles, Venice, and Mar Vista regarding: The Community’s Request for Interim Actions Prior to Closure of
Santa Monica Airport .
With almost twenty years of involvement regarding Santa Monica Airport (SMO), CRAAP Director Martin Rubin strongly
believes that it is the responsibility of the City of Santa Monica as owner and operator of SMO to address the issue of
toxic jet emissions that blow over Los Angeles residents and Santa Monica residents who live beginning less than 300
feet from the jet blast. Rubin, who is also the President of the North Westdale Neighborhood Association, states
that "The amount of pollution throughout the day from jet blast as well as emissions from the dirtiest idling jet stage
has put the Los Angeles neighborhood of North Westdale at the top of the list for bad air quality in Los Angeles County.
Adding to the unhealthful amount of toxic air pollution that surely our bodies are not supposed to breathe in, is the
extreme unhealthful noise pollution, especially over the homes adjacent to the airport and under the flight path." Rubin
115
echoes the chant of thousands who want SMO closed, that enough is enough.
The resolution to be put forth at the August 23, 2016 City Council meeting is encouraging because it does reference the
negative environmental air quality impact to SMO neighbors; an issue CRAAP has reiterated over the past 15 years. It is
a critical argument that is not speculative and should be at the top of the City's list when arguing its case for the airport's
closure. CRAAP supports passage of the Council Resolution. However, the actual value of the resolution will be
determined by how quickly toxic air pollution relief to the downwind communities will be achieved.
FYI: For those of you who don't know, there is no lead in jet aircraft fuel, smaller piston planes use leaded aviation
gasoline, just like cars used leaded gasoline many years ago before it was outlawed. However jet fuel contains many
carcinogenic compounds.
Contact me if you have questions.
Thank you,
Martin Rubin, CRAAP Direct or and NWNA President
310.479.2529
116
Esterlina Lugo
From:Robert Bortolin <Rober t_S_Bortolin@hotmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 9:43 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:SM Airport
Dear council members,
I would like to voice my opinion in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the agenda
for August 23rd .
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. It provides many benefits to residents of the City, County, and
State in addition to providing numerous jobs to the city. During times of natural disaster or national
emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding communities that
cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpayer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's
demise must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Robert Bortolin
117
Esterlina Lugo
From:Howard Kuttler <hek@hekassoc.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 21, 2016 10:01 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:jetairpollution@earthlink.net
Subject:Council Agenda Item 11. A
I am in full support of the letter (below), addressed to Santa Monica Mayor Antonio Vazquez and City Council Members;
regarding: The Community’s Request for Interim Actions Prior to Closure of Santa Monica Airport .
CONCERNED RESIDENTS AGAINST AIRPORT POLLUTION SUPPORTS
NOTICE TO VACATE BE GIVEN TO ALL FIXED BASE OPERATORS
BEFORE SEPTEMBER 1, 2016
Concerned Residents Against Airport Pollution (CRAAP) joins with the Mar Vista Community Council (MVCC), as well as
other Santa Monica and Los Angeles community leaders and activists , in support of the letter (at the bottom of this email), addressed
to Santa Monica Mayor Antonio Vazquez and City Council Members, from residents of Santa Monica, West Los Angeles, Venice, and Mar
Vista regarding: The Community’s Request for Interim Actions Prior to Closure of Santa Monica Airport .
With almost twenty years of involvement regarding Santa Monica Airport (SMO), CRAAP Director Martin Rubin strongly believes that
it is the responsibility of the City of Sa nta Monica as owner and operator of SMO to address the issue of toxic jet emissions t hat blow over
Los Angeles residents and Santa Monica residents who live beginning less than 300 feet from the jet blast. Rubin, who is also t he President o f
the North Westdale Neighborhood Association, states that "The amount of pollution throughout the day from jet blast as well as emissions
from the dirtiest idling jet stage has put the Los Angeles neighborhood of North Westdale at the top of the list for bad air qu ality in Los
Angeles County. Adding to the unhealthful amount of toxic air pollution that surely our bodies are not supposed to breathe in, is the extreme
unhealthful noise pollution, especially over the homes adjacent to the airport and under the flight path." Rubin echoes the ch ant of thousands
who want SMO closed, that enough is enough.
The resolution to be put forth at the August 23, 2016 City Counci l meeting is encouraging because it does reference the negativ e
environmental air quality impact to SMO neighbors; an issue CRAA P has reiterated over the past 15 years. It is a critical argu ment that is not
speculative and should be at the top of the City's list when ar guing its case for the airport's closure. CRAAP supports passage of the Council
Resolution. However, the actual value of the resolution will be determined by how quickly toxic air pollution relief to the dow nwind
communities will be achieved.
Howard Kuttler
1115 Pearl St.
Santa Monica CA
118
Esterlina Lugo
From:Wora Rapp <worarapp@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 12:27 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:'SantaMonicaAirportAssociation'
Subject:Santa Monica Airport
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Sant a Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August
23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Ou r airport provides a multitude of real and
tangible benefits to residents of the City of Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of
California and to our Nation. During times of natural disaster or national emergency our
airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding communities
that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both
current and future generations. Millions of ta xpayer dollars have already been wasted and
the efforts seeking the airport's demise must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Wora Rapp
USA: 310 ‐271 ‐2340
www.facebook.com/wora.rapp
119
Esterlina Lugo
From:Martin Rubin <martinrubin@earthlink.net>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 12:30 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:Mike Bonin - Los Angeles Councilmember District 11; Lisa Pinto (District Director for
Congressman Ted Lieu, 33rd District) ; Maral Ka raccusian District Director | Office of
Congressmember Karen Bass (CA-37); Rick Co le; Nelson Hernandez; Marsha Moutrie;
Concerned Residents Against Ai rport Pollution; NWNA Members
Subject:Item 11-A 8-23-16
Attachments:Growth of Jet Operations at SMO 1983 throug h 2015b.pdf; Growth of Jet Operations at
SMO 1983 through 2015a.pdf
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
CRAAP Director Martin Rubin's comment submitted to Santa Monica City Council
regarding agenda item 11 ‐A for the August 23, 2016 meeting
August 22, 2016
Mayor Vazquez, Council Members, City Manager Cole,
Regarding: 11. RESOLUTIONS - A. Resolution Regarding Local Control and Closure of the Santa Monica
Airport; …
Although I am certainly in favor of Council passing this resolution , I continue to question why air
pollution impacts on Santa Monica Airport's surrounding community are not fully presented. The material
presented at this meeting by City Manager Rick Cole is far better than any staff re port to council that I have
seen over my many years of involvement. However, the crit ical issue of air pollution can be better presented
to show how jet traffic at SMO has skyrocked over the years since just before the signing of the 1984
agreement when total annual jet op erations were less than 1,200 and grew to a peak of 18,575 in 2007. In
2015, it was just under 16,000 (see below and attached grap hs). These numbers are th e strongest numbers to
use that will show most clearl y how the downwind community has b een unjustly impacted by toxic jet
emissions. Your current charts show figures that star t in 1997 when operations we re actually, according to
SMO staff data, more than 6,200.
120
I urge the city to add, within the resolves of this reso lution, that it will start simultaneously to enact remedies
to reduce harmful jet emissions at SMO.
Sincerely,
Martin Rubin
Director, Concerned Resident s Against Airport Pollution
President, North Westdale Neighborhood Association
Co-Chair, Mar Vista Community Counc il's Santa Monica Airport Committee
4,951
4,898
6,203
7,559
9,608
12,485
13,252
16,157
16,210
18,091
17,736
18,101
18,575
15,710
13,888 12,853 13,180 12,414 14,284 15,197 15,898
10
,
0
0
0
15
,
0
0
0
20
,
0
0
0
Number of Total Jet Operations
Gr
o
w
t
h
o
f
J
e
t
O
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
t
S
M
O
19
8
3
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
2
0
1
5
(D
a
t
a
i
s
f
r
o
m
S
M
O
r
e
c
o
r
d
s
)
Gr
a
p
h
a
s
s
e
m
b
l
e
d
b
y
M
a
r
t
i
n
R
u
b
i
n
1,176
1,556
1,270
1,518
1,825
4,209
4,829
4,951
4,898
6,203
0
5,
0
0
0
Je
t
O
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
c
o
u
n
t
s
w
e
r
e
n
o
t
t
a
k
e
n
f
o
r
t
h
e
y
e
a
r
s
1
98
7
,
8
8
,
8
9
,
9
1
,
a
n
d
1
9
9
2
7,
5
5
9
9,
6
0
8
12
,
4
8
5
13
,
2
5
2
16
,
1
5
7
16
,
2
1
0
18
,
0
9
1
17
,
7
3
6
18
,
1
0
1
18
,
5
7
5
15
,
7
1
0
13
,
8
8
8
12
,
8
5
3
13
,
1
8
0
12
,
4
1
4
14
,
2
8
4
15
,
1
9
7
15
,
8
9
8
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
20,000
Total Annual SMO Jet Operations Growth By Year From 1983
(Data is from SMO records) Graph assembled by Marti n Rubin
1,
1
7
6
1,
5
5
6
1,
2
7
0
1,
5
1
8
1,
8
2
5
4,
2
0
9
4,
8
2
9
4,
9
5
1
4,
8
9
8
6,
2
0
3
7,
5
5
9
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
19
8
3
19
8
4
19
8
5
19
8
6
19
8
7
19
8
8
19
8
9
19
9
0
19
9
1
19
9
2
19
9
3
19
9
4
19
9
5
19
9
6
19
9
7
19
9
8
19
9
9
20
0
0
20
0
1
20
0
2
20
0
3
20
0
4
20
0
5
20
0
6
20
0
7
20
0
8
20
0
9
20
1
0
20
1
1
20
1
2
20
1
3
20
1
4
20
1
5
(No jet operation count was kept for 1987, 88, 89, 91, and 1992.)
121
122
Esterlina Lugo
From:mailgen@im01.smgov.net
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 3:01 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Quarantine Summary Digest
Attachments:digest.html
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
councilmtgitems@smgov.net,
Please find your quarantine summary attached to this email.
123
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:26 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW:
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Selma Benjamin [mailto:alfselb@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2016 4:14 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject:
Please evict Atlantic Aviation! Some of my friends who lived near the Airport have come down with cancers. Jets are
dangerous to humans.
Selma Benjamin
Santa Monica homeowner
124
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:27 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Declaration of intent to cl ose and the associated staff report
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: John Fairweather [mailto:johnfairweather@earthlink.net]
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2016 6:09 PM
To: Tony Vazquez <tvazquez1516@yahoo.com>; Kevin McKeown Fwd <kevin@mckeown.net>; Ted Winterer
<tedwinterer@gmail.com>; sue.himmelrich@gmail.com; Gleam Davis <gleam.davis@gmail.com>; Pam O'Connor
<pam.oconnor.samo@gmail.com>; Terry O’Day <terry.o'day@nrg.com>; Council Mailbox
<Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Rick Cole <Rick.Cole@SMGOV.NET>; Nelson Hernandez <Nelson.Hernandez@SMGOV.NET>; Marsha Moutrie
<Marsha.Moutrie@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Declaration of intent to close and the associated staff report
Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
Since I have already expressed my wholehearted support for the declaration of intent to close before you on
August 23rd, I won’t bother to repeat myself here.
What I do want to say is that I just finished reading the staff report associated with this item, and frankly I find it
to be the best staff report I have ever read! The report in one single document textually, graphically, and most
importantly clearly, encapsulates all the relevant history, all the issues, and gives an proactive set of recommendations
together with a concrete responsible plan, both of which are wholly focussed on helping the community and mitigating
adverse SMO impacts in whatever way possible.
As a board member of Airport2Park I am particularly pleased with the unambiguous commitment to a ‘great
park’ and Measure LC that the report enunciates. The report clearly reaffirms both Council and staff’s commitment to
the promise of LC in a way that will undoubtably inspire widespread public support from an electorate that has grown
cynical and distrustful of government at all levels. Such suspicions are now shown to be wholly inapplicable in our City.
We can all now focus on planning the bright future and revitalization this ‘great park’ will bring to the entire surrounding
area.
I know that there are legal battles still to be fought, and this may take a while, but after reading this report I am
absolutely confident that in the end we will prevail. The report was a breath of fresh air, and a testimony to how well
our City is run, and the integrity of all that do so at every level.
All I can say is thank you!
Sincerely,
John Fairweather
125
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:27 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Vote to Close Airport
Attachments:20160818131414597.pdf
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Carrey, Neil [mailto:ncarrey@bakerlaw.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2016 6:18 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Andrew Gledhill <andrew@agledhill.com>; Cathy Larson <fospairport@rocketmail.com>; Cindy Bendat
<cbendat@gmail.com>; Eric Faber (eric@lahomegroup.com) <eric@lahomegroup.com>; Frank
<frankgrubersm@gmail.com>; Gavin Scott <gavin.scott@verizon.net>; John Fairweather
<johnfairweather@earthlink.net>; Maryanne Laguardia <aswml@me.com>; Michael Brodsky <mbrodsky@lmu.edu>;
Michael Feinstein <mfeinstein@feinstein.org>; Mike Myers <mike@ruskingrouptheatre.com>; Mike Salazar
<mikedsalazar@gmail.com>; Shawn Landres <shawn@landres.com>; Vivien Flitton <vflitton@earthlink.net>; Zina
Josephs <zinajosephs@aol.com>
Subject: Vote to Close Airport
Attached is a letter from the Santa Monica Airport2Park Foundation strongly urging you to vote on August 23, 2016 to
close the Santa Monica Airport. The Foundation applauds all of you and staff for the great leadership you have shown in
starting the development of the new Airport Park, showing your concern for the health, well ‐being and safety of the
residents of Santa Monica and the surrounding area and for your demonstrating that voting for Measure LC was not an
idle act. We stand with you do help in any way to make all of this happen.
Neil Carrey
Of Counsel
______________________________________
BakerHostetler
11601 Wilshire Boulevard | Suite 1400
Los Angeles, CA 90025 ‐0509
T 310.442.8835
ncarrey@bakerlaw.com
bakerlaw.com
________________________________
126
This email is intended only for the use of the party to which it is addressed and may contain information that is
privileged, confidential, or protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any
dissemination, copying or distribution of this email or its contents is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from
your computer.
Any tax advice in this email is for information purposes only. The content of this email is limited to the matters
specifically addressed herein and may not contain a full description of all relevant facts or a complete analysis of all
relevant issues or authorities.
Internet communications are not assured to be secure or clear of inaccuracies as information could be intercepted,
corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Therefore, we do not accept responsibility for
any errors or omissions that are present in this email, or any attachment, that have arisen as a result of e ‐mail
transmission.
127
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:28 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Declaration of intent to cl ose and the associated staff report
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Carrey, Neil [mailto:ncarrey@bakerlaw.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2016 6:50 PM
To: Tony Vazquez <tvazquez1516@yahoo.com>; Kevin McKeown Fwd <kevin@mckeown.net>; Ted Winterer
<tedwinterer@gmail.com>; sue.himmelrich@gmail.com; Gleam Davis <gleam.davis@gmail.com>; Pam O'Connor
<pam.oconnor.samo@gmail.com>; Terry O’Day <terry.o'day@nrg.com>; Council Mailbox
<Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Rick Cole <Rick.Cole@SMGOV.NET>; Nelson Hernandez <Nelson.Hernandez@SMGOV.NET>; Marsha Moutrie
<Marsha.Moutrie@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: RE: Declaration of intent to close and the associated staff report
While I sent a letter supporting the closing of the airport on behalf of the Santa Monica Airport2Park Foundation, I have
now just read the staff report and would like to just express some of my own thoughts.
I am sure I am just one of many who believe the staff report associated with this item is one of the best staff reports I
have ever read and I have read many good staff reports over the years. It covers everything and demonstrates a great
commitment to protect the health, well ‐being and safety of our community. I think adding the second item to the
resolution of the City of taking over the FBOs demonstrates a strong commitment on the part of the City to do what is
right. Also, I fully support and I know the Airport2Park Foundation also fully supports the recommendation to remove
the Western Parcel from aviation use.
As I said before, you should all be applauded for what you have done by putting Measure LC on the ballot and then
proving to the community that their voting for the passage of the Measure was not just an idle act. I have worked for
many years (probably at least 30) and worked with many different Council members and staff on numerous issues
concerning the City, especially dealing with open space and the health and safety of our community, and I can
unequivocally state, and without taking anything away from so many truly wonderful and very dedicated prior members
of our City Council, when it comes to recreation and park issues and the health and safety of our community, you are
among the best.
Thanks and I look forward to a unanimous vote of Item 11 at the August 23, 2016 meeting.
Neil Carrey
______________________________________
BakerHostetler
11601 Wilshire Boulevard | Suite 1400
Los Angeles, CA 90025 ‐0509
T 310.442.8835
ncarrey@bakerlaw.com
128
bakerlaw.com
________________________________
This email is intended only for the use of the party to which it is addressed and may contain information that is
privileged, confidential, or protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any
dissemination, copying or distribution of this email or its contents is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from
your computer.
Any tax advice in this email is for information purposes only. The content of this email is limited to the matters
specifically addressed herein and may not contain a full description of all relevant facts or a complete analysis of all
relevant issues or authorities.
Internet communications are not assured to be secure or clear of inaccuracies as information could be intercepted,
corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Therefore, we do not accept responsibility for
any errors or omissions that are present in this email, or any attachment, that have arisen as a result of e ‐mail
transmission.
129
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:28 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW:
From: MRSD17@aol.com [mailto:mrsd17@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 9:28 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject:
Please act to end the unsafe,unhealthy jet take offs impacting thousands of homes and businesses in Sunset Park. You
were elected to represent voters. -Not Atlantic.
Roberta de la Puente
2118 Navy Street
MRSD17@aol.com
mrsd17@aol.com
130
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:28 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: stop selling jet fuel
From: Natalie McAdams [mailto:Natalie@namevents.com]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 9:48 AM
To: Tony Vazquez (tvazquez1516@yahoo.com) <tvazquez1516@yahoo.com>; Council Mailbox
<Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Natalie McAdams <Natalie@namevents.com>
Subject: stop selling jet fuel
SM Mayor and City Council,
I think it is ludicrous and unbelievable that you don’t just shut down the sale of jet fuel. What possible reason could
exist for this except that you truly don’t want to stop jet traffic in the SM/West LA area. The spewing of toxic fumes into
my neighborhood has to stop. We have been patient long enough! And enough is enough. You have no legal
impediment to this simple step.
STOP SELLING JET FUEL IMMEDIATELY!!!!!!!!!!
Natalie McAdams |Owner & Executive Producer
12016 Clarkson Rd., LA, CA 90064
310 ‐996 ‐1030 (o)|310 ‐996 ‐1068 (f)| www.namevents.com
131
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:28 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Atlantic Aviation
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Jacob Samuel [mailto:liftground@earthlink.net]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 11:49 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Atlantic Aviation
Dear Council Members:
As a lifetime resident of Santa Monica and an Ocean Park homeowner for 30 years I am asking to please vote to evict
Atlantic Aviation from Santa Monica Airport.
This is a quality of life issue and an important step in reclaiming the airport and for the city's residents.
Eliminating air traffic will impact noise and air pollution.
Let's take a big step in the right direction for the city's residents!
Jacob Samuel
2025 6th Street
SM 90405
132
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:28 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: CLOSEING SMO
From: Tom Lynch [mailto:tom@tomlynchco.com]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 12:00 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: CLOSEING SMO
THAKYOU for all of your efforts. That airport is a challenge for all of us that live in it’s flight path. Best of luck with getting it
closed.
Best
‐‐
Tom Lynch
CEO
Tom Lynch Company
315 S. Beverly Dr.
Penthouse
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
T: (310) 724 ‐6900
T: (310) 550 ‐3825
Tom@tomlynchco.com
133
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:28 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Full support for airport closure as soon as legally permitted
From: artsandhealing@gmail.com [mailto:artsandhealing@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ping Ho
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 12:20 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Full support for airport closure as soon as legally permitted
Kudos to Mayor Vazquez and Mayor Pro Tem Winterer for proposing a resolution to close SMO as soon as legally possible.
Warmly and with gratitude,
Ping
Ping Ho MA, MPH
Founding Director, UCLArts and Healing / Arts and Healing Initiative
Email: pingho@ucla.edu
Tel: (310) 452-1439
www.uclartsandh ealing.org
www.artsandhealin ginitiative.org
UCLArts and Healing transforms lives through creative expression by integrating the innate benefits of the arts with mental health
practices. We offer professional development training and community programs for self-discovery, connection, and empowerment.
134
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:29 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Airport Park
From: reekgates@verizon.net [mailto:reekgates@verizon.net]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 12:21 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Airport Park
Dear Councilmembers,
Thank you for pursuing the will of your community to not onl y increase the criminally-lacki ng amount of park & recreation
space available, but to indeed create a wonderful Great Park!
Thank you as well for dedicating yourselves to termination of t he awful noise & air pollution nuisance that usage of Clover
Park as an airport has visited upon our community. It has been an ever-increasing problem for decades, and a solution is
welcome.
Sincerely, Richard Gates
1715 Cedar St.
SM 90405
135
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:31 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Staff Report on Airport
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Moore, Richard W [mailto:richard.moore@csun.edu]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 12:30 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Staff Report on Airport
Dear Council Members:
I have lived in Santa Monica as a renter and a home owner since 1979.
Since 1981 we have had the goal of closing the airport and putting the land use for a more valuable public purpose. The
staff report and recommendations before Tuesday is another significant step towards that larger policy goal, embedded
in Proposition LC. I encourage you to accept the staff report.
Thank you
Richard W. Moore
1723 Robson Ave.
Santa Monica, CA 90405
‐‐
Richard W. Moore, Ph.D. Professor, Department of Management, College of Business and Economics, California State
University, Northridge
818 ‐677 ‐2416 richard.moore@csun.edu
136
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:31 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: 90405 Resident in FULL SUPPORT
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Robert Lipman [mailto:rlipman@me.com]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 12:39 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: John Fairweather <johnfairweather@earthlink.net>; CASMAT <casmat@earthlink.net>
Subject: 90405 Resident in FULL SUPPORT
Hi ‐
I am greatly appreciative of John Fairweather’s work, and of your efforts to move forward as quickly as possible in the
direction of LC implementation. I understand that there are constraints, and i know that you are doing everything you
can to make that happen.
Thank you,
Robert Lipman
137
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:31 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Staff Report on SMO Closure Declaration
From: Sejon Ding [mailto:sjding@hotmail.com]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 12:54 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Staff Report on SMO Closure Declaration
Dear City Council,
Thank you for your efforts in implementing Measure LC, and I appreciate the well laid out staff report
accompanying the Declaration. However, if not already being carried out, I wish the city is aggressively putting
up "full ‐court pressure" and doing every little thing it can to enforce whatever rights it deem to have. If the
city needs more money to defend itself against its actions, I am sure many residents would be happy to
contribute. I personally would like to see aggressive actions taken everyday to bring the goals of Measure LC
to bear.
Thank you again for your efforts in helping the longsuffering residents who continue to be battered and
assaulted by fumes, noise and lead by the operations of the airport on a daily basis. I can tell you from
personal experience, when I visit many of these residents, they have little happiness in their faces. I look
forward to the day when the Southern California sunshine is truly meaningful for them when they can gather
in their backyards and enjoy noise and pollution free sunshine with their loved ones.
Best regards,
Sejon Ding
Pristine Windows, Inc
Tel: 310-446-8180
Fax: 310-446-8380
138
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:31 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Support for Closing Santa Monica Airport - Agenda Item 11.A
From: Michael Brodsky [mailto:mbrodsky@lmu.edu]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 12:55 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Rick Cole <Rick.Cole@SMGOV.NET>; Nelson Hernandez <Nelson.Hernandez@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Support for Closing Santa Monica Airport ‐ Agenda Item 11.A
Dear Mayor Vazquez and City Council Members,
By 2023 if the Santa Monica Airport remains open, jet traffic (at the current rate) will INCREASE by 105%.
This is on top of a 50% incr ease during the last 5 years. Can you imagine what a 105% increase in jets would be
on our community and our environment?
_ I fully support ALL of the staff recommendations for Agenda Item 11.A to close Santa Monica Airport and
begin environmental planning fo r a transformative grand park.
_ I fully support ALL of the efforts by the City Manage r to implement this resolution especially: Removing the
Western Parcel, Creating a City of Santa Monica FBO and Ending lead fuel sales.
I would go one important stuff further and end ALL fuel sales.
I also would like to commend City Manger Rick Cole and Nelson Hernandez on this powerful staff report and
on the important and clear solutions th at are proposed and recognize the dedi cated work - that is yet to come.
I want to thank the City Council for thei r leadership and support on this issue.
Sincerely,
Michael Brodsky
Santa Monica Airport2Park Foundation Board Member
139
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:32 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: CASMAT - Another big step forward!
From: RSganzoltd [mailto:roberto@ganzoltd.com]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 1:18 PM
To: casmat@earthlink.net
Cc: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Re: CASMAT ‐ Another big step forward!
John-
I read with appreciation the letter that you sent. I have one BIG ques tion and it concerns a news story I heard
on KCRW the other day. In the story they reported that the airport will stay open unt il 2013. This is because the
City of Santa Monica accepted multi-millions of dollars in 2003 in exchange for an agreement that would
guarantee the airport remains open and functional for another 20 years from that deal. Maybe that is why the
motion from the mayor(s) states “as soon as lega lly permitted”.
This seems to contradict the statements about the c ity closing the airport after the FAA 2014 agreement had
passed. With this “new” information it seems that whatever we the citizens try to do, th e city has already played
it’s hand and the airport will remain functioning until 2023. And if this is tr ue is there any way to end the
absurdly named and invasive program called “fly neighborly”?
Are you able to comment on this and explain th at maybe I am, hopefully, wrong in my belief.
Thank you,
sincerely,
roberto schaefer
roberto@ganzoltd.com
US mobile +1 310 200 1396
L.A. home +1 310 822 9471
N.O. home +1 504 895 3471
www.ganzoltd.com
www.ganzosite.wordpress.com
http://robertoschaefer.wordpress.com/
On Aug 19, 2016, at 11:57, CASMAT <casmat@earthlink.net > wrote:
Another big step forward!
At the July 26th City Council meeting, Mayor Vazquez and Mayor Pro Tem Winterer caused an
item to be placed on the August 23rd City Council age nda to formally declare the City's intent to
140
close SMO to aviation use as soon as legally permitted. The motion further directs staff to
initiate all actions necessary to transition the land over to uses consistent with Measure LC.
That declaration will be before the City Council on Tuesday for approval. This represents
another huge step forward in the quest to close SMO and transition the land over to LC
compliant park and recreational uses to benefit a ll. I believe there is li ttle doubt that the motion
will pass unanimously, just as every motion designed to mitigate airport impacts has passed
unanimously since the passage of LC. However, this particular step is si gnificant for a number of
reasons, some of which are laid out in this letter sent to Council ye sterday by Neil Carrey,
President of Santa Monica Airport2Park Foundation.
Perhaps as significant as the declaration itself is the staff report that accompanies it . The report
details the City's position and commitment to ach ieving a resolution of the SMO issue as rapidly
as reality permits. The content of the report is noth ing short of inspirational for those of us that
have been fighting this issue for so many years, and I would encourage all of you to read it.
When you have done so, I would further encourage you to email council@smgov.net expressing
your support and thanks for thei r (and staff's) ongoing effort s on behalf of the community.
As chair of the "Yes on LC, No on D" campaign , board member of Airport2Park , and founder of
CASMAT I think I am in a position to put this ev ent in context. So, le t me add my personal
commentary at this critical j uncture, particularly since many of you in 90405 may have received
flyers critical of City and Counc il for their lack of ac tion on the airport. The fact is that while
things may not be happening as fast as we all may wish, they are definitely happening, and the
pace is picking up. Such criticism, in my opinion, continues to be unfounded.
Below is the text of an email I se nt to Council and staff yesterday:
Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
Since I have already expressed my whol ehearted support for the declaration of
intent to close before you on August 23rd, I won't bother to repeat myself here.
What I do want to say is that I just finished reading the staff report associated
with this item, and frankly I find it to be the best staff report I have ever read! The
report in one single document textually , graphically, and most importantly
clearly, encapsulates all the relevant history, all the issues, and gives an
proactive set of recommendati ons together with a conc rete responsible plan, both
of which are wholly focussed on helping the community and mitigating adverse
SMO impacts in whatever way possible.
As a board member of Airport2Park I am particularly pleased with the
unambiguous commitment to a 'great park' and Measure LC that the report
enunciates. The report clearly reaffirm s both Council and staff's commitment to
the promise of LC in a way that will undoubtably inspire widespread public
support from an electorate that has grow n cynical and distrustful of government
at all levels. Such suspicions are now shown to be who lly inapplicable in this
regard. I hope we can all now focu s on planning the bright future and
revitalization this 'great park' will bring to the entir e surrounding area.
I know that there are legal battles still to be fought, and this may take a while, but
after reading this report I am absolutely confident that in the end we will prevail.
141
The report was a breath of fresh air, and a testimony to how well our City is run,
and the integrity of all t hat do so at every level.
All I can say is thank you!
...
Please take a few minutes of your time to express your support of this motion to Council before
next Tuesday's meeting.
sincerely
John Fairweather
CASMAT
This message was sent to roberto@ganzoltd.com from:
CASMAT | casmat@earthlink.net | | 1424 Fourth Street, Suite 238 | Santa Monica, CA 90401
Email Marketing by
Unsubscribe
142
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:32 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Support for closing airport
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Ted Whetstone [mailto:ted@tedwhetstone.com]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 1:11 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Support for closing airport
I live in 90403 and fully support the move to close SM airport. I have been watching the work and communications from
CASMAT.org and I am fully aligned with their positions and he recommendations of the report prepared for the August
23 city council meeting.
Ted Whetstone
Ted
143
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:32 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Yes on C, No on D
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: sally Schneider [mailto:sallyjane17@verizon.net]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 1:20 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Yes on C, No on D
Bravo for considering the wishes of residents over those of wealthy owners of airplanes!
Sally Schneider (90405)
144
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:32 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Eliminate Jets at Santa Monica Airport
From: R & L Masada [mailto:masada2310@msn.com]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 1:22 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Eliminate Jets at Santa Monica Airport
We appreciate your resolution to close the Airport after court action … but this will take far too many years. In the
meantime, after an entire year of local control by City Council, jet flight operations have increased by 10%. We think
that you are just trying to change the subject. You apparently want increased jet flight operations for the present … and
that is why those jet operations have increased!!
Instead, on August 23, City Council should act to EVICT Atlantic Aviation, which accounts for 90% of jet flight
operations. The FAA agrees that the City has 100% control over tenants such as Atlantic Aviation. FAA decisions in 2000
and 2003 specifically applied to Atlantic Aviation.
So PLEASE evict Atlantic Aviation NOW … as you successfully evicted Justice Aviation. Follow the Airport leasing policy
which you adopted and which Atlantic’s jet flight operations violate EVERY DAY!!
Instruct staff to begin a landlord ‐tenant action NOW, because Atlantic has no lease and the City already gave written
notice to Atlantic to leave.
Get Atlantic Aviation out before December 31, 2016.
AND PLEASE stop showing favoritism to special interests like Atlantic Aviation. Put the interests of residents first.
Linda & Richard Masada
2310 Ashland Ave
Santa Monica 90405
145
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:32 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Airport Staff Report
From: Lloydski22@aol.com [mailto:Lloydski22@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 1:42 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Airport Staff Report
Mr. Mayor and Council Members,
My wife and I have lived in Sunset Park for nearly 40 year s. During this time, we have experienced everything
imaginable. Excessive Noise, pollution, and let us not forget, plane crashest.
I won't bore you with a lengthily email as I just wish to point out one small statement in The Airport Staff Report, and that
is "There are only 310 planes registered at SMO"!!! Simp ly put, 310 people have a devastating affect on tens of
thousands. !
Let the rich and famous drive from LAX instead of slowly killing us with their noise and pollution.
PLEASE listen to the voters and Measure LC..... and stop this before SMO does tu rn into a scheduled route for private
jets..
Respectfully,
Lloyd & Jean Saunders
Sunset Park
146
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:32 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Close SMO
From: Maitra ‐Konell Family [mailto:vivadna4@verizon.net]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 2:30 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Close SMO
I support ITEM 11.A and ALL the Sta ff Recommendations to close SMO as soon as legally allowed;
begin the planning for a park and to support the Cit y Manger's actions to implement this policy.
Maitra-Konell Family
vivadna4@verizon.net
147
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:32 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Park
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Ethan Lader [mailto:ethandirector@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 2:32 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Park
I support ITEM 11.A and ALL the Staff Recommendations to close SMO as soon as legally allowed; begin the planning for
a park and to support the City Manger's actions to implement this policy.
148
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:32 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: I fully support Item 11.A
From: danapion@pacificla.com [mailto:danapion@pacificla.com]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 2:33 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: I fully support Item 11.A
I am writing to let you know that I fully supp ort ITEM 11.A and ALL the Staff Recommendations to
close SMO as soon as legally a llowed; begin the planning for a par k and to support the City Manger's
actions to implement this policy.
I hope we can finally look forward to creating a co mmunity park and gathering place for all residents
to enjoy! ]
Please let us finally make this happen!!!
Dana
Dana Pion
Pacific Research, Inc.
1046 Princeton Drive | Suite #114 | Marina Del Rey, CA 90292
P: 310.740.8690 | F: 310.740.8691 | www.pacificla.com
Please help save the trees, print this email only if absolutely necessary.
149
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:33 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: SM Airport hearing
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Vasara Schafer [mailto:vasara.s@me.com]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 2:34 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: SM Airport hearing
We live near the airport and are raising a young family. We are EXTREMELY concerned about the air quality for ourselves
and our children with growing developing lungs. We smell jet fumes daily with the jets idling on the runway!!!!
This is a health hazard!!!!
We support ITEM 11.A and ALL the Staff Recommendations to close SMO as soon as legally allowed; begin the planning
for a park and support the City Manger's actions to implement this policy.
Vasara Schafer
310.880.2487
150
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:33 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Item 11.A support
From: Christopher Toussaint [mailto:c2saint@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 2:35 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Item 11.A support
To whom it may concern:
I live 3 blocks to the east of the Santa Monica airport a nd am writing to express my support for ITEM 11.A
and ALL the Staff recommendations to close SMO as soon as legally allowed. I urge the council to
begin the planning for a park and to support the City Manger's actions to implement this policy.
Thank you.
Christopher Toussaint
151
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:33 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Letter from NBAA - Santa Monica Municipal Airport
Attachments:NBAA Letter to Mayor of Santa Monica 08-19-16.pdf
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
From: Alex Gertsen [mailto:agertsen@nbaa.org]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 2:38 PM
To: Tony Vazquez <Tony.Vazquez@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; Ted Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>; Gleam Davis
<Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET>; Sue Himmelrich <Sue.Himmelrich@SMGOV.NET>; Kevin McKeown Fwd
<kevin@mckeown.net>; Pam OConnor <Pam.OConnor@SMGOV.NET>; Terry O’Day <Terry.Oday@smgov.net>; Santa
Monica City Manager's Office <manager.mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; Nelson Hernandez <Nelson.Hernandez@SMGOV.NET>;
Susan Cline <Susan.Cline@SMGOV.NET>; Marsha Moutrie <Marsha.Moutrie@SMGOV.NET>; Joseph Lawrence
<Joseph.Lawrence@SMGOV.NET>; Lance Gams <Lance.Gams@SMGOV.NET>; Ivan Campbell
<Ivan.Campbell@SMGOV.NET>; Stelios Makrides <Stelios.Makrides@SMGOV.NET>; Deena Mecham
<Deena.Mecham@SMGOV.NET>; castagna@aeroplex.net; benito.deleon@faa.gov; kevin.willis@faa.gov;
dave.cushing@faa.gov
Subject: Letter from NBAA ‐ Santa Monica Municipal Airport
Dear Mayor Vazquez:
Attached please find an electronic copy of the letter from NBAA Chief Operating Officer, Steve Brown, regarding the
Santa Monica Municipal Airport. The original copy will be arriving by FedEx.
Thank you for attention to these matters.
Sincerely,
Alex Gertsen
Alex Gertsen, C.M.
Director, Airports and Ground Infrastructure
National Business Aviation Association
1200 G Street NW
Suite 1100
Washington, DC 20005
agertsen@nbaa.org
P: (202) 737-4477
NBAA-BACE 2016 : November 1-3, 2016 – Orlando, FL
ABACE 2017 : April 11-13, 2017 – Shanghai, China
EBACE 2017 : May 22-24, 2017 – Geneva, Switzerland
www.nbaa.org/events
August 19 , 2016
By FedEx and Electronic Mail
Mr. Tony Vazquez
Mayor of the City of Santa Monica
1685 Main Street
Santa Monica, CA 90401
tony.vazqu ez@smgov.net
RE: Santa Monica Airport
Dear Mayor Vazquez:
I write on behalf of the National Business Aviation Association (NBAA). As y ou know, NBAA represents
over 11 ,000 member companies which collectively own and operate over 11,000 general aviation air craft to
facilitate the conduct of their businesses or which are otherwise i nvolved with business aviation – including
tenants and users of the Santa Monica Municipal Airport (SMO), who continue to be strongly interested in its
future accessibility and via bility.
We are disappointed that at its August 23, 2016 meeting, the City Council is scheduled to consider a
proposed resolution that would assert its intent to close the airport , when legally permitted to do so . As a
preliminary matter, the City is lega l ly obligated to continue operating SMO – through 2023 by commitments that
accompanied federal grants (as just confirmed by an FAA administrative decision dated August 15, 2016 ), and
in perpetuity by commitments that accompanied federal surplus property dee ds.
Moreover , communities across the U.S. are "good stewards" of their airports and understand that they
are economic engines for and a valued overall part of the community. T here is no rationale for Santa Monica’s
virtually unique and entirely unjustifie d hostility towards one of its greatest assets. We note that at the
Council’s July 26 meeting, Councilwoman Himmelrich stated that, in regard to SMO: “The courts need to
respect us.” Of course, respect is a two -way street – and is earned by the quality o f one’s actions .
Respectfully, we suggest there are other airport matters that should be prioritized by the Council :
Al though the Council a dopted a leasing policy for SMO in March 2016, after the passage of five
months no ae ronautical tenant at SMO yet has been offered a new lease. As NBAA previously has
communicated to the City, there are numerous defects in the policy – but the City's outright failure
to implement the policy can only be described as a complete abandonment of its fiduciary
responsibilities to the airport and its tenants , and must be remedied immediately.
T he City last month sent notices to various SMO tenants that purported to reserve the right to evict
them at any time and threatened to hold them liable for any damages to the City caused by their
fail ure to vacate the airport. These notice s are l egally baseless yet demonstrate the precarious
legal position in which the City has placed itself (and its citizens and taxpayers) by failing to issue
new tenant le ases, consistent with federal law.
A s the Council presumably is aware, in an additional administrative proceeding pending at the FAA
the City ’s lawyers already have conceded to millions of dollars of financial improprieties in its
oversight of SMO – e.g., that for years the City has over -charged interest to airport accounts, and
under -collected rent from a major non -aeronautical tenant. The City continues to contest the exact
extent of its liability (and other issues raised in the proceeding), but in the i nterim citizens and
taxpayer s (as wel l as airport users and tenants) would welcome transparency – and accountability –
for the historic and continuing mismanagement of the airport by the City .
NBAA also understand s that the Council has requested that City staff provide feedback on certain
concepts for the restrict ion of access to and the use of the Airport, so long as it remains open . We again
remind the C ouncil that its federal obligations require it to provide access to SMO on reasonable terms and
withou t unjust economic discrimination. Indeed, not just NBAA but City staff previously has advised the
Council that many of these concepts are problematic at best , or simply impermissible . For example :
Security S creening ― The purpose of a security program at a general aviation airport must actually
be security; it can not be an access restriction in disguise. But Councilman Winterer previously has
made clear the City’s true intent for a security program at SMO – i.e., “to make a irport travel less
convenient .” The Council should expect any pretextual security program implemented at SMO to
be promptly challenged and invalidated.
Proprietary FBOs ― FAA policy allows a n airport's municipal owner to opt to be the exclusive
provider of fuel or other services at an airport, if it does so with its own employees. But the Council
has signaled that its interest in operating a proprietary fixed -based operator (FBO) is premised on
the – erroneous – belief that it would enable the City to reduce the scope of services avail able at
SMO. A proprietary FBO must actually be an FBO .
Aircraft Emissions ― O n July 26 , 2016, Councilwoman Davis suggested that a recent EPA
statement on aircraft emissions provided a basis for local regulation. That claim is also in error .
The EPA is laying groundwork for aircraft emissions to be evaluated and regulated on a national
and international level, in coordination with the FAA and ICAO. The city remains preempted from
local regulation by 42 U.S.C. § 7571(a)(2) and § 7573 – statute s that unqu estionably remain
effect ive , entirely independent of the City’s grant/deed -based federal obligations.
Once again, we urge the Council to recognize that a small minority of Santa Monica should not dictate
unwise policy choices by the City as a whole . A irpo rt tenants and users are and desire to be good neighbors,
but the City’s quix o tic efforts to close the airport and to defy its legal commitme n t s have been self -defeating –
as they have been for decades at the cost of millions of dollars to taxpayers , apart from lost opportunities for
cooperation . In closing , t he airport is not “obsolete” (as City Manager Cole suggested on July 23 , 2016 ) but
rather an active, vibrant, and productive element of the Santa Monica and greater Los Angeles community –
and should be promoted, not restricted.
Sincerely,
Steve Brown
Chief Operating Officer
CC:
Santa Monica City Council, council@smgov.net
Mayor Pro Tempore , Ted Winterer, ted.wint erer@smgov.net
Council Member , Gleam Davis, gleam.davis@smgov.net
Council Member , Sue Himmelrich, sue.himmelrich@smgov.net
Council Member , Kevin McKeown, kevin@mckeown.net
Council Member , Pam O’Connor, pam.oconnor@smgov.net
Council Member , Terry O’Day, terry.oday@smgov.net
City Manager , Rick Cole, manager@smgov.net
Special Advisor to the City Manager , Nelson Hernandez, nelson.hernandez@smgov.net
Acting Director of Public Works , Susan Cline , susan.cline@smgov.net
City Attorney , Marsha Moutrie, marsha.moutrie@smgov.net
Assistant City Attorney , Joseph Lawrence, jos eph.lawrence@smgov.net
Deputy City Attorney , Lance Gams, lance.gams@smgov.net
Deputy City Attorney , Ivan Campbell, ivan.campbell@smgov.net
Airport Manager , Stelios Makrides, stelios.makrides@smgov.net
Airport Property Business Agent , Deena Mecham, deena.mecham@smgov.net
Airport Leasing, Consulting, and Property Management Agent , Curt Castagna, castagna@aeroplex.net
FAA Deputy Associate Administrator for Airports Benito DeLeon, benito.deleon@faa.gov
FAA Manager of Airports Compl iance , Kevin Willis , kevin.willis@faa.gov
FAA Los Angeles Airports District Office Manager, Dave Cushing, dave.cushing@faa.gov
152
153
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:35 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Item 11A- airport
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: agave8@yahoo.com [mailto:agave8@yahoo.com]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 3:01 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Item 11A ‐ airport
Hello
We hope you Vote to close Santa Monica Airport as soon as possible.
We can no longer live healthy and happy lives.
The jet increase is unbearable.
Loud high pitched engines, toxic leaded fuel particles, short runways, and on and on.
The city needs to stop killing its residents with allowing this non green, non environmentally safe, money loosing airport
continue to stay open.
No more back door deals and loopholes!
Fight the FAA!
Hire a new lawyer!
We VOTED!
We want change.
Thanks
Jen and Ken
154
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:35 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: 11.A
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Dd [mailto:davey2step@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 3:04 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: 11.A
Dear Council,
Regarding the august 23 meeting I fully support item 11.A I understand that you are stuck between a rock (FAA) and a
hard place (the attitude and desires of our community defined by LCs 2014 victory). I believe that adopting this item and
following the staff report that accompanies it is the best, and most responsible, path forward.
Thank you,
David Walther
Santa Monica
155
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:35 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: I fully support Item 11.A
From: David Leroi [mailto:dleroi@ymail.com]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 4:20 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: I fully support Item 11.A
Good Day.
I am writing to let you know that I completely support and endorse ITEM 11.A and ALL the Staff
Recommendations to close SMO as soon as legally allo wed; begin the planning for a park and to support the
City Manger's actions to implement this policy.
I hope we can finally look forward to creating a commun ity park and gathering place for all our residents to
enjoy!
Please let us finally make this happen!!!
Sincerely,
David Leroi
156
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:35 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Another airport email...
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Verizon [mailto:rcbee44@verizon.net]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 4:50 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Another airport email...
Dear Council,
I am writing yet another in a LONG line of emails in fervent support of ANY MEASURE that will mitigate the harmful,
noisy, unhealthful effects of SMO. It is hard at this point to think of any new talking points but as an avid supporter of
closing SMO, I urge you, I BEG you to do something, ANYTHING, to put a dent in the endless pollution & noise created by
our horrible neighbors and to put the interests of the beleaguered residents at the TOP of the priority list!
Please consider closing the western portion of the airport to create a safety area providing a runway safety area and
limiting some of the larger jets; increasing enforcement of the noise ordinance; changing hanger leases to short term
permits; having the city take over "fixed base operations" and eliminating the current providers like Atlantic Aviation;
ending the sale of lead fuel, and enhancing airport security.
There are more and more young families moving into my neighborhood. Think of all those kids as you cast your votes. It
is time to TAKE ACTION! No more waiting, no more "we'll sees". Do the things that CAN be done, NOW!
Sincerely.
Robert Brown
Sent from my iPad
157
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:35 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Support ITEM 11.A
Expires:Wednesday, August 24, 2016 12:00 AM
From: Joel D Sender [mailto:JDSender@verizon.net]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 4:52 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Support ITEM 11.A
I support ITEM 11.A and ALL the Staff Recommendations to close SMO as soon as legally allowed; begin the planning for
a park and to support the City Manger's actions to implement this policy.
Please pass it.
Thank you
Joel
Joel D Sender JDS ENDER @V ERIZON .NET 310.829.5552
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
158
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:35 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Close SMO to aviation
From: mcjackie1@verizon.net [mailto:mcjackie1@verizon.net]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 5:02 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Close SMO to aviation
I support motion to Council agenda on August 23rd to fo rmally declare the City's intent to close SMO to
aviation use as soon as legally permitted, also direct staff to initiate all ac tions necessary to transition the land
over to uses consistent with Measure LC.
sincerely
Jackie McDonald
1400 Sunset Avenue
Santa Monica, CA 90405
310 452 1956
159
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:35 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Airport closure
From: Kenny Fields [mailto:kennyfieldseditor@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 5:38 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Airport closure
Dear Council Members,
I have lived in Sunset park since 1992. My wife and I have raised our family here and I owned a business here
for 17 years. I have had to live with all of the negative ramifications of th e airport for a long time. I want to
register my full support of ITEM 11.A and all of the Staff Recommendations to close SMO as soon as legally
allowed and to begin the planning for a park. I fully support the City Manger's actions to implement this policy.
It is time to get this show on the road and take all the steps necessary to close this airport down and turn that
chunk of land into a wonderful urban open space which th e residents of Santa Moni ca and other cities can
enjoy. I will not miss the noise of jets and airplanes taki ng off. I will not miss the sm ell of jet fuel wafting to
my house. I will not miss the extra particulate matter I find on my screens and outdoor furniture. I will not
miss anything about the airport so please let's shut it down ASAP.
Thank you,
-Kenny Fields
Kenny Fields
310-985-0412 (mobile)
kennyfieldseditor@gmail.com
160
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:36 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Thank you for your efforts to close SMO!
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Matt Hendrickson [mailto:hendrickson1965@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 5:46 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Thank you for your efforts to close SMO!
I wanted to express my immense support and thanks for the City Council's ongoing efforts to close SMO airport!
Matt Hendrickson
2258 22nd St
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Sent from my iPhone
161
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:36 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: santa monica airport
From: Devin Davis [mailto:devindavis94@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 5:57 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: santa monica airport
Hello council,
I believe it is Important for this proposal to close the western portion of the airport to create a safety
area providing a runway safety area and limiting some of the larger je ts; increase enforcement of the
noise ordinance; change hanger leases to short term permits; have the city take over "fixed base
operations" and eliminate the current providers like Atlantic Aviation ; end the sale of lead fuel, and
enhance airport security.
Thank you for your time.
- devin a concerned citizen
162
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:36 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: I support item 11 A & All Staff recommendation to close SMO
From: Eric Weingarten [mailto:weinga@ca.rr.com]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 11:48 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: I support item 11 A & All Staff recommendation to close SMO
City Council,
The time to stand up to the FAA and continue the phase out of SMO as an aviation hub is NOW! I am a resident of L.A.
(90066). I live on Dewey St., one block south of the Airport. I am dismayed that the jet flights have increased 10% since
July of 2015, the date the City took control of the Airport. I can hear and smell the increase in jet flights. I cannot
imagine that noise levels conform to law. There seems to be an utter disregard for health issues by the aviation
interests. Since 1987, when I bought my home, there have been numerous fatal crashes. I personally have witnessed 5
crashes occur. It is only by God’s grace that no one on the ground has yet to be killed. While, I was well aware of the
mitigating circumstances surrounding SMO when I bought my home, the fact is jet flights have increased, toxic fuel
pollution has increased, noise levels have increased, population has increased and despite LC, and the new leasing
policy, Atlantic Aviation sill operates and refuses to vacate. Many residents fear that if we shut down SMO, massive
development will occur and traffic congestion will increase beyond the intolerable levels currently on 23 rd St. and on
Bundy. Most are totally unaware that commercial and residential development on the Airport site is
prohibited and unlawful. Others fear the laws will change to accommodate mass development once the Airport ceases
to operate.
City Council, you have talked the talk. Now it is definitely time to walk the walk!!
Thank you for your consideration and we hope you will represent the concerns & well ‐being of both Santa Monica and
Los Angeles residents regarding safety, health, noise and fuel pollution concerns.
Sincerely,
Eric and Helane Weingarten
13209 Dewey St.,
L.A., CA 90066
163
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:36 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Closing Santa Monica Airport
From: Eileen Tunick [mailto:eileen.et@verizon.net]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 11:40 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Closing Santa Monica Airport
To all City Council Members:
I have been a homeowner in Santa Monica for the past 37 years. I'm tired of the noise and air pollution
caused by the airport traffic. There have been at least two plane crashes within a fe w blocks from my home in
recent years; to be specific one involved a st udent pilot and the other involved Harrison Ford.
I strongly support ITEM 11.A and ALL the Staff Recommendations to close SMO as soon
as legally allowed.
You need to begin the planning for a park and to support the City Manger's actions to
implement this policy.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely, Eileen Tunick
164
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:36 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Thank you all for working hard to transi tion The Santa Monica airport into a park
for everyone.
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Neil Keepers [mailto:nkrepela@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 11:28 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Thank you all for working hard to transition The Santa Monica airport into a park for everyone.
Sent from my iPhone
165
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:36 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Santa Monica Airport
From: Katharine Dreyfuss [mailto:kitdreyfuss@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 11:07 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Re: Santa Monica Airport
Dear City Council members:
Please consider my recommendation to support ITEM 11.A and the Staff Recommendations to close
SMO as soon as legally allowed, begin the planni ng for a park, and support the City Manger's actions
to implement this policy.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Kit Dreyfuss
621 25th Street
Santa Monica
CA 90402
166
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:36 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: support item 11.A
From: Anne Arikian [mailto:aarikian@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 7:44 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: support item 11.A
I support ITEM 11.A and ALL the Sta ff Recommendations to close SMO as soon as legally allowed; I
encourage the Council to begin the pl anning for a park and to support the City Manger's actions to
implement this policy.
Anne Arikian
1919 Delaware Ave
Santa Monica, CA 90404
--
Anne M. Arikian, M.D.
Personal Email: aarikian@gmail.com
Work Email: aarikian@mednet.ucla.edu
167
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:36 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: SMO
From: Hjeengineering@aol.com [mailto:Hjeengineering@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 6:14 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Gleam Davis <Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET>; Terry O’Day <Terry.Oday@smgov.net>; Ted Winterer
<Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: SMO
Dear Mayor and City Counsil Members,
My wife and I are please that finally after all this time some thing is happening in regards of closing Santa Monica Airport,
just so you know, we have noticed that the Jet flights have increased substantially, we also found out that the leases (or at
least permission to stay) have been extended fo r Atlantic Aviation, this is not good.
The LC measure was won by the residence overwhelmingly, so act accordingly put the interests of residence first for a
change and evict Atlantic Aviation.
Stop the jet flights ASAP , do what the people that voted y ou into office are asking for, e.g. Measure LC.
Thanks,
Regards,
Hans J. Ehringer
Marion Ehringer
2940 Glenn Ave.
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Phone: 310 392 3611
Cell: 310 729 1434
hjeengineering@aol.com
168
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:36 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Closing SMO to aviation
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: sally Schneider [mailto:sallyjane17@verizon.net]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 6:02 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Closing SMO to aviation
Thank you for backing our community by committing to LC and the proposed park.
169
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:37 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: airport2park resolution
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Heidi Fields [mailto:fieldskh@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2016 8:43 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Kenny Fields <kennyfieldseditor@gmail.com>
Subject: airport2park resolution
To SM City Council members:
I am writing to let you know that I support Item 11.A and all staff recommendations to close the Santa Monica airport as
soon as legally possible. I fully support the planning for a sustainable park space for our community. It is time for the
noise and pollution created by the airport to come to an end. I realize it is a process and will take time to achieve, but
let's move forward towards a healthy, clean air choice that will provide benefits for our community for generations to
come.
Thankyou!
Heidi Fields
SM resident
170
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:37 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: SMO closure
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: iPhone Yahoo Email [mailto:dgilbertson@yahoo.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2016 7:49 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: SMO closure
After living under the flight path in Sunset Park for more than 30 years, I support ITEM 11.A and ALL the Staff
Recommendations to close SMO as soon as legally allowed; begin the planning for a park and to support the City
Manager's actions to implement this policy.
Best, Daniel Gilbertson.
171
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:37 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Aug 23 vote
From: Lovell Shao [mailto:lovellshao@hotmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2016 7:30 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Aug 23 vote
Dear city council members,
I would like to express my support for item 11.A and ALL the Staff Recommend ations to close SMO
as soon as legally allowed.
My family and I live right in the flight path to the SM airport. I am very conc erned for the HEALTH and
SAFETY of my family. Base on research from UCL A, the pollutions from the business jets are
hazardous to the health of my children and my family.
Please do vote for the closure of t he SM airport for the safety and the health of the SM residents that
live nearby.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Lovell Shao
172
Esterlina Lugo
From:tim@cashins.org
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:37 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Santa Monica City Council Meeting, Aug. 23, 2016, Agenda Item 11
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Tim Cashin
Santa Monica, CA
173
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:37 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 11.A
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: David Reilly [mailto:stringandstrobe@me.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2016 5:09 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Agenda Item 11.A
Dear Council Members,
Please close SMO as soon as legally possible and begin planning for a Park!
The City Council is now following the mandate of Santa Monica voters by implementing Measure LC to regain local
control of OUR airport and to begin the environmental planning process to transform it into a MUCH needed healthy
and sustainable Park. A park that will be accessible and available to EVERYONE.
I support your resolution and support ALL of the Staff Recommendations to close SMO as soon as legally possible and
begin the Environmental Planning for a new Park!
Thank you,
David Reilly
Sent from my iPhone
174
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:40 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: SMO
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Debra L [mailto:dlthorne55@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2016 9:25 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: SMO
I support, item 11 – A and all the staff recommendations to closeSMO as soon as legally allowed, begin the planning for
a park and to support the city manager's actions to implement this policy
Sent from my iPhone
175
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:40 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: City Council Motion 13B
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: jesse kramer [mailto:thejok@verizon.net]
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2016 10:46 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: City Council Motion 13B
I would like to express my support for the following motion:
"13.B Request of Mayor Tony Vazquez and Mayor Pro Tem Ted Winterer, that the City Council place an item on the
August 23, 2016, City Council agenda, regarding consideration of a resolution (1) expressing the City Council’s intention
to close the Santa Monica Airport to aviation use, as soon as that is legally permitted with a goal of June 30, 2018 and
earlier if possible, and, upon compliance with applicable legal processes, to transition the land currently occupied by the
Airport to uses consistent with Measure LC (Local Control), and (2) authorizing the City Manager to initiate all
administrative measures necessary to implement the resolution, including commencement of planning and
environmental review processes required by the California Environmental Quality Act and the State Planning Act.”
Jesse Kramer
658 Ashland Ave.
Santa Monica, CA 90405
176
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:40 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: thanks for your efforts on airport
From: Dave Kang [mailto:davekang@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2016 8:59 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: thanks for your efforts on airport
Hello SM City Council,
Just wanted to add my voice to the growing chorus of residents who would like to see the airport become a park
as soon as legally feasible as described in measure LC.
I understand we have an important vote coming up Tuesda y and would urge you to vote on behalf of residents
and not aviation special interests. A park will benefit a greater majority of people a nd make our city a safer,
quieter, and more enj oyable place to live.
Thanks for listening,
Dave Kang
Ocean Park homeowner
177
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:40 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: I support Agenda Item 11.A
From: Kayla Thomas [mailto:kaylathomasryan@aol.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2016 11:42 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: I support Agenda Item 11.A
To whom it may concern:
As a Santa Monica resident, I support ITEM 11.A and ALL the Staff Recommendations to close SMO as soon as legally
allowed; begin the planning for a park and to support the City Manger's actions to implement this policy.
Thank You for your consideration.
-Kayla Thomas
Santa Monica Resident
210 Santa Monica Blvd. #505
Santa Monica, CA 90401
178
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:41 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: SM Airport
From: Brett Schafer [mailto:bschafer@elkdesignsinc.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2016 11:24 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: SM Airport
To whom it may concern,
I support ITEM 11.A and ALL the Staff Recomme ndations to close SMO as soon as legally
allowed; begin the planning for a park and to su pport the City Manger's actions to implement this
policy.
Thank You,
Brett Schafer
President
Elk Designs Inc
Ph. 310-391-6200
Fx. 310-391-6222
Cell. 310-387-7840
www.elkdesignsinc.com
Sent from my iPhone
179
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:41 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: support for closing down SMO and creating a park
From: Barbara Filet [mailto:barrie.filet@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2016 11:03 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: support for closing down SMO and creating a park
Mayor and council members,
I support the Airport Resolution - Agenda Item 11.A for Tuesday.
Barbara Filet
A Close the Airport
B Begin Environmental Planning for a Park
6 things that can be done:
1 Commencing the park pl anning process,CEQA & NEPA
2 Investigate jet operators that operate as scheduled airlines
3 File with the FAA to close the Western Parcel of the Airport
4 Enforce the SMO noise ordinance as written
5 Change Hanger leases to permits
6 Take over operations from Atlant ic Aviation and American Flyers
7 Eliminate lead fuel
8 Make jet users go th ough airport security
180
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:41 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Airport Resolution
From: Lou Bon [mailto:lbon@roadrunner.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2016 4:02 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Airport Resolution
As a long time resident on the 2400 block of Ashland just north of the Airport, I have suffered with the noise and
pollution for 30 years. Please resolve to close the airport ASAP. Thank you.
Lou Bon
2427 Ashland Avenue
Santa Monica, CA 90405
310.699.4378 cell
181
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:41 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Close SMO!
From: Victor Davich [mailto:vdavich@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2016 2:33 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Close SMO!
To all members of the Sa nta Monica City Council
As a longtime resident of Santa Moni ca as well as a library Boardmember, I am writing to support your efforts
to attain cessation of flights at th e Santa Monica Airport, closure, and co nversion of our property into a vibrant
center for our community and residents.
I understand the complexity and daun ting challenge this endeavor repr esents. Thus, I appreciate each
councilmember’s dedication, tenacity, and intellect in fina lly bringing this to fruiti on, including Airport2Parks
recommendations:
closure of the western portion of the airport to create a safety area providing a runway safety area and
limiting some of the larger jets;
increased enforcement of the noise ordinance;
conversion of hanger leases to short term permits;
City assumption of "fixed base operations”
cessation of the sale of lead fu el, and enhance airport security.
We are at an historic moment for the city and I tr ust you, our council, to carry out the community’s longtime
desire for a healthier, safe r, and quieter environment.
Thank you.
All best
Victor Davich
vdavich@gmail.com
mob: 310.309.1217
182
183
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:41 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: please support item 11.A
From: Heather Jones [mailto:heather@rhythmchild.net]
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2016 2:20 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: please support item 11.A
Please, please support ITEM 11.A and ALL the Staff Recommendations to close SMO as soon as legally
allowed; begin the planning for a park and to support the City Manger's actions to implement this policy.
Heather Jones
Director of Education & Community Programs
The Rhythm Child Network
11700 National Blvd. Suite L ‐205
Los Angeles, CA 90064
310 575 9372
heather@rhythmchild.net I www.rhythmchild.net
184
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:41 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Airport Park & Recreation Facility
From: Jack Macmillan [mailto:Century37@hotmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2016 1:19 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Airport Park & Recreation Facility
Dear Mayor & City Council,
This note is simply to inform you of the universal approval of the West Mar Vista & Venice communities for
the support of your Agenda Item 11.A and all Staff Recommendations to replace the SM Airport with a healthy
and sustainable community park and recreation facility on a more timely basis.
Many thanks for moving forward on these common sense moves.
John K Macmillan
West Mar Vista
185
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:42 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Atlantic Aviation resolution
From: Ettie Lahooti [mailto:elahooti@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2016 8:29 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Atlantic Aviation resolution
To council:
We appreciate your resolution to close the airport after court action but th is will take many years. In the
meanwhile, after a full year of local control by city counci l; jet flight operations ha ve increased by 10%. We
think that you’re just tryi ng to change the subject. You want increased jet flight operations for the present and
that’s why they increased!
Instead, city council should act on August 23 rd to evict Atlantic Aviation, which account for 90% jet flight
operations. The FAA agrees but the city possesses 100% control over Airport tenants such as Atlantic
Aviation. FAA decision in 2000 and 2003 speci fically applied to Atlantic Aviation.
So, evict Atlantic Aviation now, like you successfully evic ted justice aviation. Follow the Airport leasing policy
which you have adapted, and which Atla ntic’s Jet Flight operati on violate every day. Inst ruct staff to begin a
landlord-tenant action now, because Atlantic has no lease and the city already gave written notice to leave.
Get Atlantic out before December 31, 2016. Please stop showing favoritism special interests like Atlantic
Aviation. Put the interests of residents first for a change!
Regards,
Ettie Lahooti
186
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:42 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Notice to FBOs to vacate
From: Paulette Rochelle ‐Levy [mailto:paulette453@earthlink.net]
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2016 6:48 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Notice to FBOs to vacate
Dear Santa Monica Mayor and City Council Members:
We thank you for your efforts to close Santa Monica Airport. While the closure process proceeds, gaining “local
control” of the Airport is one of the 5 Strategic Priorities of the City . Today, multiple fixed base operators (FBOs)
provide aeronautical services and have significant control of the Airport. These FBO operations include fueling and
maintenance, as well as many extra services, such as limousine service, aircraft washing, baggage handling, catering,
concierge services, rental cars, and hotel arrangements.
Beginning July 2015, these FBOs have had no right to continued leases at the Airport. Their leases are expired, but they
remain at the Airport and continue to perpetuate harmful impacts on the community. There are no agreements, laws,
or regulations that prohibit the City from evicting the FBOs. In fact, the 1984 Settlement Agreement that obligated the
City to “provide sufficient space for the location and operation of 3 full service fixed base operators” expired on July 1,
2015. Furthermore, the FAA Director’s Determination dated November 22, 2000 which was affirmed by the FAA Final
Decision dated February 2, 2003 confirmed (a) that FBO leases were not 30 ‐year leases, but were actually 29 ‐year leases
timed to expire on July 1, 2015, (b) that it would be unreasonable for the City to be required to enter into FBO lease
agreements beyond July 1, 2015, and (c) that beyond July 1, 2015, the Airport is “a local land use matter”.
The City, as the owner and proprietor of the Airport, should legally and immediately remove the FBOs and assert the
City’s “proprietary exclusive right” to be the only exclusive service provider at the Airport. As the sole service provider,
the City would achieve de facto “local control” of these Airport services and be able to directly manage them in line with
the interests of the local community.
The Proprietary Exclusive Right
The FAA Airport Compliance Manual, which provides guidance on an airport sponsor’s commitments when they accept
federal grants, explains the Proprietary Exclusive Right as follows:
“The owner of a public ‐use airport (public or private owner) may elect to provide any or all of the aeronautical
services needed by the public at the airport. In fact, the statutory prohibition against exclusive rights does not
apply to these owners. However, while they may exercise the exclusive right to provide aeronautical services,
they may not grant or convey this exclusive right to another party. The airport sponsor that elects to engage in a
proprietary exclusive must use its own employees and resources to carry out its venture. An independent
commercial enterprise that has been designated as an agent of the airport sponsor may not exercise nor be
granted such an exclusive right.”
187
“Aircraft fueling is a prime example of an aeronautical service an airport sponsor may choose to provide itself.
While the airport sponsor may exercise its proprietary exclusive to provide fueling services, aircraft owners may
still assert the right to obtain their own fuel and bring it onto the airport to service their own aircraft, but only
with their own employees and equipment and in conformance with reasonable airport rules, regulations, and
minimum standards.”
Even if we assume the 1994 grant commitments extend to 2023 (which is actively being disputed), the “proprietary
exclusive right” is still in complete compliance with all obligations of the City.
We strongly but respectfully request you take the following actions:
1. Give Notice to Vacate to all FBOs at the Airport, including Atlantic Aviation and American Flyers, before
September 1, 2016.
2. Authorize the City to assert its “proprietary exclusive right” and provide minimal levels of service while
continuing to evaluate and periodically adjust service levels until Airport closure is legally cleared.
3. Rent or buy equipment and employ staff that may be required to operate fuel services and to park aircraft.
These steps are the most direct path to help the City achieve its Strategic Priority of local control at the
Airport. Meanwhile, the remaining legal issues with the FAA related to the 1994 Grant and the 1948 Instrument of
Transfer should continue to be aggressively pursued.
Santa Monica is an extremely capable city that maintains and operates many services efficiently and effectively,
including fire, police, Big Blue Bus, waste collection, recycling, cemetery, CityTV, and parks and recreation. With the
addition of FBO services we can also safely operate the Airport with the local control necessary to reduce the Airport’s
impact on our surrounding communities.
Regards,
Paulette
188
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:43 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Santa Monica Airport - August 23rd Meeting
From: Poonam Bhatla [mailto:pbhatla8@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 12:20 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Santa Monica Airport ‐ August 23rd Meeting
After a full year of of local contro l by City council, jet flight operati ons have increased. Please act on August
23rd to evict Atlantic Aviation which account for 90% of jet flight operations, which are a cause of not only
noise pollution but harmful ultra fine particulate.
So evict Atlantic Aviation now, like you successfully evicted Justice Aviation and follow the policy you
adopted.
Please stop showing favoritism to special interests like At lantic Aviation and put the interests of the residents
first for a change.
Thank you for taking the right action,
A resident of Sunset Park Santa Monica
189
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:43 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Santa Monica Airport - It's time has come, shut it down!
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: moongood@aol.com [mailto:moongood@aol.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2016 11:01 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Santa Monica Airport ‐ It's time has come, shut it down!
The airport operations need to be drastically curtailed and eventually shutdown. It is a hazard to the community,
schools and people who live in the area.
The airport was never envisioned to handle jet traffic and the noise and pollution is a health hazard. In the last several
months at Sea Colony there has been a constant sprinkling of some unknown substance coming out of the sky, the only
source can be from the air traffic.
Also there doesn't appear to be any monitoring of air traffic altitudes, numerous planes/jets have a habit of flying low
upon take ‐off. Which adds to the noise and pollution problems.
Shut it down and redevelop for community use!
Bill Sundblad
Sea Colony
33 year OP Resident
Sent from my iPad
190
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:43 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Santa Monica Airport
From: darren ruddell [mailto:darrenruddell@yahoo.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2016 8:19 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Santa Monica Airport
Dear Santa Monica City Council:
I am writing to you as a resident of Santa Monica (in the Sunset Park neighborhood) and I want to
communicate my support for ITEM 11.A on the upcoming City Co uncil meeting scheduled for August
23.
I support all staff recommendations to close SMO as soon as legally possible and then to convert this
space into a park.
I appreciate your consideration.
Thanks,
Darren Ruddell
1348 Pine Street
SM, CA 90405
191
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:44 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Inhumane exposure to severe noise pollution.
From: James Murray [mailto:jmurray7@icloud.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2016 4:11 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Inhumane exposure to severe noise pollution.
My name is Dr. James Murray MD and I have lived here for 32 years in Ocean Park and practiced here during
that time in medicine and still have a full-time practice with the Santa Monica Bay physicians.
I am horrified this issue is even on the table. How could anybody in the council ever vote in favor of damaging
the people Santa Monica?
The City of Santa Monica has had 100% control over land us e at the Airport since July 1st, 2015, and since
then the City Council has failed its duty to its residents by allowing Atlantic Aviation to continue it use
illegally. Yes, this is true. Our city council, you, the board, is aware of the continued use of the Santa
Monica airport illegally.
I am very sorry that special interest has taken its roots not just the politi cal landscape but also in the City of
Santa Monica Council as well; therefore I am a dding my voice to Evict Atlantic Aviation now;
they are responsible for the noise po llution, for the loss of communications and the Internet every time. I
cannot concentrate. I cannot live. This is a violation of my rights as a US citizen. It's a violation of the
Constitution.
I am sure the City Council will fu lfill its duty to its residents on August 23 , by evicting Atlantic Aviation.
And I know that I will keep in mind th e names of those council that fail to do so this coming reelection.
Most Sincerely.
James P Murray MD MSPH
507 Bay St., SM 90405
310 428-0102
192
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:44 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Atlantic aviation special interest
From: Laura Lei [mailto:leilaura022@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2016 4:03 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Atlantic aviation special interest
Dear Gleam, Ted, Terry,
We appreciate your resolution to close the airport after court ac tion. Please be objective a nd work really for the
interests of Santa Monica residents but not b een influenced by the special interests group!
Thanks for doing your job!
Best regards,
Laura
193
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:44 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: 8/23/16 agenda item 11.A. -- Resolution Regarding Local Control and Closure of
the Santa Monica
From: Steven Naftali [mailto:stevenaftali@yahoo.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2016 3:40 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: 8/23/16 agenda item 11.A. ‐‐ Resolution Regarding Local Control and Closure of the Santa Monica
Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council Members:
Me and my family urge you to vote closing the Santa Monica Ai rport as soon as possible, in compliance with the spirit of
Measure LC.
Regards,
Steve Naftali
stevenaftali@yahoo.com
The information transmitted is intended only for the pers on which it is addressed and may contain confidential
and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, disse mination or other use of, or taking of any action in
reliance upon, this information by persons or entities ot her than the intended reci pient is prohibited. If you
received this message in error, please contact th e sender and delete the material from any computer.
194
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:44 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Save the Airport/Renew Atlantic Aviation
From: Cynthia Pinkos [mailto:cynthiapinkos@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2016 3:30 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Save the Airport/Renew Atlantic Aviation
Just a reminder that many many Sunset Part residents, like myself, want to see the air port stay and view most of
the anti-airport sentiment misguided. The residents who don't like the airport s houldn't have moved here.
195
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:44 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Evict Atlantic Aviation.
From: Edward Ivan Luci [mailto:ed_luci@yahoo.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2016 2:54 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: UCLA G MAIL <jmurray@ucla.edu>
Subject: Evict Atlantic Aviation.
The City of Santa Monica has 100% control over land use at the Airport since July 1st, 2015, and since then
the City Council has failed its duty to its residents by allowing Atlantic Aviation to continue it use illegally.
I am very sorry that special interest has taken its roots not just the political landscape but also in
the City of Santa Monica Council as well, therefore I am adding my voice to Evict Atlantic Aviation now;
they are responsible for the noise pollution, for the loss of communications and the Internet every time.
I am sure the City Council will fulfill its duty to its residents on August 23, by evicting Atlantic Aviation.
I know that I will keep in mind the names of those council that fail to do so this coming reelection.
Sincerely.
Edward Luci
507 Bay St.
SM 90405
196
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:45 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Declaration on Closing SMO
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: William Schoene [mailto:williamschoene@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2016 2:20 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Declaration on Closing SMO
We write in support of council's declaration to end airport operations at SMO as rapidly as is feasible, given the FAA's
determination to keep it operating. Thank you for trying to carry out the wishes of SM residents as expressed by the
vote for recent measure LC.
Bill & Mary Lou Schoene
197
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:45 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Close SMO
From: Ron Rabatsky [mailto:rrabatsky@verizon.net]
Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2016 3:06 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Close SMO
Council,
I am a homeowner here in Santa Monica, and I vote. I bought my home in 1983 knowing that the airport was to be closed
in time for my retirement. That time has come.
Please close SMO to aviation use as soon as legally permitted an d take all actions necessary to transition the land over to
uses consistent with Measure LC.
Thank you for your support at the meeting on this coming Tuesday. Hope to see you there.
Ron Rabatsky
1743 Robson Ave
Santa Monica, 90405
198
Esterlina Lugo
From:Laura Sittoni <laura.sittoni@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:53 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:SM Airport
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport provides a mul titude of real and tangible benefits to residents of the Cit y of Santa
Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During times of natural disaster or national emergency ou r airport is
an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and future generations. Millions o f taxpayer
dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Laura Miller
144 Alta Ave
SM 90402
T. 310-498 0931
laura.sittoni@gmail.com
199
Esterlina Lugo
From:Eric Woodman <ewoodman@jps.net>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:54 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:SantaMonicaAirportAssociation
Subject:Item 11 on Aug 23, 2016 agenda
2nd attempt with corrected address.
Eric Woodman
(650) 207 ‐5810
‐‐‐‐‐Forwarded Message ‐‐‐‐‐
>From: Eric Woodman <ewoodman@jps.net>
>Sent: Aug 21, 2016 12:06 PM
>To: councilmtgitems@smgov
>Cc: SantaMonicaAirportAssociation <info@santamonicaairport.info>
>Subject:
>
>Dear council members,
>
>I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
>
>The proposed resolution is premature and a complete waste of taxpayer money.
>
>Leaded aviation fuel is scheduled to be replaced in 2 years by unleaded alternatives currently going through final
testing. Further, the argument about the amount of leaded fuel currently being consumed on the airport and
immediate surrounding area is based upon a flawed incomplete analysis. Purchase gallons at the airport was used which
necessarily includes 95% or more of gallons used away from the airport in flights out of the area. The number of takeoff
operations, taxi operations and landing operations times an average gallons used during each type operation is the only
way to estimate the amounts of lead being considered. Further, using activity from piston aircraft to evidence a
downturn in use is flawed as the downturn was substantially contributed to by the onerous limitations on aircraft
activity imposed by the City. Claimed subjective fear of an aircraft accident affecting neighbors is also flawed. The City
caused the circumstances of lower jet aircraft operations on departure by requiring power back on departure instead of
allowing jet aircraft to climb at the 2,000 ‐3,000 feet per mile across thee ground they are normally capable of, making
glide to a water landing all but assured n the case of a catastrophic engine failure on take off. Further, there is already
evidence the airport is adequately protected from a landing accident causing damage off the airport property.
>
>Consideration of this legislation is not so urgent a matter that it should be considered ahead of the final outcome from
existing legal action: trial on the effect of the FAA transfer deed to the City and the fallout from the City's loss before the
FAA on the 2023 obligation date from acceptance of FAA grant funds in 2003 containing the 20 year termination of the
City's obligations to manage public use the airport.
>
>Staff's recommendations for immediate action are also flawed. It claimed the "status quo is inconsistent with Measure
LC, produces adverse environmental impacts, creates the possibility of hazards, and does not improve the overall quality
of life." Staff's recommendation is based upon long term maintenance into the future. The only reason to act now
200
instead of saving tax payer money by waiting until finalization of the outcomes of the two existing legal actions is to
placate a vocal population.
>
>The job of the council is to adequately balance competing interests to arrive at a reasoned decision. Existing legal
action negatively affects the City's planned action unless finally resolved in it's favor. Waiting until resolution can only
be justified by the loud demands of the Cities populous. The demands are for the City to ignore the rule of law and to
move forward despite continual losses in legal action. The city should not rubber stamp this anarchy in defiance of
ongoing litigation.
>
>Consideration should be given to another issue. Passage of this resolution provides irrefutable evidence of the cities
violation of the terms and conditions to its ownership of the land required to be for perpetual use as an airport. Such
evidence will certainly be used in the upcoming trial over the interpretation of the FAA transfer documents. If not
directly resulting in cancelation of the 1948 deed from the FAA to the City, the next step will be legal action to cancel the
transfer deed for violation of the conditions, allowing the FAA to free the airport from any semblance of City control and
transfer it to another authority for continued operation of the airport in perpetuity.
>
>Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport provides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to residents of
the City of Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During times of natural disaster or
national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding communities that
cannot be overstated.
>
>Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and future generations.
Millions of taxpayer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise must come to a close.
>
>Consider well the effects of what the council is asked to approve without waiting for the answers that will govern it's
authority. Anarchy isn't the answer!
>
>Sincerely,
>
>
>Eric Woodman
>(650) 207 ‐5810
201
Esterlina Lugo
From:Sarah Elizabeth McCandless <semccand@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 8:56 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Item 11 on 8/23/16
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Sarah Elizabeth McCandless
202
Esterlina Lugo
From:Allan Rempel <allan.rempel@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 9:37 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Resolution Regarding Local Control and Closure of the Santa Monica Airport
Dear Council Members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport provides a mul titude of real and tangible benefits to residents of the Cit y of Santa
Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During times of natural disaster or national emergency ou r airport is
an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
It is a critical element of our transportation infrastructure a nd also a historic cornerstone of our Nation's historic world-le ading aviation
industry. It creates local jobs and enables other airports like LAX and Burbank to provide better airline service; closing Sant a Monica Airport
would have countless ripple effects that would make tr ansportation throughout Greater Los Angeles more difficult.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and future generations. Millions o f taxpayer
dollars have already been wasted on this discussion and the efforts seeking the airport's demise must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Allan Rempel, PhD, CFI
203
Esterlina Lugo
From:Toni Scharff <toni_scharff@earthlink.net>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 9:41 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:oppose item 11 on tomorrow's agenda
August 22, 2016
Dear council members,
SANTA MONICA AIRPORT IS NOT AN ANTIQUATED RELIC OF THE PAST!!
I hereby write in support of THIS Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Toni A Scharff
829 Hill Street
204
Esterlina Lugo
From:danpatey@danpatey.com
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 10:03 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Opinion on Item 11
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport provides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to residents of
the City of Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During times of natural disaster or
national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding communities that
cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and future generations.
Millions of taxpayer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Dan Patey
205
Esterlina Lugo
From:Isabelle Marx <isabellemarx@me.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 10:27 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Support KSMO
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Isabelle Marx
Thank you,
SantaMonicaAirportAssociation
Sent from my iPhone
206
Esterlina Lugo
From:BonnieJohnstone <bonnieinpeace@earthlink.net>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 10:47 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:CRAAP
Subject:SMO
You've heard many stories. When in the area I myse lf have often experience d discomfort as a result
of plane flights.
Please do all that you can to immediately im plement the changes needed to stop the harm &
damages.
Thank you.
207
Esterlina Lugo
From:Jesse Derks <jessejderks@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 10:48 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Agenda Item, 11 A
Dear Mayor Vasquez and Council Members:
As you know there are significant issues raised recently regarding the Santa Monica airport (SMO) that should be
considered. My family, friends, coworkers, and I urgently request that on Tuesday you:
1. Closely consider the viewpoints of all interests, not simp ly the interests of a few outspoken opponents of the airport.
This is doubly true given the outspoken few may be serving other interests (with or without their direct knowledge) or
acting on incomplete/erroneous information.
2. Immediately develop a plan to support the airport throu g h 2023. Startin g in 2021 you and the council should develop a
plan to expand, maintain as-is, or wind down operations of the airport. This compromise will not injure either side
irreparably. Should you decide to wind down operations legally; the opponents will still have the airport closed.
Additionally the tenants of the airport gain stability until the le gal closure, and defined plans therein, to find a place to
take their business. The city is also protected from unnecessa ry legal costs. Should the winds of public opinion shift, as
they do quite often, then the airport is still there for the city of Santa Monica. At that time the people in the city can
decide to maintain or expand the facilit ies. Given technological advancement, this airport could be an unexpected boon in
5-6 years’ time.
3. Expand airport outreach, as many residents do not rea lize the benefits the airport provides. They are likely basin g their
reaction to the issue on fear-mongering or incomplete info rmation provided by the people/groups listed in point one.
Many smaller employers simply cannot use LAX as, logically, th e airport is used primarily for large jets and small/large
aircraft traffic does not mix well. This is more than small jets or large jets, it is the many small businesses and individuals
using propeller aircraft to service their customers in a time efficient manner.
As as person whom believes in common-sense actions, I urge you to use the legal framework allowed regarding the
airport. Like most cities, I doubt Santa Monica has an excess of cash laying around to cover the expenses of defending
illegal actions, much less the fines that could be imposed, if it decides to summar ily start ignoring agreements it entered
into previously. This is one thing anti-airport zealots stud iously try to deflect and ignore , but would not be ignored by
many voters on election day when they see a rise in taxes to cover the costs of illegally closing the airport.
I know there are varied fears, as anti-airport groups stoke th em to try and prevent calm deliberation, but failing to act in
a calm manner will continue to lead to knee-jerk pandering where the lives of the people who voted you into office, as
well as their employers, are held hostage to a hysterical few with little interest but their own fleeting cause du-jour. SMO
provides benefits to us all, including children and the el derly, and they are benefits that must be considered.
208
Don't let the recent veiled threats and fear-mongering of the few stop you from doing the right thing. Santa Monica is a
green city and should not have even more automobiles unnecessarily stuck in traffic spewing toxins into the neighboring
communities and Santa Monica itself.
I ask you to fulfill your responsibility by taking the abov e actions on Tuesday, August 23 without further delay.
Sincerely,
Jesse J. Derks
---
It matters little how we die, so long as we die better men than we imagined we could be -- and no
worse than we feared.
209
Esterlina Lugo
From:Will Pastron <willpastron@verizon.net>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 10:51 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Support of Santa Monica Airport
Dear council members,
I live in the area and see and hear the airplanes flying to and from Santa Monica Airport every day.
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport provides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to residents of
the City of Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During times of natural disaster or
national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to
Santa Monica and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and future generations.
Millions of taxpayer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Will Pastron
210
Esterlina Lugo
From:David Greene <davidgreene867@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 11:29 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:'CRAAP'
Subject:Item 11 A.
We've tolerated the environmental terrorism from toxic air produced by jets at SMO for long enough. We are in full
support of any and all efforts to close the Santa Monica to air traffic immediately and agree with the letter sent by
Martin Rubin to Mayor Vasquez and the City Council regarding that closure.
Sincerely,
David and Deborah Greene
211
Esterlina Lugo
From:Barbara Goodson <bdgoodson16@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 11:35 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Close the Airport
It is long overdue for Santa Monica Airport to be closed. All the bureaucratic 'fear based' excuses as to what the FAA will
do to us and the 'special interests' that falsify facts to keep it open and continue allowing planes to fly lower, louder and
later than ever must be stopped. This is what the constituents voted to have enforced and it’s unconscionable that it is
continuing to be so cavalierly ignored.
Sincerely,
Barbara G Gustafson
212
Esterlina Lugo
From:Ben <bcwang@yahoo.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 11:37 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:Rick Cole; Nelson Hernandez
Subject:Support for Agenda Item 11-A on 8-23-16 // Community Letter Regarding FBOs and
the City's "Proprietary Exclusive Right"
Attachments:Letter 0822a.pdf
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
Dear Santa Monica City Council:
In regards to City Council Meet ing Agenda Item 11-A on August 23, 2016, I am in strong support of
agenda item 11.A . In particular, I urge the City Council to direct the City Manager to proceed with
great urgency, reflecting this top Strategic Priority of the City . With your clear direction and the
unwavering support of the community, I am confident that our City Staff can deliver, and even exceed
expectations.
In addition, I submit the attached community letter . In summary . . .
200+ authors and signatories
of the attached community letter respectfu lly request you take the following actions:
1. Give Notice to Vacate to all FBOs at the Airport, including Atlantic Aviation and American
Flyers, before September 1, 2016.
2. Authorize the City to assert its “proprietary exclusive right” and provide minimal levels of
service while continuing to evaluate and periodica lly adjust service levels until Airport closure
is legally cleared.
3. Rent or buy equipment and empl oy staff that may be required to operate fuel services and to
park aircraft.
Thank you all for your consideration and efforts,
--Ben
-------------------------------
Ben Wang
Mobile: 310-663-9264
E-mail: bcwang@yahoo.com
-------------------------------
200 +
Authors and s ignatories of the attached c ommuni ty l etter
r espectfully request you take the following actions:
1. Give Notice to Vacate to all FBOs at the Airport, including Atlantic
Aviation and American Flyers, before September 1, 2016 .
2. Authorize the City to assert its “proprietary exclusive right” and provide
minimal levels of service while continuing to eval uate and periodically
adjust service levels until Airport closure is legally cleared.
3. Rent or buy equipment and employ staff that may be required to
operate fuel services and to park aircraft.
1 of 3
Residents of Santa Monica,
West Los Angeles, Venice, and Mar Vista
August 8 , 2016
Santa Monica City Council
1685 Main Street, Room 209
Santa Monica, California 90401
E -mail: council@smgov.net
RE: The Community’s Request for Interim Actions Prior to Closure of Santa Monica Airport
Dear Santa Monica Mayor and City Council Members:
We t hank you for your efforts to c lose Santa Monica Airport. While the closure process proceeds, g aining
“l ocal c ontrol” of the Airport is one of the 5 Strategic Priorities of the City . Today, multiple fixed base
operators (FBOs) provid e aeronautical services and have significant control of the Airport. These FBO
operations include fueling and maintenance, as well as many extra services , such as limousine service, aircraft
washing, baggage handling, catering, concierge services, rental cars, and hotel arrangements.
B eginning July 2015, these FBO s have had no right to continued leases at the Airport. T heir leases are
expired, but they remain at the Airport and continue to perpetuate harmful impacts on the community.
T here are no agreements, laws, or r egulations that prohibit the City from evictin g the FBOs . In fact, the 1984
Settlement Agreement that obligated the City to “provide sufficient space for the location and operation of 3
full service fixed base operators” expired on July 1, 2015. Furthermore, the FAA Director’s Determination
dated November 22, 2000 which was affirmed by the FAA Final Decision dated February 2, 2003 confirmed (a)
that FBO leases were not 30 -year leases , but were actually 29 -year leases timed to e xpire on July 1, 2015, (b)
that it wo uld be unreasonable for the City to be required to enter into FBO lease agreement s beyond July 1,
2015 , and (c) that beyond July 1, 2015 , the Airport is “a local land use matter”.
T he City , as the owner and proprietor of the Airport, should legally and immediately remove the FBO s and
assert the City’s “proprietary exclusive right” to be the on ly exclusive service provider at the Airport . As the
sole service provider, the City would achieve de facto “local control ” of these Airport services and be able to
directly manage them in line with the interests of the local community.
The Proprietary Exclusive Right
Th e FAA Airport Compliance Manual, which provides guidance on an airport sponsor’s commitments when
they accept federal grants , explains the Proprietary Exclusive Right as follows :
“The owner of a public -use airport (public or private owner) may elect to provide any or all of the
aeronautical services needed by the public at the airport. In fact, the statutory prohibition against
exclusive rig hts does not apply to these owners. However, while they may exercise the exclusive right to
provide aeronautical services, they may not grant or convey this exclusive right to another party. The
2 of 3
airport sponsor that elects to engage in a proprietary exclus ive must use its own employees and
resources to carry out its venture . An independent commercial enterprise that has been designated as
an agent of the airport sponsor may not exercise nor be granted such an exclusive right.”
“Aircraft fueling is a prime example of an aeronautical service an airport sponsor may choose to
provide itself. While the airport sponsor may exercise its proprietary exclusive to provide fueling
services, aircraft owners may still assert the right to obtain their own fuel and bring it onto the airport
to service their own aircraft, but only with their own employees and equipment and in conformance
with reasonable airport rules, regulations, and minimum standards.”
E ven if we assume the 1994 grant commitments extend to 2023 (which is actively being disputed), the
“p roprietary e xclusive r ight ” is still in complete compliance with all obligations of the City .
We strongly but respectfully request you take the following actions:
1. Give N otice to Vacate to all FBOs at the Airport , including Atlantic Aviation and American Flyers , before
September 1, 2016.
2. Authorize the City to assert its “proprietary exclusive right” and provide minimal levels of service while
continuing to evaluate and per iodically adjust service levels until Airport closure is legally cleared .
3. Rent or buy equipment and employ staff that may be required to operate fue l services and to park
air craft .
These steps are the most direct path to help the City achieve its Strategic Priority of local control at the
A irport. Meanwhile, the remaining legal issues with the FAA related to the 1994 Grant and the 1948
Instrument of Transfer should continue to be aggressively pursued.
Santa Monica is a n extremely capable city that maintains and operates many services efficiently and
effectively , including fire, police, Big Blue Bus, waste collection, recycling, cemet e ry, CityTV, and parks and
recreation. With the addition of FBO services we can also safely operat e the A irport with the local control
necessary to reduce the Airport’s impact on our surrounding communities.
Sincerely,
Residents and Representatives of the
Santa Monica, West Los Angeles, Venice, and Mar Vista Communities
Additional Signatories
The people below endorse the letter to the Santa Monica City Council from the Residents of Santa
Monica, West Los Angeles, Venice, and Mar Vista dated August 8, 2016 regarding the Community’s
Request for Interim Actions Prior to Closure of Santa Monica Airport. Signatures were optional and are
on file.
• 8/20/2016 3:01 // Noah Bardach
• 8/20/2016 3:03 // Joanne Curtis
• 8/20/2016 3:05 // Igor Meglic
• 8/20/2016 3:09 // Phil Brock
• 8/20/2016 3:15 // Eric Weingarten // "City Council, The time to stand up to the FAA and continue
the phase out of SMO as an aviation hub is NOW! I am a resident of L.A. (90066). I live on Dewey
St., one block south of the Airport. I am dismayed that the jet flights have increased 10% since July
of 2015, the date the City took control of the Airport. I can hear and smell the increase in jet
flights. I cannot imagine that noise levels conform to law. There seems to be an utter disregard for
health issues by the aviation interests. Since 1987, when I bought my home, there have been
numerous fatal crashes. I personally have witnessed 5 crashes occur. It is only by God's grace that
no one on the ground has yet to be killed. While, I was well aware of the mitigating circumstances
surrounding SMO when I bough t my home, the fact is jet flights have increased, toxic fuel pollution
has increased, noise levels have increased, population has increased and despite LC, and the new
leasing policy, Atlantic Aviation sill operates and refuses to vacate. Many residents fear that if we
shut down SMO, massive development will occur and traffic congestion will increase beyond the
intolerable levels currently on 23rd St. and on Bundy. Most are totally unaware that commercial
and residential development on the Airport site i s prohibited and unlawful. Others fear the laws
will change to accommodate mass development once the Airport ceases to operate. City Council,
you have talked the talk. Now it is definitely time to walk the walk!! Thank you for your
consideration and w e hope you will represent the concerns & well -being of both Santa Monica and
Los Angeles residents regarding safety, health, noise and fuel pollution concerns. Sincerely, Eric and
Helane Weingarten 13209 Dewey St., L.A., CA 90066 "
• 8/20/2016 3:22 // Emi O nishi
• 8/20/2016 3:25 // Andrea Maitra
• 8/20/2016 3:28 // Grady Hall // Strongly opposed to airport, which is outdated, serves only a tiny
fraction of the community, and is dangerous to surrounding neighborhoods. Would love to see the
airport transformed in to the westside's best park -- something would help to make Santa Monica
even better for the long term.
• 8/20/2016 3:33 // Dee Forrest // I strongly oppose the jet traffic, pollution and noise that is
impacting the westside.
• 8/20/2016 4:13 // Kerry Candaele
• 8/20/2016 4:25 // Gary Glickman // Our lives are deeply afflicted by conning airport traffic. We can
hardly prosper in our own homes, needing to stop all conversation every two minutes because of
airport noise. Our health is deeply affected by the deep b lack smear of jet fuel on our windmills,
our furniture, and all our plants, including our garden. This is not a humane way to care for a
community.
• 8/20/2016 5:14 // Rick Reiss
• 8/20/2016 5:18 // Gavin Scott // A special note to the staff to thank them for their hard work and
initiative. We are lucky to have Rick Cole and Nelson Hernandez working with our councilors.
• 8/20/2016 5:41 // Brad Segal // Please take control. This is beyond unacceptable! Thank you.
• 8/20/2016 5:57 // Jennifer McCaffrey
• 8/20/2016 7:19 // Joan Wilder
• 8/20/2016 8:07 // Alison St.Onge // Please, for the safety, health and pollution of our
neighborhoods. Thank you.
• 8/20/2016 8:09 // Bill Nuttle
• 8/20/2016 8:15 // Ursula Fox
• 8/20/2016 8:33 // Loree Bryer
• 8/20/2016 8:36 // Tin a Ogata
• 8/20/2016 9:07 // Jerry Rubin
• 8/20/2016 9:07 // Paola Levenson // "The time is now! No more JETS! Always & forever!!! Please
do what you know the community wants. Thanks!"
• 8/20/2016 9:09 // Penny Jennings // This must happen!
• 8/20/2016 9:10 // Virginia Mastroianni // "I own a house at 13203 Dewey Street. I have lived there
with my autistic son for over 16 years. THE JETS ARE BIGGER, LOUDER, AND THE FUMES ARE MORE
NOXIOUS. I have witnessed plane crashes on the runway behind my house. Everyda y I pray that the
plane doesn't land in my backyard and kill my family. And I am talking G7's -HUGE JETS FLOWN BY
FAT CATS WHO COULD EASLY AFFORD TO BUILD A RUNWAY AWAY FROM RESIDENTIAL AREAS. We
want our neighborhood back. We want to be able to BREATHE C LEAN AIR. PLEASE CONSIDER OUR
FAMILIES HEALTH AND RESPECT OUR REQUEST. VIRGINIA MASTROIANNI 13203 DEWEY STREET LOS
ANGELES, CA 90066"
• 8/20/2016 9:11 // Anita Byrd
• 8/20/2016 9:13 // Charles Fox // We live directly across the street and have witnessed the
d egradation of our air and sound quality over decades. Unfortunately we cannot measure the
health costs . . . except both of us contracted cancer a decade ago.
• 8/20/2016 9:18 // Mark Zurbuchen PhD
• 8/20/2016 9:19 // Jeff Silberman
• 8/20/2016 9:51 // Tom Knech tel
• 8/20/2016 9:52 // Peter Altschuler
• 8/20/2016 10:03 // Mutsuko Erskine // Tried to also send email to Council@smgov.net but didn't
go through.
• 8/20/2016 10:08 // kristine Sorensen
• 8/20/2016 10:20 // Jill Rosen // NOW
• 8/20/2016 10:21 // Andrea Milam // My 3 year old twin daughters play at Cloverfield park and we
have been overwhelmed by jet exhaust at take off as they played on the slides. I'm afraid for their
safety.
• 8/20/2016 10:23 // Lealani Ranch
• 8/20/2016 10:26 // Mark Logan
• 8/20/2016 10:26 // Joline Jung // "I would love to drop off to someone they lemons off of our tree
that are covered in black gunk from airplanes. Our lemons must be scrubbed before use. So much
for organic??? We have lived in our Venice home for 52 years. These fly ov ers are terrible. We can
just imagine what we are breathing in. The airplanes should be flying over Santa Monica as that is
their home."
• 8/20/2016 10:28 // Susan Bresnan // Please consider that the proven respiratory ailments, like
asthma, that our chil dren are getting due to the airport air pollution, can easily be prevented by
voting to close the airport and let us all breathe fresh air, thanks to the ocean.
• 8/20/2016 10:33 // suzanne joffe
• 8/20/2016 10:37 // William Guston
• 8/20/2016 10:48 // Olivia K elly
• 8/20/2016 10:49 // Emily Van Horn
• 8/20/2016 10:52 // Laura Kaiser
• 8/20/2016 10:53 // charles rollins
• 8/20/2016 10:54 // Sandra Wise
• 8/20/2016 10:57 // Suanne Ware -Diaz
• 8/20/2016 11:01 // Lauren Wallenstein
• 8/20/2016 11:01 // Andrew Wallenstein
• 8/20/2016 11:02 // Inge Mueller // It's way overdue!
• 8/20/2016 11:02 // LaWeen Salvo // "I just read (and perused the charts of) the entire 20 -page staff
report regarding the closure of Santa Monica Airport (Agenda Item 11 -A, I believe). In addition to
su pporting this petition calling for a Notice to Vacate for all FBO's, I urge you to look into the
possibility of significantly raising fines for noise violations, which, according to your chart, are on
the increase. A hefty increase in fines may act as a d eterrent to pilots/aviation interests who seem
undeterred by the current fines. Thank you for your continued efforts to resolve the airport issue in
a manner that reflects the best interests of Santa Monica residents. Sincerely, LaWeen Salvo"
• 8/20/2016 11:15 // Robert Brown // ENOUGH!!!
• 8/20/2016 11:18 // Dennis Wilder, Ph.D. // My son lives near the airport and we cannot talk on the
phone being interrupted constantly by the overwhelming roar of jet noise. I am also concerned
about their effect on air qual ity and his health.
• 8/20/2016 11:19 // M Kent Sayama
• 8/20/2016 11:30 // Larry Miceli // 2128 Marine street. 30 year resident DIRECTLY at the west end
of the runway.
• 8/20/2016 11:30 // donna pociecha
• 8/20/2016 11:33 // socorro gallegos
• 8/20/2016 11:39 // Annie sabroux
• 8/20/2016 11:40 // Lucas Rogers
• 8/20/2016 11:44 // Maureen Antonio // This coming election, the Santa Monica Council Members
who by their actions have shown they are No Airport/Slow Growth will get my vote.
• 8/20/2016 11:48 // Marylou Hanna
• 8/20/2016 11:55 // Anne Yee
• 8/20/2016 11:57 // Alice Ellis
• 8/20/2016 12:01 // MARK PALLATT
• 8/20/2016 12:19 // grace gabe
• 8/20/2016 12:20 // Joy Abbott // We're 32 years in Sunset Park and waiting - please close these
operators that negatively impact our h ealth.
• 8/20/2016 12:23 // katherine newmark // We have been waiting since 1987!!!!! Please stop the
jets!!!
• 8/20/2016 12:24 // Om Kailas // Let's protect Santa Monica and Venice from onerous air traffic
overflight by closing the airport today.
• 8/20/2016 12:28 // Stephen Manes
• 8/20/2016 12:30 // David Ginsburg
• 8/20/2016 12:33 // Robert J Newmark // Ready for the airport to close!!!!!! Noise, pollution et al!
• 8/20/2016 12:35 // Richard Levine
• 8/20/2016 12:38 // Richard Calabro // "Dear City Council, We u nderstand that you know that the
FAA is negligent on a laundry list of EPA laws as well as the Federal Noise Control Act. Who knows
how much SMO has contributed to cancer and other health related issues to our community over
the last 80 years, but it's yo ur time to reverse the tide. Please continue to put pressure and shut
down this World War II relic for the health of our community. 6 Simple Reasons to Shut Down this
Healthcare Disaster -Site #1 - Los Angeles SMOG Worst Since 2009 - Please read the LA Time s article
published on August 5th. #2 - LAX Expansion Almost Completed and is 6 Miles Down the Road. It
will also include a new $3 million private LAX lounge/terminal expansion for the VIPs. #3 -
Hawthorne Airport is Expanding for Private Jets 12 Miles Do wn the Road - Daily Breeze Article
dated December 12, 2015, http://www.dailybreeze.com/business/20151212/business -at -
hawthorne -municipal -airport -finally -takes -flight #4 - Van Nuys Airport Is Expanding for Private Jets
Less Than 16 Miles Up the Road #5 - As of last month, the City Ontario finally gets their airport back
to expand and relieve the so -called LAX congestion. #6 - The FAA keeps rolling the dice with
children's lives. Our schools are crop sprayed daily with pollutants which include planes flying as
close as 425 feet from John Muir Middle School (Event took place on July 11, 2015, 7:11 AM) There
is absolutely no need for this World War II relic to exist."
• 8/20/2016 12:55 // Paul Goldman
• 8/20/2016 12:55 // Michelle Krupkin
• 8/20/2016 13:20 // Priscilla Levine
• 8/20/2016 13:22 // Jake Avnet
• 8/20/2016 13:22 // Monica Williams
• 8/20/2016 13:23 // Stephan Hewitt
• 8/20/2016 13:26 // Jonny Pray
• 8/20/2016 13:28 // Eileen Tunick // I have been a homeowner near the airport for the past 37
years. Why is it taking the city so long to close the airport since the passage of Prop. LC?
• 8/20/2016 13:28 // Jan Simonovic
• 8/20/2016 13:32 // Nick Kazan
• 8/20/2016 13:34 // Jodi Shannahan // The n umber of jets taking off every day is increasing and
devastating the tranquility and air quality of our envirinment. It starts early in the morning and into
the evening. Please, close down SMO in the interest of sanity. We know that unless we do, the
numbe r of jets will increase and our quality of life severely decrease.
• 8/20/2016 13:34 // Randall Klarin // I am directly under the flight path and it is LOUD
• 8/20/2016 13:37 // Jason McClaren // Secondarily to the above, we would at the very least like to
see the jets removed from the airport. The level of noise is extreme as is the smell of jet fuel in the
neighborhood.
• 8/20/2016 13:42 // Jim Shannahan
• 8/20/2016 13:51 // Anne Yee // Homeowner in Santa Monica.
• 8/20/2016 13:52 // Karen Blechman
• 8/20/2016 14 :10 // haRa Beck
• 8/20/2016 14:11 // Judith Diana Winston // "We are asking the City to evict the aviation service
providers right away, as their leases expired in July 2015, and they facilitate the noise, danger and
pollution we live with daily. Accordin g to FAA rules the city can provide basic services on their own.
This gives us immediate local control over fuel sales and services until we are comfortable to take
additional measures to reduce air traffic and close the airport. Taking over the services at SMO now
is a big step in the right direction to reducing jet traffic and it's impacts upon the surrounding
communities. Thank you!!!"
• 8/20/2016 14:19 // hal lindes
• 8/20/2016 14:19 // Peter Donald
• 8/20/2016 14:25 // Mia Levenson
• 8/20/2016 14:25 // Andrea Lieberman // The planeshave been waking my husband up at 5:00 a.m.
since we have lived here. The fumes from jets apparently idling for take off are pronounced often
between 5 p.m. and 6:30 or so when our walking Mar Vista neighborhood is out and ab out.
• 8/20/2016 14:26 // Ricarda Ankenbrand -Lindes // It is time to close the Santa Monica Airport!
• 8/20/2016 14:28 // Sharon Ryan
• 8/20/2016 14:28 // Max Levenson
• 8/20/2016 14:30 // Sam Levenson
• 8/20/2016 14:32 // Justine Lowe
• 8/20/2016 14:32 // Diana Tra n
• 8/20/2016 14:42 // Jordan Ellis
• 8/20/2016 14:45 // David Clennon
• 8/20/2016 14:53 // Vanessa Ballesteros
• 8/20/2016 14:56 // David Gyepes
• 8/20/2016 15:03 // Matt Kozlov
• 8/20/2016 15:08 // stephen unger // Stop dragging your feet and respond to the will of the people
of Santa Monica who you are supposed to represent! Stephen Unger, homeowner, taxpayer and
voter
• 8/20/2016 15:12 // Kathy Wang
• 8/20/2016 15:13 // George Young
• 8/20/2016 15:19 // Alan Kerner
• 8/20/2016 15:20 // louis ssutu
• 8/20/2016 15:21 // Dean na Ssutu
• 8/20/2016 15:21 // Laura Ssutu
• 8/20/2016 15:30 // Margaret Turner
• 8/20/2016 15:36 // Lawrence Arnstein
• 8/20/2016 15:41 // Gabriella Bring
• 8/20/2016 15:44 // Jason McClaren // "We live next door to SM airport. What authorities fail to
understand is that before a jet takes off, they warm up their engines for about an hour. The jets
also tax for a while before they are cleared to take off. The amount of jet fuel and noise pollution
that happens 1 hour before they are allowed to take off is immense a nd extremely stressful. This
whole area smells like jet fuel which is detrimental to our health and the health of our kids. Thank
you for your time"
• 8/20/2016 15:51 // Sharon Rogers // "I have lived on 28th St. and Ocean Park since 1972. The
noise and sme ll of airplane exhaust has increased recently. Even late at night I hear jets landing.
Please fix this."
• 8/20/2016 15:53 // Robert Maschio
• 8/20/2016 15:53 // Betsy Katz
• 8/20/2016 16:03 // David Blackman
• 8/20/2016 16:04 // Paul McCloskey III
• 8/20/2016 16:0 8 // Susan Hartley
• 8/20/2016 16:19 // Mindy Taylor -Ross // Please close the airport now. Regardless of the FAA,
they will never let it go. Make a move to protect your community and neighboring communities.
• 8/20/2016 16:35 // Bill Hooper // Yes, let's greatly improve the health of residents of the city by
closing the airport - to cut down on noise and jet exhaust. Thank you!
• 8/20/2016 16:53 // Luis Diaz
• 8/20/2016 17:00 // Gina Maslow // I live in Venice, directly over the western flight path.
• 8/20/2 016 17:17 // Barbara Jean
• 8/20/2016 17:18 // Paul Kuzniar
• 8/20/2016 17:47 // Michael Kerekes
• 8/20/2016 18:06 // Mark Schwartz
• 8/20/2016 18:11 // Ashley Dyer
• 8/20/2016 18:11 // Rahm Tamir
• 8/20/2016 18:33 // Maureen Bradford // Please do something about the jets. They are
unbearable!
• 8/20/2016 18:58 // Mark Gorman
• 8/20/2016 19:40 // Marta Vago
• 8/20/2016 19:49 // Steve Binder
• 8/20/2016 20:03 // Gina Binder
• 8/20/2016 20:14 // Amy Shouse
• 8/20/2016 20:25 // Tom Tran
• 8/20/2016 20:28 // Christine Ly
• 8/20/2016 20:48 // Alexis Koren // Please stop poisoning us!
• 8/20/2016 21:09 // BONNIE JOHNSTONE
• 8/20/2016 21:35 // Nancy J Owens
• 8/20/2016 21:51 // Jeffrey Treves
• 8/20/2016 22:31 // Valentine Marvel
• 8/20/2016 23:00 // Caroline Payne // Over the years of it's oper ation, the Santa Monica Airport has
greatly increased it's negative impact upon the health and well being of the people in the
surrounding communities.
• 8/20/2016 23:23 // Saku Ee
• 8/21/2016 0:14 // Roberta B. Gillerman // "Thank you Coucil Members for prote cting the air from
exhaust, and also the skies above 2 schools, Richland elementary, and Webster Middle School. Our
health and welfare depend upon you and your vote!"
• 8/21/2016 0:27 // David BattinThe // The airport only serves a privileged few at the expe nse of
many residences. There is no place in our community for such an inconvenience. Not only do we
tolerate the constant noise of aircraft engines that interrupt an otherwise guietafternoon or
evening, we must endure residue of spent fuel that pollute s the air we breath but is also harmful to
any plant life. It also covers our homes and requires.additional up keep. Finall this airport serves no
real benefit to the community. It is a burden and should be closed as soon as possible for the
safety of ou r neighborhood.
• 8/21/2016 0:43 // Judith bettelheim
• 8/21/2016 4:42 // Amy DeBiasse
• 8/21/2016 5:57 // Sam Levenson
• 8/21/2016 7:27 // Rick Reiss
• 8/21/2016 10:51 // Julia Liebeskind // "Please take action immediately to stop the privileged few
from harmi ng our environment, our community, and the health and safety of thousands of people.
The airport serves only the interests of the private jet set who like its convenience a d dont give a
damn about the negative externalities The airport has no economic justification in cost -benefit
terms and represents a taking from the citizens of Santa Monica who own it The land should serve
the interests of these citizens "
• 8/21/2016 11:07 // Jonathan Stein
• 8/21/2016 11:20 // Natalie Miller // The jets are getting ou t of control. It's destroying our once
peaceful neighborhood. Please help us renew Santa Monica to the awesome community it once
was.
• 8/21/2016 11:28 // Natalie McAdams
• 8/21/2016 12:43 // Mel Clark // Thank you to all City Council members who are working towards
closing the airport and to turning it into a park.
• 8/21/2016 13:06 // Joel // Bernstein
• 8/21/2016 13:57 // Frank Weeks
• 8/21/2016 13:57 // Susan Reid // "For the well being of all of us - close the airport. Please - we all
count. Thank you, Susan Emmet Reid"
• 8/21/2016 14:15 // Christa Occhiogrosso
• 8/21/2016 14:18 // Jessica Greene
• 8/21/2016 15:30 // Eddie Arias
• 8/21/2016 15:31 // Jason Knapp
• 8/21/2016 15:54 // Jennifer Field
• 8/21/2016 16:00 // Sandra Casillas
• 8/21/2016 16:10 // Katherine Lee
• 8/21/2016 17:22 // Andrew Varenho rst
• 8/21/2016 18:19 // Edward McQueeney // This should be the number one priority of SM City
government. In a city blessed with resources to spare, no expense likewise should be spared to
fight this legal battle that's so important not just to those of us cursed with this airport, but
nationally as well.
• 8/21/2016 18:21 // Roy Rico // Doing what's necessary to close the airport is greatly appreciated.
• 8/21/2016 18:38 // Lorri A. Benson // We need your support to make this happen. The community
no longer wants this airport and feels that it is compromising our health and safety, as well as our
quality of life. Please support your community.
• 8/21/2016 18:51 // Lowell Har ris
• 8/21/2016 19:41 // Sara Sherman Drapkin // Thank You for following the Law.
• 8/21/2016 19:58 // Mia Levenson
• 8/21/2016 20:40 // leslie Corzine
• 8/21/2016 20:40 // Anne Yee
• 8/21/2016 21:36 // Leigh Brumberg
• 8/21/2016 22:56 // Virginia Ernst
• 8/21/2016 23:53 // John Londono
• 8/22/2016 0:13 // James Lloyd -Smith // Resident of Sunset Park
• 8/22/2016 0:30 // Steven Benson
• 8/22/2016 1:10 // Susan Cope r // It is after 10pm, and two fixed wing planes have just passed over
my home in the Sea Colony off Barnard Way. The added noise is very wearing.
• 8/22/2016 1:28 // Paula Mazur
• 8/22/2016 1:35 // Jeremy Alcock // No Jets!
• 8/22/2016 2:04 // Jessica Tracy
• 8/22/2016 3:18 // Stephen Mills
• 8/22/2016 9:01 // Jon Geller
• 8/22/2016 10:47 // Marion Nataf // Please hear our requests. This is not about money this is about
lives!
• 8/22/2016 10:50 // Eitan Melamed
• 8/22/2016 12:53 // Nathaniel Wilson // I live at 2907 Virginia Avenue Santa Monica CA. Even at my
location the noise and pollution from the fossil fuel burning aircraf t is a health issue. In addition the
noise from jets and helicopters increases every year. I support a ballot measure to limit the out of
control growth in the use of jets and helicopters at the air port.
213
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 11:41 AM
To:Tony Vazquez; Ted Winterer; Pam OConnor; Sue Himmelrich; Gleam Davis; Terry O’Day;
Kevin McKeown Fwd
Cc:councilmtgitems; Clerk Mailbox
Subject:FW: Item 11.A
Council ‐
Please see the email below re: SMO agenda item.
Stephanie
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Eddy Winston [mailto:winstonfarms@att.net]
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 11:10 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Item 11.A
Dear Santa Monica City Council Members,
My neighbors and I support item 11.A and all the staff recommendations to close Santa Monica Airport, begin planning
for a park and support the city manager's actions to implement this policy.
Respectfully,
Edmond Winston
2015 Oak St.
Santa Monica, 90405
Sent from my iPhone
214
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 11:42 AM
To:Pam OConnor; Tony Vazquez
Cc:councilmtgitems; Clerk Mailbox
Subject:FW: In Support of the Santa Monica Airport
Council ‐
Please see the email below re: SMO agenda item.
Stephanie
From: lpriestley180@gmail.com [mailto:lpriestley180@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Lisa Priestley
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 11:02 AM
To: Gleam Davis <Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET>; Ted Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>; Terry O’Day
<Terry.Oday@smgov.net>; Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; pam.oconner@smgov.net; Sue
Himmelrich <Sue.Himmelrich@SMGOV.NET>; tony.vazques@smgov.net; Kevin McKeown Fwd <kevin@mckeown.net>
Subject: In Support of the Santa Monica Airport
Dear Councilmen/women:
As a resident of Sunset Park I am being bombarded w ith paper mailings trying to sw ay me into believing that
the SM Airport should be closed and that I should contact my councilmembers. So I am doing just that - BUT
not in an attempt to close the airport rather to STRONG LY express my support of the Airport. I have been a
Sunset Park resident for over 30 year s. In my opinion those trying to ge t out of contractual obligations are
wasting my tax payer dollars , those residents who moved into this ne ighborhood and now want the Airport gone
- should have considered that befo re buying here. The Airport brings jobs, and frankly has the lowest
concentration of people and cars (i.e. tra ffic) for the area. Please don't try to sell me on the "park" idea - I've
already seen what happens in our City - developers win, there will be more hotels, more shops, more cars, more
cars, more cars. This is already evident by what ha s happened at Bergamot Station - the SM Museum has
moved out of Santa Monica!!!
So when counting your constituents wishes please count this as vote to SAVE the SM AIRPORT.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth Priestley
215
Esterlina Lugo
From:Hank Bunker <bunkerhb@yahoo.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 11:41 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Agenda Item 11
Dear Council Members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport provides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to residents of the Cit y of
Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our country. During times of natural disaster or national emerg ency,
our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and future generations. Millions o f
taxpayer dollars have already been wasted. Ef forts seeking the airport's demise must cease.
Sincerely,
Hank Bunker
216
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 11:42 AM
To:Tony Vazquez; Ted Winterer; Pam OConnor; Sue Himmelrich; Gleam Davis; Terry O’Day;
Kevin McKeown Fwd
Cc:councilmtgitems; Clerk Mailbox
Subject:FW: Reelections
Council ‐
Please see the email below re: SMO agenda item.
Stephanie
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Maureen Antonio [mailto:mcantonio@antoniodesign.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2016 8:50 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Reelections
To the Santa Monica City Council,
This coming election, the Santa Monica City Council Members who by their actions have shown they are No Airport/Slow
Growth will get my vote.
Sincerely,
Maureen Antonio
mcantonio@antoniodesign.com
310.739.0413
Resident of Sunset Park
217
Esterlina Lugo
From:LE <lucase@hotmail.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 11:46 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Resolution Regarding Local Control and Closure of the Santa Monica Airport
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport provides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to residents of
the City of Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During times of natural disaster or
national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding communities that
cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and future generations.
Millions of taxpayer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Your Name
Lucas I. Etchegaray
218
Esterlina Lugo
From:sacredvoyage@verizon.net
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 12:50 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Santa monica Airport
I want to express my strong feelings th at the City of Sanata Monica should take charge of all airport transactions until
such time that the airport can be closed and re-developed as parks and recreational areas (at the soonest possible legal
date)/ This means being in charge of fuel sales etc - all wi th an eye to creating the least possible noise (from planes) -
cleanest possible air quality (no leaded fuel) and the great est safety for residents (from any plane mishps)!!
Thank you,
Judith Diana Winston
Euclid Street, Santa Monica
sacredvoyage@verizon.net
219
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 1:17 PM
To:Tony Vazquez; Ted Winterer; Pam OConnor; Sue Himmelrich; Gleam Davis; Terry O’Day;
Kevin McKeown Fwd
Cc:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Please close SMO
Council ‐
Please see the email below re: SMO agenda item.
Stephanie
From: Andrew Wilder [mailto:andrew@andrewwilder.com]
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 1:09 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Rick Cole <Rick.Cole@SMGOV.NET>; Nelson Hernandez <Nelson.Hernandez@SMGOV.NET>; Nomo Jetson
<nomorejets@gmail.com>
Subject: Please close SMO
Dear City Council Members,
I am writing to support Item 11A on tomorrow night's meeting agenda. Please follow the Staff's
recommendations to close SMO as soon as possible, begin the planning for a park, and support the
City Manager's actions to implement this plan.
I also ask that you ENFORCE the new leasing poli cy and remove Atlantic Aviation and the other
FBOs from the airport immediately. They are incompatible with surrounding neighborhoods and
therefore are in violation of the leasing policy.
Please also STOP fuel sales at SMO entirely.
Thank you very much!
Sincerely,
Andrew Wilder
90405
220
Esterlina Lugo
From:John Londono <londoj01@hotmail.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 1:31 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Airport Resolution
Dear City Council:
I would like to express my support for the City Council to pass the resolution that calls for the closure of SMO.
Thank you,
John Londono
221
Esterlina Lugo
From:Nancy Klein <nancyklein@ymail.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 1:33 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Santa Monica Airport NO on 11
Dear Council Members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and against item 11 on
the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should rema in open. Our airport provides a
multitude of real and tangible benefits to residents of the City of Santa
Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our
N ation. During times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport
is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding
communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceab le and invaluable public resource would be a
loss to both current and future gene rations. Millions of taxpayer dollars
have already been wasted and the effo rts seeking the airport's demise must
come to a close.
Sincerely,
N ancy Klei n
633 21st Place
Santa Monica, CA 90402
Sent from my iPhone
222
Esterlina Lugo
From:Lisa Fetchko <lisafetchko@hotmail.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 2:06 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:Concerned Residents Against Airport Pollution
Subject:Support for August 22, 2016 Lette r from Martin Rubin (@ CRAAP)
I wholeheartedly agree with Mr. Rubin's point, as detailed in the letter belo w. Please show the incredible growth
in jet traffic (and air pollution) since 1983 wh en you are discussing the SM Airport issue.
Lisa Fetchko
2825 Stoner Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90064
August 22, 2016
Mayor Vazquez, Council Members, City Manager Cole,
Regarding: 11. RESOLUTIONS - A. Resolution Regarding Local Control and Closure of the Santa Monica
Airport; …
Although I am certainly in favor of Council passing this resolution , I continue to question why air
pollution impacts on Santa Monica Airport's surrounding community are not fully presented. The material
presented at this meeting by City Manager Rick Cole is far better than any staff re port to council that I have
seen over my many years of involvement. However, the crit ical issue of air pollution can be better presented
to show how jet traffic at SMO has skyrocked over the years since just before the signing of the 1984
agreement when total annual jet op erations were less than 1,200 and grew to a peak of 18,575 in 2007. In
2015, it was just under 16,000 (see below and attached grap hs). These numbers are th e strongest numbers to
use that will show most clearl y how the downwind community has b een unjustly impacted by toxic jet
emissions. Your current charts show figures that star t in 1997 when operations we re actually, according to
SMO staff data, more than 6,200.
223
The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the co rrect file and location.
I urge the city to add, within the resolves of this reso lution, that it will start simultaneously to enact remedies
to reduce harmful jet emissions at SMO.
Sincerely,
Martin Rubin
Director, Concerned Resident s Against Airport Pollution
President, North Westdale Neighborhood Association
Co-Chair, Mar Vista Community Counc il's Santa Monica Airport Committee
224
Esterlina Lugo
From:Stephen Wyle <stephen@stephenwyle.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 2:22 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Opposition to Item 11 of the August 23rd Council Agenda
Dear council members,
I and my family have been airplane owners and tena nts at Santa Monica Airport for the past 41 years during
which time we have been responsible and considerate members of the community. I am writing in support of
Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Stephen Wyle
225
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 2:29 PM
To:Tony Vazquez; Ted Winterer; Pam OConnor; Sue Himmelrich; Gleam Davis; Terry O’Day;
Kevin McKeown Fwd
Cc:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Please evict Atlantic Aviation
Council ‐
Please see the email below re: SMO agenda item.
Stephanie
From: Reiner P Braun [mailto:rpbraunaic@aol.com]
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 2:10 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Please evict Atlantic Aviation
Dear City of Santa Monica Council Members:
We appreciate your resolution to close the Airport after court ac tion, but this will take many years. In the meanwhile, after
a full year of local control by City Council, jet flight oper ations have increased by 10%. How is this possible? The air
pollution and noise as a result of the heavy jet traffic makes it more and more unbearable to live in the vicinity of the Santa
Monica Airport.
We ask that City Council act on August 23 to evict Atlantic Aviation, which accounts for 90% of jet flight operations. The
FAA agrees that the City possesses 100% control over Airport tenants such as Atlantic Aviation. FAA decisions in 2000
and 2003 specifically applied to Atlantic Aviation. It is our un derstanding that Atlantic Aviati on currently occupies their
space without a valid lease.
PLEASE evict Atlantic Aviation now, like you successfully evict ed Justice Aviation. Please foll ow the Airport leasing policy
which you adopted, and which Atlantic's jet f light operations violate every single day. We request that you instruct staff to
begin a landlord-tenant court action now, because Atlantic has no lease and the City already gave written notice to leave.
We request that Atlantic Aviation be evic ted no later than December 31, 2016 and that any show of favoritism to special
interests like Atlantic Aviation by the City of Santa Monica be stopped.
Sincerely,
Reiner P. Braun
Patricia M. Braun
1811 Pier Avenue
Santa Monica, CA 90405
rpbraunaic@aol.com
226
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 2:53 PM
To:Tony Vazquez; Ted Winterer; Pam OConnor; Sue Himmelrich; Gleam Davis; Terry O’Day;
Kevin McKeown Fwd
Cc:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: the vote to close sm airport
Council ‐
Please see the email below re: SMO agenda item.
Stephanie
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: JoJo Winston [mailto:jojoconnie47@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 2:33 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: the vote to close sm airport
please accept my request to have the airport closed and transformed into a park.
Tank you,
Dr Jo Winston
227
Esterlina Lugo
From:Lbautista1 <lbautista1@aol.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 2:55 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Item 11 on agenda for August 23rd
Dear Members of the Santa Monica City Council,
I use Santa Monica airport when I come down to visit the dental school at UCLA. I graduated UCLA's school of Dentistry
as a DDS in 1992 and again after my residency in pediatric dent istry in 2002. The airport is a value to the community. I
purchase fuel and rent a car when I land at SMO.
When I was a pre-doc I used to visit the museum to clear my head. I have been using the airport since 1986. I am writing
in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open forever. It's histor ic, a local job provider, and provides so much to the Santa
Monica community.
Sincerely,
Dr. Lance Bautista
228
Esterlina Lugo
From:Joan <joanewin@earthlink.net>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 2:53 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:Concerned Residents Against Airport Pollution
Subject:Agenda item 11. A. August 23, 2016 Santa Monica City Council meeting
From the desk of Joan Winters,
Co ‐founder of Concerned Residents Against Airport Pollution
Regarding: Agenda item 11. A. August 23, 2016 Santa Monica City Council meeting - Resolution Regarding
Local Control and Closure of the Santa Monica Airport...
I support any and all efforts to address the immedi ate reduction in Santa Monica Airport's dangerous
toxic jet fumes.
Dear Mayor Vazquez, Council Me mbers, and City Manager Cole;
I grew up and live in my home located about 1/2 mile east of th e eastern end of Santa M onica Airport in the Los
Angeles neighborhood of North Westdale. My home is located by the flight path so I am acutely aware of the
changes that have taken place over the decades. No change has been more significant than the change in my air
quality due to the growth of privat e jets using Santa Monica Airport. Be cause of the noticeable odor and the
negative sensations I feel when the fumes of jets permeat e my home inside as well as outside, I have had to
significantly alter my lifestyle. Almost daily I do not feel comfortable bein g outside and working in my garden,
for example. Another example is when I am inside of my house and I have to run around and close windows
and doors because the noxious, sickening jet fumes start waft ing in as a jet (or several jets) idles/take off sitting
on the runway. This is certainly a quality of life issue, and a major health issue. This is a situation that both the
City of Santa Monica and th e FAA should correct.
Again, I support any and all efforts to address th e immediate reduction in Santa Monica Airport's
dangerous toxic jet fumes.
Thank you,
Joan Winters
Co-founder, Concerned Reside nts Against Airport Pollution
229
Esterlina Lugo
From:seppo.hurme@att.net
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 3:07 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Agenda Item 11, Resolution Regarding Loca l Control and Closure of the Santa Monica
Airport
Dear Council members,
Since I'll be unable to attend your meeting and to discuss the subject resolution, I'm submitting the following in response:
Santa Monica Airport an d public infrastructure
(An open letter to the Sa nta Monica City Council)
It is almost axiomatic that virtually any piece of public infras tructure is noisy, smelly or unsightly. While the
Santa Monica airport may not meet all of the above crit eria, it has obviously created many detractors. But let us
look at it from the point of vi ew of infrastructure, as a facility designed to serve th e needs of the community, in
this case by providi ng aviation services.
You know that the airport has been here for over 90 years and during that time it has hosted the Douglas
Aircraft Co. factory, now long gone. That factory was one of the most impo rtant facilities in Santa Monica,
putting the city on the map. It also pr ovided much of the financial wherewith al to the city to grow and expand
and provided employment and housing for thousands of people in Santa Monica and surrounding cities. In fact,
it was so successful that the city has moved on and become home for other types of businesses. It is
understandable that people moving into Santa Monica/West Los Angeles area since 1973 when Douglas plant
closed, have little appreciation for its financial contribution or its contribut ion to aviation, aerospace and the war
efforts during WWII, Kor ean War and Vietnam War.
Santa Monica Airport has been and is a vital part of th e aviation infrastructure in the Los Angeles area. There
are many other airports in the area so what is the big problem in closing down Santa Monica? With the closure
of any airport, the airports in the surrounding area will s ee an increasing load of traffic and if we continue down
this path, pretty soon nobody wants to have an air port in his neighborhood or city. What do we do then?
As I mentioned before, almost any piece of infrastructure is going to have its opponents because of noise, smell
or unsightliness. In most communities the infrastructure facilities are usually spread around so that no single
area has to carry more than its fair share. So how does the city of Santa Monica stand in its share of
infrastructure? How many of the following does the ci ty have: Power plants, sewage treatment plants, oil
drilling rigs, oil refineries, prisons, landfills, or smoke stack industries? Ed ison power plant is in El Segundo, as
is the sewage treatment plant, no oil rigs that I know of and the nearest oil refinery is in El Segundo where the
local residents can enjoy its sights and smells. The nearest prison is in downtown Los Ange les and landfills are
even further away. And there is no heavy industry in Sa nta Monica since the departur e of Douglas Aircraft Co.
So would you say that the city is carrying its fair share of the infrastructure load?
Isn’t this elitism in the ex treme that you are not willing to tolerate an ything that offends your refined senses and
dump it on others? You know, I have yet to meet a single person who did not willingly move into this area. And
if they didn’t know that the airport was there, shame on them!
230
You are probably well aware that America’s infrastructu re has been in decline for some time. The American
Society of Civil Engineers has done some estimates and our infrastructure is in ur gent need of upgrading. And
yet, here you are ready to tear down a significant piece of this infrastruc ture, which not only is a local but a
national asset! And all of this to plea se a few malcontents and de velopers who stand to ma ke a real killing when
the airport property is developed. What we need is so me serious political will from our politicians -- not
weather vanes.
In addition, have you not considered what this will do to the local traffic? I used to live just on the Los Angeles
side between Bundy Drive and Centinela Avenue and betw een I-10 and Ocean Park Blvd. I’d like to invite you
to come and check out the traffic one day in the late afternoon when people get off work in Santa Monica. I
remember what it was like 50 years ago. We had parking restrictions on our streets so that Douglas employees
would not park here. But the traffic flowed well and ther e were very few serious acci dents. I don’t think that
most residents here want a repeat of the Playa Vista development on the former Hughes Airport with its huge
population density and attendant increase in traffic load.
Over 50 years ago, Sam Yorty got elected mayor of Los A ngles with the promise of doing away with separate
collection of trash and metal cans. That collection had b een perhaps the first serious attempt at recycling. Well,
that decision was finally overturned many years later and now trash, recyclables and garden waste are all
collected separately, saving huge volumes of material fr om going into landfills. Th at regrettable delay in
conservation was and remains Sam Yorty’s legacy.
30 years ago, then--Congressman Henry Waxman succeeded in stopping the Metro Red Line expansion to the
West side because of objections from the residents of Beverly Hills. They did not want the great unwashed
descending on their beautiful city. We ll, that decision has now been re versed, even by Mr. Waxman. But I
seriously doubt that I will see this lin e operating to the Veterans Administra tion, much less to the beach at Santa
Monica, in my life time. How much time has been lost and how much easier would the traffic on the West side
and Santa Monica be if that subway line were running t oday? So that remains Mr. Waxman’s legacy.
Your decision to support the closure of Santa Monica Airp ort will go down in history in the similar manner. The
only difference is that this time, that decision soon will be impossible to re verse, unlike those that I mentioned
above. Is this the kind of political legacy that you want to leave?
S.I. Hurme
310.478.9435
Mr. Hurme is a Naval Aviator and former Marine Corp s officer and helicopter pilot who served in Vietnam.
231
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 3:14 PM
To:Tony Vazquez; Ted Winterer; Pam OConnor; Sue Himmelrich; Gleam Davis; Terry O’Day;
Kevin McKeown Fwd
Cc:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Resolution to Close SMO - Staff Report Accompanying Same
Importance:High
Council ‐
Please see the email below re: SMO agenda item.
Stephanie
From: Sabrina Burton [mailto:sburton@pajamalaw.net]
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 2:57 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Resolution to Close SMO ‐ Staff Report Accompanying Same
Importance: High
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Ahead of tomorrow evening’s vote on the captioned resolution, I want to thank the Council and in particular
City staff for their continued efforts to move this ma tter forward. At the suggestion of one of the local
advocacy groups, I read the staff report supporting the agenda item and I was extremely impressed. T his is a
Herculean effort, to be sure. But the staff report makes clear that the City has a firm grasp of both the legal
issues and the resident concerns around the closure of SMO.
Please keep pushing ahead on this course, which I am confident will see the airport closed in the shortest
timeframe practicable. I look forward to spending my golden years strolling and relaxing at the great park
that will someday replace SMO!
Thank you, as always, for your time and for your service to our community.
Best regards,
Sabrina Burton
2105 Navy Street
310-309-0553
232
Esterlina Lugo
From:Flying Scholarship <info@flysmo.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 3:16 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:8/23/2016 City Council Meeting . Agenda Item 11 (Airport)
Council Members
City of Santa Monica
re. 8/23/2016 City C ouncil Meeting . Agenda Item 11 (Airport)
via email: councilmtgitems[at]smgov[dot]net
“Educational Value of SMO”
Dear council members,
We are writing in opposition to Item 11 on the ag enda and in support of Santa Monica Airport.
Flying Scholarship for High School Girls is a STEM-related effort and complements PUBLIC HIGH
SCHOOL’s Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math programs.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open and efforts seeking it's clos ure should be abandoned. Our airport
provides a multitude of benefits to residents of the City of Santa Monica, the County of Los Angeles, the State
of California, and to our entire Country.
This airport is of tremendous educa tional value to our youth. The positiv e influence and the educational value
to the students cannot be overstated. By virtue of Santa M onica Airport being where it is, opportunities have
been opened to less-affluent families whose daughters have every right to learn, and be part of our society’s
future advancement.
During times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa
Monica and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
It is time to heed the responsible voices of your constituents and of Americans across our country who have
b een warning against taking an action su ch as the one before you now. A vote against Santa Monica Airport is a
vote against ourselves and will fray the fabric of our nation.
Sincerely,
233
On behalf of volunteers, st udents, and their teachers:
Flying Scholarship fo r High School Girls
info@flysmo.com
website: www.flysmo.com
234
Esterlina Lugo
From:Chase Ashton <socalaviator@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 3:22 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Please Save Santa Monica Airport
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
--
~ Charles Ashton
235
Esterlina Lugo
From:MM MM <90291girl@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 3:23 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:CRAAP
Subject:Santa Monica Airport
Dear Santa Monica council,
I grew up on Armacost Avenue near Bundy and Ocean Park . Each day private jets run their engines for long
periods of time before taking off. The neighborhood which is densely populated with residential homes
becomes inundated with thick toxic gases. We have to shut all the windows even on hot days to protect
ourselves from lead and other chemicals in the air.
When my family moved here, the air port was used only for small aircraft . Those planes did not produce any
odor. However, now the airport is bei ng used by celebrities and the well to do at our expense. We did not sign
up for this when we moved here.
I am very concerned about the health effects of re peated jets over and over again polluting the neighborhood
with toxic fumes. More and more families with child ren are moving here because our area is slightly more
affordable than the beach areas.
Children should not be exposed to thes e toxic fumes on an ongoing basis.
I urge you to either shut down the airport, or restrict it to small aircraft only. This was the original use of the
airport, jets are a new and unwelcome phenomenon here.
Thank you.
Miriam Jannol
424.610.7477
236
Esterlina Lugo
From:Jeff Wachner GoForMail <jw@goformail.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 3:30 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Agenda Item 11 "Resolution R egarding Local Control and Cl osure of the Santa Monica
Airport;
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Jeff Wachner
237
Esterlina Lugo
From:pattyhmj <pattyhmj@aol.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 3:48 PM
To:Joan; councilmtgitems
Cc:Concerned Residents Against Airport Pollution
Subject:RE: Agenda item 11. A. August 23, 2016 Santa Monica City Council meeting
Attachments:20160822_154143.png
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
To all concern.
This is the end of runway at West side of Santa Moni ca Airport. With homes this close it is common sense that
the growth of jet traffic in residential area is so danger ous to our health and freedom to breath clean air. Living
in this home since 1954...I see a huge increase in black particles dust, toxic fumes and noise. The charm is
gone. Yes I was here before the Jets.
Patty Laurie
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: Joan <joanewin@earthlink.net>
Date: 8/22/16 2:52 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: SM City Council agenda item co mments <councilmtgitems@smgov.net>
Cc: Concerned Residents Against Airport Pollution <jetairpollu tion@earthlink.net>
Subject: Agenda item 11. A. August 23, 2016 Santa Monica City Council meeting
From the desk of Joan Winters,
Co-founder of Concerned Residen ts Against Airport Pollution
Regarding: Agenda item 11. A. August 23, 2016 Santa Monica City Council meeting - Resolution Regarding
Local Control and Closure of the Santa Monica Airport...
I support any and all efforts to address the immedi ate reduction in Santa Monica Airport's dangerous
toxic jet fumes.
Dear Mayor Vazquez, Council Me mbers, and City Manager Cole;
I grew up and live in my home located about 1/2 mile east of th e eastern end of Santa M onica Airport in the Los
Angeles neighborhood of North Westdale. My home is located by the flight path so I am acutely aware of the
changes that have taken place over the decades. No change has been more significant than the change in my air
quality due to the growth of privat e jets using Santa Monica Airport. Be cause of the noticeable odor and the
negative sensations I feel when the fumes of jets permeat e my home inside as well as outside, I have had to
significantly alter my lifestyle. Almost daily I do not feel comfortable bein g outside and working in my garden,
for example. Another example is when I am inside of my house and I have to run around and close windows
and doors because the noxious, sickening jet fumes start waft ing in as a jet (or several jets) idles/take off sitting
238
on the runway. This is certainly a quality of life issue, and a major health issue. This is a situation that both the
City of Santa Monica and th e FAA should correct.
Again, I support any and all efforts to address th e immediate reduction in Santa Monica Airport's
dangerous toxic jet fumes.
Thank you,
Joan Winters
Co-founder, Concerned Residents Against Airport Pollution
239
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 3:55 PM
To:Tony Vazquez; Ted Winterer; Pam OConnor; Sue Himmelrich; Gleam Davis; Terry O’Day;
Kevin McKeown Fwd
Cc:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Support 11.A
Council ‐
Please see the email below re: SMO agenda item.
Stephanie
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Connie Waldeck [mailto:jojoconnie47@icloud.com]
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 3:48 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Support 11.A
Count me in! I support 11.A!
Connie
240
Esterlina Lugo
From:Nan Waldman <n.waldman.esq@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 4:01 PM
To:N Waldman
Cc:councilmtgitems; Concerned Resi dents Against Airport Pollution
Subject:Re: Agenda item 11. A. August 23, 2016 Santa Monica City Council meeting
Re: Agenda Item 11.A.
August 23,2016 Santa Monica City Council Meeting. Resolution Regarding Local Control and Closure of Santa Monica
Airport.
August 23, 2016
Dear Mayor Vazquez, Council Members, and City Manager Cole:
I am writing to support any and all efforts to address the immediate reduction of dangerous toxic jet fumes coming from
Santa Monica Airport.
My name is Nan Waldman. I live in West LA and used to go west to Clover Park (adjacent to and north of the Santa
Monica Airport) ‐‐ but stopped going there after a nauseating cloud of aviation gas shrouded me and my little twin
cousins in a fog that made us wet and sick. We immediately packed up their little bicycles and immediately went home
to shower. We felt sick.
I cannot imagine what it must be like to live near all that pollution.
The City of Santa Monica and the FAA should do whatever it takes to protect the public by reducing or eliminating Santa
Monica Airport's dangerous and toxic jet fumes.
It is wrong for members of the public to be unable to enjoy our public parks without injury caused to us by private jet
owners and their passengers.
Sincerely,
Nan Waldman
Mailing address:
15760 Ventura Blvd
Suite 850
Encino CA 91436
241
Esterlina Lugo
From:alice burston <alburston@hotmail.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 5:12 PM
To:councilmtgitems; Marty Rubin; David Burston
Subject:Agenda item 11
Regarding: Agenda item 11. A. August 23, 2016 Santa Monica City Council meeting - Resolution Regarding
Local Control and Closure of the Santa Monica Airport...
I support any and all efforts to address the immedi ate reduction in Santa Monica Airport's dangerous
toxic jet fumes.
Dear Mayor Vazqu ez, Council Members,
I live in Venice under the flight path from Santa Monica Airport. My ho me is located under theflight path so I
am acutely aware of the changes that have taken place over the decades. No change has been more significant
than the change in my air quality due to the growth of private jets usi ng Santa Monica Airport. The noise and
pollution from the jets affect my life and the life of my loved ones. Often I have to stop conversations to wait
for a jet or noisy prop to pass by before continuing. It is impossible to take a nap because of the plane
noise. The potential for an accident that none of us want to happen but yet may very well due to the short
runway is another reason to close this airport. This is a situation th at both the City of Santa Monica and the
FAA should correct.
Again, I support any and all efforts to address th e immediate reduction in Santa Monica Airport's
dangerous toxic jet fumes.
Thank you,
Alice Burston
Resident of Venice
242
Esterlina Lugo
From:Eric Shalov <eric@ericshalov.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 5:13 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Agenda Item 11 "Resolution R egarding Local Control and Cl osure of the Santa Monica
Airport"
Dear Santa Monica City Council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a swift close.
I am concerned that the vocal minorit y of Santa Monica resident s that oppose the airpor t are disproportionately
over-represented in the council’s incessant attempts to close the airport and hara ss the honest businesses that
operate there.
Any reaffirmation of the Council's desi re to immediately close the airport in violation of existing agreements
will only serve to provide further confirmation of the City Council's intent to break the law and violate the terms
of the 1948 Instrument of Transfer, as signed by the C ity Manager of the City of Santa Monica on August 10,
1948.
I therefore encourage the council to:
1) Honor the terms of the 1948 Instrument of Transfer.
2) Immediately cease the ongoing harassment of airpor t tenants and users, and the wasteful spending on
legal avenues to terminate or disrupt legal and economically productive airport operations.
3) Encourage an honest and transparent di alogue in matters of the airport’s future.
4) Protect the airport, as it is an invaluable and irreplaceable asse t to public safety, education, and the
City’s well-being.
Sincerely,
Eric Shalov
Commercial Pilot
243
Esterlina Lugo
From:Rick R. <ricrose5000@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 5:28 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Santa Monica Airport
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
FJ Rosenthal
244
Esterlina Lugo
From:Santa Monica City Manager's Office
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 5:42 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem Conflict of Interest
Attachments:smac 6-4-13 AC Confl.pdf; SMAA Letter to City Council.pdf
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
From: SMAA Admin [mailto:info@santamonicaairport.info]
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 4:43 PM
To: Tony Vazquez <Tony.Vazquez@SMGOV.NET>; Ted Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>; Gleam Davis
<Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET>; Sue Himmelrich <Sue.Himmelrich@SMGOV.NET>; Pam OConnor
<Pam.OConnor@SMGOV.NET>; Terry O’Day <Terry.Oday@smgov.net>; Kevin McKeown Fwd <kevin@mckeown.net>;
Marsha Moutrie <Marsha.Moutrie@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Santa Monica City Manager's Office <manager.mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; Nelson Hernandez
<Nelson.Hernandez@SMGOV.NET>; Ivan Campbell <Ivan.Campbell@SMGOV.NET>; telios.makrides@smgov.net
Subject: RE: Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem Conflict of Interest
Hello,
Please see attachments.
Sincerely,
Christian Fry
President
Santa Monica Airport Association
245
Esterlina Lugo
From:Andrew Varenhorst <varenhorst.andrew@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 7:38 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Airport resolution
Thanks for all the work you've done getting the airport to close. Please do as much as possible to finally get it
closed and a park in!
Thanks!
Andrew Varenhorst
246
Esterlina Lugo
From:Karen D'Arc <darcwriter@earthlink.net>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 9:25 PM
To:Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems; Clerk Mailb ox; Rick Cole; Nelson Hernandez; Tony
Vazquez; Gleam Davis; Sue Himmelrich; Kevin McKeown Fwd; Pam OConnor; Terry
O’Day; Ted Winterer
Subject:Airport Resolution
Re: 8/23/16 agenda item 11.A. -- Resolution Regarding Local Control and Closure of the Santa Monica
Airport
I support agenda item 11.A. and hope all of you will, too.
Thank you very much.
Sincerely,
Karen Scourby D’Arc
247
Esterlina Lugo
From:Hans Schieder <hans@lafn.org>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 10:07 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:SMO
Gentlemen:
The great resource that is Santa Monica Airport should be exploited by the City
of Santa Monica as a welcome spot for tourists arriving by air to visit the sea.
Commercials showing the wonderful condit ion of the airport should be used as
advertising and played in states wher e the weather is le ss than friendly.
Instead of trying to end one of the great success stories of our time the City of
Santa Monica should work hard to benefit from that resource.
Tourism can increase tremendously bring much additional money to the city if
the right audience is reached.
Once lost and airport is never regained. And during an emergency that open
area and runway would be invaluable as a means to land aircraft which could
bring help for those living here.
It is critical that people think this through clearly because once a decision is
made it cannot be reversed. Once lost the airport will never return, and with
that loss any real assistance during ti mes of emergency will be lost as well.
Sincerely,
Hans Schieder
248
Esterlina Lugo
From:Dawn Patrol <perfidia.surf@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 10:47 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11
Here is a suggested message to email councilmtgitems@smgov.net :
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Jen Rosenfeld
255
Esterlina Lugo
From:Brian Bland <blandcbhs@aol.com>
Sent:Monday, August 22, 2016 11:40 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Item 11-A on Council agenda for Tues., Aug. 23, 2016
Dear Council members and staff:
We heartily support the proposed resolution that commits the city to make every effort to end aviation
activities at SMO as soon as po ssible. We also endorse the analysi s and comments on the resolution
from Friends of Sunset Park.
The aviation lobby and its local adherents want t he public to be frightened about shutting down "the
airport." We encourage the council, in its discussion, to make a very clear distinction between actual
aviation activities and the separate, worthwhile, a ttractions on the campus, such as Spitfire Grill,
Barker Hangar, the Museum of Fl ying, the Ruskin Group theater, et al. These are not targeted for
closure by the City.
We occasionally patronize these activities and are certain to frequent them more often when such
visits are not degraded by the danger, noise and po llution (jet fuel and lead fuel) generated by
aviation activity.
Sincerely,
Brian and Jeanne Bland
Santa Monica
256
Esterlina Lugo
From:Peter terSteeg <ptersteeg@varonis.com>
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 6:41 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Agenda Item 11A
Importance:High
Dear Mayor Vasquez and Council Members:
As you know there are signif icant issues raised recently regarding the Santa Monica
airport (SMO) that should be considered. My family, friends, coworkers, and I urgently
request that on Tuesday you:
1. Closely consider the viewpoints of all interests, not simply the interests of a few
outspoken opponents of the airport. This is doubly true given the outspoken few may be
serving other interests (wit h or without their direct knowledge) or acting on
incomplete/erroneous information.
2. Immediately develop a plan to support the airport throu g h 2023. Startin g in 2021 you
and the council should develop a plan to expand, maintain as-is, or wind down
operations of the airport. This compromise wi ll not injure either side irreparably. Should
you decide to wind down operations legally; the opponents will st ill have the airport
closed. Additionally the tenants of the airpor t gain stability until the legal closure, and
defined plans therein, to find a place to take their business. The ci ty is also protected
from unnecessary legal costs. Should the winds of public opinion shift, as they do quite
often, then the airport is still there for the city of Santa Monica. At that time the people
in the city can decide to maintain or expand the facilities. Given technological
advancement, this airport could be an unexpected boon in 5-6 years’ time.
3. Expand airport outreach, as many reside nts do not realize the benefits the airport
provides. They are likely ba sing their reaction to the issue on fear-mongering or
incomplete information provided by the people/groups listed in point one. Many smaller
employers simply ca nnot use LAX as, lo g ically, the airport is used primarily for lar g e j ets
and small/large aircraft traffic does not mix we ll. This is more than small jets or large
jets, it is the many small businesses and indi viduals using propeller aircraft to service
their customers in a ti me efficient manner.
As a person whom believes in common-sens e actions, I urge you to use the legal
framework allowed regarding the airport. Like most cities, I doubt Santa Monica has an
excess of cash laying around to cover the expenses of defending illegal actions, much
less the fines that could be imposed, if it decides to summa rily start ignoring
agreements it entered into previously. This is one thing anti-airport zealots studiously
try to deflect and i g nore, but would not be i g nored by many voters on election day when
they see a rise in taxes to cover the costs of illegally clos ing the airport.
257
I know there are varied fears, as anti-airport groups st oke them to try and prevent calm
deliberation, but failing to act in a calm manner will continue to lead to knee-jerk
pandering where the lives of the people who voted you into office, as well as their
employers, are held hostage to a hysterical fe w with little interest but their own fleeting
cause du-jour. SMO provides benefits to us all, including children and the elderly, and
they are benefits that must be considered.
Don't let the recent veiled threats and fear -mongering of the few stop you from doing
the ri g ht thin g . Santa Monica is a g reen city and should not have even more automobiles
unnecessarily stuck in traffic spewin g toxins into the nei g hborin g communities and Santa
Monica itself.
I ask you to fulfill your respon sibility by taking the above actions on Tuesday, August 23
without further delay.
Signed,
Peter terSteeg (A homeowner in Los Angeles and Palm Springs)
This email and any attachments th ereto may contain private, confidential, and priv ileged material for the sole use of the inten ded
recipient. Any review, copying, or distribution of this email (o r any attachments thereto) by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not
the intended recipient, please contact the se nder immediately and permanently delete th e original and any copies of this email and any
attachments thereto.
258
Esterlina Lugo
From:Lauren de la Fuente <laure n@pearlstreetmarketing.com>
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 8:07 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:8/23/16 agenda item 11.A
To: Mayor Vazquez and members of the City Council (cc: Rick Cole, Nelson Hernandez)
From: Lauren de la Fuente, 2110 Pearl Street 90405
RE: 8/23/16 agenda item 11.A. ‐‐ Resolution Regarding Local Control and Closure of the Santa Monica Airport ;
Policy for Eliminating Private Provision of Aeronautical Services and Establishing Exclusive Public Proprietary Fixed Based
Operations With City Provision of Aeronautical Services Required By Law; Consideration of Other Lawful Means of
Curtailing Adverse Airport Impacts, Including, Among Others: Applying to the FAA for Runway Alterations; Enforcing
Local, State & Federal Laws Relating to Airport Operations; Transitioning From Leases to a Permit System for Certain
Airport Uses; Eliminating Lead Fuel; and Enhancing Airport Security
I support agenda item 11.A. In particular, I urge the City Council to direct the City Manager to proceed with all due
haste with respect to the following actions:
1. Commence the park planning process, including conducting an environmental analysis as required by the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA). – As noted in the staff
report, I agree that the time to commence planning and environmental analysis of the conversion of the airport to a
park is now.
2. Investigate whether certain fractional jet operators are impermissibly operating as scheduled
airlines. Newspaper and other advertisements circulated to the general public are increasingly supporting the
impression that this is, in fact, the case. As the staff report has noted, both the FAA and the City of Santa
Monica prohibit scheduled airline operations out of SMO. Fractional jet operators who operate at SMO should
be required to provide the City with sufficient documentation and records to establish that their operations do
not amount to surreptitious scheduled service.
3. Submit an application to FAA, which would alter the Airport runway by removing the 1949 Quit Claim Parcel,
also known as the “Western Parcel,” from aviation use. The FOSP Board agrees that, given the pending legal
action, and in order to place the City of Santa Monica in a position to capitalize on its upcoming legal victories, it
makes sense to now file the application to close the Western Parcel to aviation, as part of the City’s appeal of
the grant assurance.
4. Cease forbearance of lax enforcement of the Santa Monica Airport noise ordinance, and apply enforcement as
written. As noted, the City’s enforcement practice of its noise ordinance pre ‐dates the advent of popular
fractional ownership and jets ‐on ‐demand services at the airport and thus is outdated and overly
lax. Enforcement should be adjusted to reflect current airport operations.
5. Transition aircraft hangar uses from lease agreements to permits. A permit system is a reasonable
accommodation until the City prevails in court and expeditiously closes the Airport per the subject City Council
Resolution. The proposed permit system provides an important step toward greater local control over the
property aviation users now occupy.
6. Create a City of Santa Monica Fixed Based Operation. If the City is required to operate the airport and if FBO
services are required, the City would have greater local control by establishing a municipal FBO. The two private
FBO providers should be eliminated as soon as City staff is ready to assume the duties, which should in no case
be later than December 31, 2016.
259
7. Elimination of leaded fuel. The sale of leaded fuel should be phased out completely, as soon as legally possible,
even before the City could begin operation of a municipal FBO. There is a viable alternative fuel that could
service an estimated 65 percent of the propeller aircraft fleet based at SMO.
8. Enhanced Security. The FOSP Board urges the City to ensure that whatever contract is signed with a private
airport security firm, that the City retain maximum local control over security operations and that those
operations be conducted in a manner that aligns completely with all local concerns, including but not limited to
ensuring that SMO is not used to transport contraband or illegal persons at any time or by any user of the SMO
facilities, including but not limited to clients of the privately run FBOs, so long as those FBOs are operating at
SMO.
The ongoing negative health effects of air and noise pollution, not to mention safety concerns, created by ongoing
airport operations, dictate that the optimal public policy goal of the City should be to close the airport and repurpose
the area to maximize park, open space, and cultural facilities. All of these goals can be addressed by adopting the
proposed resolution, which I fully support.
Thank you,
Lauren de la Fuente
2110 Pearl Street
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Principal, Pearl Street Marketing
lauren@pearlstreetmarketing.com
310.283.8488
www.pearlstreetmarketing.com
260
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 8:10 AM
To:Tony Vazquez; Ted Winterer; Pam OConnor; Sue Himmelrich; Gleam Davis; Terry O’Day;
Kevin McKeown Fwd
Cc:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Fails to evict Atlantic Aviation from the Airport
Council ‐
Please see the email below re: SMO agenda item.
Stephanie
From: Simona Garon [mailto:simona.garon@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 5:45 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Fails to evict Atlantic Aviation from the Airport
Dear City Council,
We appreciate your resolution to close the Airport after court action, but this will take many years. Meanwhile,
after a full year of lo cal control by City Counc il, jet flight operations have in crease by 10%. I think that you are
just trying to change the subjec t. Citi Council should act on Augus t 23 to EVICT ATLANTIC AVIATION
which accounts for 90% of jet flight operations. Atlantic has no lease and the City already gave them written
notice to leave. PLEASE STOP SHOWING FAVORI TISM TO SPECIAL INTERESTS LIKE ATLANTIC
AVIATION! Put the interests of RESIDENTS first for a change!!!
Best Regards,
Dr. Simona Garon
2127 Navy St
Santa Monica
90405
261
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 8:10 AM
To:Tony Vazquez; Ted Winterer; Pam OConnor; Sue Himmelrich; Gleam Davis; Terry O’Day;
Kevin McKeown Fwd
Cc:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Santa Monica/Sunset Park Anti-Airport mailer
Council ‐
Please see the email below re: SMO agenda item.
Stephanie
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Pauline Greene [mailto:PaulineG@roadrunner.com]
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 9:59 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Gleam Davis <Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Santa Monica/Sunset Park Anti ‐Airport mailer
Re:Airport future—recent mail ‐out noting that three council members are accused of "soft corruption" in regard to SM
Airport.
I am a long ‐time resident of Santa Monica, living in Village Park.
This is an HOA with 75 families in 75 units. We are located between Ocean Park Blvd and Pico Blvd., just blocks away
from the SM Airport.
We do hear small planes and jets, mostly on weekends, and during the daylight hours.
Believe me, the "noise" from the airport is nothing compared to Police helicopters, news and weather copters,
directly overhead in our neighborhood. Not to mention the racket from two major freeways (the
210 and the 405) which intersect and border our neighborhood. That noise is 24 hours and includes large semi's,
motorcycles, emergency vehicles, sirens, especially bothersome at night. Not to mention at least one flight path for jets
heading to or from LAX.
Meanwhile street traffic is bothersome, particularly in the afternoon, when heading out of Santa Monica going
EAST, bumper to bumper, along Pico, and Ocean Park, and Pearl St.
Yes. Pearl St. —where our only entrance to Village Park Way, is located. Needless to say no one who lives here
plans to approach or leave Village Park between the hours of 4 pm to 6:30 pm, on any day of the week.
Why am I going on about this? My thought is that the main reason for this mailer was to support any and all
efforts to close the SM Airport. To free up land for development (rumors of high rise condos, and apartments—maybe a
mew "mall", or commercial center, or how about another hotel?). I think a park was mentioned somewhere as well.
What would that be? A new urban desert perhaps.
Heavy traffic is the problem folks!
I don't feel that the council makes any effort to communicate with those of us who are established residents of
Santa Monica. So I am happy to hear that there may be a few council members who are interested in something other
than real estate development and tourism.
262
And that "soft corruption" line I find offensive.
Thanks for reading—Pauline Greene
269
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 8:11 AM
To:Tony Vazquez; Ted Winterer; Pam OConnor; Sue Himmelrich; Gleam Davis; Terry O’Day;
Kevin McKeown Fwd
Cc:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Atlantic Aviation Vote
Council ‐
Please see the email below re: SMO agenda item.
Stephanie
From: Jonathan Spees [mailto:jjspees@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 8:02 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Atlantic Aviation Vote
Dear Councilpersons:
As a resident of Santa Monica since 1993, I respectfully request that you take actions consistent with measure
LC and your resolution to close th e Santa Monica airport and follow the Airport Leasing Policy, which you
adopted.
Leases are legal agreements and landlo rds have rights thereunder. It is my understanding that it is now within
your rights to take action to evict Atlantic Aviation, a nd that there are specific F AA actions which support this
right.
Please take all legal actions necessary to take this important step toward clos ure of the airport now.
Sincerely,
Jon Spees
--
___________________
Jonathan Spees
310-396-5617
310-488-9696 cell
270
Esterlina Lugo
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 9:07 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: FOSP: Council 8/23/16 item 11.A -- Airport resolution -- SUPPORT
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
From: ZinaJosephs@aol.com [mailto:ZinaJosephs@aol.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2016 5:06 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; councilmtgitems <councilmtgitems@SMGOV.NET>; Clerk Mailbox
<Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; Rick Cole <Rick.Cole@SMGOV.NET>; Nelson Hernandez
<Nelson.Hernandez@SMGOV.NET>; Tony Vazquez <Tony.Vazquez@SMGOV.NET>; Gleam Davis
<Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET>; Sue Himmelrich <Sue.Himmelrich@SMGOV.NET>; Kevin McKeown Fwd
<kevin@mckeown.net>; Pam OConnor <Pam.OConnor@SMGOV.NET>; Terry O’Day <Terry.Oday@smgov.net>; Ted
Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: zinajosephs@aol.com
Subject: FOSP: Council 8/23/16 item 11.A ‐‐ Airport resolution ‐‐ SUPPORT
August 20, 2016
To: Mayor Vazquez and members of th e City Council (cc: Rick Cole, Nelson Hernandez)
From: Board of Directors, Friends of Sunset Park (FOSP)
RE: 8/23/16 agenda item 11.A. -- R esolution Re g ardin g Local Control and Closure o f the Santa Monica
Airport ; Policy for Eliminating Private Pr ovision of Aeronautical Services and Establishing Exclusive Public
Proprietary Fixed Based Operations With City Provision of Aeronaut ical Services Required By Law;
Consideration of Other Lawful Me ans of Curtailing Adverse Airpor t Impacts, Including, Among Others:
Applying to the FAA for Runway Alte rations; Enforcing Local, State & Federal Laws Relating to Airport
Operations; Transitioning From Leases to a Permit Syst em for Certain Airport Uses; Eliminating Lead Fuel;
and Enhancing Airport Security
Council 8/23/16 agenda: http://santamonicacityca .iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=1070
271
The FOSP Board thanks the City Council and City Staff, in particular City Mana ger Rick Cole and Senior
Adviser to the City Manager on Airport Affairs Nels on Hernandez, for moving these items forward and for
continuing to make progress.
We support agenda item 11.A. In particular, we urge the City Council to direct the City Manager to proceed
with all due haste with resp ect to the following actions:
1. Commence the park planning process, including conduc ting an environmental analysis as required by
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Protection Act
(NEPA). – As noted in the staff report, the FOSP Bo ard agrees that the time to commence planning and
environmental analysis of the conversion of the airport to a park is now.
2. Investigate whether certain fractional jet opera tors are impermissibly operating as scheduled
airlines. Newspaper and other advertisements circulat ed to the general public are increasingly supporting
the impression that this is, in fact, the case. As th e staff report has noted, bot h the FAA and the City of
Santa Monica prohibit scheduled air line operations out of SMO. Fractio nal jet operators who operate at
SMO should be required to provide the City with su fficient documentation and records to establish that
their operations do not amount to surreptitious scheduled service.
3. Submit an application to FAA, which would alter the Airport r unway by removing the 1949 Quit Claim
Parcel, also known as the “Western Parcel,” from aviation use. The FOSP Board agrees that, given the
pending legal action, and in order to place the City of Santa Monica in a pos ition to capitalize on its
upcoming legal victories, it makes sense to now file the application to close the Western Parcel to
aviation, as part of the City’s appeal of the grant assurance.
4. Cease forbearance of lax enfor cement of the Santa Monica Airport noise ordinance, and apply
enforcement as written. As noted, the City’s enfor cement practice of its noise ordinance pre-dates the
advent of popular fractional ownershi p and jets-on-demand services at the airport and thus is outdated
and overly lax. Enforcement should be adjust ed to reflect current airport operations.
5. Transition aircraft hangar uses from lease agreements to permits. A permit system is a reasonable
accommodation until the City prevails in court and expe ditiously closes the Airport per the subject City
Council Resolution. The proposed permit system provi des an important step toward greater local
control over the property av iation users now occupy.
6. Create a City of Santa Monica Fixed Based Operation. If the City is required to operate the airport and
if FBO services are required, the City would have greater local control by estab lishing a municipal FBO.
The two private FBO providers should be eliminated as soon as City staff is r eady to assume the duties,
which should in no case be later than December 31, 2016.
7. Elimination of leaded fuel. The sale of leaded fuel should be phased out completely, as soon as
legally possible, even before the City could begi n operation of a municipal FBO. There is a viable
alternative fuel that could service an estimated 65 percent of the prope ller aircraft fleet based at SMO.
8. Enhanced Security. The FOSP Board urges the City to ensure that wh atever contract is signed with a
private airport security firm, that the City retain maximum local contro l over security operations and that
those operations be conducted in a manner that aligns completely with all local concer ns, including but
not limited to ensuring that SMO is not used to transport contraband or illegal persons at any time or by
272
any user of the SMO facilities, incl uding but not limited to clients of the privately run FBOs, so long as
those FBOs are operating at SMO.
The ongoing negative health effects of air and noise po llution, not to mention safety concerns, created by
ongoing airport operations, dictate that the optimal publ ic policy goal of the City should be to close the
airport and repurpose the area to maximize park, open space, and cultural facilities. All of these goals
can be addressed by adopting the proposed resolution, which the FOSP Board supports.
273
Esterlina Lugo
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 9:24 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: SMO ---- Airport Resolution
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
From: LSAPC@aol.com [mailto:LSAPC@aol.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2016 2:34 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; councilmtgitems <councilmtgitems@SMGOV.NET>; Clerk Mailbox
<Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; Rick Cole <Rick.Cole@SMGOV.NET>; Nelson Hernandez
<Nelson.Hernandez@SMGOV.NET>; Tony Vazquez <Tony.Vazquez@SMGOV.NET>; Gleam Davis
<Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET>; Sue Himmelrich <Sue.Himmelrich@SMGOV.NET>; Kevin McKeown Fwd
<kevin@mckeown.net>; Pam OConnor <Pam.OConnor@SMGOV.NET>; Terry O’Day <Terry.Oday@smgov.net>; Ted
Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: lsapc@aol.com
Subject: SMO ‐‐‐‐ Airport Resolution
We thank the City Council and City Sta ff, in particular City Manager Rick Cole and Senior Adviser to the City
Manager on Airport Affairs Nelson Hernandez, for movi ng these items forward and for continuing to make
progress.
We support agenda item 11.A. In particular, we urge the City Council to direct the City Manager to proceed
with all due haste with resp ect to the following actions:
1. Commence the park planning process, including conduc ting an environmental analysis as required by
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Protection Act
(NEPA). – As noted in the staff report, the FOSP Bo ard agrees that the time to commence planning and
environmental analysis of the conversion of the airport to a park is now.
2. Investigate whether certain fractional jet opera tors are impermissibly operating as scheduled
airlines. Newspaper and other advertisements circulat ed to the general public are increasingly supporting
the impression that this is, in fact, the case. As th e staff report has noted, bot h the FAA and the City of
Santa Monica prohibit scheduled air line operations out of SMO. Fractio nal jet operators who operate at
SMO should be required to provide the City with su fficient documentation and records to establish that
their operations do not amount to surreptitious scheduled service.
274
3. Submit an application to FAA, which would alter the Airport r unway by removing the 1949 Quit Claim
Parcel, also known as the “Western Parcel,” from aviation use. The FOSP Board agrees that, given the
pending legal action, and in order to place the City of Santa Monica in a pos ition to capitalize on its
upcoming legal victories, it makes sense to now file the application to close the Western Parcel to
aviation, as part of the City’s appeal of the grant assurance.
4. Cease forbearance of lax enfor cement of the Santa Monica Airport noise ordinance, and apply
enforcement as written. As noted, the City’s enfor cement practice of its noise ordinance pre-dates the
advent of popular fractional ownershi p and jets-on-demand services at the airport and thus is outdated
and overly lax. Enforcement should be adjust ed to reflect current airport operations.
5. Transition aircraft hangar uses from lease agreements to permits. A permit system is a reasonable
accommodation until the City prevails in court and expe ditiously closes the Airport per the subject City
Council Resolution. The proposed permit system provi des an important step toward greater local
control over the property av iation users now occupy.
6. Create a City of Santa Monica Fixed Based Operation. If the City is required to operate the airport and
if FBO services are required, the City would have greater local control by estab lishing a municipal FBO.
The two private FBO providers should be eliminated as soon as City staff is r eady to assume the duties,
which should in no case be later than December 31, 2016.
7. Elimination of leaded fuel. The sale of leaded fuel should be phased out completely, as soon as
legally possible, even before the City could begi n operation of a municipal FBO. There is a viable
alternative fuel that could service an estimated 65 percent of the prope ller aircraft fleet based at SMO.
8. Enhanced Security. The FOSP Board urges the City to ensure that wh atever contract is signed with a
private airport security firm, that the City retain maximum local contro l over security operations and that
those operations be conducted in a manner that aligns completely with all local concer ns, including but
not limited to ensuring that SMO is not used to transport contraband or illegal persons at any time or by
any user of the SMO facilities, incl uding but not limited to clients of the privately run FBOs, so long as
those FBOs are operating at SMO.
The ongoing negative health effects of air and noise po llution, not to mention safety concerns, created by
ongoing airport operations, dictate that the optimal publ ic policy goal of the City should be to close the
airport and repurpose the area to maximize park, open space, and cultural facilities. All of these goals
can be addressed by adopting the proposed resolution, which we support.
Thank you.
Louis Ssutu
Deanna Ssutu
Residents of Sunset Park
275
Esterlina Lugo
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 9:29 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Item 11.A
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 11:41 AM
To: Tony Vazquez <Tony.Vazquez@SMGOV.NET>; Ted Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>; Pam OConnor
<Pam.OConnor@SMGOV.NET>; Sue Himmelrich <Sue.Himmelrich@SMGOV.NET>; Gleam Davis
<Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET>; Terry O’Day <Terry.Oday@smgov.net>; Kevin McKeown Fwd <kevin@mckeown.net>
Cc: councilmtgitems <councilmtgitems@SMGOV.NET>; Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: FW: Item 11.A
Council ‐
Please see the email below re: SMO agenda item.
Stephanie
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Eddy Winston [mailto:winstonfarms@att.net]
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 11:10 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Item 11.A
Dear Santa Monica City Council Members,
My neighbors and I support item 11.A and all the staff recommendations to close Santa Monica Airport, begin planning
for a park and support the city manager's actions to implement this policy.
Respectfully,
Edmond Winston
2015 Oak St.
Santa Monica, 90405
Sent from my iPhone
276
Esterlina Lugo
From:Faustino Garza <faustino_garza@msn.com>
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 9:29 AM
To:Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems; Clerk Mailb ox; Rick Cole; Nelson Hernandez; Tony
Vazquez; Gleam Davis; Sue Himmelrich; Kevin McKeown Fwd; Pam OConnor; Terry
O’Day; Ted Winterer
Subject:SMO Resolution
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
August 23, 2016
Members of Santa Monica City Council
City Manager Rick Cole
Re: Airport Closure Resolution
Dear Sirs/Madams:
I have been a homeowner and resident of Santa Monica for the past 29 year s. I and my family are opposed to
closing our airport.
We believe that SMO is a valuable asset for our city, providing a speci al service to our community while
generating important income for our c ity. The proposal to close it reminds us of the very bad idea of several
decades ago, to remove rail tracks and right-of-ways in Los Angeles. The airport is rich in history and we
residents should be proud to have it.
We further believe that the reasons given for closing th e airport (noise, safety, pollution), are specious at best
and could be used just the same to close the Interstate 10 Freeway or any of our overloaded neighborhood
streets. We believe that the proposal to close SM O comes from those residents who are going to personally
benefit from its closure.
We believe that a large number of our neighbor s and fellow residents sh are our sentiments.
Yet I understand that all of you are unite d in your resolve to close our airp ort. Who then on the Council is
representing our interests in this matter? We claim to be a city that prides itself on diversity and fairness for
all, yet seem to be run by a Council that closes out those with concerns that it does not share.
And you plan to replace the airport with parks? To be used by whom? Loca ted on the far southern edge of our
city limits, these parks would hardly be convenient to the majority of our re sidents. I’m sure the residents of
Mar Vista will be thrilled to have them.
Before you go off with your plans to close SMO, you owe us taxpaying residents a clear plan on how you are
going to replace the $7-$8 million in revenues that is generated from its operation. Not to mention the
important indirect employment and tax benefits that SMO brings to our general community.
Any Council member who owns a home a nd/or lives in the neighborhood of th e airport will personally benefit
from its closure and thus should recuse himsel f or herself from any actions on this matter.
277
Faustino Garza
Sunset Park Resi dent of 29 years
278
Esterlina Lugo
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 9:30 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: In Support of the Santa Monica Airport
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 11:42 AM
To: Pam OConnor <Pam.OConnor@SMGOV.NET>; Tony Vazquez <Tony.Vazquez@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: councilmtgitems <councilmtgitems@SMGOV.NET>; Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: FW: In Support of the Santa Monica Airport
Council ‐
Please see the email below re: SMO agenda item.
Stephanie
From: lpriestley180@gmail.com [mailto:lpriestley180@gmail.com ] On Behalf Of Lisa Priestley
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 11:02 AM
To: Gleam Davis <Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET >; Ted Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET >; Terry O’Day
<Terry.Oday@smgov.net >; Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET >; pam.oconner@smgov.net ; Sue
Himmelrich <Sue.Himmelrich@SMGOV.NET >; tony.vazques@smgov.net ; Kevin McKeown Fwd <kevin@mckeown.net >
Subject: In Support of the Santa Monica Airport
Dear Councilmen/women:
As a resident of Sunset Park I am being bombarded w ith paper mailings trying to sw ay me into believing that
the SM Airport should be closed and that I should contact my councilmembers. So I am doing just that - BUT
not in an attempt to close the airport rather to STRONG LY express my support of the Airport. I have been a
Sunset Park resident for over 30 year s. In my opinion those trying to ge t out of contractual obligations are
wasting my tax payer dollars , those residents who moved into this ne ighborhood and now want the Airport gone
- should have considered that befo re buying here. The Airport brings jobs, and frankly has the lowest
concentration of people and cars (i.e. tra ffic) for the area. Please don't try to sell me on the "park" idea - I've
already seen what happens in our City - developers win, there will be more hotels, more shops, more cars, more
cars, more cars. This is already evident by what ha s happened at Bergamot Station - the SM Museum has
moved out of Santa Monica!!!
So when counting your constituents wishes please count this as vote to SAVE the SM AIRPORT.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth Priestley
279
Esterlina Lugo
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 9:31 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Reelections
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 11:42 AM
To: Tony Vazquez <Tony.Vazquez@SMGOV.NET>; Ted Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>; Pam OConnor
<Pam.OConnor@SMGOV.NET>; Sue Himmelrich <Sue.Himmelrich@SMGOV.NET>; Gleam Davis
<Gleam.Davis@SMGOV.NET>; Terry O’Day <Terry.Oday@smgov.net>; Kevin McKeown Fwd <kevin@mckeown.net>
Cc: councilmtgitems <councilmtgitems@SMGOV.NET>; Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: FW: Reelections
Council ‐
Please see the email below re: SMO agenda item.
Stephanie
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Maureen Antonio [mailto:mcantonio@antoniodesign.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2016 8:50 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Reelections
To the Santa Monica City Council,
This coming election, the Santa Monica City Council Members who by their actions have shown they are No Airport/Slow
Growth will get my vote.
Sincerely,
Maureen Antonio
mcantonio@antoniodesign.com
310.739.0413
Resident of Sunset Park
280
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 9:40 AM
To:Tony Vazquez; Ted Winterer; Pam OConnor; Sue Himmelrich; Gleam Davis; Terry O’Day;
Kevin McKeown Fwd
Cc:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: SM Airport Closure/ Item 11-A 8-23-16
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
Council ‐
Please see the below email re: SMO agenda item.
Thanks,
Stephanie
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: shaybebo@aol.com [mailto:shaybebo@aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 9:00 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Mike Bonin ‐ Los Angeles Councilmember District 11 <mike.bonin@lacity.org>; Lisa Pinto (District Director for
Congressman Ted Lieu, 33rd District) <lisa.pinto@mail.house.gov>; maral@mail.house.gov; Rick Cole
<Rick.Cole@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: SM Airport Closure/ Item 11 ‐A 8 ‐23 ‐16
I hate the jets.
I hate the noise
I hate the smell
I hate the unfairness of a few spoiling life for many because they have the money.
Please make it stop.
Thanks,
Elin Katz
310 ‐801 ‐4429
3017 Dahlgren Avenue
Los Angeles CA 90066
8/23/2016
281
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 10:44 AM
To:Tony Vazquez; Ted Winterer; Pam OConnor; Sue Himmelrich; Gleam Davis; Terry O’Day;
Kevin McKeown Fwd
Cc:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Aug 23 item 11.A
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
Council ‐
Please see the email below re: SMO agenda item.
Thanks,
Stephanie
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: SUZANNE ESCOFFIER [mailto:escoffiers@mac.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 10:27 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Aug 23 item 11.A
Dear council members:
I am a resident of Ocean Park, supporter of Airport2Park, and frequent user of Clover Park.
I strongly support ITEM 11.A and ALL the Staff Recommendations to close SMO as soon as legally allowed.
I support beginning the planning for a park as soon as possible with the community. And I support the City Manger's
actions to implement this policy.
Regards,
Suzanne Escoffier
Raymond Avenue
(310) 795 ‐7766
282
Esterlina Lugo
From:Sylvia Rath <sylvia@lvns.org>
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 11:13 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Close Santa Monica Airport and stop Jets now!
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
The jet traffic has increased turning SMO into a commer cial loud polluting airport. The jets rumble over our
house even as late at 10:30 at night. Our son has cancer and the air quality is getting worse. Please shut down
the fueling station by ending the lease and close as much down as the city can. Invest money to fight the FDA.
Between LAX and SMO there is always airplane noise causing both stress and illn ess to local residents.
Sylvia Rath
--
www.lvns.org
289
Esterlina Lugo
From:Thane Roberts <robertsthane@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 11:39 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Item 11a: SMO Closure
Dear Council Members:
I support the position of the FOSP that the airport be closed as soon as is practical based on the
overwhelming support of the LC measure in the recent election.
Specifically, I would has that you do the following as soon as possible:
1. Commence the park planning process, in cluding conducting an environmental anal ysis as required by the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
2. Investigate whether certain fractio nal jet operators are impermissibly operating as scheduled airlines.
3. Submit an application to FAA, which would alter the Airport runway by removing the 1949 Quit Claim Parcel from aviation use.
4. Cease forbearance of lax enforcement of the Santa Monica Ai rport noise ordinance, and ap ply enforcement as written.
5. Transition aircraft hangar uses from lease agreements to permits.
6. Create a City of Santa Monica Fixed Based Operation.
7. Elimination of leaded fuel sales.
8. Enhance Airport Security.
The ongoing negative health effects of air and noise pollution, not to mention safety concerns, created by ongoing
airport operations, dictate that the optimal public policy goal of the City should be to close the airport and repurpose
the area to maximize park, open space, and cultural facilities. All of these goals can be addressed by adopting the
proposed resolution, which the FOSP Board supports.
Sincerely,
Thane Roberts AIA
50 ‐year Santa Monica Resident
1
Esterlina Lugo
From:agave8@yahoo.com
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 12:00 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:ITEM 11A Airport
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
Categories:Red Category
Dear Council
We ask that you support and protect the residents from the air and noise pollution at Santa Monica Airport and Close
the airport ASAP.
Our health is in danger!
Both Mentally and physically.
We ask for a green open space park to replace the airport, and to serve to protect and serve the majority of residents.
In this so called sustainable green city!
No smoking, no lawn blowers,
No JETS!
Thank you
Ken
2
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 1:09 PM
To:Tony Vazquez; Ted Winterer; Pam OConnor; Sue Himmelrich; Gleam Davis; Terry O’Day;
Kevin McKeown Fwd
Cc:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 11A for Aug 23 Meeting--250+ Signature Petition
Attachments:Petition with 250+ signatur es to Close Airport.pdf
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
Council ‐
Please see the below email re: SMO agenda item.
Thanks,
Stephanie
From: Bob Rigdon [mailto:bobrigdon@roadrunner.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 12:51 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Agenda Item 11A for Aug 23 Meeting ‐‐250+ Signature Petition
To the City Council:
Attached is a letter with signatures from over 250 community residents and
representatives strongly urging the counc il to pass Agenda Item 11A on tonight’s
calendar, recommending strong and immediate action to close the airport and to evict
Atlantic Aviation and American Flyers.
Bob Rigdon
Santa Monica Resident
2 5 0+
Authors and signatories of the attached community letter
r espectfully request you take the following actions:
1. Give Notice to Vacate to all FBOs at the Airport, including Atlantic Aviation
and American Flyers, before September 1, 2016 .
2. Authorize the City to assert its “proprietary exclusive right” and provide
minimal levels of service while continuing to evaluate and periodical ly
adjust service levels until Airport closure is legally cleared.
3. Rent or buy equipment and employ staff that may be required to operate
fuel services and to park aircraft.
1 of 3
Residents of Santa Monica,
West Los Angeles, Venice, and Mar Vista
August 8 , 2016
Santa Monica City Council
1685 Main Street, Room 209
Santa Monica, California 90401
E -mail: council@smgov.net
RE: The Community’s Request for Interim Actions Prior to Closure of Santa Monica Airport
Dear Santa Monica Mayor and City Council Members:
We t hank you for your efforts to c lose Santa Monica Airport. While the closure process proceeds, g aining
“l ocal c ontrol” of the Airport is one of the 5 Strategic Priorities of the City . Today, multiple fixed base
operators (FBOs) provid e aeronautical services and have significant control of the Airport. These FBO
operations include fueling and maintenance, as well as many extra services , such as limousine service, aircraft
washing, baggage handling, catering, concierge services, rental cars, and hotel arrangements.
B eginning July 2015, these FBO s have had no right to continued leases at the Airport. T heir leases are
expired, but they remain at the Airport and continue to perpetuate harmful impacts on the community.
T here are no agreements, laws, or r egulations that prohibit the City from evictin g the FBOs . In fact, the 1984
Settlement Agreement that obligated the City to “provide sufficient space for the location and operation of 3
full service fixed base operators” expired on July 1, 2015. Furthermore, the FAA Director’s Determination
dated November 22, 2000 which was affirmed by the FAA Final Decision dated February 2, 2003 confirmed (a)
that FBO leases were not 30 -year leases , but were actually 29 -year leases timed to e xpire on July 1, 2015, (b)
that it wo uld be unreasonable for the City to be required to enter into FBO lease agreement s beyond July 1,
2015 , and (c) that beyond July 1, 2015 , the Airport is “a local land use matter”.
T he City , as the owner and proprietor of the Airport, should legally and immediately remove the FBO s and
assert the City’s “proprietary exclusive right” to be the on ly exclusive service provider at the Airport . As the
sole service provider, the City would achieve de facto “local control ” of these Airport services and be able to
directly manage them in line with the interests of the local community.
The Proprietary Exclusive Right
Th e FAA Airport Compliance Manual, which provides guidance on an airport sponsor’s commitments when
they accept federal grants , explains the Proprietary Exclusive Right as follows :
“The owner of a public -use airport (public or private owner) may elect to provide any or all of the
aeronautical services needed by the public at the airport. In fact, the statutory prohibition against
exclusive rig hts does not apply to these owners. However, while they may exercise the exclusive right to
provide aeronautical services, they may not grant or convey this exclusive right to another party. The
2 of 3
airport sponsor that elects to engage in a proprietary exclus ive must use its own employees and
resources to carry out its venture . An independent commercial enterprise that has been designated as
an agent of the airport sponsor may not exercise nor be granted such an exclusive right.”
“Aircraft fueling is a prime example of an aeronautical service an airport sponsor may choose to
provide itself. While the airport sponsor may exercise its proprietary exclusive to provide fueling
services, aircraft owners may still assert the right to obtain their own fuel and bring it onto the airport
to service their own aircraft, but only with their own employees and equipment and in conformance
with reasonable airport rules, regulations, and minimum standards.”
E ven if we assume the 1994 grant commitments extend to 2023 (which is actively being disputed), the
“p roprietary e xclusive r ight ” is still in complete compliance with all obligations of the City .
We strongly but respectfully request you take the following actions:
1. Give N otice to Vacate to all FBOs at the Airport , including Atlantic Aviation and American Flyers , before
September 1, 2016.
2. Authorize the City to assert its “proprietary exclusive right” and provide minimal levels of service while
continuing to evaluate and per iodically adjust service levels until Airport closure is legally cleared .
3. Rent or buy equipment and employ staff that may be required to operate fue l services and to park
air craft .
These steps are the most direct path to help the City achieve its Strategic Priority of local control at the
A irport. Meanwhile, the remaining legal issues with the FAA related to the 1994 Grant and the 1948
Instrument of Transfer should continue to be aggressively pursued.
Santa Monica is a n extremely capable city that maintains and operates many services efficiently and
effectively , including fire, police, Big Blue Bus, waste collection, recycling, cemet e ry, CityTV, and parks and
recreation. With the addition of FBO services we can also safely operat e the A irport with the local control
necessary to reduce the Airport’s impact on our surrounding communities.
Sincerely,
Residents and Representatives of the
Santa Monica, West Los Angeles, Venice, and Mar Vista Communities
Additional Signatories
The people below endorse the letter to the Santa Monica City Council from the Residents of
Santa Monica, West Los Angeles, Venice, and Mar Vista dated August 8, 2016 regarding the
Community’s Request for Interim Actions Prior to Closure of Santa Monica Airport. Signatures
were optional and are on file.
• 8/20/2016 3:01 // Noah Bardach
• 8/20/2016 3:03 // Joanne Curtis
• 8/20/2016 3:05 // Igor Meglic
• 8/20/2016 3:09 // Phil Brock
• 8/20/2016 3:15 // Eric Weingarten // "City Council, The time to stand up to the FAA and
continue the phase out of SMO as an aviation hub is NOW! I am a resident of L.A. (90066). I
live on Dewey St., one block south of the Airport. I am dismayed that the jet flights have
increased 10% since July of 2015, the date the City took control of the Airport. I can hear
and smell the increase in jet flights. I cannot imagine that noise levels conform to law.
There seems to be an utter disregard for health issues by the aviation interests. Since 1987,
when I bought my home, there have been numerous fatal crashes. I personally have
witnessed 5 crashes occur. It is only by God's grace that no one on the ground has yet to be
killed. While, I was well aware of the mitigating circumstances surrounding SMO when I
bough t my home, the fact is jet flights have increased, toxic fuel pollution has increased,
noise levels have increased, population has increased and despite LC, and the new leasing
policy, Atlantic Aviation sill operates and refuses to vacate. Many residents fear that if we
shut down SMO, massive development will occur and traffic congestion will increase
beyond the intolerable levels currently on 23rd St. and on Bundy. Most are totally unaware
that commercial and residential development on the Airport site i s prohibited and
unlawful. Others fear the laws will change to accommodate mass development once the
Airport ceases to operate. City Council, you have talked the talk. Now it is definitely time to
walk the walk!! Thank you for your consideration and w e hope you will represent the
concerns & well -being of both Santa Monica and Los Angeles residents regarding safety,
health, noise and fuel pollution concerns. Sincerely, Eric and Helane Weingarten 13209
Dewey St., L.A., CA 90066 "
• 8/20/2016 3:22 // Emi O nishi
• 8/20/2016 3:25 // Andrea Maitra
• 8/20/2016 3:28 // Grady Hall // Strongly opposed to airport, which is outdated, serves only
a tiny fraction of the community, and is dangerous to surrounding neighborhoods. Would
love to see the airport transformed in to the westside's best park -- something would help to
make Santa Monica even better for the long term.
• 8/20/2016 3:33 // Dee Forrest // I strongly oppose the jet traffic, pollution and noise that is
impacting the westside.
• 8/20/2016 4:13 // Kerry Candaele
• 8/20/2016 4:25 // Gary Glickman // Our lives are deeply afflicted by conning airport traffic.
We can hardly prosper in our own homes, needing to stop all conversation every two
minutes because of airport noise. Our health is deeply affected by the deep b lack smear of
jet fuel on our windmills, our furniture, and all our plants, including our garden. This is not a
humane way to care for a community.
• 8/20/2016 5:14 // Rick Reiss
• 8/20/2016 5:18 // Gavin Scott // A special note to the staff to thank them for their hard
work and initiative. We are lucky to have Rick Cole and Nelson Hernandez working with our
councilors.
• 8/20/2016 5:41 // Brad Segal // Please take control. This is beyond unacceptable! Thank
you.
• 8/20/2016 5:57 // Jennifer McCaffrey
• 8/20/2016 7:19 // Joan Wilder
• 8/20/2016 8:07 // Alison St.Onge // Please, for the safety, health and pollution of our
neighborhoods. Thank you.
• 8/20/2016 8:09 // Bill Nuttle
• 8/20/2016 8:15 // Ursula Fox
• 8/20/2016 8:33 // Loree Bryer
• 8/20/2016 8:36 // Tin a Ogata
• 8/20/2016 9:07 // Jerry Rubin
• 8/20/2016 9:07 // Paola Levenson // "The time is now! No more JETS! Always & forever!!!
Please do what you know the community wants. Thanks!"
• 8/20/2016 9:09 // Penny Jennings // This must happen!
• 8/20/2016 9:10 // Virginia Mastroianni // "I own a house at 13203 Dewey Street. I have
lived there with my autistic son for over 16 years. THE JETS ARE BIGGER, LOUDER, AND THE
FUMES ARE MORE NOXIOUS. I have witnessed plane crashes on the runway behind my
house. Everyda y I pray that the plane doesn't land in my backyard and kill my family. And I
am talking G7's -HUGE JETS FLOWN BY FAT CATS WHO COULD EASLY AFFORD TO BUILD A
RUNWAY AWAY FROM RESIDENTIAL AREAS. We want our neighborhood back. We want to
be able to BREATHE C LEAN AIR. PLEASE CONSIDER OUR FAMILIES HEALTH AND RESPECT
OUR REQUEST. VIRGINIA MASTROIANNI 13203 DEWEY STREET LOS ANGELES, CA 90066"
• 8/20/2016 9:11 // Anita Byrd
• 8/20/2016 9:13 // Charles Fox // We live directly across the street and have witnessed the
d egradation of our air and sound quality over decades. Unfortunately we cannot measure
the health costs . . . except both of us contracted cancer a decade ago.
• 8/20/2016 9:18 // Mark Zurbuchen PhD
• 8/20/2016 9:19 // Jeff Silberman
• 8/20/2016 9:51 // Tom Knech tel
• 8/20/2016 9:52 // Peter Altschuler
• 8/20/2016 10:03 // Mutsuko Erskine // Tried to also send email to Council@smgov.net but
didn't go through.
• 8/20/2016 10:08 // kristine Sorensen
• 8/20/2016 10:20 // Jill Rosen // NOW
• 8/20/2016 10:21 // Andrea Milam // My 3 year old twin daughters play at Cloverfield park
and we have been overwhelmed by jet exhaust at take off as they played on the slides. I'm
afraid for their safety.
• 8/20/2016 10:23 // Lealani Ranch
• 8/20/2016 10:26 // Mark Logan
• 8/20/2016 10:26 // Joline Jung // "I would love to drop off to someone they lemons off of
our tree that are covered in black gunk from airplanes. Our lemons must be scrubbed
before use. So much for organic??? We have lived in our Venice home for 52 years. These
fly ov ers are terrible. We can just imagine what we are breathing in. The airplanes should
be flying over Santa Monica as that is their home."
• 8/20/2016 10:28 // Susan Bresnan // Please consider that the proven respiratory ailments,
like asthma, that our chil dren are getting due to the airport air pollution, can easily be
prevented by voting to close the airport and let us all breathe fresh air, thanks to the ocean.
• 8/20/2016 10:33 // suzanne joffe
• 8/20/2016 10:37 // William Guston
• 8/20/2016 10:48 // Olivia K elly
• 8/20/2016 10:49 // Emily Van Horn
• 8/20/2016 10:52 // Laura Kaiser
• 8/20/2016 10:53 // charles rollins
• 8/20/2016 10:54 // Sandra Wise
• 8/20/2016 10:57 // Suanne Ware -Diaz
• 8/20/2016 11:01 // Lauren Wallenstein
• 8/20/2016 11:01 // Andrew Wallenstein
• 8/20/2016 11:02 // Inge Mueller // It's way overdue!
• 8/20/2016 11:02 // LaWeen Salvo // "I just read (and perused the charts of) the entire 20 -
page staff report regarding the closure of Santa Monica Airport (Agenda Item 11 -A, I
believe). In addition to su pporting this petition calling for a Notice to Vacate for all FBO's, I
urge you to look into the possibility of significantly raising fines for noise violations, which,
according to your chart, are on the increase. A hefty increase in fines may act as a d eterrent
to pilots/aviation interests who seem undeterred by the current fines. Thank you for your
continued efforts to resolve the airport issue in a manner that reflects the best interests of
Santa Monica residents. Sincerely, LaWeen Salvo"
• 8/20/2016 11:15 // Robert Brown // ENOUGH!!!
• 8/20/2016 11:18 // Dennis Wilder, Ph.D. // My son lives near the airport and we cannot
talk on the phone being interrupted constantly by the overwhelming roar of jet noise. I am
also concerned about their effect on air qual ity and his health.
• 8/20/2016 11:19 // M Kent Sayama
• 8/20/2016 11:30 // Larry Miceli // 2128 Marine street. 30 year resident DIRECTLY at the
west end of the runway.
• 8/20/2016 11:30 // donna pociecha
• 8/20/2016 11:33 // socorro gallegos
• 8/20/2016 11:39 // Annie sabroux
• 8/20/2016 11:40 // Lucas Rogers
• 8/20/2016 11:44 // Maureen Antonio // This coming election, the Santa Monica Council
Members who by their actions have shown they are No Airport/Slow Growth will get my
vote.
• 8/20/2016 11:48 // Marylou Hanna
• 8/20/2016 11:55 // Anne Yee
• 8/20/2016 11:57 // Alice Ellis
• 8/20/2016 12:01 // MARK PALLATT
• 8/20/2016 12:19 // grace gabe
• 8/20/2016 12:20 // Joy Abbott // We're 32 years in Sunset Park and waiting - please close
these operators that negatively impact our h ealth.
• 8/20/2016 12:23 // katherine newmark // We have been waiting since 1987!!!!! Please
stop the jets!!!
• 8/20/2016 12:24 // Om Kailas // Let's protect Santa Monica and Venice from onerous air
traffic overflight by closing the airport today.
• 8/20/2016 12:28 // Stephen Manes
• 8/20/2016 12:30 // David Ginsburg
• 8/20/2016 12:33 // Robert J Newmark // Ready for the airport to close!!!!!! Noise, pollution
et al!
• 8/20/2016 12:35 // Richard Levine
• 8/20/2016 12:38 // Richard Calabro // "Dear City Council, We u nderstand that you know
that the FAA is negligent on a laundry list of EPA laws as well as the Federal Noise Control
Act. Who knows how much SMO has contributed to cancer and other health related issues
to our community over the last 80 years, but it's yo ur time to reverse the tide. Please
continue to put pressure and shut down this World War II relic for the health of our
community. 6 Simple Reasons to Shut Down this Healthcare Disaster -Site #1 - Los Angeles
SMOG Worst Since 2009 - Please read the LA Time s article published on August 5th. #2 -
LAX Expansion Almost Completed and is 6 Miles Down the Road. It will also include a new
$3 million private LAX lounge/terminal expansion for the VIPs. #3 - Hawthorne Airport is
Expanding for Private Jets 12 Miles Do wn the Road - Daily Breeze Article dated December
12, 2015, http://www.dailybreeze.com/business/20151212/business -at -hawthorne -
municipal -airport -finally -takes -flight #4 - Van Nuys Airport Is Expanding for Private Jets Less
Than 16 Miles Up the Road #5 - As of last month, the City Ontario finally gets their airport
back to expand and relieve the so -called LAX congestion. #6 - The FAA keeps rolling the dice
with children's lives. Our schools are crop sprayed daily with pollutants which include
planes flying as close as 425 feet from John Muir Middle School (Event took place on July 11,
2015, 7:11 AM) There is absolutely no need for this World War II relic to exist."
• 8/20/2016 12:55 // Paul Goldman
• 8/20/2016 12:55 // Michelle Krupkin
• 8/20/2016 13:20 // Priscilla Levine
• 8/20/2016 13:22 // Jake Avnet
• 8/20/2016 13:22 // Monica Williams
• 8/20/2016 13:23 // Stephan Hewitt
• 8/20/2016 13:26 // Jonny Pray
• 8/20/2016 13:28 // Eileen Tunick // I have been a homeowner near the airport for the past
37 years. Why is it taking the city so long to close the airport since the passage of Prop. LC?
• 8/20/2016 13:28 // Jan Simonovic
• 8/20/2016 13:32 // Nick Kazan
• 8/20/2016 13:34 // Jodi Shannahan // The n umber of jets taking off every day is increasing
and devastating the tranquility and air quality of our envirinment. It starts early in the
morning and into the evening. Please, close down SMO in the interest of sanity. We know
that unless we do, the numbe r of jets will increase and our quality of life severely decrease.
• 8/20/2016 13:34 // Randall Klarin // I am directly under the flight path and it is LOUD
• 8/20/2016 13:37 // Jason McClaren // Secondarily to the above, we would at the very least
like to see the jets removed from the airport. The level of noise is extreme as is the smell of
jet fuel in the neighborhood.
• 8/20/2016 13:42 // Jim Shannahan
• 8/20/2016 13:51 // Anne Yee // Homeowner in Santa Monica.
• 8/20/2016 13:52 // Karen Blechman
• 8/20/2016 14 :10 // haRa Beck
• 8/20/2016 14:11 // Judith Diana Winston // "We are asking the City to evict the aviation
service providers right away, as their leases expired in July 2015, and they facilitate the
noise, danger and pollution we live with daily. Accordin g to FAA rules the city can provide
basic services on their own. This gives us immediate local control over fuel sales and
services until we are comfortable to take additional measures to reduce air traffic and close
the airport. Taking over the services at SMO now is a big step in the right direction to
reducing jet traffic and it's impacts upon the surrounding communities. Thank you!!!"
• 8/20/2016 14:19 // hal lindes
• 8/20/2016 14:19 // Peter Donald
• 8/20/2016 14:25 // Mia Levenson
• 8/20/2016 14:25 // Andrea Lieberman // The planeshave been waking my husband up at
5:00 a.m. since we have lived here. The fumes from jets apparently idling for take off are
pronounced often between 5 p.m. and 6:30 or so when our walking Mar Vista
neighborhood is out and ab out.
• 8/20/2016 14:26 // Ricarda Ankenbrand -Lindes // It is time to close the Santa Monica
Airport!
• 8/20/2016 14:28 // Sharon Ryan
• 8/20/2016 14:28 // Max Levenson
• 8/20/2016 14:30 // Sam Levenson
• 8/20/2016 14:32 // Justine Lowe
• 8/20/2016 14:32 // Diana Tra n
• 8/20/2016 14:42 // Jordan Ellis
• 8/20/2016 14:45 // David Clennon
• 8/20/2016 14:53 // Vanessa Ballesteros
• 8/20/2016 14:56 // David Gyepes
• 8/20/2016 15:03 // Matt Kozlov
• 8/20/2016 15:08 // stephen unger // Stop dragging your feet and respond to the will of the
people of Santa Monica who you are supposed to represent! Stephen Unger, homeowner,
taxpayer and voter
• 8/20/2016 15:12 // Kathy Wang
• 8/20/2016 15:13 // George Young
• 8/20/2016 15:19 // Alan Kerner
• 8/20/2016 15:20 // louis ssutu
• 8/20/2016 15:21 // Dean na Ssutu
• 8/20/2016 15:21 // Laura Ssutu
• 8/20/2016 15:30 // Margaret Turner
• 8/20/2016 15:36 // Lawrence Arnstein
• 8/20/2016 15:41 // Gabriella Bring
• 8/20/2016 15:44 // Jason McClaren // "We live next door to SM airport. What authorities
fail to understand is that before a jet takes off, they warm up their engines for about an
hour. The jets also tax for a while before they are cleared to take off. The amount of jet fuel
and noise pollution that happens 1 hour before they are allowed to take off is immense a nd
extremely stressful. This whole area smells like jet fuel which is detrimental to our health
and the health of our kids. Thank you for your time"
• 8/20/2016 15:51 // Sharon Rogers // "I have lived on 28th St. and Ocean Park since 1972.
The noise and sme ll of airplane exhaust has increased recently. Even late at night I hear jets
landing. Please fix this."
• 8/20/2016 15:53 // Robert Maschio
• 8/20/2016 15:53 // Betsy Katz
• 8/20/2016 16:03 // David Blackman
• 8/20/2016 16:04 // Paul McCloskey III
• 8/20/2016 16:0 8 // Susan Hartley
• 8/20/2016 16:19 // Mindy Taylor -Ross // Please close the airport now. Regardless of the
FAA, they will never let it go. Make a move to protect your community and neighboring
communities.
• 8/20/2016 16:35 // Bill Hooper // Yes, let's greatly improve the health of residents of the
city by closing the airport - to cut down on noise and jet exhaust. Thank you!
• 8/20/2016 16:53 // Luis Diaz
• 8/20/2016 17:00 // Gina Maslow // I live in Venice, directly over the western flight path.
• 8/20/2 016 17:17 // Barbara Jean
• 8/20/2016 17:18 // Paul Kuzniar
• 8/20/2016 17:47 // Michael Kerekes
• 8/20/2016 18:06 // Mark Schwartz
• 8/20/2016 18:11 // Ashley Dyer
• 8/20/2016 18:11 // Rahm Tamir
• 8/20/2016 18:33 // Maureen Bradford // Please do something about the jets. They are
unbearable!
• 8/20/2016 18:58 // Mark Gorman
• 8/20/2016 19:40 // Marta Vago
• 8/20/2016 19:49 // Steve Binder
• 8/20/2016 20:03 // Gina Binder
• 8/20/2016 20:14 // Amy Shouse
• 8/20/2016 20:25 // Tom Tran
• 8/20/2016 20:28 // Christine Ly
• 8/20/2016 20:48 // Alexis Koren // Please stop poisoning us!
• 8/20/2016 21:09 // BONNIE JOHNSTONE
• 8/20/2016 21:35 // Nancy J Owens
• 8/20/2016 21:51 // Jeffrey Treves
• 8/20/2016 22:31 // Valentine Marvel
• 8/20/2016 23:00 // Caroline Payne // Over the years of it's oper ation, the Santa Monica
Airport has greatly increased it's negative impact upon the health and well being of the
people in the surrounding communities.
• 8/20/2016 23:23 // Saku Ee
• 8/21/2016 0:14 // Roberta B. Gillerman // "Thank you Coucil Members for prote cting the air
from exhaust, and also the skies above 2 schools, Richland elementary, and Webster Middle
School. Our health and welfare depend upon you and your vote!"
• 8/21/2016 0:27 // David BattinThe // The airport only serves a privileged few at the expe nse
of many residences. There is no place in our community for such an inconvenience. Not
only do we tolerate the constant noise of aircraft engines that interrupt an otherwise
guietafternoon or evening, we must endure residue of spent fuel that pollute s the air we
breath but is also harmful to any plant life. It also covers our homes and requires.additional
up keep. Finall this airport serves no real benefit to the community. It is a burden and
should be closed as soon as possible for the safety of ou r neighborhood.
• 8/21/2016 0:43 // Judith bettelheim
• 8/21/2016 4:42 // Amy DeBiasse
• 8/21/2016 5:57 // Sam Levenson
• 8/21/2016 7:27 // Rick Reiss
• 8/21/2016 10:51 // Julia Liebeskind // "Please take action immediately to stop the
privileged few from harmi ng our environment, our community, and the health and safety of
thousands of people. The airport serves only the interests of the private jet set who like its
convenience a d dont give a damn about the negative externalities The airport has no
economic justification in cost -benefit terms and represents a taking from the citizens of
Santa Monica who own it The land should serve the interests of these citizens "
• 8/21/2016 11:07 // Jonathan Stein
• 8/21/2016 11:20 // Natalie Miller // The jets are getting ou t of control. It's destroying our
once peaceful neighborhood. Please help us renew Santa Monica to the awesome
community it once was.
• 8/21/2016 11:28 // Natalie McAdams
• 8/21/2016 12:43 // Mel Clark // Thank you to all City Council members who are working
towards closing the airport and to turning it into a park.
• 8/21/2016 13:06 // Joel // Bernstein
• 8/21/2016 13:57 // Frank Weeks
• 8/21/2016 13:57 // Susan Reid // "For the well being of all of us - close the airport. Please -
we all count. Thank you, Susan Emmet Reid"
• 8/21/2016 14:15 // Christa Occhiogrosso
• 8/21/2016 14:18 // Jessica Greene
• 8/21/2016 15:30 // Eddie Arias
• 8/21/2016 15:31 // Jason Knapp
• 8/21/2016 15:54 // Jennifer Field
• 8/21/2016 16:00 // Sandra Casillas
• 8/21/2016 16:10 // Katherine Lee
• 8/21/2016 17:22 // Andrew Varenho rst
• 8/21/2016 18:19 // Edward McQueeney // This should be the number one priority of SM
City government. In a city blessed with resources to spare, no expense likewise should be
spared to fight this legal battle that's so important not just to those of us cursed with this
airport, but nationally as well.
• 8/21/2016 18:21 // Roy Rico // Doing what's necessary to close the airport is greatly
appreciated.
• 8/21/2016 18:38 // Lorri A. Benson // We need your support to make this happen. The
community no longer wants this airport and feels that it is compromising our health and
safety, as well as our quality of life. Please support your community.
• 8/21/2016 18:51 // Lowell Har ris
• 8/21/2016 19:41 // Sara Sherman Drapkin // Thank You for following the Law.
• 8/21/2016 19:58 // Mia Levenson
• 8/21/2016 20:40 // leslie Corzine
• 8/21/2016 20:40 // Anne Yee
• 8/21/2016 21:36 // Leigh Brumberg
• 8/21/2016 22:56 // Virginia Ernst
• 8/21/2016 23:53 // John Londono
• 8/22/2016 0:13 // James Lloyd -Smith // Resident of Sunset Park
• 8/22/2016 0:30 // Steven Benson
• 8/22/2016 1:10 // Susan Cope r // It is after 10pm, and two fixed wing planes have just
passed over my home in the Sea Colony off Barnard Way. The added noise is very wearing.
• 8/22/2016 1:28 // Paula Mazur
• 8/22/2016 1:35 // Jeremy Alcock // No Jets!
• 8/22/2016 2:04 // Jessica Tracy
• 8/22/2016 3:18 // Stephen Mills
• 8/22/2016 9:01 // Jon Geller
• 8/22/2016 10:47 // Marion Nataf // Please hear our requests. This is not about money this
is about lives!
• 8/22/2016 10:50 // Eitan Melamed
• 8/22/2016 12:53 // Nathaniel Wilson // I live at 2907 Virginia Avenue Santa Monica CA.
Even at my location the noise and pollution from the fossil fuel burning aircraf t is a health
issue. In addition the noise from jets and helicopters increases every year. I support a ballot
measure to limit the out of control growth in the use of jets and helicopters at the air port.
• 8/22/2016 13:48 // Barbara Goodson Gustafson It's ti me to end this bureaucratic 'fear
based' and/or 'special interest' dance with the FAA and do the right thing for the people of
Santa Monica.
• 8/22/2016 14:21 // William Hogle
• 8/22/2016 14:21 // DavidGreene // We've tolerated toxic air far too long. The airp ort needs
to close.
• 8/22/2016 14:39 // MONIKA OLIVARES
• 8/22/2016 15:09 // Guy Cass // "I fully support this because the airport does not serve the
majority of residents. Thank you! Guy"
• 8/22/2016 18:50 // Minda Johnstone // When we moved to our home 18 yea rs ago, there
were lovely little prop planes landing at SMO. Just fine. The jets have since become
unbearable. We are sick of the jet fumes filling up our house when we have the windows
open. We are sick of the noisy jets landing over our heads during the day and well into the
late, LATE nighttime hours. Enough already.
• 8/22/2016 18:59 // Douglas Johnstone // We really need your help to gain control of the
airport and reduce or stop jet traffic. Living downwind of the airport when the jet traffic is
ne arly non stop on Sundays is almost unbearable, let alone the remaining days of the week.
Good luck and thank you.
• 8/22/2016 19:55 // Cliffton Tsai // We have lived in this house at the edge of Cheviot Hills
for 39 years and the airport noise has gotten mu ch worse with the jets. Please shut the
airport down and return our neighbourhood to some serenity.
• 8/22/2016 22:30 // Andrew Varenhorst
• 8/23/2016 0:39 // Darrell Robb // Please continue the hard work of the majority of Santa
Monicans and stand up to the FAA and private jet interests to begin the process of restoring
community safety to our city and allow clean peaceful conversion of the airport to parks
lands.
• 8/23/2016 1:37 // Kent Alves // "Please act now. "
• 8/23/2016 1:41 // Dirk Beving // Although I live in Mar Vista I will do everything I can to
ensure council members who don't work to eliminate jets are defeated in the next election.
• 8/23/2016 2:34 // Jan -Peter Flack
• 8/23/2016 3:37 // JOHN BARSKY // THE JET FUMES ARE RIDICULOUS AND VERY HARMFUL
AND VIOLATE THE POLLUTION LAWS IN CALIFORNIA. THE SAFETY OF THE PEOPLE IN THE
AREA IS AT GREAT RISK. THE NOISE FROM ALL THE AIRCRAFT IS HARMFUL TO HUMANS
AND ANIMALS. THIS AIRPORT NEEDS TO CEASE BEING AND IT HAS RUINED MY LIVING
CONDITIONS IN WEST LOS ANGELES FOR DECADES. ONLY GREED WILL KEEP IT ALIVE..STOP
THIS AIRPORT FROM OPERATING BEFORE IT RUINS US ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.
3
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 1:09 PM
To:Tony Vazquez; Ted Winterer; Pam OConnor; Sue Himmelrich; Gleam Davis; Terry O’Day;
Kevin McKeown Fwd
Cc:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Santa Monica Airport Issue
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
Council ‐
Please see the below email re: SMO agenda item.
Thanks,
Stephanie
From: Carolyn Hanlin [mailto:carolhan777@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 12:18 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Santa Monica Airport Issue
I would be sad to see the airport close. I support it and hope you lose all of your
legal battles. So much tax payer dollars have been wasted on this issue, and I say
"shame on you."
Carolyn Hanlin
Santa Monica Resident
4
Esterlina Lugo
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 1:08 PM
To:Tony Vazquez; Ted Winterer; Pam OConnor; Sue Himmelrich; Gleam Davis; Terry O’Day;
Kevin McKeown Fwd
Cc:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: SMO...
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
Council ‐
Please see the below email re: SMO agenda item.
Thanks,
Stephanie
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐
From: Hardin [mailto:joehardin@earthlink.net]
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 11:39 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: SMO...
Council members,
Please do all you can to remove the Western Parcel from aviation uses ASAP. Also, please end jet fuel sales at SMO
ASAP. Small actions can make major improvements to the health and welfare of Santa Monica residents.
Thanks for your hard work,
Joe 310 ‐428 ‐5031
5
Esterlina Lugo
From:Edward McQueeney <edpmcq@aol.com>
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 12:26 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Item 11-A
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
Dear Council,
Closing Santa Monica Airport should be the top priority for City government until such time as this is finally and
successfully accomplished.
Given the resources av ailable to the City, no expense should be spared on waging the legal and political campaign
necessary to close SMO as soon as possible.
Unfortunately, no option other than closure exists to finally put this decades-long c ontroversy to rest, and to end this
blight on westside residential neighborhoods.
Thank you for considering these views.
Edward McQueeney
6
Esterlina Lugo
From:RSganzoltd <roberto@ganzoltd.com>
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 12:23 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:item 11-A
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
To Whom it May Concern-
As a resident of very nearby Venice I want to express my dismay at the so-called “Fly Neighborly” program
which is anything but neighborly. By encouraging, or enfo rcing, planes that use the Santa Monica Airport to fly
over our neighborhood after takeoff instead of staying over Sa nta Monica until they either reach altitude or the
ocean is madness and unfair to all of us. If Santa Moni ca continues to operate the airport for ANY reason, even
those beyond the City’s cont rol, this program should be banned and abandoned immediately. Please keep your
pollution, both noise and partic ulate matter, to yourselves.
Thank you,
roberto schaefer
roberto@ganzoltd.com
US mobile +1 310 200 1396
L.A. home +1 310 822 9471
N.O. home +1 504 895 3471
www.ganzoltd.com
www.ganzosite.wordpress.com
http://robertoschaefer.wordpress.com/
1
Esterlina Lugo
From:Laura Kaiser <laura_kaiser@mac.com>
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 1:38 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Item 11. A
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
Please be advised that I fully support the measures described in the letter to Mayor Vazquez and SM City Council
Members regarding “The Community’s Request for Interim Actions Prior to Closure of Santa Monica Airport.”
Laura Kaiser
LA 90066
2
Esterlina Lugo
From:Cathy Larson <fospairport@rocketmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 1:34 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Item 11-A Airport Resolution
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
Councilmembers,
I support the staff recommendations.
Thanks,
Cathy Larson
Santa Monica Resident
3
Esterlina Lugo
From:valstreit@roadrunner.com
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 2:14 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:SMO City Council Meeting August 23rd Item 11
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport provides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to residents of
the City of Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During times of natural disaster or
national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding communities that
cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and future generations.
Millions of taxpayer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise must come to a close.
The fact remains that you are obligated by Grant Assurances until 2023 and beyond that by the Property Conveyance.
There are 500+ GA airports across the country with the same Surplus Property Instruments. Some of those have floated
the idea of closing and they are still open today.
"Making the Case for Airport Closures
Shutting down an airport, especially a public ‐owned one, may not always go as smoothly as its owners might hope.
That’s the lesson from some recent attempts at airport closures, as the FAA rejected petitions to close from the
operators of Bakersfield Municipal Airport in California and Allentown Queen City Municipal Airport in Pennsylvania to
close their respective airfields.
The agency has tough criteria for the closure of airports that have received federal funding, and petitioners must
demonstrate how a proposed transfer or sale of airport property would benefit civil aviation. According to the FAA, such
benefits may include “future growth in operations; increased capacity of the airport, advancement of the interests of the
aeronautical users and service providers; and the local, regional and national interests of the airport.”
The FAA also specifies that the airport owner must comply with all federal obligations set forth under the Airport
Improvement Program (AIP) agreements, and the agency also stipulates that all airport revenue (including proceeds
from the sale of any airport property) be invested in a replacement airport, reinvested in AIP ‐eligible projects or
returned to the aviation trust fund. In the case of Allentown Queen City Municipal Airport, which sees approximately
50,000 operations a year, the agency has said that it will not consider a request to close the airport without prior
approval of a replacement airport of equal or greater value to the aviation system."
Sincerely,
Val Streit
14
Esterlina Lugo
From:Myron Kayton <m.kayton@att.net>
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 2:30 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:airport
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
23 August 2016
Santa Monica has attracted many productive companies (ent ertainment, architecture, construction) because the airport
permits their employees to travel and pe rmits visitors to arrive conveniently.
If the airport closes, there will be inevitab le rooftop helicopter traffic which is noi sier and more polluting than jet aircraf t. Or
some of the companies would move to cities that have private airports.
Let’s keep SMO open and develop the south-side buildings for academic and aviation purposes.
15
Esterlina Lugo
From:John Dudzinsky <johnd@lantanadevelopment.com>
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 2:41 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Cc:J P
Subject:Santa Monica Airport Support Letter
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
Sincerely,
S. John Dudzinsky, Jr.
Aircraft Owner and Hangar Owner at KSMO
Lantana Development Company, Inc.
3355 Motor Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90034-3711
johnd@lantanadevelopment.com
www.lantanadevelopment.com
Tel 310-441-9922
Fax 310-441-7755
16
Esterlina Lugo
From:David Sirh <dsirh@mac.com>
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 3:12 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Airport Measure
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
Hi,
I'd like to voice my support for restricting jet traffic at SMO. Please evict the jet tenants without leases. The jets have
been flying closer to my house and the noise and exhaust effect my preschooler.
David Sirh
Santa Monica
Sent from my iPhone 6s
17
Esterlina Lugo
From:Bruce Gustafson <itsbg18@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 3:16 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Item 11-A
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
I wish to urge the SM City Council to unanimously approve the vote to end the continued inappropriate use of the
current airport for aviation purposes, particularly so for the proliferating use of the land as a jet port. As a 37 year SM
resident and 15 year homeowner right beneath the flight path, it has become completely out of line with extreme,
obscenely high decibel noise levels, excess jet pollution, diminished peace of mind and quality of life, and everything else
that goes along with this outdated and dangerous use of the land.
I do thank those past and present on the Council who have worked hard on behalf of the majority of citizens who seek
the closure of the airport and its eventual highest and best use as a park and small business and art center. I will be
attentive to the respective Council member vote on this matter. Thank you for your good representation.
Sent from my iPad
18
Esterlina Lugo
From:Justin Sherrill <jsherrillucla@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 4:13 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Opposition to Item 11
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
Dear council members,
I am writing in support of Santa Monica Airport a nd in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
As an area resident, I love having the airport and maintaining al l the rich history of the property. I don't have a corporate j et, nor rent one, or
have a small airplane. I just love the airport for the huge role in had in WWII and aviation in general, from the early days of flight in the area
in the 1910's to present.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport provides a mul titude of real and tangible benefits to residents of the Cit y of Santa
Monica, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During times of natural disaster or national emergency ou r airport is
an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public resource would be a loss to both current and future generations. Millions o f taxpayer
dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise must come to a close.
Sincerely,
Justin Sherrill
19
Esterlina Lugo
From:pad45@mac.com
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 4:28 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Item 11 - A
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
Council,
Please approve s etting a City policy to close the Santa Monica Airport as so on as legally permitted with a goal of July 1, 2018, as
outlined in Item 11 - A of tonight’s agenda.
Peter Donald
Chair, Airport Commission
310 871-4862
pad45@mac.com
20
Esterlina Lugo
From:Jane Dempsey <janedempsey@earthlink.net>
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 4:47 PM
To:councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Clerk Mailb ox; Rick Cole; Nelson Hernandez; Tony
Vazquez; Gleam Davis; Sue Himmelrich; Kevin McKeown Fwd; Pam OConnor; Terry
O’Day; Ted Winterer
Subject:RE: 8/23/16 agenda item 11.A. -- Resolution Regarding Local Control and Closure of
the Santa Monica Airport
Attachments:August 26 City Council.pdf
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
Dear Mayor Vasquez and City Council members,
Please see attached letter.
Jane Dempsey
August 26, 2016
RE: 8/23/16 agenda item 11.A. -- Resolution Regarding Local Control and Closure of the Santa Monica Airport
Dear Mayo r Vasquez and mem bers of the C ity Council ,
I fully support the position of Friends of Sunset Park as outlined in their letter (below) of August 20, 2016 .
Sincerely,
Jane Dempsey , 820 Wilson Place , Santa Monica, CA 90405
(Friend s of Sunset Park letter of August 20, 2016 )
To: Mayor Vazquez and members of the City Council (cc: Rick Cole, Nelson Hernandez)
From: Board of Directors, Friends of Sunset Park (FOSP)
RE: 8/23/16 agenda item 11.A. -- Resolution Regarding Local Control and Closure of the Santa Monica Airport ;
Policy for Eliminating Private Provision of Aeronautical Services and Establishing Exclusive Public Proprietary Fixed Based
Operations With City Provision of Aeronautical Services Required By Law; Consideration of Other Lawful Means of
Curtailing Adverse Airport Impacts, Including, Among Others: Applying to the FAA for Runway Alterations; Enforcing
Local, State & Federal Laws Relating to Airport Operations; Transitioning From Leases to a Permit System for Certain
Airport Uses; Eliminating Lead Fuel; and Enhancing Airport Security
Council 8/23/16 agenda: http://santamonicacityca.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=1070
The FOSP Board thanks the City Council and City Staff, in particular City Manager Rick Cole and Senior Adviser to the City
Manager on Airport Affairs Ne lson Hernandez, for moving these items forward and for continuing to make progress.
We support agenda item 11.A. In particular, we urge the City Council to direct the City Manager to proceed with all due
haste with respect to the following actions:
1. Commence the park planning process, i ncluding conducting an environmental analysis as required by the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA). – As noted
in the staff report, the FOSP Board agrees that the time to commence planning and environmental analysis of
the conversion of the airport to a park is now.
2. Investigate whether certain fractional jet operators are impermissibly operating as scheduled
airlines . Newspaper and other advertise ments circulated to the general public are increasingly supporting the
impression that this is, in fact, the case. As the staff report has noted, both the FAA and the City of Santa
Monica prohibit scheduled airline operations out of SMO. Fractional jet o perators who operate at SMO should
be required to provide the City with sufficient documentation and records to establish that their operations do
not amount to surreptitious scheduled service.
3. Submit an application to FAA, which would alter the Airport runway by removing the 1949 Quit Claim Parcel,
alsoAknownAasAtheA“WesternAParcel,”AfromAaviationAuse . The FOSP Board agrees that, given the pending legal
action, and in order to place the City of Santa Monica in a position to capitalize o n its upcoming legal victories, it
makesAsenseAtoAnowAfileAtheAapplicationAtoAcloseAtheAWesternAParcelAtoAaviation,AasApartAofAtheACity’sAappealAofA
the grant assurance.
4. Cease forbearance of lax enforcement of the Santa Monica Airport noise ordinan ce, and apply enforcement as
written . sAnoted,AtheACity’sAenforcementApracticeAofAitsAnoiseAordinanceApre -dates the advent of popular
fractional ownership and jets -on -demand services at the airport and thus is outdated and overly
lax. Enforcement should be adjusted to reflect current airport operations.
5. Transition aircraft hangar uses from lease agreements to permits. A permit system is a reasonable
accommodation until the City prevails in court and expeditiously closes the Airport per the sub ject City Council
Resolution. The proposed permit system provides an important step toward greater local control over the
property aviation users now occupy.
6. Create a City of Santa Monica Fixed Based Operation . If the City is required to opera te the airport and if FBO
services are required, the City would have greater local control by establishing a municipal FBO. The two private
FBO providers should be eliminated as soon as City staff is ready to assume the duties, which should in no case
be l ater than December 31, 2016.
7. Elimination of leaded fuel . The sale of leaded fuel should be phased out completely, as soon as legally possible,
even before the City could begin operation of a municipal FBO. There is a viable alternative fuel that could
service an estimated 65 percent of the propeller aircraft fleet based at SMO.
8. Enhanced Security . The FOSP Board urges the City to ensure that whatever contract is signed with a private
airport security firm, that the City retain maximum lo cal control over security operations and that those
operations be conducted in a manner that aligns completely with all local concerns, including but not limited to
ensuring that SMO is not used to transport contraband or illegal persons at any time or by any user of the SMO
facilities, including but not limited to clients of the privately run FBOs, so long as those FBOs are operating at
SMO.
The ongoing negative health effects of air and noise pollution, not to mention safety concerns, created by ongoing
airport operations, dictate that the optimal public policy goal of the City should be to close the airport and repurpose
the area to maximize park, open space, and cultural facilities. All of these goals can be addressed by adopting the
propose d resolution, which the FOSP Board supports.
21
Esterlina Lugo
From:Johnathan Malloy <johnathanmalloy@msn.com>
Sent:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 4:49 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Santa Monica airport
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
Dear council members,
As I current airline pilot, prior flight instructor (at Santa Monica), and general avia tion enthusiast, I am writing
in support of Santa Monica Airport and in opposition to item 11 on the August 23rd agenda.
Santa Monica Airport should remain open. Our airport pr ovides a multitude of real and tangible benefits to
residents of the City of Santa Moni ca, County of Los Angeles, State of California and to our Nation. During
times of natural disaster or national emergency our airport is an indispensable asset with value to Santa Monica
and surrounding communities that cannot be overstated.
Squandering our irreplaceable and invaluable public re source would be a loss to both current and future
generations. Millions of taxpa yer dollars have already been wasted and the efforts seeking the airport's demise
must come to a close.
I have traveled to cities big and small and have seen a wide range of airports ac ross the country. There is no
place like KSMO. Cities would kill to have an airport with the history and locat ion of Santa Monica. It truly is a
one of a kind asset with a wide range of uses. I believe people need to realiz e how fortunate they are to have one
of the crown jewels of av iation in their backyard.
There can and must be a compromise. My professional opinion is this: Instead of working so hard to close the
airport, encourage its use. Make KSMO the place wher e a new age of aviation can begin. Implement plans for
bio fuels and unleaded av gas. Use it as a breeding ground for the next generati on of great aviators and
engineers. Allow KSMO to thrive a nd it will benefit the city more than any park or business complex ever
would.
You don't know what you've got until it's gone. Utilize the fantastic and i rreplaceable resources you've been
given. Take some pride in your airport. There is a wi n win for all here. Please consider these suggestions.
Respectfully,
Johnathan Malloy
Sent from my iPhone