LB commission to resurrect controversial proposal for international airport

[aesop_image imgwidth=”500px” img=”https://signal-tribune.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Screen-Shot-2017-03-02-at-4.15.53-PM.png” credit=”Courtesy Long Beach Airport” align=”right” lightbox=”on” caption=”Long Beach has made numerous upgrades to the Long Beach Airport in recent years. The controversial proposal by JetBlue Airways to effectively transform the municipal airport into an international one was believed to be definitively quashed by the city council in January. However, the Airport Advisory Commission voted on Feb. 16 to discuss later this month a recommendation to convince the city council to rethink its decision.” captionposition=”right” revealfx=”off”] By: CJ Dablo
Staff Writer
If Long Beach city officials had thought that the fight over an international airport had been finished over a month ago, they were wrong. In a surprise move, the city’s Airport Advisory Commission voted to revisit the request for a federal-inspection services facility (FIS) on Feb. 16. It means that at its next meeting this month, that commission will discuss a recommendation to ask that the city council rethink its seemingly fateful January decision and vote this time in favor of the FIS facility that would be needed for an international airport.
According to the minutes from its February meeting, the commission voted merely to place the issue on its agenda for its March meeting. Audio from the city’s website confirms that the commissioners did not discuss the merits of the proposal. The commissioners will take on the subject at length at the next meeting, and since it is a public forum, there will be an opportunity for public comment.
Assistant City Attorney Michael Mais acknowledged in a phone interview Wednesday that it is unusual for a commission to ask the city council to reconsider a vote. However, he said that if the issue is discussed on the March agenda and the commission ultimately votes in favor of the recommendation, that information will be forwarded to the council.
“That doesn’t automatically put it on the city council agenda,” he added, explaining that one or more councilmembers would have to agree to add it to the agenda. Mais said that, to his knowledge, no new information surrounding the proposal has emerged.
While the controversy isn’t in the past tense, it will bring back some bad memories. Third District Councilmember Suzie Price acknowledged earlier this year that the decision that effectively stopped any further discussion on the FIS was one of the most difficult decisions she has made during her time on the council.
The drama surrounding the proposed FIS had been believed to have ended earlier this year when the Long Beach City Council voted 8-1 on Jan. 24 to receive and file a report that had painted an overall positive outlook of the proposal to build a customs facility and offer international service. Sixth District Councilmember Dee Andrews was the lone dissenting vote.
Over the course of about two years, the proposal had been picked apart in community meetings and study sessions. The city council and the Airport Advisory Commission had plenty of time to review the plan, which had been fiercely opposed by community-advocacy group Long Beach Neighborhoods First. Many of the members of this group say that they live along the flight path of the planes that serve the Long Beach Airport.
The proposed FIS facility would only need to be built if city and airport officials ultimately approve a plan to effectively transform the domestic airport into an international one. Those who opposed the plan cited concerns that the proposal could threaten the city’s unique noise ordinance, which is intended to reduce airplane noise and prohibit planes from flying in and out of the airport late at night.
The advocacy group rejected conclusions drawn by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The Signal Tribune reported earlier this year that the city attorney’s office published FAA’s statements that the concerns that a new international service would somehow undermine the city’s noise ordinance are “unwarranted.”
The entire commission discussion on Feb. 16 to add the issue to the next agenda lasted only a few minutes, and it took place at the very end of its regular meeting when each commissioner has an opportunity to make a comment. Audio of the commission meeting that took place at Skylinks Municipal Golf Course located at 4800 E. Wardlow Road in Long Beach is available on the city’s website.
The minutes reflect an unusual breakdown of the vote— four supported the motion, one dissented against the motion, one abstained, two recused themselves and one was absent.
Commissioner Jeff Rowe initiated the motion, and his colleague, Commissioner Roland Scott, seconded the motion. Their motion won the support of fellow Commissioners Jeffrey Anderson and Gerald Mineghino.
Only Commissioner Elizabeth Cruz definitively voted against putting the issue up for discussion.
Commissioner Wayne Chaney, Sr. abstained from voting. Commission Chair Karen Sherman and Vice Chair Glenn Ray recused themselves from the vote. Commissioner Hal Gosling was absent from the meeting.
Long Beach Airport spokeswoman Stephanie Montuya-Morisky confirmed to the Signal Tribune earlier this year that JetBlue is the only airline that expressed serious interest in having an international terminal. JetBlue is the airport’s biggest tenant. The airline has a consent-decree agreement with the City, and it does pay a fine when its planes take off or land after hours.
The FIS has its vocal advocates too, including Ron Salk, a former airport advisory commissioner who served from 2000 to 2008.
“I have a concern that JetBlue’s patience will have been stretched beyond reasonable limits,” Salk said in a phone interview. He disputed arguments by Long Beach Neighborhoods First that voiced concern that the noise ordinance would be threatened by a major change to the airport. Salk argued that JetBlue is making a “reasonable” request to fly internationally out of the municipal airport, and he didn’t believe that the City could tell the airline how to run its business.
Salk said there is a “remote chance” that the FAA could intervene and say that the City could not dictate JetBlue’s activities to this degree and the ordinance could be in jeopardy. He also warned that JetBlue could give up on Long Beach entirely.
“There is a real possibility that they would leave us,” he added, “if they don’t get that international facility [!] And they’re willing to pay for a good portion of that. And it doesn’t mean more noise or more flights.”
As of press time, the agenda for the next commission meeting has not yet been posted.