Santa Monica Airport: A Time for Action

by Mayor Richard Bloom

This Tuesday, the Santa Monica City Council will be asked to amend its laws in order to improve the safety of those who live adjacent to Santa Monica Airport. Built in 1919, our airport was once surrounded by only few residences and was utilized for decades by small, propeller-driven aircraft and the occasional larger aircraft built by neighboring Douglas Aircraft.

Close to a century later, the airport abuts dense residential and bustling commercial zones in every direction and will see close to 25,000 annual operations. Of those, nearly 9,000 flights will be by so-called Class C and Class D aircraft. By the Federal government’s own safety guidelines, these aircraft do not belong at our airport because the runway is too short and is lacking in what are known as “runway safety zones”. These zones are best thought of as places that rapidly accelerating or decelerating planes in distress can safely stop without crashing into the surrounding neighborhood.

Class C and D aircraft also account for much of the rapidly increasing number of overall operations. With every additional flight, the safety risk to Santa Monica and Los Angeles residents increases.

Ironically, the same Federal Government that tells us our airport is too small for these aircraft also asserts that it retains sole and final decision making authority on the issue. But the responsible Federal agency, the FAA, by its own admission, serves two unrelated masters: airport safety and maintaining access for as many aircraft as possible.

Using this strange bureaucratic logic, the FAA, for all intents and purposes, has told the City of Santa Monica that the airport is “safe enough”. The City’s position on this issue is, and will remain, unambiguous: safety comes first and the possibility of an aviation disaster is a clear and present danger.

Fed up with the Fed’s lack of focus and action, the City of Santa Monica, in 2002, proposed to the FAA that it approve a runway safety plan. Since the plan would conform the airport to the FAA’s own guidelines, it seemed like a logical step that could be implemented immediately. Regrettably, the FAA has dragged its feet for the last five years, refusing to approve a plan that would protect the safety of residents in addition to many aircraft pilots and passengers.

Under these circumstances, the City has no alternative but to protect its residents by acting locally and decisively. No doubt, this step risks expensive and complicated litigation with the federal government. The outcome of this battle is hard to predict.

Like myself, virtually every member of the Santa Monica City Council has voiced his or her opinion that the time has come for defining action on this critical local issue. We must be resolute and dedicated in our decision and in the legal battles to come.