1 Vernice Hankins
From: Brodsky, Michael <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2023 7:09 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Support for Agenda Item 7.B - Planning for a Great Park Attachments: SantaMonica-lack-of-park-space.png
EXTERNAL
Dear City Council Members,
I support this Tuesday’s upcoming Agenda Item 7.B staff report to proceed with the Future Planning Process for SMO that will hopefully, with your support, lead to the creation of a Great Park right here in Santa Monica.
Santa Monica has been known to be historically park poor, but it wasn’t always the case.
In 1926, Santa Monica appropriately planned for our future park needs and purchased public land for the use as a park (including shared field for airplanes.) That park was our largest park in Santa Monica, it contained a recreation center, tennis courts, archery range, shooting range, and even a golf course. Unfortunately, during WWII the airport gobbled up our park! That governmental action left Santa Monica with a severe deficiency in parks and open space from which we have never recovered. Santa Monica now has only 1.6 acres of park space per 1,000 residents. That is less than HALF of the L.A County park’s already low average. Even when we add 160 acres of park space at the airport, we will STILL be below the county average.
On the scale of the top 20 cities in California, Santa Monica is dead last.
We also come in near-last when looking at the size of our largest parks (a tiny 26 acres) compared to other L.A. County cities, and we also come in near-last in the percentage of park space in relation to the city area compared to other L.A. County cities. The data speaks for itself.
The 2016 L.A. County Parks Needs Assessment ranks Santa Monica as HIGH NEED for parks.
Even if we add 160 acres of park space at the Airport, we will STILL be less than HALF of the L.A. County average. It is time for the city to restore the parkland that was taken from us.
Parks are the lungs of the city.
We need to provide our community with a Great Park that will foster imagination, social interaction, and be accessible for all to enjoy essential recreational resources to maintain healthy Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 outcomes. We need to prioritize parks which provide essential educational and social services for everyone and not just a few.
We need a sustainable Great Park that can facilitate green infrastructure, nature-based solutions, increase biodiversity, that can reclaim storm water runoff (to restore our aquifer that is needed to support future development) and we need to reduce the increasing urban heat island effect.
It is time for us to start planning to restore our long-lost park space that can provide for a future without limitations.
Sincerely,
Michael Brodsky
Santa Monica
Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Vernice Hankins
From: Vivien Flitton <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2023 2:03 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Council Mailbox
Subject: 1/24/23 Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
I support the staff recommendation to begin a public planning process for the future of Santa Monica Airport.
I look forward to the airport closing in 2028 and the land being turned into a Great Park that everyone can enjoy.
We want to preserve the Museum of Flying, The Ruskin Group Theater and the artist studios, and look forward to more cultural and arts uses, more public recreational facilities and public open spaces. Let’s start now with some more pickelball and tennis courts.
Sincerely,
Vivien Flitton
Sunset Park
Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:12 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: Bradley <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2023 2:14 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
:) Great that we will have a park for every one!
Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:11 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Item 7B
From: Ann Garneau <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2023 2:04 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Item 7B
EXTERNAL
How exciting ‐ a Grand Park in Santa Monica. Bravo for the decision. Unfortunately, I live on the other side of Bundy so I’m not a voter, but I’m an enthusiast!!!
Ann Garneau.
12033 National Blvd, Los Angeles, CA 90064
Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:11 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2023 2:04 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
Dear City Council:
I am happy to see the start of the public planning process for the conversion of the airport into a great park. Public land must be used for a public purpose, and creating a beautiful park will be our legacy for generations to come.
Let’s be shovel ready on January 1, 2029.
Cindy Bendat
31‐year resident
Item 7.B
01/24/23
6 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:11 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Yes to the Great Park! Agenda item 7-B: Study Session From: Gregg Chadwick <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2023 1:59 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Yes to the Great Park! Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
As a Santa Monica homeowner and small business owner, I heartily support the new Planning Process for the creation of a Great Park when the current Santa Monica Airport closes on Dec 31, 2028.
This new park will support everyone in our community and provide much needed open space in Santa Monica.
Thank you for your leadership!
Gregg Chadwick
www.greggchadwick.com
Item 7.B
01/24/23
7 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:11 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Airport Conversion Study, Item 7b on the January 24, 2023 Council Agenda From: Neil Carrey <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2023 6:46 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Airport Conversion Study, Item 7b on the January 24, 2023 Council Agenda
EXTERNAL
Peter James and his staff should be congratulated for doing such an amazing and detailed staff report for the subject Item for your January 24, 2023 Agenda. I am writing this email to urge you to approve the additional money requested by staff and adopt the recommendations of staff.
Among a number of other things, I am President of the Santa Monica Airport2Park Foundation. The Board of this Foundation was the Executive Committee of the Measure LC campaign, so we have been involved for a number of years with the process of eventually turning SMO into a Great Park. I go back even further, as part of a small group that was instrumental to the development of Airport Park. It was at that time, I looked at the airport and said someday we need to expand Airport Park to the entire airport.
With the delay of the expansion of Airport Park, many of the people who supported Measure LC and field and park uses and lovers have become skeptical about whether the City and Council is really serious about closing the Santa Monica Airport and turning it into open space for sports, recreational and many other things that can go into the space presently occupied by the airport. Therefore, it is imperative that you move forward and start what will be a long process. While there is still almost 6 years until the Airport is scheduled to close, from my 12 years as a Recreation and Parks Commissioner and experience in seeing parks and recreation facilities developed, for a space this big, 6 years is very short and planning in earnest must begin. It is also important to let people know that you and the City are serious about developing a Great Park.
You, as Members of the City Council, have a unique opportunity to take the lead role in making this happen and transform Santa Monica from a City with substantially less park space than is recommended to a City with a substantial amount of park space and recreational facilities.
Switching hats to my role as Chair of the Santa Monica Travel and Tourism Board, a Great Park can also become a tourist attraction, just like Central Park in NYC.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
8 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
6 Finally, it took me 25 years to help turn Belmar Park into a reality after Michael Feinstein and I first met at the Civic Center and talked about building a playing field next to the Civic Center and across the street from Santa Monica High School. Now that I just turned 80, I probably do not have 25 years to wait to see the Great Park. Therefore, from a personal standpoint, accept the Staff recommendations, start the process and give me a chance to see this happen. Thanks
Neil Carrey
[email protected]
[email protected]
(T) 310-451-9188
(C) 310-200-5067
Item 7.B
01/24/23
9 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
7 Vernice Hankins
From: Lee Unger <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 2:47 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
Re: Agenda Item 7B
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents that cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Thank you for your consideration of this request to keep the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport.
Lee Unger
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
10 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:18 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: Robin Shakeshaft <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2023 7:29 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
To Santa Monica City Council:
This is to express my strong support for initiating a new planning process to determine the future of the Santa Monica Airport, and to say that I hope that this will result in the development of a Great Park.
Thank you.
Robin Shakeshaft
1325 Maple St., Santa Monica
Item 7.B
01/24/23
11 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:17 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: Joseph Lutz <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2023 5:19 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
We support the airport conversion.
Best regards,
Joe Lutz
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
Item 7.B
01/24/23
12 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:17 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: Hal Bogotch <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2023 4:55 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
Hello!
I live in Sunset Park with my wife & our daughter. I'm writing to express my support for the new Planning Process and for the creation of a Great Park that will support everyone in our community, as well as addressing the dearth of open space here in Santa Monica.
In addition, I'm wondering if we're getting closer to the day when no leaded (jet) fuels will be stored or used in our neighborhood.
Sincerely,
‐‐ Hal Bogotch
⭼⭽⭾⭿⮀⮁⮂
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Mr. Hal Bogotch
2520 Cloverfield Blvd
S.M. ‐‐ 90405
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Item 7.B
01/24/23
13 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:16 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: Robert Morra <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2023 3:00 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
Dear SM Council, As a 30 year resident of SM. Please continue to allow SM community to have move park space by converting the airport to park space.
Thank you !!!
Robert Morra
Sent from my iPhone
Item 7.B
01/24/23
14 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:16 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: iPhone Yahoo Email <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2023 2:48 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
Just to thank you for your support for the new Planning Process and for the creation of a Great Park in place of our current polluting and dangerous noisy airport.
Now, please remove the hideous leaded fuel from these inconsiderate flyers. It’s 2023, not 1923.
Thank you.
Best,
Daniel.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
15 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
6 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:15 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: 7-B: Study Session
From: ALAN KERNER <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2023 2:38 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
I am writing to express my appreciation for your support of the great park.
Alan Kerner
1761 Sunset Ave
Sent from my iPhone
Item 7.B
01/24/23
16 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
7 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:15 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: Robert Brown <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2023 2:24 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
Thank you for the comprehensive report regarding moving forward on the SMO conversion.
I am curious about a couple things…
1) Line one of Paragraph 5 of the executive summary says, “ At present, the community’s preferred outcome for the future of the Airport is unclear.” I can assure you, the community’s preferred outcome has been stated for over 40 years. CLOSE SMO and create more park space. Measure LC passed 60 to 40. Measure D was defeated 60‐40. The community wants the airport closed ASAP and the community wants the City of Santa Monica to uphold its promise and create more park space to be enjoyed by the entire community. 2) On the Conversion Plan, page 173, a revision to Measure LC is suggested. Who exactly will be rewriting that measure or proposing changes? It feels like an opening for City Staff to undermine the intention of Measure LC which, again, passed 60‐40.
There is a great deal of mistrust of the City Council and the backroom deals that get made. The fact that this massive document drops only 48 hours before the Council meeting is not helpful to you either The people of Santa Monica have spoken time and time again regarding that airport. No more studies, surveys or votes. PLOW IT UNDER and make it a park/public space for the enjoyment of the community! Yes, it will be expensive and, yes, it will be time consuming. But it will also create a legacy that will last for generations.
Robert Brown
Sunset Park
E: [email protected]
M: 310.795.5353
Item 7.B
01/24/23
17 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
8 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:12 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: SM Airport
From: SHELDON KARDENER <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2023 2:23 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: SM Airport
EXTERNAL
I am a resident of Sunset Park.
There is no question that Santa Monica has become enormoulsly "over built." Counter this by making the Airport a park would go a long way to restoring a pastoral feeling to our community.
I wholeheartedly endorse the idea of converting the airport to a public park.
Sheldon H. Kardener
2324 Hill Str
Item 7.B
01/24/23
18 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
9 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:12 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: Mary <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2023 2:17 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and City Councilmembers,
I support the new Planning Process and the creation of a Great Park that will support everyone in our community and address the lack of much needed open space here in Santa Monica.
With appreciation,
Mary Hubbell
Ocean Park
Sent from my iPad
Item 7.B
01/24/23
19 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
10 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:12 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: SM Airport Closure
From: hal lindes <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2023 2:17 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: SM Airport Closure
EXTERNAL
Dear City Council,
We are writing to express our support for the new Planning Process and for the creation of a Great Park that will support everyone in our community and address the lack of much needed open space right here in Santa Monica.
Sincerely,
Hal Lindes
Item 7.B
01/24/23
20 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:52 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: Erick Brownstein <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2023 1:03 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
Hi
I support the new Planning Process and the creation of a Great Park that will support everyone in our community and address the lack of much needed open space right here in Santa Monica! Thanks
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
@ErickB
M: 323 640 9690
Item 7.B
01/24/23
21 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:52 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2023 12:50 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Cc: Kim Baer <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
Dear Council:
my wife Kim Baer and I live directly west of SMO, and we’ve felt the impact of the air traffic since moving here in 1997. we strongly support the CIty’s planning process to complete the conversion of SMO to a beautiful public park. Replacing the toxicity of SMO with trees and plants is a wonderful idea. thanks for your consideration,
Michael Sieverts and Kim Baer
1121 Hill Street 90405
Item 7.B
01/24/23
22 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:52 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: KENT ALVES <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2023 12:48 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
I have reviewed the proposed process and various options for our new great park in Santa Monica. I support the direction and process for the park contained in the study package that the council released.
Kent Alves
Sent from KHA iPhone
Item 7.B
01/24/23
23 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:51 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: JOHN VENTURA <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2023 12:36 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
Dear City Council,
I am a long time resident of Santa Monica and reside in the Sunset Park area of the city. I would like to express my support for the new Planning Process and the creation of a Great Park that will support everyone in our community and address the lack of much needed open space right here in Santa Monica.
Thank you,
John Ventura
Santa Monica Resident since 2005
Item 7.B
01/24/23
24 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:51 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: William Nuttle <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2023 8:26 AM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
I support the new Planning Process and for the creation of a Great Park that will support everyone in our community. We in the southeast area of Santa Monica much need more open space! Bill Nuttle
Item 7.B
01/24/23
25 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
6 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:51 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: Caroline Denyer <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2023 12:37 AM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
Members of the City Council,
I express my support for the new Planning Process and for the creation of a Great Park that will support everyone in our community and address the lack of much needed open space right here in Santa Monica.
Caroline Denyer ( Sunset Park resident )
Sent from my iPhone
Item 7.B
01/24/23
26 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
7 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:51 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: Lauren de la Fuente <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2023 8:25 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
I support the new Planning Process for the creation of a Great Park that will support everyone in our community and address the lack of much needed open space right here in Santa Monica. Let’s be the innovative community we were once known and revered for.
We can create and build a world‐class park where the Santa Monica Airport is now located when Airport closes at midnight on December 31, 2028. This is a once‐in‐a‐lifetime opportunity. I support transforming Santa Monica Airport into a great, beautiful, stunning and wonderful park. We can do this! Transform the Airport into a special park we all love.
PS, I vote.
Thank you for doing the right thing…designing, creating and building a special and wonderful park in our home of Santa Monica.
Sincerely,
Lauren
Lauren de la Fuente
2110 Pearl Street
Santa Monica, CA 90405
[email protected]
310.283.8488
Item 7.B
01/24/23
27 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
8 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:19 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: Polina Zhitomirsky <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2023 8:09 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
Hello,
I am all in support for the park! Can we have a small Central Park here? Would be amazing.
Thanks,
Polina
Item 7.B
01/24/23
28 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:53 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: Heather Gould <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:33 AM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Davis and City Council members…
I have been and remain in support of the new public planning process to determine the future of Santa Monica Airport. And I continue to strongly support the creation of a large community park on the site when the airport closes at midnight on December 31, 2028.
Heather Gould
2704 14th Street
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Sent from my iPhone
Item 7.B
01/24/23
29 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:53 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: Randall Klarin <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2023 6:53 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
Please consider the proposal for a great park at the current site of SMO. A golf course would be a major asset to the community.
R. Klarin
RW Klarin
Item 7.B
01/24/23
30 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:52 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: Kenny Fields <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2023 5:25 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
To the City Council of Santa Monica,
I am a resident of Santa Monica since 1986. I have lived in Ocean Park and Sunset Park for that entire time in various locations including the home I have owned since 1992 in Sunset Park. My grown children are products of the Santa Monica schools. I know how lucky I am to live in this City.
I am writing to voice my strong support of creating a Great Park on the site of the current Santa Monica Airport, once the City takes control of the property on January 1, 2029. I want to encourage the current City Council to initiate a Public Planning Process which will help determine the future of the the airport when it closes.
This is a wonderful opportunity to create a phenomenal open space/park which will support many activities for the residents of Santa Monica and will benefit the quality of life for not only citizens of Santa Monica, but the surrounding areas as well.
Please add my name to the long list of supporters of this project. Let’s make this project something that the entire City can be proud of.
Thank you,
Kenny Fields
1740 Cedar Street
Santa Monica, 90405
Item 7.B
01/24/23
31 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:52 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: 1/24/23 Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: Vivien Flitton <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2023 2:03 PM
To: councilmtgitems <[email protected]>
Cc: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: 1/24/23 Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
I support the staff recommendation to begin a public planning process for the future of Santa Monica Airport.
I look forward to the airport closing in 2028 and the land being turned into a Great Park that everyone can enjoy.
We want to preserve the Museum of Flying, The Ruskin Group Theater and the artist studios, and look forward to more cultural and arts uses, more public recreational facilities and public open spaces. Let’s start now with some more pickelball and tennis courts.
Sincerely,
Vivien Flitton
Sunset Park
Item 7.B
01/24/23
32 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 10:29 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: I support this effort by Airport to Park
From: Lauren de la Fuente <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 10:02 AM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: I support this effort by Airport to Park
EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Davis and City Council Members,
The Santa Monica Airport2Park Foundation strongly supports staff’s recommendation to begin the planning process for the future of Santa Monica Airport, as do I.
Not only will this action start the planning for the Airport Conversion Process, but it is also the first step in realizing the full potential of the upcoming parks master plan for the entire City. Our city is park‐poor compared to others in the area, and those parks we do have are small to medium size. The Great Park on the airport land will increase the effectiveness of our entire park system by serving as the hub for parks throughout the City.
As population and housing densities increase with each passing decade, park space must increase accordingly. The City is now at a watershed moment. We have a once in a lifetime opportunity, and obligation to future generations to create a livable City of the future. That means a dramatic increase in park space, and is the purpose of the upcoming planning process.
We are impressed by the thoroughness of Staff’s report and its presentation of the many facets of the planning process and possible outcomes, and the conflicting needs that the process will address. This is the reality of any large public planning process.
At the same time we are concerned that language in the report may be interpreted as ‘pessimistic’ regarding the City’s ability to plan, create and operate a Great Park. While we understand Staff’s caution, unwarranted pessimism may lead to public distrust of the intent to keep the promise made at the time of the Measure LC fight to build a Great Park. Yes, financing any great undertaking is complex, but Santa Monica can draw on ample resources to build and operate the park. We should make no small plans. Big plans inspire, and inspirational plans usually find a way to happen. So let's start this multi‐year process with optimism, and let's plan to make immediate recreational use of the space after closure.
As the report points out, income from the airport is currently over $20 million per year, virtually all of which is from non‐ aviation uses. This figure will inevitably increase as aviation uses are replaced and buildings are upgraded, and will continue to grow following airport closure at the end of 2028. These funds exist because the City acted to move loss‐ making airport operations to a firm financial footing which led to aviation businesses being replaced with market‐rate non‐aviation tenants. But while the airport remains, airport fund money can only be used for constrained purposes within the airport premises.
The consent decree allowing closure of the airport resulted from both the City’s decision to continue the legal fight and the community’s measure LC victory. These two things ultimately made these funds available for Great Park purposes.
The alliance between the City and the community created this opportunity, and LC passed by a large margin for one fundamental reason, and that was the promise of a Great Park. These funds should be ample to cover operating costs, as well as much of development.
Significantly, and as the report notes, parks are built over time, often over decades. The City should not necessarily expect to fund the whole park at once and should not make that an absolute goal. Initial costs need not be prohibitive, as the report shows from examples it cites.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
33 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Let’s always keep in mind: the major cost of the park, the land, was paid for almost a century ago with a parks bond.
Your predecessors and residents were visionary then, let’s be visionary now.
Ten years ago, after losing the big jets lawsuits, the City was considering throwing in the towel after 50 years of trying to close the airport. The FAA was insisting the City could not close the airport under the 1984 agreement. The City started a process that seemed designed to prepare residents to accept the airport’s continuation. And then in 2014 the aviation industry gathered signatures to put Measure D on the ballot to remove all control over SMO's future from the City. But the community fought back and with the support of City Council and virtually every community organization in the area, Santa Monica defeated the aviation industry and the nearly $1 million they spent to keep SMO operating as their private preserve. (Airport2Park board members also served as the board of the Measure LC community organization.) Compared to this past history, we see no reason for pessimism. We as a city and community united, absolutely can and will do this! Let’s be bold!
In the meantime we believe there are still many things that can be done on the existing 12‐acre Airport Park expansion to mitigate existing citywide issues (e.g., playing fields, pickle‐ball courts, etc.). If any incremental funding for that already designed and approved park space can be found, then that work can and should go ahead. Showing visible progress on already planned parkland at the airport will not only buoy public trust, but may also lay a foundation for other forms of non‐city funding to help move the entire process forward.
Airport2Park was formed to help bring the Great Park into existence, and we have found that while such opportunities for other funding are out there, without a clear commitment by the City to begin work on the process, it is difficult to tap into these sources. We hope the proposed planning process, and signs of progress on the existing expansion plan, will resolve these difficulties.
As always, we thank City Council for its support in closing the airport and using this publicly owned land as a once in a lifetime opportunity to do something truly great.
Sincerely,
Lauren de la Fuente
2110 Pearl Street
Santa Monica, CA 90405
[email protected]
310.283.8488
Item 7.B
01/24/23
34 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Vernice Hankins
From: Nate <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 10:13 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents that cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Nathan Siahpush
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
35 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 Vernice Hankins
From: Vikram Sasi <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 9:40 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Conset Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Sana Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Vikram Sasi
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
36 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 Vernice Hankins
From: Airport2Park <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:57 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; David White
Subject: 1/24/23 agenda item 7-B - From Santa Monica Airport2Park Board
EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Davis and City Council Members,
The Santa Monica Airport2Park Foundation strongly supports staff’s recommendation to begin the planning process for the future of Santa Monica Airport.
Not only will this action start the planning for the Airport Conversion Process, but it is also the first step in realizing the full potential of the upcoming parks master plan for the entire City. Our city is park‐poor compared to others in the area, and those parks we do have are small to medium size. The Great Park on the airport land will increase the effectiveness of our entire park system by serving as the hub for parks throughout the City.
As population and housing densities increase with each passing decade, park space must increase accordingly. The City is now at a watershed moment. We have a once in a lifetime opportunity, and obligation to future generations to create a livable City of the future. That means a dramatic increase in park space, and is the purpose of the upcoming planning process.
We are impressed by the thoroughness of Staff’s report and its presentation of the many facets of the planning process and possible outcomes, and the conflicting needs that the process will address. This is the reality of any large public planning process.
At the same time we are concerned that language in the report may be interpreted as ‘pessimistic’ regarding the City’s ability to plan, create and operate a Great Park. While we understand Staff’s caution, unwarranted pessimism may lead to public distrust of the intent to keep the promise made at the time of the Measure LC fight to build a Great Park. Yes, financing any great undertaking is complex, but Santa Monica can draw on ample resources to build and operate the park. We should make no small plans. Big plans inspire, and inspirational plans usually find a way to happen. So let's start this multi‐year process with optimism, and let's plan to make immediate recreational use of the space after closure.
As the report points out, income from the airport is currently over $20 million per year, virtually all of which is from non‐ aviation uses. This figure will inevitably increase as aviation uses are replaced and buildings are upgraded, and will continue to grow following airport closure at the end of 2028. These funds exist because the City acted to move loss‐ making airport operations to a firm financial footing which led to aviation businesses being replaced with market‐rate non‐aviation tenants. But while the airport remains, airport fund money can only be used for constrained purposes within the airport premises.
The consent decree allowing closure of the airport resulted from both the City’s decision to continue the legal fight and the community’s measure LC victory. These two things ultimately made these funds available for Great Park purposes. The alliance between the City and the community created this opportunity, and LC passed by a large margin for one fundamental reason, and that was the promise of a Great Park. These funds should be ample to cover operating costs, as well as much of development.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
37 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
6 Significantly, and as the report notes, parks are built over time, often over decades. The City should not necessarily expect to fund the whole park at once and should not make that an absolute goal. Initial costs need not be prohibitive, as the report shows from examples it cites.
Let’s always keep in mind: the major cost of the park, the land, was paid for almost a century ago with a parks bond.
Your predecessors and residents were visionary then, let’s be visionary now.
Ten years ago, after losing the big jets lawsuits, the City was considering throwing in the towel after 50 years of trying to close the airport. The FAA was insisting the City could not close the airport under the 1984 agreement. The City started a process that seemed designed to prepare residents to accept the airport’s continuation. And then in 2014 the aviation industry gathered signatures to put Measure D on the ballot to remove all control over SMO's future from the City. But the community fought back and with the support of City Council and virtually every community organization in the area, Santa Monica defeated the aviation industry and the nearly $1 million they spent to keep SMO operating as their private preserve. (Airport2Park board members also served as the board of the Measure LC community organization.) Compared to this past history, we see no reason for pessimism. We as a city and community united, absolutely can and will do this! Let’s be bold!
In the meantime we believe there are still many things that can be done on the existing 12‐acre Airport Park expansion to mitigate existing citywide issues (e.g., playing fields, pickle‐ball courts, etc.). If any incremental funding for that already designed and approved park space can be found, then that work can and should go ahead. Showing visible progress on already planned parkland at the airport will not only buoy public trust, but may also lay a foundation for other forms of non‐city funding to help move the entire process forward.
Airport2Park was formed to help bring the Great Park into existence, and we have found that while such opportunities for other funding are out there, without a clear commitment by the City to begin work on the process, it is difficult to tap into these sources. We hope the proposed planning process, and signs of progress on the existing expansion plan, will resolve these difficulties.
As always, we thank City Council for its support in closing the airport and using this publicly owned land as a once in a lifetime opportunity to do something truly great.
Sincerely,
The Santa Monica Airport2Park Foundation board:
Neil Carrey ‐ Chair
Michael Brodsky
John Fairweather
Frank Gruber
Cathy Larson
Mike Salazar
Item 7.B
01/24/23
38 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
7 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:53 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Santa Monica Airport Closure
Attachments: 016147415.JPG
From: Ricarda Ankenbrand‐Lindes <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2023 8:29 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Cc: Ricarda Ankenbrand‐Lindes <[email protected]> Subject: Santa Monica Airport Closure
EXTERNAL
Dear City Council,
We are writing to express our support for the new Planning Process and for the creation of a Great Park that will support everyone in our community and address the lack of much needed open space right here in Santa Monica.
Sincerely,
Ricarda Ankenbrand-Lindes
‐‐
Ricarda Ankenbrand‐Lindes
Coldwell Banker | Global Luxury
301 N. Canon Dr., Suite E
Beverly Hills, CA 90210
310‐500‐8017 mobile
Coldwell Banker President's Elite
BRE#: 01431595 The linked image cannot be
displayed. The file may hav e
been mov ed, renamed, or
deleted. Verify that the link
points to the correct file and
location.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
39 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 10:29 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: Jamie Lloyd‐Smith <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 10:12 AM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Cc: Katherine McNamara <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
We write to express our strong support for the initiation of a public process to determine the future of the airport lands after the airport closes in 2028. We urge the council to stay the course in developing plans for a great park to serve the community, and to initiate a transparent and participatory public process to make these plans. It is non‐negotiable that the sentiments of Santa Monica voters, as expressed strongly in Measure LC, be respected in determining the future uses of this land. We have reviewed the Conversion Report and favor the Public or Public+ models, possibly with private concessions to increase revenues. We have been closely engaged in this issue for more than a decade, and it will remain one of the most important issues driving the voting behavior of our household.
Thank you,
Jamie Lloyd‐Smith and Katherine McNamara
Sunset Park residents
Item 7.B
01/24/23
40 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 10:29 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: Steven Naftali <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 10:08 AM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
Honorable City Council members:
My family and I are Santa Monica residents and voters. We will whole heartedly appreciate each of your votes to close the SM airport, SMO, and to create a new park in its place.
Regards,
Steve Naftali
[email protected]
The information transmitted is intended only for the person which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this message in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
41 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Jane Dempsey <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 12:13 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: RE: 1/24/23 agenda item 7-B
EXTERNAL
Dear City Council Members,
I strongly support the January 22, 2023 Friends of Sunset Park letter below and the Airport2Park letter below.
Thank you for your continued support of our neighborhood and residents.
Sincerely,
Jane Dempsey
***********************************************************************************************************
January 22, 2023
To: Mayor Davis and City Council members
From: Board of Directors, Friends of Sunset Park (FOSP) RE: 1/24/23 agenda item 7-B Study Session: Public Process to Determine the Future of the Santa Monica Airport
Study Session staff report and recommendation:
https://santamonicacityca.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=1352&MediaPosition=&ID=5303 &CssClass=
The FOSP Board supports the staff recommendation to begin a public planning process for the future of the Santa Monica Airport.
FOSP members worked very hard to pass Measure LC in 2014, and we look forward to transforming the Santa Monica Airport into a Great Park after the airport closes at midnight on December 31, 2028.
At one point, the staff report states, “At present, the community’s preferred outcome for the future of the Airport is unclear.” As a gentle reminder, this was the outcome of the election in 2014:
15,434 registered voters in Santa Monica voted “Yes” on Measure LC to “affirm the City Council’s authority to close all or part of the Airport,” winning 60-40. -- https://itsourland.org/ 14,688 registered voters in Santa Monica voted “No” on Measure D, which would have required the city “to continue to operate the Airport,” losing 41-59. -- https://itsourland.org/ Item 7.B
01/24/23
42 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Measure LC ballot language also talked about “the development of parks, public open spaces, and public recreational facilities; and the maintenance and replacement of existing cultural, arts, and education uses.” In addition to gaining much needed park space on the Airport property, we also want to preserve the Museum of Flying, the Ruskin Group Theater, and the artist studios that we loved visiting during the pre-pandemic annual Airport Art Walks. https://www.santamonica.gov/press/2019/02/21/13th-annual-santa-monica-airport-artwalkreturns-march-23 Again, the FOSP Board supports agenda item 7-B and looks forward to the process of transforming the Santa Monica Airport into a Great Park!
Dear Mayor Davis and City Council Members,
The Santa Monica Airport2Park Foundation strongly supports staff’s recommendation to begin the planning process for the future of Santa Monica Airport.
Not only will this action start the planning for the Airport Conversion Process, but it is also the first step in realizing the full potential of the upcoming parks master plan for the entire City. Our city is park-poor compared to others in the area, and those parks we do have are small to medium size. The Great Park on the airport land will increase the effectiveness of our entire park system by serving as the hub for parks throughout the City.
As population and housing densities increase with each passing decade, park space must increase accordingly. The City is now at a watershed moment. We have a once in a lifetime opportunity, and obligation to future generations to create a livable City of the future. That means a dramatic increase in park space, and is the purpose of the upcoming planning process.
We are impressed by the thoroughness of Staff’s report and its presentation of the many facets of the planning process and possible outcomes, and the conflicting needs that the process will address.
This is the reality of any large public planning process.
At the same time we are concerned that language in the report may be interpreted as ‘pessimistic’ regarding the City’s ability to plan, create and operate a Great Park. While we understand Staff’s caution, unwarranted pessimism may lead to public distrust of the intent to keep the promise made at the time of the Measure LC fight to build a Great Park. Yes, financing any great undertaking is complex, but Santa Monica can draw on ample resources to build and operate the park. We should make no small plans. Big plans inspire, and inspirational plans usually find a way to happen. So let's start this multi-year process with optimism, and let's plan to make immediate recreational use of the space after closure.
As the report points out, income from the airport is currently over $20 million per year, virtually all of which is from non-aviation uses. This figure will inevitably increase as aviation uses are replaced and buildings are upgraded, and will continue to grow following airport closure at the end of 2028. These funds exist because the City acted to move loss-making airport operations to a firm financial footing which led to aviation businesses being replaced with market-rate non-aviation tenants. But while the airport remains, airport fund money can only be used for constrained purposes within the airport premises.
The consent decree allowing closure of the airport resulted from both the City’s decision to continue the legal fight and the community’s measure LC victory. These two things ultimately made these funds available for Great Park purposes. The alliance between the City and the community created Item 7.B
01/24/23
43 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 this opportunity, and LC passed by a large margin for one fundamental reason, and that was the promise of a Great Park. These funds should be ample to cover operating costs, as well as much of development.
Significantly, and as the report notes, parks are built over time, often over decades. The City should not necessarily expect to fund the whole park at once and should not make that an absolute goal.
Initial costs need not be prohibitive, as the report shows from examples it cites.
Let’s always keep in mind: the major cost of the park, the land, was paid for almost a century ago with a parks bond. Your predecessors and residents were visionary then, let’s be visionary now.
Ten years ago, after losing the big jets lawsuits, the City was considering throwing in the towel after 50 years of trying to close the airport. The FAA was insisting the City could not close the airport under the 1984 agreement. The City started a process that seemed designed to prepare residents to accept the airport’s continuation. And then in 2014 the aviation industry gathered signatures to put Measure D on the ballot to remove all control over SMO's future from the City. But the community fought back and with the support of City Council and virtually every community organization in the area, Santa Monica defeated the aviation industry and the nearly $1 million they spent to keep SMO operating as their private preserve. (Airport2Park board members also served as the board of the Measure LC community organization.)
Compared to this past history, we see no reason for pessimism. We as a city and community united, absolutely can and will do this! Let’s be bold!
In the meantime we believe there are still many things that can be done on the existing 12-acre Airport Park expansion to mitigate existing citywide issues (e.g., playing fields, pickle-ball courts, etc.). If any incremental funding for that already designed and approved park space can be found, then that work can and should go ahead. Showing visible progress on already planned parkland at the airport will not only buoy public trust, but may also lay a foundation for other forms of non-city funding to help move the entire process forward.
Airport2Park was formed to help bring the Great Park into existence, and we have found that while such opportunities for other funding are out there, without a clear commitment by the City to begin work on the process, it is difficult to tap into these sources. We hope the proposed planning process, and signs of progress on the existing expansion plan, will resolve these difficulties.
As always, we thank City Council for its support in closing the airport and using this publicly owned land as a once in a lifetime opportunity to do something truly great.
Sincerely,
The Santa Monica Airport2Park Foundation board
Item 7.B
01/24/23
44 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Andrew Grove <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 12:28 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: SM Airport Public Comment
EXTERNAL
The future is in flux. The Santa Monica Municipal Airport is already significantly changed from what it was just a few years ago, and rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable piece of community infrastructure even more valuable to, and compatible with, the people of Santa Monica. Any “approach that is informed by data, robust and transparent discussion, rigorous economic evaluation and a visionary, far-reaching outlook to make the best use of this land for many generations to come” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders, including current aviation users and the young urban cohort likely to use the airport in the future, as part of the LA DOT Urban Air Mobility initiatives and otherwise. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
Andrew Grove
Santa Monica, CA
Item 7.B
01/24/23
45 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: Mike Patlin <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 12:26 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: SMO
EXTERNAL
The Santa Monica Municipal Airport has been an asset for over 100 years to our community. Rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable infrastructure even more valuable and compatible with the people of Santa Monica. Any discussion, "to make the best use of this land for many generations to come,” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders. We need the experience and skills of current aviators to have a clear vision into the next 100 years. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
Mike Patlin
Hanger owner
Sent from my iPhone
Item 7.B
01/24/23
46 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Vernice Hankins
From: M. Ross Klun <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 12:24 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
I am a resident and I support efforts to keep the airport operating. I see it as an asset during disasters. I see the airport as a source of revenue for city businesses because of the private and corporate traffic it conveniently attracts directly into the city rather than far‐away airports.
M. Ross Klun
City Resident
Item 7.B
01/24/23
47 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 12:20 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: WILLIAM KERR <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 10:34 AM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
Hello!
I’d to thank the City Council for its support in closing the airport and for thoughtful consideration in using the publicly owned land as a once in a lifetime opportunity to do something truly great.
Please don’t make a short sided decision that would only add to congestion in our urban setting — Please make your mark in history and implement forward movement in creating historical open space — The Santa Monica Park.
Adding more buildings in a city is not memorable. The legacy of your office can be grand. Be bold. People will remember and praise our City and its leaders!
Thank you from a neighbor and a citizen of our great Southland.
Sincerely,
William Kerr
310‐877‐0598
Item 7.B
01/24/23
48 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 Vernice Hankins
From: Richard Wolf <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 12:20 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low-density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring the development of the parcels is an inevitability.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Sana Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low-density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances were the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
49 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
6 Richard Wolf
Stakeholder
---------------------------------------
Sent from my iPad
Item 7.B
01/24/23
50 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
7 Vernice Hankins
From: Jeff Meltzer <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 12:14 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Fwd: It would be a shame to close down Torrance Airport just a few years short of Flying Cars to Downtown LA and Dodger Stadium
EXTERNAL
Please consider guiding the City of Santa Monica into the future.
Below is a multi‐Media presentation to explain the once‐in‐a‐generation opportunity the City of Santa Monica Airport Asset.
During the LA Olympics in 2028, no cars will be allowed to drive to any Olympic venues. News report announces NO CARS for Olympics 2028
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYxgV17skDA&t=137s
The 2024 Olympics in Paris will introduce the public to using Evtols. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjZylpRXlec
What could be added to Torrance Airport over the next few years to be available to the public by 2028 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lE3nh6Ddir8
Please let me know if you have any questions, I would be happy to help. ‐‐
Jeff Meltzer, Co‐Founder
Time To Fly Planes
To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
51 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
8 In the City of Santa Monica, local Real Estate Developers eager to get their hands on Prime Raw Land are pushing the agenda to close their airport. Is that the situation in your organization In the meantime, I wanted to share some pleasant news about EVTALs and how this will reduce Torrance's impact on your community.
One happy fact is that EVTOL will be about 100 times quieter than aircraft. Since they are electric, like a Tesla, they make very little noise. This week, the City of Chicago started its Test flights. And the first few passengers get to fly. So if you want to go to Chicago and see how quiet an eVTOL can be, go to this website and get your ticket. Cheers : https://eveairmobility.com/chicago/
Noise associated with EVTOL
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIBGVxLvf4o&t=8s
EVTOL is an exciting new technology if anybody wants to look into this. EVTOLs are electric aircraft ( Quieter than a typical car) that will soon be flying throughout Los Angeles. it would be extremely foolhardy for our community to give up an airport just before gaining access to electric flying cars. Having Santa Monica for the citizens to use will be a tremendous asset to getting into downtown Los Angeles, when there is Gridlock.
Please do not squander an opportunity to have an airport near you. Here is a trip to see what a Laker Game or Dodger Game in Downtown LA might look like in 2024.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UFJPIyCQvY
Here is a video showing how SUPER QUIET they are!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHmXR0wBOiI
Please let me know if you have any questions, I would be happy to help. ‐‐
Jeff Meltzer, Co‐Founder
Time To Fly Planes
To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
52 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Bill Price <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 12:42 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Close the Santa Monica airport?
EXTERNAL
If anything happens to LAX during a disaster (and this world appears to suffer catastrophe on a regular basis) the west side of Los Angeles will be without a port of any kind to provide much‐needed relief supplies. No railroad, no seaport, and no airport. The Santa Monica Airport is the emergency backup as a reliever airport to LAX. Close it, turn the land over to developers, and there will be blood on your hands during the next disaster. ‐‐
B I L L P R I C E ● 213 709 1141
3724 Stewart Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90066
[email protected] | www.billprice.com
Item 7.B
01/24/23
53 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: Jeff Meltzer <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 12:44 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Cc: SCAUWG
Subject: Re: KSMO - Emails to Council Members Needed by Tues 12 pm
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
Keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
The exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low-density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring the parcels' development is inevitable.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Sana Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected by state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low-density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two were the Gelson’s (Lincoln) and Builder Remedy projects. l, however
7. In 2028, the Olympics will be hosted by Los Angeles. NO CARS will be allowed to drive to any Venue. Electric Evtols will, however, be allowed.
8. Electric Evtols are 100 times quieter than aircraft or, for that matter, automobiles. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHmXR0wBOiI Item 7.B
01/24/23
54 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 9. Flying Cars are the best way for the City of Santa Monica to embrace the future and reduce noise and bumper-to-bumper traffic.
10 The City Council in Florida have already committed to building a Vertiport for their Evtols, and Santa Monica can follow their lead. This would be perfect timing for the 2028 Olympics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lE3nh6Ddir8 Vidoe showing the new Vertiport in Florida.
Could you keep the airport open? It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Jeffrey B. Meltzer
Stakeholder
On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 12:00 PM SCAUWG <[email protected]> wrote:
Letter to SMO City Council Needed by Tues. 1/24 - 12 pm To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Letter and Special Proposed Email addressing KSMO Status:
Dear Airport Supporter,
The Santa Monica City Council will address the process to determine the future of the Santa Monica Airport on Tuesday, January 24, 2023. The City's Staff Report and materials submitted by the City can be found Here.
Like many at-risk airports, Santa Monica has been invaded by heavily prodevelopment groups who serve as a training ground for state legislators Ben Allen and Richard Bloom and also have significant influence with Ted Lieu at the Federal level.
WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY
While the residents of Santa Monica have been overly critical of pilots and the aviation community, development is an absolutely NO-GO topic with the residents. The promising strategy to prevent the closure of Santa Monica Airport ironically is to adopt Item 7.B
01/24/23
55 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 a non-aviation-centric approach. Specifically, framing and communicating the limited choices residents have with land use legislation and the unique ultra-low-density land use an airport provides to highlight the irreplaceable benefits to residents' quality of life that can only be enjoyed if Santa Monica Airport remains operational.
HOW TO HELP
Attend: If able, please attend the City Council meeting on Tuesday, January 24, 2023, at 7 pm, Santa Monica City Hall, 1685 Main Street, Room 250, Sana Monica, CA 90401. The meeting is expected to last 4-7 hours. Those who are able to attend are permitted to address the City Council for 1-2 minutes or can donate their time to another speaker. We need our voices heard.
Watch: You can watch (but not participate) either Here or on the City's YouTube channel Here
Email: To support these efforts, please consider copying the below text and sending one email to all eight (8) of the noted email addresses by the City Council cutoff of noon on Tuesday, January 24, 2023.
Thank you for your ongoing support.
Blue skies and tailwinds,
Eve Lopez
Pilot, SMO Tenant
Santa Monica Resident
------------------------------------------------------
Council Member Email Addresses and Proposed Message::
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Item 7.B
01/24/23
56 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 [email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultralow-density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring the development of the parcels is an inevitability.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Sana Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low-density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
57 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
6 6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances were the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
[Your Name]
Stakeholder
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
The above message was sent to SCAUWG by Santa Monica Pilot and Airport Advocate, Eve Lopez.
More Information about KSMO and the Santa Monica City Council can be found on SCAUWG.ORG, including the Staff Report 5303 that details the proposed development of Santa Monica Airport. You can view it HERE.
VISIT OUR SITE NOW - so much new information has been added - simply click: www.scauwg.org
Copyright © 2018,-2023 Ron Berinstein, All rights reserved.
Our mailing address is:
21551 Burbank Blvd. #81 Woodland Hills, CA 91367
Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
58 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
7 This email was sent to [email protected]
why did I get this? unsubscribe from this list update subscription preferences SCAUWG ꞏ 2629 Foothill Blvd # 221 ꞏ La Crescenta, CA 91214-3511 ꞏ USA To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Email Marketing Powered by Mailchimp
‐‐
Jeff Meltzer, NWFA CWFI, CR
NWFA Forensic Inspections, Inc.
462 E 17th St #C., Costa Mesa, CA 92627
Office: 310‐525 ‐0590
Fax:
Web:www.flooringdetective.com
Item 7.B
01/24/23
59 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
8 Vernice Hankins
From: Michael Rosen <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 12:39 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: January 24 agenda: Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
he Santa Monica Municipal Airport has been an asset for over 100 years to our community. Rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable infrastructure even more valuable and compatible with the people of Santa Monica. Any discussion, "to make the best use of this land for many generations to come,” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders. We need the experience and skills of current aviators to have a clear vision into the next 100 years. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
The Santa Monica Airport protects the entire Westside community from high-density & high-rise development due to the airport control zone that encompasses over 50 square miles. The Airport also protects our Santa Monica residents, from larger commercial jet traffic & noise flying into LAX. It’s no secret that developers want access to this land. Once we lose an Airport as an asset, it is not something we can get back. For the sake & benefit of all, we ask that you consider the option of keeping the Airport open as a viable resource beyond 2028 to be included in your current & future Santa Monica Planning decisions.
The Santa Monica Airport has provided safety, emergency and disaster service response to the Los Angeles community for 100+ years. Closure of the Airport would result in losing this essential asset, risking more loss of human life and more suffering during tragic events.
Any approach that is informed by data, robust and transparent discussion, rigorous economic evaluation and a visionary, far-reaching outlook to make the best use of this land for many generations to come must include existing and future aviation stakeholders, including current aviation users and the young urban cohort likely to use the airport in the future, I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process.
Michael A. Rosen
Chief Investment Officer
Angeles Investments
www.angelesinvestments.com
429 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 650
Santa Monica, CA 90401
310-393-6300 x111
The information contained in and accompanying this communication may be strictly confidential and intended solely for the use of the intended recipient(s) or entity to which they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient(s) of this communication, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this email. Please delete and destroy all copies immediately. Emails may be interfered with; many contain computer defects and may not be successfully replicated on other systems. Angeles Investment Advisors, LLC, and its subsidiaries (“Angeles”) give no warranties in relation to these Item 7.B
01/24/23
60 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
9 matters. The recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses. Angeles accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. If you have any doubts about the authenticity of an email purportedly sent by Angeles, please contact Angeles immediately at (310) 393-6300. Angeles reserves the right to intercept and monitor the content of email messages to and from its system.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
61 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
10 Vernice Hankins
From: Paul Vitagliano <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 12:35 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Airport - City Council Meeting
EXTERNAL
I fully support the existence and continued operation of Santa Monica Airport. The Santa Monica Municipal Airport is already significantly changed from what it was just a few years ago and rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable piece of community infrastructure even more valuable to and compatible with the people of Santa Monica. Any “approach that is informed by data robust and transparent discussion rigorous economic evaluation and a visionary far‐reaching outlook to make the best use of this land for many generations to come” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders including current aviation users and the young urban cohort likely to use the airport in the future as part of the LA DOT Urban Air Mobility initiatives and otherwise. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
Please keep the airport and all aviation related leases in tact and stop leasing to non aviation concerns, such as vintage car sales etc.
Sincerely,
Paul Vitagliano
[email protected]
(310) 562‐5128
@paulvitagliano
Item 7.B
01/24/23
62 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
11 Vernice Hankins
From: Bob Gallion <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 12:32 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: SMO
EXTERNAL
I live one block from SMO and yes, I sometimes dislike the noise but the disaster support an airport offers outweighs the undesirable noise.
The technology to promote green aviation that protects residents from aircraft noise & pollution is now created & rapidly advancing. The future of aviation is certain to be cleaner and quieter for all of our benefit. The advantages of a general aviation airport serving the community for regional travel would consume less resources and bring more revenue to our local economy.
Many airports that have been closed still sit undeveloped, untransformed & underutilized as a profitable resource for decades. There is never enough money, planning or commitment to enable a transition for the public good. And in all cases, the city loses financial profit or gain since there is zero revenue coming in.
As the city council knows, there is not funding or public financial support to create a “great park”. It is a cheap political balloon to propagate the myth that a park will be created within one’s political career or even within the lifetime of most of the pro “great park” lobby effortists. Any Park, unlike the Santa Monica Airport, is not a self‐sustaining resource.
Parks must be financed by the City and ultimately by residents’ taxes to maintain which is no longer a financially viable option.
The future is in flux. The Santa Monica Municipal Airport is already significantly changed from what it was just a few years ago, and rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable piece of community infrastructure even more valuable to, and compatible with, the people of Santa Monica. Any “approach that is informed by data, robust and transparent discussion, rigorous economic evaluation and a visionary, far‐reaching outlook to make the best use of this land for many generations to come” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders, including current aviation users and the young urban cohort likely to use the airport in the future, as part of the LA DOT Urban Air Mobility initiatives and otherwise. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
Thank you for your time & consideration.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
63 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
12 Vernice Hankins
From: jalon o'connell <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 12:28 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
Dear City Council
The Santa Monica Airport has provided safety, emergency and disaster service response to the Los Angeles community for 100+ years. Closure of the Airport would result in losing this essential asset, risking more loss of human life and more suffering during tragic events. The math is simple. There will be earthquakes, fires and other disaster events multiple times over the next one hundred years. Any city council that removes our Santa Monica Airport aviation land use as an emergency resource will have blood on their hands for a millennium.
During medical flights, I have witnessed people who have died waiting for medical evacuation. I have been in a helicopter as people died en route to a hospital and I have sat next to many people (in helicopters and airplanes) who are only alive today, because they were flown to emergency medical care or to safety.
Thinking back to 9-11, if LAX is compromised in any way, due to a dirty bomb or any unforeseen event. The Westside of Los Angeles is void of a port of any kind. No rail road, no sea port and no airport. The Santa Monica Airport is the emergency back up as a reliever airport to LAX.
Aviation is the safest form of transportation available at this time. It is statistically in fact more dangerous to ride a motorcycle, car, bike or to be a pedestrian in Santa Monica than to be a pilot or passenger on an airplane. Not one citizen of Santa Monica has been harmed by an aircraft accident.
STOP TRYING TO CLOSE THE AIRPORT, OR STEAL MORE OF IT'S LAND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! STOP BEING SO SHORT SITED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sincerely,
Jalon O'Connell Morton
Item 7.B
01/24/23
64 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Bryan F. <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 12:44 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: SMO Airport
EXTERNAL
To Whom it May Concern:
The Santa Monica Municipal Airport has been an asset for over 100 years to our community. Rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable infrastructure even more valuable and compatible with the people of Santa Monica. Any discussion, "to make the best use of this land for many generations to come,” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders. We need the experience and skills of current aviators to have a clear vision into the next 100 years. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit. ‐ Bryan Ferrell
Item 7.B
01/24/23
65 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
Item 7.B
01/24/23
66 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: FRIGOLA PEDRO <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 1:02 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Preserve Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council Members:
As a long time member of the Santa Monica (SM) community I urge you to preserve Santa Monica Airport (SMO) as a general aviation (GA) airport.
SMO has been an asset to the SM community for well over 100 years, and continues to serve in key ways as a relief airport, local medivac station, GA training facility, as well as meeting local transportation needs .
On a personal basis, as a SM business owner and pilot with a tie‐down at SMO, SMO has allowed me to efficiently interact with my SM‐based science&technology company and its customers across California and nearby States.
Please preserve SMO. It is an irreplaceable resource that can AND should continue to be an asset to Santa Monica for the next 100 years!
Thank you,
Pedro Frigola
Senior Researcher and Co‐Founder
RadiaBeam Technologies, LLC
1735 Stewart St. Suite A
Santa Monica, CA 90404
Item 7.B
01/24/23
67 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: Kevin Flick <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 12:56 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: SM Airport - protect and preserve
EXTERNAL
Thinking back to 9‐11, if LAX is compromised in any way, due to a dirty bomb or any unforeseen event. The Westside of Los Angeles is void of a port of any kind. No rail road, no sea port and no airport. The Santa Monica Airport is the emergency back up as a reliever airport to LAX.
Aviation is the safest form of transportation available at this time. It is statistically in fact more dangerous to ride a motorcycle, car, bike or to be a pedestrian in Santa Monica than to be a pilot or passenger on an airplane. Not one citizen of Santa Monica has been harmed by an aircraft accident.
The airport has been financially abused by City staff and the City Council. Millions of dollars have been illegally misappropriated out of the Airport fund and spent on frivolous law suits. Residents who chose to buy homes next to the airport are the most vocal in trying to profit from closing the airport. The airport is a valuable resource to Santa Monica, inexpensive to operate, an asset to our community and is profitable to all of Santa Monica, inviting people to enjoy the local area, shop, eat & use our hotels.
The airport finances itself, bringing jobs to our community and could be an incubator for innovation if given the opportunity. Historically, the many businesses at the Airport have offered career opportunities and livelihoods to the community. The Airport has provided quality STEM education for 100+ years, something to be embraced by all who wish to pursue a route that positively enhances one’s livelihood in a healthy and sustainable way. Our existing parks & recreation areas at SMO provide kids & adults with a safe & uncrowded place to play.
The technology to promote green aviation that protects residents from aircraft noise & pollution is now created & rapidly advancing. The future of aviation is certain to be cleaner and quieter for all of our benefit. The advantages of a general aviation airport serving the community for regional travel would consume less resources and bring more revenue to our local economy.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
68 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Vernice Hankins
From: Vanessa Gibson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 12:55 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica City Council Agenda Item 6B
EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
As the City Council decides the future of the Santa Monica Airport, it is important to know that the Santa Monica Airport protects the entire Westside community in a 4 mile area surrounding it from high-density & highrise development due to what’s referred to in aviation as airspace protection. To ensure the safety of all, airspace surrounding an airport must be protected from inappropriate development. Airports must be protected from obstacles to ensure aircraft flying in good weather during the initial and final stages of flight, or in the vicinity of the airport, can do so safely.
The Airport also protects our local residents, which is in close proximity to LAX’s air traffic, from larger commercial jet traffic & noise.
It’s no secret that developers want access to this land since open land is non-existent and is vastly profitable to develop. These ill-conceived development plans don't consider the reduction of quality in life to the entire Westside LA's future by the increase in population density, vehicular traffic and congestion. Removing an asset that protects all of our local residents from these negative impacts will be diminishing every individual’s quality of life for generations to come.
Long-term sustainable impact & foresight needs to be considered in all Airport & community planning initiatives & decisions. Once we lose an Airport as an asset, it is not something we can get back. For the sake & benefit of all, we ask that you consider the option of keeping the Airport open as a viable resource beyond 2028 to be included in your current & future Santa Monica Airport Planning decisions.
The Santa Monica Airport has provided safety, emergency, medical, military and disaster service response to the Los Angeles & worldwide community for 100+ years. Closure of the Airport would result in losing this essential emergency & disaster relief protection asset, including more loss of human life and more suffering during tragic events. There will be earthquakes, fires and other disaster events multiple times over the next one hundred years. Removal of our Santa Monica Airport aviation land use as an emergency resource will negatively impact everyone in our community.
Aviation is statistically the safest form of transportation available at this time. It is in fact more dangerous to ride a motorcycle, car, bike or to be a pedestrian in Santa Monica than to be a pilot or passenger on an airplane.
The extensive & rigorous hours of training required to fly an airplane is primarily focused on learning extensive safety & emergency procedures to protect the lives of the pilot, the passengers & all people on the ground for everyone’s well being.
The airport finances itself, bringing profit & jobs to our community and could be an incubator for innovation advancement if given the opportunity. Historically & at present, the many businesses at the Airport have offered countless & generous career opportunities and livelihoods to Santa Monica & LA-based residents.
The Airport continues to provide endless & lucrative opportunities for career advancement & prosperity for all who choose to participate in the training programs & offers many compatible use services including technology, art & entertainment.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
69 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 The Airport has provided quality STEM education for 100+ years, something to be embraced by all who wish to pursue a route that positively enhances one’s livelihood in a healthy and sustainable way.
Our existing parks & recreation areas at SMO provide kids & adults alike with a safe & uncrowded place to play as compatible use to the existing airfield.
The technology to promote green aviation that protects residents from aircraft noise & pollution has been created & is rapidly advancing. The future of aviation will be cleaner and quieter for the benefit of all. The advantages of a general aviation airport serving the community for regional travel would consume less resources and bring more revenue to our local economy. Santa Monica has a unique beneficial opportunity to be at the forefront of green aviation technology by embracing these assets as viable & sustainable.
As the city council knows, there is no funding or public financial support to create a “great park”. Every park must be financed by the City and ultimately by residents’ taxes to maintain which is no longer a financially viable or self-sustaining option.
Airports connect people worldwide. The Santa Monica Airport doesn’t stand alone. It provides General Aviation access to a national & international infrastructure connecting people to each other & experiences otherwise not possible. It’s a joyful place, inviting people to fly in from other locations to our destination city to enjoy the area, work, shop, eat & use our hotels.
For these important reasons, I ask that you add the option of keeping the Airport open as a sustainable resource beyond 2028 in your current & future Santa Monica Airport Planning decisions & recommendations.
Thank you for your time & consideration.
Vanessa Gibson
Item 7.B
01/24/23
70 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 Vernice Hankins
From: Graham Fig <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 12:55 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Airport - Protest of Closure.
EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica Council,
A shame upon you for wanting to shut down your historic airport which has been in use since the 1920’s. It is steeped in history and when founded it was not in a high density residential area.
The city grew around the airport, and not the other way around.
More is the pity that you do not seem to fully understand what an airport does for a community. Airports are lifeblood for any community. They should NOT be affected by the personal aspirations of City Councils who are politically motivated, nor greedy land developers who will profit materially from the shuttered airport’s future land value.
I am a prolific airport user, and a sometime user of your airport. Shutting it down is not just, not correct and not appreciated by the wider pilot and business community.
These are the people creating or bringing business into your community every day.
Sincerely,
Graham Fig
ATP
Graham Fig
New York
[email protected]
1‐516‐776‐6211
Item 7.B
01/24/23
71 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
6 Vernice Hankins
From: Jeff Meltzer <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 12:51 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Cc: SCAUWG
Subject: Re: KSMO - Emails to Council Members Needed by Tues 12 pm
EXTERNAL
During the LA Olympics in 2028, no cars will be allowed to drive to any Olympic venues. News report announces NO CARS for Olympics 2028
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYxgV17skDA&t=137s
On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 12:44 PM Jeff Meltzer <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear Councilmembers:
Keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
The exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low-density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring the parcels' development is inevitable.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Sana Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected by state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low-density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
72 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
7 6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two were the Gelson’s (Lincoln) and Builder Remedy projects. l, however
7. In 2028, the Olympics will be hosted by Los Angeles. NO CARS will be allowed to drive to any Venue. Electric Evtols will, however, be allowed.
8. Electric Evtols are 100 times quieter than aircraft or, for that matter, automobiles. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHmXR0wBOiI
9. Flying Cars are the best way for the City of Santa Monica to embrace the future and reduce noise and bumper-to-bumper traffic.
10 The City Council in Florida have already committed to building a Vertiport for their Evtols, and Santa Monica can follow their lead. This would be perfect timing for the 2028 Olympics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lE3nh6Ddir8 Vidoe showing the new Vertiport in Florida.
Could you keep the airport open? It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Jeffrey B. Meltzer
Stakeholder
On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 12:00 PM SCAUWG <[email protected]> wrote:
Letter to SMO City Council Needed by Tues. 1/24 - 12 pm To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Letter and Special Proposed Email addressing KSMO Status:
Dear Airport Supporter,
The Santa Monica City Council will address the process to determine the future of the Santa Monica Airport on Tuesday, January 24, 2023. The City's Staff Report and materials submitted by the City can be found Here.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
73 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
8 Like many at-risk airports, Santa Monica has been invaded by heavily prodevelopment groups who serve as a training ground for state legislators Ben Allen and Richard Bloom and also have significant influence with Ted Lieu at the Federal level.
WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY
While the residents of Santa Monica have been overly critical of pilots and the aviation community, development is an absolutely NO-GO topic with the residents. The promising strategy to prevent the closure of Santa Monica Airport ironically is to adopt a non-aviation-centric approach. Specifically, framing and communicating the limited choices residents have with land use legislation and the unique ultra-low-density land use an airport provides to highlight the irreplaceable benefits to residents' quality of life that can only be enjoyed if Santa Monica Airport remains operational.
HOW TO HELP
Attend: If able, please attend the City Council meeting on Tuesday, January 24, 2023, at 7 pm, Santa Monica City Hall, 1685 Main Street, Room 250, Sana Monica, CA 90401. The meeting is expected to last 4-7 hours. Those who are able to attend are permitted to address the City Council for 1-2 minutes or can donate their time to another speaker. We need our voices heard.
Watch: You can watch (but not participate) either Here or on the City's YouTube channel Here
Email: To support these efforts, please consider copying the below text and sending one email to all eight (8) of the noted email addresses by the City Council cutoff of noon on Tuesday, January 24, 2023.
Thank you for your ongoing support.
Blue skies and tailwinds,
Eve Lopez
Pilot, SMO Tenant
Santa Monica Resident
------------------------------------------------------
Council Member Email Addresses and Proposed Message::
Item 7.B
01/24/23
74 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
9 [email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultralow-density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring the development of the parcels is an inevitability.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
75 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
10 4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Sana Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low-density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances were the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
[Your Name]
Stakeholder
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
The above message was sent to SCAUWG by Santa Monica Pilot and Airport Advocate, Eve Lopez.
More Information about KSMO and the Santa Monica City Council can be found on SCAUWG.ORG, including the Staff Report 5303 that details the proposed development of Santa Monica Airport. You can view it HERE.
VISIT OUR SITE NOW - so much new information has been added - simply click: www.scauwg.org
Copyright © 2018,-2023 Ron Berinstein, All rights reserved.
Our mailing address is:
21551 Burbank Blvd. #81 Woodland Hills, CA 91367
Want to change how you receive these emails?
Item 7.B
01/24/23
76 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
11 You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list.
This email was sent to [email protected]
why did I get this? unsubscribe from this list update subscription preferences SCAUWG ꞏ 2629 Foothill Blvd # 221 ꞏ La Crescenta, CA 91214-3511 ꞏ USA To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Email Marketing Powered by Mailchimp
‐‐
Jeff Meltzer, NWFA CWFI, CR
NWFA Forensic Inspections, Inc.
462 E 17th St #C., Costa Mesa, CA 92627
Office: 310‐525 ‐0590
Fax:
Web:www.flooringdetective.com
‐‐
Jeff Meltzer, NWFA CWFI, CR
NWFA Forensic Inspections, Inc.
462 E 17th St #C., Costa Mesa, CA 92627
Office: 310‐525 ‐0590
Fax:
Web:www.flooringdetective.com
Item 7.B
01/24/23
77 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
12 Vernice Hankins
From: Shoichiro Akiyama <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 12:50 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low-density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring the development of the parcels is an inevitability.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Sana Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low-density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances were the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
78 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
13 Shoichiro Akiyama
Item 7.B
01/24/23
79 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Jeff Meltzer <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 1:33 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Cc: SCAUWG
Subject: Re: KSMO - Emails to Council Members Needed by Tues 12 pm
EXTERNAL
Please review this very carefully.
Santa Monica Airport can be converted into an Electric Airport Hub. https://verticalmag.com/news/urban‐air‐port‐hyundai‐plan‐65‐evtol‐air‐taxi‐hubs/ https://vimeo.com/605847677?embedded=true&source=vimeo_logo&owner=91776491 On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 12:44 PM Jeff Meltzer <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear Councilmembers:
Keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
The exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low-density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring the parcels' development is inevitable.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Sana Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected by state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low-density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
80 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two were the Gelson’s (Lincoln) and Builder Remedy projects. l, however
7. In 2028, the Olympics will be hosted by Los Angeles. NO CARS will be allowed to drive to any Venue. Electric Evtols will, however, be allowed.
8. Electric Evtols are 100 times quieter than aircraft or, for that matter, automobiles. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHmXR0wBOiI
9. Flying Cars are the best way for the City of Santa Monica to embrace the future and reduce noise and bumper-to-bumper traffic.
10 The City Council in Florida have already committed to building a Vertiport for their Evtols, and Santa Monica can follow their lead. This would be perfect timing for the 2028 Olympics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lE3nh6Ddir8 Vidoe showing the new Vertiport in Florida.
Could you keep the airport open? It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Jeffrey B. Meltzer
Stakeholder
On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 12:00 PM SCAUWG <[email protected]> wrote:
Letter to SMO City Council Needed by Tues. 1/24 - 12 pm To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Letter and Special Proposed Email addressing KSMO Status:
Dear Airport Supporter,
The Santa Monica City Council will address the process to determine the future of the Santa Monica Airport on Tuesday, January 24, 2023. The City's Staff Report and materials submitted by the City can be found Here.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
81 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Like many at-risk airports, Santa Monica has been invaded by heavily prodevelopment groups who serve as a training ground for state legislators Ben Allen and Richard Bloom and also have significant influence with Ted Lieu at the Federal level.
WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY
While the residents of Santa Monica have been overly critical of pilots and the aviation community, development is an absolutely NO-GO topic with the residents. The promising strategy to prevent the closure of Santa Monica Airport ironically is to adopt a non-aviation-centric approach. Specifically, framing and communicating the limited choices residents have with land use legislation and the unique ultra-low-density land use an airport provides to highlight the irreplaceable benefits to residents' quality of life that can only be enjoyed if Santa Monica Airport remains operational.
HOW TO HELP
Attend: If able, please attend the City Council meeting on Tuesday, January 24, 2023, at 7 pm, Santa Monica City Hall, 1685 Main Street, Room 250, Sana Monica, CA 90401. The meeting is expected to last 4-7 hours. Those who are able to attend are permitted to address the City Council for 1-2 minutes or can donate their time to another speaker. We need our voices heard.
Watch: You can watch (but not participate) either Here or on the City's YouTube channel Here
Email: To support these efforts, please consider copying the below text and sending one email to all eight (8) of the noted email addresses by the City Council cutoff of noon on Tuesday, January 24, 2023.
Thank you for your ongoing support.
Blue skies and tailwinds,
Eve Lopez
Pilot, SMO Tenant
Santa Monica Resident
------------------------------------------------------
Council Member Email Addresses and Proposed Message::
Item 7.B
01/24/23
82 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 [email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultralow-density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring the development of the parcels is an inevitability.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
83 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Sana Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low-density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances were the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
[Your Name]
Stakeholder
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
The above message was sent to SCAUWG by Santa Monica Pilot and Airport Advocate, Eve Lopez.
More Information about KSMO and the Santa Monica City Council can be found on SCAUWG.ORG, including the Staff Report 5303 that details the proposed development of Santa Monica Airport. You can view it HERE.
VISIT OUR SITE NOW - so much new information has been added - simply click: www.scauwg.org
Copyright © 2018,-2023 Ron Berinstein, All rights reserved.
Our mailing address is:
21551 Burbank Blvd. #81 Woodland Hills, CA 91367
Want to change how you receive these emails?
Item 7.B
01/24/23
84 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
6 You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list.
This email was sent to [email protected]
why did I get this? unsubscribe from this list update subscription preferences SCAUWG ꞏ 2629 Foothill Blvd # 221 ꞏ La Crescenta, CA 91214-3511 ꞏ USA To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Email Marketing Powered by Mailchimp
‐‐
Jeff Meltzer, NWFA CWFI, CR
NWFA Forensic Inspections, Inc.
462 E 17th St #C., Costa Mesa, CA 92627
Office: 310‐525 ‐0590
Fax:
Web:www.flooringdetective.com
‐‐
Jeff Meltzer, NWFA CWFI, CR
NWFA Forensic Inspections, Inc.
462 E 17th St #C., Costa Mesa, CA 92627
Office: 310‐525 ‐0590
Fax:
Web:www.flooringdetective.com
Item 7.B
01/24/23
85 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
7 Vernice Hankins
From: Susan Cockrell <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 1:29 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
To the City Council of Santa Monica -
I am a long-time resident of Santa Monica having gone through the public school system myself and raising two children through the same system.
I've seen Santa Monica go through many changes over the 50 years I've lived here, some of which I have supported and some of which I haven't. And currently, I am adamantly opposed to the closure of the Santa Monica Municipal Airport. The charm of our city, Santa Monica, has been overtaken by development. We've become a densely populated community in many areas. And with the airport's closure it will only exacerbate the issues we already face in this community; cost of living, homelessness, traffic, crime, etc. It's no secret the land will be overdeveloped; it's too valuable and the greed will forsake the common sense of the airport's true value to this community.
I've always found the airport to be a destination for rich aviation history, entertainment for adults and families, strong earnings for the city, and most importantly a safety net for emergencies.
The Santa Monica Airport protects the entire Westside community from high-density & high-rise development due to the airport control zone that encompasses over 50 square miles. The Airport also protects our Santa Monica residents, from larger commercial jet traffic & noise flying into LAX. And the jet noise that was happening from SMO reached a compromise to the residents....the runway was shortened and larger corporate jets have been removed. Reasonable request and accomplished. What's left to whine about? People purchased their homes knowingly around the airport at a reduced price no less. With a mob of voices now and the desire to increase their property values, they can all cry foul about the airport's existence. They should be careful for what they wish for. It’s no secret that developers want access to this land. Once we lose an Airport as an asset, it is not something the city can get back.
The Santa Monica Airport has provided safety, emergency and disaster service response to the Los Angeles community for 100+ years. Closure of the Airport would result in losing this essential asset. Earthquakes and fires are not going away especially as the climate changes continue to occur. The Santa Monica Airport is an emergency resource that will serve the community and its surrounding neighbors. If removed, there will be nothing between LAX and the valley. This will result in risking unnecessary loss and suffering during tragic events. The other resources will be overwhelmed and readily unavailable to our area.
Lastly, another important part to consider, the Airport has been a strong asset to the community's infrastructure. Lots of career opportunities and livelihoods have been created.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
86 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
8 For the sake & benefit of ALL, I ask that you consider the option of keeping the Airport open as a viable resource beyond 2028 to be included in your current & future Santa Monica Planning decisions.
Thank you in advance for this consideration,
Susan Cockrell
Item 7.B
01/24/23
87 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
9 Vernice Hankins
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 1:25 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre
Subject: 1/24/23 agenda item 7-B Study Session: Public Process to Determine the Future of the Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Davis and City Council Members,
I urge you to supports staff’s recommendation to begin the planning process for the future of Santa Monica Airport.
Not only will this action start the planning for the Airport Conversion Process, but it is also the first step in realizing the full potential of the upcoming parks master plan for the entire City. Our city is park‐poor compared to others in the area, and those parks we do have are small to medium size. The Great Park on the airport land will increase the effectiveness of our entire park system by serving as the hub for parks throughout the City.
As population and housing densities increase with each passing decade, park space must increase accordingly. The City is now at a watershed moment. We have a once in a lifetime opportunity, and obligation to future generations to create a livable City of the future. That means a dramatic increase in park space, and is the purpose of the upcoming planning process.
I was impressed by the thoroughness of Staff’s report and its presentation of the many facets of the planning process and possible outcomes, and the conflicting needs that the process will address. This is the reality of any large public planning process.
At the same time I am concerned that language in the report may be interpreted as ‘pessimistic’ regarding the City’s ability to plan, create and operate a Great Park. While I understand Staff’s caution, unwarranted pessimism may lead to public distrust of the intent to keep the promise made at the time of the Measure LC fight to build a Great Park. Yes, financing any great undertaking is complex, but Santa Monica can draw on ample resources to build and operate the park. We should make no small plans. Big plans inspire, and inspirational plans usually find a way to happen. So let's start this multi‐year process with optimism, and let's plan to make immediate recreational use of the space after closure.
As the report points out, income from the airport is currently over $20 million per year, virtually all of which is from non‐ aviation uses. This figure will inevitably increase as aviation uses are replaced and buildings are upgraded, and will continue to grow following airport closure at the end of 2028. These funds exist because the City acted to move loss‐ making airport operations to a firm financial footing which led to aviation businesses being replaced with market‐rate non‐aviation tenants. But while the airport remains, airport fund money can only be used for constrained purposes within the airport premises.
The consent decree allowing closure of the airport resulted from both the City’s decision to continue the legal fight and the community’s measure LC victory. These two things ultimately made these funds available for Great Park purposes.
The alliance between the City and the community created this opportunity, and LC passed by a large margin for one fundamental reason, and that was the promise of a Great Park. These funds should be ample to cover operating costs, as well as much of development.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
88 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
10 At one point, the staff report states, “At present, the community’s preferred outcome for the future of the Airport is unclear.” As a gentle reminder, this was the outcome of the election in 2014:
15,434 registered voters in Santa Monica voted “Yes” on Measure LC to “affirm the City Council’s authority to close all or part of the Airport,” winning 60‐40. ‐‐ https://itsourland.org/ 14,688 registered voters in Santa Monica voted “No” on Measure D, which would have required the city “to continue to operate the Airport,” losing 41‐59. ‐‐ https://itsourland.org/ Measure LC ballot language also talked about “the development of parks, public open spaces, and public recreational facilities; and the maintenance and replacement of existing cultural, arts, and education uses.” Significantly, and as the report notes, parks are built over time, often over decades. The City should not necessarily expect to fund the whole park at once and should not make that an absolute goal. Initial costs need not be prohibitive, as the report shows from examples it cites.
Let’s always keep in mind: the major cost of the park, the land, was paid for almost a century ago with a parks bond.
Your predecessors and residents were visionary then, let’s be visionary now.
Ten years ago, after losing the big jets lawsuits, the City was considering throwing in the towel after 50 years of trying to close the airport. The FAA was insisting the City could not close the airport under the 1984 agreement. The City started a process that seemed designed to prepare residents to accept the airport’s continuation. And then in 2014 the aviation industry gathered signatures to put Measure D on the ballot to remove all control over SMO's future from the City. But the community fought back and with the support of City Council and virtually every community organization in the area, Santa Monica defeated the aviation industry and the nearly $1 million they spent to keep SMO operating as their private preserve. (Airport2Park board members also served as the board of the Measure LC community organization.) Compared to this past history, I see no reason for pessimism. We as a city and community united, absolutely can and will do this! Let’s be bold!
In the meantime I believe there are still many things that can be done on the existing 12‐acre Airport Park expansion to mitigate existing citywide issues (e.g., playing fields, pickle‐ball courts, etc.). If any incremental funding for that already designed and approved park space can be found, then that work can and should go ahead. Showing visible progress on already planned parkland at the airport will not only buoy public trust, but may also lay a foundation for other forms of non‐city funding to help move the entire process forward.
As always, I thank City Council for its support in closing the airport and using this publicly owned land as a once in a lifetime opportunity to do something truly great.
Sincerely,
Ofer Grossman
1115 Hill Street
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Item 7.B
01/24/23
89 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
11 Vernice Hankins
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 1:23 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: The future of Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
Santa Monica Airport is a piece of aviation history that should not be ignored or eliminated for a commercial/or municipal entity for profit or a park.
The future of commercial aviation's pilots comes from our youth and their training is provided by local airports. Santa Monica Airport has provided for years pilot training schools. Those schools provide income and the encouragement of the students to buy their own planes and get the experienced needed to be a commercial pilot.
In addition and maybe more important, Santa Monica Airport has provided safety, emergency and disaster service response to the Los Angeles community for 100+ years. Closure of the Airport would result in losing this essential asset, risking more loss of human life and more suffering during tragic events. There will be earthquakes, fires and other disaster events multiple times over the next one hundred years. Thinking back to 9-11, if LAX is compromised in any way, due to a dirty bomb or any unforeseen event. The Westside of Los Angeles is void of a port of any kind. No rail road, no sea port and no airport.
The Santa Monica Airport is the emergency back up as a reliever airport to LAX.
The result of this closure could result in the life of a City Council person, their family member or just a good neighbor or friend that suffers or dies because this valuable asset is now just another park.
A previous owner of an private aviation plane which was housed at Santa Monica Airport Patricia Quinn Defrain
Item 7.B
01/24/23
90 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
12 Vernice Hankins
From: Hanna Hartnell <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 1:21 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Wake up Santa Monica Council
EXTERNAL
Santa Monica City Council:
You're living in a fantasy land! We live on the edge of Los Angeles.
In times of distress, weather or human ignited, our Santa Monica Airport is our last resort to receive outside help other than by sea.
Wake up! Santa Monica must stay forward thinking, not shrinking and separating its citizens from all that the airport provides is poor judgement.
It's 2023! And You want to eliminate an airport?!
Enjoy your horse and buggy on the way out of town.
Hanna Hartnell
HARTNELL Couture LLC
1332 10th Street
Santa Monica CA 90401
Studio 310 393 6587
[email protected]
Item 7.B
01/24/23
91 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
13 Vernice Hankins
From: Dave Shapiro // STG <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 1:20 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Airport Future
EXTERNAL
Hey there, I received the note about tomorrow’s meeting. I’m unfortunately traveling but I wanted to send this over to share some thoughts.
I’m a long time pilot of almost 20 years. I live in San Diego but work in LA. For 10 years I flew up to Santa Monica every single Monday morning and flew home every single Wednesday night. Those flights were not only imperative for my business but they were the joy of my week, every single week.
A few years back I stopped doing this flight every week and had to find other ways of travel for work every week. All of this was because of the issues at Santa Monica airport. The whole time I was there I was parking my plane at American Flyers. I loved that school. I did all my training and received my flight instructor rating from them. Then for years I rented a space from them for the plane. As you are likely aware, they ultimately had to close their doors to their Santa Monica location due to too many unknowns with their lease and the airport’s impending closure.
Since then my work and travel has been a disaster. I now fly into Van Nuys and the drive from their to my office in Century City is longer than the flight from San Diego to Van Nuys. I’ve lost hundreds, if not thousands of hours, of time spent in the car now that I can’t fly into SMO due to so many unknowns. I have a number of friends who are based at SMO who have had countless of issues that have really effected their lives.
Ultimately all of this has been due to people buying homes next to an airport that’s been there for over 100 years and then wanting to not live next to an airport. It doesn’t seem very logical or reasonable that those people would get their way and hurt so many others in the process when those people knew exactly what they were signing up for.
The runway was already shortened which ruined a number of businesses and millions of tax revenue to Santa Monica. However the larger jet traffic is gone as a result. It seems that’s a good compromise and leaving the airport be as is means that everyone on both sides of the line take it on the chin a bit.
I hope that people can be more long term thinking about this and understand the need for such an airport that we can never get back if it’s shut down. With the amount of fires we get in LA area, Santa Monica airport can really help continue to fight those fires, help people with medical needs medivac in and out of the area and so much more.
I hope this can be reconsidered and the airport can stay open indefinitely. Thank you! ds
‐‐‐
Sound Talent Group
Dave Shapiro
Cell: 518‐275‐7448 (office line currently not in use during apocalypse) www.SoundTalentGroup.com
Item 7.B
01/24/23
92 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
14 Vernice Hankins
From: Deidre Powell <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 1:17 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
City Council Members,
The Santa Monica Airport protects the entire Westside community from high‐density & high‐rise development due to the airport control zone that encompasses over 50 square miles. The Airport also protects our Santa Monica residents, from larger commercial jet traffic & noise flying into LAX. It’s no secret that developers want access to this land. Once we lose an Airport as an asset, it is not something we can get back. For the sake & benefit of all, we ask that you consider the option of keeping the Airport open as a viable resource beyond 2028 to be included in your current & future Santa Monica Planning decisions.
The Santa Monica Airport protects the entire Westside community from high‐density & high‐rise development due to the airport control zone that encompasses over 50 square miles. The Airport also protects our Santa Monica residents, from larger commercial jet traffic & noise flying into LAX. It’s no secret that developers want access to this land. Once we lose an Airport as an asset, it is not something we can get back. For the sake & benefit of all, we ask that you consider the option of keeping the Airport open as a viable resource beyond 2028 to be included in your current & future Santa Monica Planning decisions.
The Santa Monica Airport has provided safety, emergency and disaster service response to the Los Angeles community for 100+ years. Closure of the Airport would result in losing this essential asset, risking more loss of human life and more suffering during tragic events. The math is simple. There will be earthquakes, fires and other disaster events multiple times over the next one hundred years. Any city council that removes our Santa Monica Airport aviation land use as an emergency resource will have blood on their hands for a millennium.
Thinking back to 9‐11, if LAX is compromised in any way, due to a dirty bomb or any unforeseen event. The Westside of Los Angeles is void of a port of any kind. No rail road, no sea port and no airport. The Santa Monica Airport is the emergency back up as a reliever airport to LAX.
Thank you for your consideration.
Deidre Powell
[email protected]
Item 7.B
01/24/23
93 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
15 Vernice Hankins
From: Laura Sittoni <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 1:16 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Please do not destroy our landmark and important site for emergency evacuation.
EXTERNAL
City Council
Regular Meeting
1/24/2023 5:30 PM
City Hall
Please do not destroy our landmark and important site for emergency evacuation.
The Santa Monica Municipal Airport has been an asset for over 100 years to our community. Rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable infrastructure even more valuable and compatible with the people of Santa Monica. Any discussion, "to make the best use of this land for many generations to come,” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders. We need the experience and skills of current aviators to have a clear vision into the next 100 years. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
The Santa Monica Airport protects the entire Westside community from high‐density & high‐rise development due to the airport control zone that encompasses over 50 square miles. The Airport also protects our Santa Monica residents, from larger commercial jet traffic & noise flying into LAX. It’s no secret that developers want access to this land. Once we lose an Airport as an asset, it is not something we can get back. For the sake & benefit of all, we ask that you consider the option of keeping the Airport open as a viable resource beyond 2028 to be included in your current & future Santa Monica Planning decisions.
The Santa Monica Airport has provided safety, emergency and disaster service response to the Los Angeles community for 100+ years. Closure of the Airport would result in losing this essential asset, risking more loss of human life and more suffering during tragic events. The math is simple. There will be earthquakes, fires and other disaster events multiple times over the next one hundred years. Any city council that removes our Santa Monica Airport aviation land use as an emergency resource will have blood on their hands for a millennium.
Sincerely,
Laura Miller
144 Alta Ave
Santa Monica CA 90402
Tel.310.498 0931
Sent from my iPad
Item 7.B
01/24/23
94 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
16 Vernice Hankins
From: James Lawson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 1:14 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Airport
EXTERNAL
Dear Council
The future is in flux. The Santa Monica Municipal Airport is already significantly changed from what it was just a few years ago, and rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable piece of community infrastructure even more valuable to, and compatible with, the people of Santa Monica.
Any “approach that is informed by data, robust and transparent discussion, rigorous economic evaluation and a visionary, far‐reaching outlook to make the best use of this land for many generations to come” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders, including current aviation users and the young urban cohort likely to use the airport in the future, as part of the LA DOT Urban Air Mobility initiatives and otherwise.
I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
Jim Lawson
2913 3rd Street, Unit 202
Santa Monica, CA 90405
(213) 718‐2229 Cell
Item 7.B
01/24/23
95 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
17 Vernice Hankins
From: Victor D'Agostino <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 1:12 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica airport in my past.
EXTERNAL
The Santa Monica Airport protects the entire Westside community from high‐density & high‐rise development due to the airport control zone that encompasses over 50 square miles. The Airport also protects our Santa Monica residents from larger commercial jet traffic & noise flying into LAX. It’s no secret that developers want access to this land. Once we lose an Airport as an asset, it is not something we can get back. For the sake & benefit of all, we ask that you consider the option of keeping the Airport open as a viable resource beyond 2028 to be included in your current & future Santa Monica Planning decisions.
The Santa Monica Airport has provided safety, emergency and disaster service response to the Los Angeles community for 100+ years. Closure of the Airport would result in losing this essential asset, risking more loss of human life and more suffering during tragic events. The math is simple. There will be earthquakes, fires and other disaster events multiple times over the next one hundred years. Any city council that removes our Santa Monica Airport aviation land use as an emergency resource will have blood on their hands for a millennium.
Also, in 1976, my Brother in law Lew was flown from Baja California to Santa Monica airport where he was transferred to UCLA with a snake bite. He recovered. Thank You Victor B. D'Agostino. WLA.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
96 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Kendall Hales <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 2:02 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Keep the Airport Open
EXTERNAL
Dear Council Member,
The Santa Monica Airport protects the entire Westside community from high-density & high-rise development due to the airport control zone that encompasses over 50 square miles. The Airport also protects our Santa Monica residents, from larger commercial jet traffic & noise flying into LAX. It’s no secret that developers want access to this land. Once we lose an Airport as an asset, it is not something we can get back. For the sake & benefit of all, we ask that you consider the option of keeping the Airport open as a viable resource beyond 2028 to be included in your current & future Santa Monica Planning decisions.
Regards,
Kendall Hales
Item 7.B
01/24/23
97 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: Maciej Makowiecki <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 2:01 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Conset Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Sana Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Mac Makowiecki
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
98 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Vernice Hankins
From: Ron Berinstein <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 1:52 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: AGENDA ITEM 7B - CITY COUNCIL HEARING 1/24/2023
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious that keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low-density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring the development of the parcels is an inevitability.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Sana Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low-density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances were the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Moreover, there are yet other reasons: Financial Return and Community Fulfillment:
Item 7.B
01/24/23
99 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 The coming air taxi eVtol and eCtol market that KSMO may be an important hub for, will serve both business and the need for community travel access well. To PREVENT aircraft from flying lower, and in less predictable flight tracks, should the KSMO Control Tower is closed, thereby reducing current airspace regulations.
Please Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the BENEFIT of RESIDENTS and the surrounding communities.
With best regards,
Ron Berinstein
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Ron Berinstein CFII
FAA WINGS Pro
FAA WINGS Master Pilot Certificate recipient
Veteran Aviation Safety Presenter ‐ LA ‐ Orange County ‐ San Diego Director/Webmaster scauwg.org website
Southern California Airspace Users Working Group
www.scauwg.org
Visited by Thousands Monthly
(323) 394‐1331
Note: This communication is meant for the addressees' eyes only. No other reproduction in any form is approved or allowed unless so stated explicitly in writing by the author, Ron Berinstein.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
100 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 Vernice Hankins
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 1:49 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Caroline Torosis; Christine Parra; Gleam Davis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock; David White; Peter James; Susan Cline Cc: [email protected]
Subject: FOSP: City Council 1/24/23 item 7-B -- SUPPORT!
EXTERNAL
January 22, 2023
To: Mayor Davis and City Council members
From: Board of Directors, Friends of Sunset Park (FOSP) RE: 1/24/23 agenda item 7-B Study Session: Public Process to Determine the Future of the Santa Monica Airport
The FOSP Board supports the staff recommendation to begin a public planning process for the future of the Santa Monica Airport.
FOSP members worked very hard to pass Measure LC in 2014, and we look forward to transforming the Santa Monica Airport into a Great Park after the Airport closes at midnight on December 31, 2028.
At one point, the staff report states, “At present, the community’s preferred outcome for the future of the Airport is unclear.” As a gentle reminder, this was the outcome of the election in 2014:
15,434 registered voters in Santa Monica voted “Yes” on Measure LC to “affirm the City Council’s authority to close all or part of the Airport,” winning 60-40. -- https://itsourland.org/ 14,688 registered voters in Santa Monica voted “No” on Measure D, which would have required the city “to continue to operate the Airport,” losing 41-59. -- https://itsourland.org/ Measure LC ballot language also talked about “the development of parks, public open spaces, and public recreational facilities; and the maintenance and replacement of existing cultural, arts, and education uses.” In addition to gaining much needed park space on the Airport property, we also want to preserve the Museum of Flying, the Ruskin Group Theatre, and the artist studios that we loved visiting during the pre-pandemic annual Airport Art Walks. https://www.santamonica.gov/press/2019/02/21/13th-annual-santa-monica-airport-artwalkreturns-march-23
Item 7.B
01/24/23
101 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
6 Again, the FOSP Board supports agenda item 7-B and looks forward to the process of transforming the Santa Monica Airport into a Great Park!
Item 7.B
01/24/23
102 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
7 Vernice Hankins
From: Mark Liphardt <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 1:44 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Save Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
I wish to express my opinion that the Santa Monica Airport is a valuable resource to the area.
It contributes to the safety of residents in an emergency where LAX is farther away and unable to accommodate smaller non jet traffic. The Santa Monica Airport is the emergency back up as a reliever airport to LAX.
It offers STEM opportunities to students and training opportunities for new pilots. There is an ongoing shortage in the industry.
The idea that we need another park is just IMHO a way to enrich real estate developers and we already have housing being unaffordable for most 1st time buyers.
Stop the greedy land grab and support the Santa Monica Airport as a valuable resource for the future.
Mark Liphardt
Pilot
Item 7.B
01/24/23
103 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
8 Vernice Hankins
From: Bobby Loesch <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 1:43 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Conset Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Sana Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Robert W Loesch
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
104 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Ann Hoover <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 3:01 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: January 24, 2023 Council Meeting - Agenda Item 7.B. - SUPPORT for Friends of Sunset Park letter re the "Future of Santa Monica Airport"
EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Davis and Esteemed Councilmembers:
I write in support of the letter to you, below, from the Board of Directors for the Friends of Sunset Park (FOSP). In particular, I support the closing of the airport as planned and on schedule & support in its place (per Measure LC) the development of parks, public open spaces, and public recreational facilities together with the maintenance of existing cultural, arts, and education uses.
In addition to gaining much needed community park & recreational space on the Airport property, I support preserving the Museum of Flying, the Ruskin Group Theater, and the various artist studios in the area.
And, pickleball anyone??
Sincerely,
Ann Bowman
Santa Monica resident, 26+ years
***********************************************************************************************************
January 22, 2023
To: Mayor Davis and City Council members
From: Board of Directors, Friends of Sunset Park (FOSP) RE: 1/24/23 agenda item 7-B Study Session: Public Process to Determine the Future of the Santa Monica Airport
Study Session staff report and recommendation:
https://santamonicacityca.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=1352&MediaPosition=&ID=5303 &CssClass=
The FOSP Board supports the staff recommendation to begin a public planning process for the future of the Santa Monica Airport.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
105 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 FOSP members worked very hard to pass Measure LC in 2014, and we look forward to transforming the Santa Monica Airport into a Great Park after the airport closes at midnight on December 31, 2028.
At one point, the staff report states, “At present, the community’s preferred outcome for the future of the Airport is unclear.” As a gentle reminder, this was the outcome of the election in 2014:
15,434 registered voters in Santa Monica voted “Yes” on Measure LC to “affirm the City Council’s authority to close all or part of the Airport,” winning 60-40. -- https://itsourland.org/ 14,688 registered voters in Santa Monica voted “No” on Measure D, which would have required the city “to continue to operate the Airport,” losing 41-59. -- https://itsourland.org/ Measure LC ballot language also talked about “the development of parks, public open spaces, and public recreational facilities; and the maintenance and replacement of existing cultural, arts, and education uses.” In addition to gaining much needed park space on the Airport property, we also want to preserve the Museum of Flying, the Ruskin Group Theater, and the artist studios that we loved visiting during the pre-pandemic annual Airport Art Walks. https://www.santamonica.gov/press/2019/02/21/13th-annual-santa-monica-airport-artwalkreturns-march-23 Again, the FOSP Board supports agenda item 7-B and looks forward to the process of transforming the Santa Monica Airport into a Great Park!
Item 7.B
01/24/23
106 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Vernice Hankins
From: Albert Gersh <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 2:55 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
Dear Esteemed Councilmembers,
I am a local pilot flying humanitarian missions with Angel Flight West, which is based at Santa Monica airport. We provide a much needed medical transport service for patients that often cannot afford to travel for their medical visits. The Santa Monica airport is an incredibly historic and valuable resource for the entire community, and I strongly encourage you to protect and support it.
The Santa Monica Municipal Airport has been an asset for over 100 years to our community. Rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable infrastructure even more valuable and compatible with the people of Santa Monica. Any discussion, "to make the best use of this land for many generations to come,” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders. We need the experience and skills of current aviators to have a clear vision into the next 100 years. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
The airport finances itself, bringing jobs to our community and could be an incubator for innovation if given the opportunity. Historically, the many businesses at the Airport have offered career opportunities and livelihoods to the community. The Airport has provided quality STEM education for 100+ years, something to be embraced by all who wish to pursue a route that positively enhances one’s livelihood in a healthy and sustainable way. Our existing parks & recreation areas at SMO provide kids & adults with a safe & uncrowded place to play.
The Santa Monica Airport has provided safety, emergency and disaster service response to the Los Angeles community for 100+ years. Closure of the Airport would result in losing this essential asset, risking more loss of human life and more suffering during tragic events. The math is simple. There will be earthquakes, fires and other disaster events multiple times over the next one hundred years. Any city council that removes our Santa Monica Airport aviation land use as an emergency resource will have blood on their hands for a millennium.
Santa Monica was once the center of aerospace technology and innovation before anyone invented the term STEM. This era provided the development and prosperity we are still enjoying today. Please support science and technology in Santa Monica and keep our airport open and prosperous for the community.
Sincerely,
Albert Gersh
818‐732‐4308
Item 7.B
01/24/23
107 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 Vernice Hankins
From: Annie McLaughlin <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 2:53 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Conset Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Sana Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Annie McLaughlin
Stakeholder
‐‐
Annie McLaughlin
847-421-0486
Item 7.B
01/24/23
108 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 Vernice Hankins
From: Bill <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 2:33 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Support for the airport
EXTERNAL
The airport has been financially abused by City staff and the City Council. Millions of dollars have been illegally misappropriated out of the Airport fund and spent on frivolous law suits. Residents who chose to buy homes next to the airport are the most vocal in trying to profit from closing the airport. The airport is a valuable resource to Santa Monica, inexpensive to operate, an asset to our community and is profitable to all of Santa Monica, inviting people to enjoy the local area, shop, eat & use our hotels.
During the Northridge earthquake, the airport was used, starting minutes after the shaking, to advise the city personnel about the damage. Their response was coordinated from the air to best serve our citizens.
Your support for this valuable asset is appreciated.
Bill Kemp
Item 7.B
01/24/23
109 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
6 Vernice Hankins
From: Gary Palmer <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 2:18 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: 24-Jan 20232 Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obviously in the best interests for Santa Monica and its residents to keep the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport.
While exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council, it should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low‐density land use which benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents and cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring that development of the parcels is inevitable.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Sana Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low‐density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances were the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Thank you
Gary Palmer
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
110 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
7 Vernice Hankins
From: MIKE DAVENPORT <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 2:14 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Airport
EXTERNAL
Hello,
The Santa Monica Airport has provided safety, emergency and disaster service response to the Los Angeles community for 100+ years. Closure of the Airport would result in losing this essential asset, risking more loss of human life and more suffering during tragic events. The math is simple. There will be earthquakes, fires and other disaster events multiple times over the next one hundred years. Any city council that removes our Santa Monica Airport aviation land use as an emergency resource will have blood on their hands for a millennium.
During medical flights, I have witnessed people who have died waiting for medical evacuation. I have been in a helicopter as people died en route to a hospital and I have sat next to many people (in helicopters and airplanes) who are only alive today, because they were flown to emergency medical care or to safety.
Thinking back to 9‐11, if LAX is compromised in any way, due to a dirty bomb or any unforeseen event. The Westside of Los Angeles is void of a port of any kind. No rail road, no sea port and no airport. The Santa Monica Airport is the emergency back up as a reliever airport to LAX.
Aviation is the safest form of transportation available at this time. It is statistically in fact more dangerous to ride a motorcycle, car, bike or to be a pedestrian in Santa Monica than to be a pilot or passenger on an airplane. Not one citizen of Santa Monica has been harmed by an aircraft accident.
The airport has been financially abused by City staff and the City Council. Millions of dollars have been illegally misappropriated out of the Airport fund and spent on frivolous law suits. Residents who chose to buy homes next to the airport are the most vocal in trying to profit from closing the airport. The airport is a valuable resource to Santa Monica, inexpensive to operate, an asset to our community and is profitable to all of Santa Monica, inviting people to enjoy the local area, shop, eat & use our hotels.
Sent from my iPhone
Item 7.B
01/24/23
111 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Derek Spears <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 3:10 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: SMO Airport
EXTERNAL
I am writing to you in regards to Tuesday’s discussion of SMO airport. As a previous longtime Ocean Park resident and current airport adjacent Mar Vista resident, I want to express my support for the airport. It provides multiple benefits to our area:
A constant attraction for aviation enthusiast and families. A limit of construction height in the area
An emergency evacuation and supply airport critical during times of natural disaster or crisis A future clean transportation hub
The last point I want to emphasize. Clean aviation is a revolution that is almost upon us. eVTOL aircraft and other revolutionary electric aviation trends are close to becoming a reality. Santa Monica is uniquely positioned as a community that has the existing infrastructure to support it. Such a transportation revolution would be a vital part of reducing traffic and congestion as a future transportation alternative. As a previous City Council could not look to the future potential when they almost tore down the pier, I urge this council to look forward to the potential SMO presents in the future. I would also add that once SMO is removed, it is much more likely to become the next Century City rather than a park, as the lure of commercial development money will prove to be too great for a city with a challenging budget.
Thanks for your consideration.
Derek Spears
Item 7.B
01/24/23
112 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 3:04 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: Anne Heller <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 1:23 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
City Council,
I would like to support the Planning Process and the creation of the Great Park on the site of the Santa Monica airport.
Thanks,
Anne Heller
Sent from my iPhone
Item 7.B
01/24/23
113 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Ted and Cindy Gablin <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 3:50 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Subject: Santa Monica City Council 1-24-23 Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
I am a general aviation pilot and have used Santa Monica airport to visit attractions in your city. I have also patronized Santa Monica Airport businesses. I believe keeping Santa Monica Airport operational is in the best interest for Santa Monica, it’s residents and the surrounding communities.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. I believe the Consent Decree should not be exercised. The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low‐density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. Your city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring the development of the parcels is an inevitability.
4. Your city staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State of California has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Sana Monica airport is the ONLY land use that is protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low‐density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances were for the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Please keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Theodore J. Gablin
Private Pilot and Aviation Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
114 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: Paul DeBusschere <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 3:23 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
City Council
Regular Meeting
1/24/2023 5:30 PM
City Hall Council Chambers
1685 Main Street, Room 250
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Dear Santa Monica City Council Members:
Please consider the option of keeping the Airport open as a viable resource beyond 2028 to be included in your current & future Santa Monica Planning decisions. I have been flying in the southern California area since 1985, and the Santa Monica Airport is a valuable resource for aviation safety.
Also, during those times when roads are closed due to flooding or other weather conditions, Santa Monica Airport provides access to the local community for emergency ingress and egress from the area. If the airport is closed, that very important infrastructure asset will be lost forever.
There are many benefits to the local community like emergency medical flights. As you know, the vehicle traffic in the greater Los Angeles area is atrocious, and that will never improve. How many lives have been saved by the availability of the Santa Monica Airport to its local community? Please seriously consider leaving the airport open in perpetuity. It is too important to lose.
Regards,
Paul DeBusschere
PO Box 1028
Camarillo, CA 93011-1028
Item 7.B
01/24/23
115 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Vernice Hankins
From: David Kahn <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 3:16 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Council meeting re: Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
Dear City Council,
The future is in flux. The Santa Monica Municipal Airport is already significantly changed from what it was just a few years ago, and rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable piece of community infrastructure even more valuable to, and compatible with, the people of Santa Monica. Any “approach that is informed by data, robust and transparent discussion, rigorous economic evaluation and a visionary, far‐reaching outlook to make the best use of this land for many generations to come” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders, including current aviation users and the young urban cohort likely to use the airport in the future, as part of the LA DOT Urban Air Mobility initiatives and otherwise. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
Thank you for your time & consideration.
Yours truly,
David A. Kahn
David A. Kahn
19434 Business Center Drive
Northridge, Ca. 91324
Phone: 818‐886‐2600
Fax: 818‐886‐2625
www.KahnAir.com
Like us on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/KahnAir
Item 7.B
01/24/23
116 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 Vernice Hankins
From: Jérôme Paillard <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 3:13 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: KSMO future!
EXTERNAL
Closing KSMO is all but a good idea!
The Santa Monica Airport has provided safety, emergency and disaster service response to the Los Angeles community for 100+ years. Closure of the Airport would result in losing this essential asset, risking more loss of human life and more suffering during tragic events. The math is simple. There will be earthquakes, fires and other disaster events multiple times over the next one hundred years. Any city council that removes our Santa Monica Airport aviation land use as an emergency resource will have blood on their hands for a millennium.
The airport has been financially abused by City staff and the City Council. Millions of dollars have been illegally misappropriated out of the Airport fund and spent on frivolous law suits. Residents who chose to buy homes next to the airport are the most vocal in trying to profit from closing the airport. The airport is a valuable resource to Santa Monica, inexpensive to operate, an asset to our community and is profitable to all of Santa Monica, inviting people to enjoy the local area, shop, eat & use our hotels.
The technology to promote green aviation that protects residents from aircraft noise & pollution is now created & rapidly advancing. The future of aviation is certain to be cleaner and quieter for all of our benefit. The advantages of a general aviation airport serving the community for regional travel would consume less resources and bring more revenue to our local economy.
Many airports that have been closed still sit undeveloped, untransformed & underutilized as a profitable resource for decades. There is never enough money, planning or commitment to enable a transition for the public good. And in all cases, the city loses financial profit or gain since there is zero revenue coming in.
Think carefully
Jerome Paillard
CPL & CFI
Item 7.B
01/24/23
117 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 4:56 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Jan 24 Meeting. Item 7B. Study Session. Public Process to Determine the Future of the Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
Members of the City CouncilI am pro-airport. I have lived in Mar Vista since 1975 and have flown out of our beloved airport since 1978 when I began to learn to fly. I moved to be closer so I could fly out of SMO. So, yes, I am biased. And, yes, it is hard to hear and read others' comments who disagree, as adamantly, even to the point of insults, as well as been an eye-witness to this Council's denigration of what should be the west coast's jewel of an airport, filled with the history of our country's aviation story.
Worse has been your total disregard of the meaning and intention of the underlying grants of this 278 acres to be used as an airport "in perpetuity",violated so blatantly by this City's back door dealing with the FAA, all for the developers in your pockets who want to take this precious west side property to churn more tax dollars into the pockets of this City who continues with such blatant disregard to the continuing crowding of the west side of Los Angeles.
We all can agree that we can disagree, say what we want, do pretty much what we want, under the banner of our country and the laws we have created to compact ourselves into these United States of America. I was thinking then why am I so upset by the actions of this Council for the last 50 years? This City and its Council have done everything they can think of to eliminate this prized treasure. From "No Jets" signs, to the ongoing breaches of the 1984 Agreement, "strangulation" became your go-to policy. Typhoon, DC-3, favorite restaurants gone. Landing fees imposed. Stealing of the Trust fund money into the public coffers. The list of anti-airport actions is a long and sordid one.
As a lawyer, I got into my profession because my study of the law, how democracies came about, the compact societies make, all bound by the law, is what has made us exceptional. But, lately, the disregard of the law scares me. This Board and the Airport Commission dealing with SMO have violated every reasonable premise. Now they threaten to close the airport in 1978, after shortening the runway to keep the jets out. Ah, yes, the jets. Such noise. At the height of their use of SMO, 60 movements a day. 600 seconds spread out over the day's operations were just too much for the NIMBYS, who made enough noise that this Council has begun to accede to the madness,
"No man is above the law and no man is below it: nor do we ask any man's permission when we ask him to obey it." Theodore Roosevelt, the 26th President of the United States said that. How does that relate to SMO, you ask?Ah, let me share a bit more and why I am so upset. The history of SMO is quite revealing. It was dedicated by grants to the City to be used forever more as an airpark. That was the original grant when it was carved out on Cloverfield. That is a grantor's specific bequest and the condition of the deed. Let's go forward a bit more. Now, it is WWII. Uncle Sam seizes all airports across the country for the war effort. Then, after, in 1948, SMO, along with many other airports, are returned to each municipality, by an Instrument of Transfer, which stipulates, you take this back, with all our improvements, and the deal is you must keep this running as an airport "in perpetuity" or else we reserve the right to take it back. I started flying out of here in 1979. Then, the "No Jets" attempted ban was shut down by the courts, peace for a bit, but the City was hell bent to make life miserable for this economic engine that employed thousands and contributes a 1/4 of a Billion dollars to the local community. I joined the Santa Monica Airport Association, served as Vice-President for a while, learned about all this. Then, to put SMO in its place, the FAA sued them for this attempted jet ban, and other actions, resulting in the 1984 Agreement. New buildings, tie down spaces, obligations defined. A Tower Lease for 50 years. But the City, in its usual bad faith, as I have witnessed, did everything it could to undermine the sanctity of that deal. "Strangulation" of the very facility it had. No leases. Businesses driven out. Typhoon, Justice Aviation, then American Flyers all forced to leave. You eat at Spifire Grill? Poor Joe, the owner, was on a month to month lease. What?? After all these years?? So, the word was out. . .use another airport. .SMO is unfriendly. . .and then the FAA makes a turn-coat deal and goes against all of its advocacy for over 80 years and gives up the fight. So, why do I, and others persist? I can only say to all of you, when we do not respect our laws, and fail to honor them -- the grants, the Instrument of Transfer -- despite the unpleasant facts of their implication -- like here, with the defined grants and stipulations, ignored by you, our local government only interested in development and tax revenue -- I mean, honestly, have you driven around Santa Monica and borne witness to all the traffic? How about stuck on the 405 going eastbound at 3 p.m., every afternoon? Well, my take, and say what you wish, is that this City is out of control, has no respect for the laws, nor its citizens, never mind us LA neighbors, run by developer for developers.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
118 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 We shall see what happens, but I leave you with this thought: If you devised your property, or some rights, for a particular promise, but your city ingored its legal oblgiations, how would you feel about it? To me, as a lawyer, the "election" you held a few years ago was bogus. There was no right to decide because that was already decided and dictated by our predecessors.
And, that, my fellow citizens, is what I feel is more paramount to us all. An eastward look at Washington, D.C. is the same malaise: Money has got us all, and will be the end of this noble experiment of a democratic republic when we disrespect and ignore at our peril the laws which we are bound to honor.
The saga of SMO is but only one act being played out on many stages reflecting this malady. When SMO is gone, if you dare go through with this insanity, you all will be responsible when the jetliners are coming over our heads at 2000 feet into LAX to save fuel, the repetitive noise of over 500 flights a day over head, and developers are building high rises greater than 10 stories, all of which they cannot do today because of the airport control zone in existence because of SMO up to 5000 feet and in a 5 mile radius.
Consider the implications of what you do. Closing this landmark treasure is a short-sighted fool's errand. The damage that will ensue to all of the basin in Los Angeles, never mind the west side, will be irreversible. It will be this Board whose blood from this disastrous decision will be on your hands. I say most respectfully: Do not. Instead I urge you to be bold. Restore this airport to its greatness and place in history, once and for all.
Thank you.
Robert J. Young
Robert J. Young, Esq.
Law Offices of Robert J. Young
11664 National Boulevard
Suite 441
Los Angeles, CA 90064
(310)567-8644
[email protected]
DISCLAIMER: The information in this message is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this message by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this e-mail are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter. Please immediately contact the sender if you have received this message in error. Thank you.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
119 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Vernice Hankins
From: Jenna <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 4:56 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members:
Airports are crucial to communities for many reasons. The critical transportation of people and supplies during emergencies is absolutely vital. The airport is also used to save lives during medical transports, to fuel firefighting aircraft, and to help with search and rescue missions. Once an airport is closed, it's practically impossible to find enough land to open a new one. It's an asset that needs protection.
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
120 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Jenna Loh
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
121 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 Vernice Hankins
From: Gary Gonsalves <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 4:55 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Please Keep SMO Open
EXTERNAL
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
Dear Council Members:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
122 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
6 5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Gary Gonsalves
Pilot/SoCal Resident
Item 7.B
01/24/23
123 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
7 Vernice Hankins
From: Ellen Mark <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 4:55 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: 1/24/23 agenda item 7-B: Public Process to Determine the Future of the Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Davis and City Council Members,
As a 25‐year resident of Santa Monica, I join with the Friends of Sunset Park Board and The Santa Monica Airport2Park Foundation board in supporting the staff’s recommendation to begin the planning process for the future of Santa Monica Airport.
I look forward to the realization of a Great Park at the Airport for future citizens of our wonderful City! Sincerely,
Ellen Mark
Item 7.B
01/24/23
124 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
8 Vernice Hankins
From: Bill Browne <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 4:45 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
As a firefighter, I have seen the benefits up close and personal. I have been at brushfires where resources were used at the Santa Monica Airport. Peoples's homes were saved. I have witnessed people who have died waiting for medical evacuation. I have been on a helicopter as people died en route to a hospital and I have sat next to many people who are only alive today because they were transported by air to emergency medical care.
The Santa Monica Municipal Airport has been a resource that has provided safety, emergency, and disaster service response to the coastal community at large for over 100 years.
Living here comes with knowing it's not if but when tragedy happens. There will be earthquakes, fires, and other disaster events over the next one hundred years. Closure of the Airport would result in risking more loss of human life and more suffering during tragic events.
Thank you for your consideration.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
125 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
9 Vernice Hankins
From: JI <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 4:01 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Keep SMO open!
EXTERNAL
The Santa Monica Municipal Airport has been an asset for over 100 years to our community. Rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable infrastructure even more valuable and compatible with the people of Santa Monica. Any discussion, "to make the best use of this land for many generations to come,” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders. We need the experience and skills of current aviators to have a clear vision into the next 100 years. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
Jonathan
Item 7.B
01/24/23
126 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Bob Rigdon <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 5:05 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: 1-24-23 Agenda Item 7-B: Airport Study
Attachments: Talking Back+cartoon.pdf
EXTERNAL
Mayor Davis and Councilmembers”
I am a long-time resident of Ocean Park, and I am still adversely affected by SMO operations every day. Here is an opinion piece I wrote in 2016 that was published in the local paper, rebutting every argument you will hear in favor of extending airport operations. I strongly urge you to stick to the decision of the city voters in 2018 and close the airport down as soon as that is permitted under the Federal Court Order.
Robert Rigdon
1019 Pier Avenue
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Item 7.B
01/24/23
127 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
Talking Back to the FAA
Santa Monica Airport (SMO) has lost power in both engines. In a heroic effort to keep her from going down, the FAA, National Business Aviation Association (NBAA), and Atlantic Aviation have been talking fast. Here are their talking points, followed by the truth:
AThe Airport was here first.@
As if land title records did not exist ninety years ago? The City bought the land in 1926 for a park. The linguists at the NBAA argue that 90 years ago, the word A>park@ actually meant >@airfield.@ This may be debated for centuries. But my house and my neighborhood were built in 1928, and when the federal government showed up during WWII, the communities of Sunset Park and Ocean Park were already mature. The armed forces left after about five years, and Douglas Aircraft left 10 years later. Various tenants have come and gone since then, each one louder and dirtier and nastier than the ones before. SMO is a terrible neighbor, and the City finally decided to use the land for the benefit of the people. Both the City and the neighborhoods were here first.
AThe airport is >in perpetuity.=@
The federal government had an emergency wartime lease, but ownership and a permanent easement were never part of the deal. When the Feds surrendered their tenancy, they wanted some right to use the improvements they left behind. They did not own the improvements in the first place, and in any event, the improvements depreciated into nothing after 20 years. Last year, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals expressed doubt that there is anything left of this claim. The Court knows that a tenant with a temporary right of possession cannot transform itself into an owner with permanent rights. A few years ago, the FAA relied mainly on the statute of limitations (>you waited too long to kick us out=). But a renter=s rights don=t even mature into Asquatter=s rights.@ Not even that. Will the FAA be able to pull off a shell game? We=ll find out when the case of City of Santa Monica v. USA, USDC # 213-CV-8046 comes to trial in downtown Los Angeles in Summer 2017.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
128 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
A SMO is a >reliever= for LAX.@
This claim is made in nearly every FAA brief, so let=s be clear: it=s not about military preparedness, it=s not about emergency services, and there is no constitutional Right to Fly. What we are talking about is an endless queue of jets and planes in and out of Santa Monica, Venice, and West Los Angeles. LAX doesn=t want them, Santa Monica doesn=t want them, and the FAA wants to dump them somewhere. The FAA started to use the word Areliever@ in about 2009, but calling SMO a Areliever@ does not increase our legal burden. The word itself has no legal or magical significance We helped to defend the Nation from its foreign enemies, but using us as a dump is an entirely different matter. And the Statute of Limitations cannot protect this noisy new invasion in Court.
ASMO is like the Interstate Highway System.@
Sounds like a good comparison if you happen to own a jet, but not true. The Interstate Highway System was approved, built, and paid for by Congress, and it serves everyone. By contrast, SMO has Ano trespassing@ signs every 150 feet. In order to add SMO to the Interstate Highway System, Congress would have to: end its typical deadlock, condemn the southern quarter of the city, and then vote to approve and fund this venture. But Congress did not do that, and it never will, so the FAA wants to skip the parts about agreeing, voting, funding, condemning, and building. They have been trying to do this all by decree. The Courts will notice.
The business interests at SMO think they=re the Interstate Highway System like a dog marks a tree and thinks he owns it. But it=s not the Interstate Highway System, and it=s not even like the Interstate Highway System. Not remotely.
AAviation is part of our history.@
Some buildings at SMO are over fifty years old, and the entire park can be set aside as a UNESCO World Heritage Site as far as I am concerned, if they just stop the noise and pollution. To be fair, I enjoy Aviation Avenue, with its charming, Stepford face and peaceful 50's vibe, and the Museum of Flying at the former airport is fun.
But similar aviation museums and exhibits can also be found in Torrance, Palmdale, Camarillo, Santa Ana, Long Beach, Paso Robles, San Luis Obispo, Lompoc, San Diego, Edwards AFB, March AFB, Yorba Linda, Simi Valley, and Exposition Park in Downtown Los Angeles. With this kind of self-promotion, it=s no wonder that the aviation industry thinks the world revolves around it. The Museum of Flying will teach your children that there is no environmental cost for such profligate use of natural resources, but the pollution and noise of the airport does not need preserving.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
129 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
Those of greater vision believe that the City should make this beautiful hilltop into a great public park, and I think that such a park should honor the City=s aviation history.
AClose proximity to private jets and planes is important. Shame on Santa Monica for selfishly trying to push them off on weaker communities. (>NIMBY=).@
This is a particularly galling argument coming from airport businesses that are motivated exclusively by self-interest. The NBAA runs a luxury game for Delaware limited liability companies. They hide behind a frozen and cowardly federal bureaucracy, feed on a spectacularly corrupt tax-shelter allowance, and wrap themselves in past glories. Eisenhower would retch, and the FAA should be ashamed. These are dangerous and selfish carpetbaggers, openly dismissive of the damage they cause, operating for fun and profit at the expense of everyone else. Do they apologize for their noise and pollution? Do they apologize for drowning out so many conversations and meals and telephone calls and parties, joy, tears, and mournings? No, they don=t give a damn. They steal peace and quiet minute by minute, day after day, years at a time. SMO is no longer a necessity. Close proximity is not a societal burden that must be shared. It is a special access ticket for the rich and greedy and a drag on real progress.
AWhere will the planes go?@
They can go six miles down the road to LAX, or to Burbank, Van Nuys, Long Beach, John Wayne, Oxnard, or whoever will let them in, including many other facilities mentioned above. Or just stop flying. If rent-a-jet customers had to drive to Colton or Hemet, they wouldn=t even bother. Classic bi-planes, crop-dusters, Pipers, and WWII piston planes like the ones owned by Petitioner Harrison Ford=s ilk are falling out of the sky from mechanical failure, and they are derided as extravagant, wasteful, destructive, and inappropriate for recreation. Duck and cover, Penmar Park! These antiques have almost no mufflers, and they cause way too much pollution, suffering, and danger. They should be permanently banned and grounded.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
130 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
ASMO stands in the way of over-development.@
Aviation businesses used this scare tactic back in 2013 in their failed attempt to sell Proposition D to the voters. The City Charter now prohibits almost any development of the land formerly occupied by the airport without a vote of the people. No condos, K-Marts, or high-rises. Period. From the other side of its mouth, SMAA argues that SMO is the economic powerhouse of the City. You be the judge. Take a look around. Now try to imagine it with a little less air traffic.
AThis is a sophisticated federal matter. You tiny peons wouldn=t understand.@ The FAA is seriously off-course. After its long incestuous relationship with aviation, manufacturing, the military and former military, the FAA has finally become completely unmoored from its original congressional mandate to Apromote civil aviation,@ which does not mean crush all non-aviation opponents by any means possible. The FAA=s work here has become a narrow crusade for aviation and private businesses, pampered plutocrats, and spoiled celebrities, without any regard for the common man. I just read 25 pages of argument and judgment from the FAA, all about what is profitable and convenient for business and not a word about us here on the ground. So the FAA finds itself in bitter, bad-faith adversarial actions and outright bullying, all across the Country. It=s a disgraceful record. In the case of Santa Monica, the FAA repeatedly broke its own agreements and defied settled law.
Many people think that you can=t fight the combined power of the federal government and petitioner Harrison Ford. Folks just shrug their shoulders and say,@give up!@ But soon this dismissive sense of privilege and entitlement will change or be changed. We are not just arguing over 225 acres of the former airport land. What is at stake is heavily-populated neighborhoods in every direction that must listen to this noise-factory morning, noon, and night. Have you seen Newark, NJ? In this democratic and forward-thinking country, it is hard to explain why these over-zealous bureaucrats would side with such a ridiculously small number of monied interests against so many good people. Kudos to the City Council for taking up the gauntlet. This fight may not be easy, but the day that SMO finally closes its doors will be a great day for all of us.
Robert Rigdon
Frustrated Sunset Park Resident
Item 7.B
01/24/23
131 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
Item 7.B
01/24/23
132 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: David Stiller <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 5:11 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Ksmo
EXTERNAL
Please retain our airport. It is a huge asset and safety feature of our community.
Sincerely
Dave stiller
Hill st
Santa Monica
Sent from the all new AOL app for iOS
Item 7.B
01/24/23
133 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Rachel and Ken Mercer <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 5:24 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Agenda Item 7B 1/24/23
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers,
It has become very clear during the Council's past discussions of plans for the future of Santa Monica Airport that citizens do not support development of this parcel. You have a chance during tomorrow's session to consider a "third way", that of keeping the airport open, thus benefiting from not only from the economic benefits the airport provides, but also from the federal government's protection from the undesired development. The lack of support and funding for a park space in the area created by the shortened runway shows that the creation of parkland would place the City under even more development pressure while greatly reducing its leverage in negotiations due to increase fiscal pressures.
Please do open a conversation about this possible solution. It provides the Council the best possible way to benefit all citizens of Santa Monica.
Sincerely,
Ken Mercer
Item 7.B
01/24/23
134 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 5:24 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: Andrew Solmssen <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 4:15 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
Hello! As a Santa Monica resident, I'm incredibly supportive of the new planning process and the creation of the Great Park ‐ it is exactly what we need in our community.
Thanks for your consideration,
Andrew Solmssen
431 Pier Ave
Item 7.B
01/24/23
135 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 5:24 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda Item 7-B: Study Session Santa Monica Parks & Recreation Master Plan From: Kathy Knight <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 3:28 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda Item 7‐B: Study Session Santa Monica Parks & Recreation Master Plan
EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council Members:
I want you let you know that I support the new Planning Process for the Santa Monica Parks & Recreation Master Plan. I have looked forward for years to see this open space used as a great park for our City. We need open space in Santa Monica, especially with our rising population.
Please support this Process.
Sincerely,
Kathy Knight, 30 year resident of Santa Monica
Sunset Park
(310) 613‐1175
[email protected]
Item 7.B
01/24/23
136 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 Vernice Hankins
From: Michael Rogers <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 5:19 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Agenda Item 7B - Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members:
I urge you to keep the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport! An operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
I have flown many Angel Flight West missions to and from the Santa Monica airport moving cancer sufferers for treatment. Santa Monica Airport is headquarters for Angel Flight West and many other non‐profit and for‐profit businesses, educational facilities, restaurants and attractions. These businesses hire hundreds of employees and generate millions of dollars of revenue for the city.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Michael Rogers
Pilot Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
137 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 Vernice Hankins
From: Daniel Cascaddan <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 5:16 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Airports are Irreplaceable Resources
Importance: High
EXTERNAL
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
Dear Council Members:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability.
Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City.
Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low density land use decision the state Item 7.B
01/24/23
138 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
6 cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Prof. Daniel Cascaddan, California State University
Social Scientist/Pilot
Professor of Political Science
former US Navy PACE Professor (NAG combat pay)
Faculty Advisor, Campus Science Fiction Club
Parent‐child Model Rocketry Instructor
FCC amateur radio license KN6TRH
Item 7.B
01/24/23
139 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
7 Vernice Hankins
From: Annelie Hubinette <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 5:21 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Meeting concerns January 24, 2023
EXTERNAL
Dear City Council Members,
Thank you for your hard work. As a neighbor of Van Nuys Airport, I care deeply about your work and keeping our dear airport open.
Thinking back to 9‐11, if LAX is compromised in any way, due to a dirty bomb or any unforeseen event. The Westside of Los Angeles is void of a port of any kind. No railroad, no seaport and no airport. The Santa Monica Airport is the emergency backup as a reliever airport to LAX.
Aviation is the safest form of transportation available at this time. It is statistically in fact more dangerous to ride a motorcycle, or car, bike or to be a pedestrian in Santa Monica than to be a pilot or passenger on an airplane. Not one citizen of Santa Monica has been harmed by an aircraft accident.
The airport has been financially abused by City staff and the City Council. Millions of dollars have been illegally misappropriated out of the Airport fund and spent on frivolous lawsuits. Residents who chose to buy homes next to the airport are the most vocal in trying to profit from closing the airport. The airport is a valuable resource to Santa Monica, inexpensive to operate, an asset to our community, and profitable to all of Santa Monica, inviting people to enjoy the local area, shop, eat & use our hotels.
The airport finances itself, bringing jobs to our community, and could be an incubator for innovation if given the opportunity. Historically, the many businesses at the Airport have offered career opportunities and livelihoods to the community. The Airport has provided quality STEM education for 100+ years, something to be embraced by all who wish to pursue a route that positively enhances one’s livelihood in a healthy and sustainable way. Our existing parks & recreation areas at SMO provide kids & adults with a safe & uncrowded place to play.
Respectfully,
Annelie J. Hubinette
Senior Certified Flight Instructor
Item 7.B
01/24/23
140 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 5:25 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: ALICE ELLIS <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 5:14 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Davis and City Council members,
I support the staff recommendation to begin a public planning process for the future of the Santa Monica Airport. Please continue to make progress. My neighbors and I look forward to the process of transforming the Santa Monica Airport into a Great Park! Thank you,
Alice Ellis
Item 7.B
01/24/23
141 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: Fink, Regina (AssetMark, Attorney) <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 5:24 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Keep Santa Monica Airport OPEN!! -- Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
Dear Council Members:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects. Additionally, closing the airport would allow for overdevelopment beyond just the airport property, since building height restrictions would be gone.
Don’t allow overdevelopment.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Thank you.
Regina Fink
707 Idaho Ave, apt 117
Santa Monica CA 90403
310 613 4400
Item 7.B
01/24/23
142 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 *** This message has been encrypted using Transport Layer Security (TLS) *** NOTICE: All email sent to or from AssetMark, Inc., AssetMark Trust Company, divisions Aris and Savos Investments, or their affiliates, is subject to archival retention and review by someone other than the recipient. This email message is confidential, intended only for the named recipient(s) above and for the purposes indicated. If you have received this message in error, or are not the named recipient(s), please keep this information confidential, immediately notify the sender and delete this email message. AssetMark, Inc., AssetMark Trust Company, Aris, Savos Investments, or their affiliates, will not accept any liability for damage caused by a virus transmitted through this email. IMPORTANT: Email may not be secure. AssetMark, Inc., AssetMark Trust Company, Aris, Savos Investments, or their affiliates, are not liable for the protection of any emails received containing client sensitive information.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
143 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
Mike Salazar, Architect
Ocean Park/Santa Monica resident
Support Letter for Item 7B, 1/24/23
January 23, 2023
RE: City Council Item 7B - Jan. 24, 2023
Dear Mayor Davis and City Council Members:
I am writing today as an individual, an architect and a resident of Ocean Park to express my general support of the staff’s recommendation to jumpstart the delayed Parks Master Plan and the conversion/planning process for the future of Santa Monica Airport as a Great Park for all to enjoy.
As the pandemic put all of our lives and most activities on hold, this is the critical moment to seize the day and approve the staff process. It’s not a perfect analysis or process yet, but it is a necessary template to get the Parks Master Plan and the “legacy” Great Park in motion.
The staff report may leave the impression that the preferred outcome of residents is unclear regarding the airport to park conversion, Measure LC’s overwhelming mandate/approval in 2014 made one thing very clear: The airport’s days are numbered, as it’s our land and we want a Great Park.
Measure LC facts:
• Over 60% of voters approved Measure LC, an electoral mandate. • 52 of 55 Precincts voted to support Measure LC, indicating extensive community support • Voters agreed that only parks and recreation uses should take the place of our airport. • Measure LC retains local control over our airport land and cannot be overturned without a vote of the residents.
In one local resident survey prior to Measure LC, the results told the story of an airport that is an exclusive playground for the privileged few, with few visits for aviation uses. Yet the results also told of the regular patronage of residents of the myriad non-aviation uses - art studios, restaurants, swap meet, theater, Barker Hangar, etc. – all of which will remain and thrive once the airport is closed, and the future Great Park begins.
Another concern is the report’s take current ‘airport’ finances and a somewhat pessimistic tone about the financial options for a Great Park.
Regarding the current airport finances, the facts are quite clear from the 2014 “clarification” of the 2011 study of the annual financial benefits of the entire “Airport Campus,” a necessary separation clarifying the vast non-aviation benefits from the few aviation/airport benefits:
• Aviation uses cover about 168 acres, roughly 67% of the “Campus,” yet aviation contributed only 20% of the annual economic benefits of the entire campus in 2014 (roughly $54 million annually, equivalent to a “medium-sized strip mall”).
• The non-aviation uses, spread out over about 33% of the campus provided 80% of all annual economic benefits in 2014 ($225 million annually). These are non-aviation uses that will all remain and flourish when the airport closes and when the Great Park is motion.
In fact, prior to Measure LC, the airport operations amassed a whopping $13.6 million dollar debt in the General Fund that partially remains. However, it should be clear that today, with the reduced Item 7.B
01/24/23
144 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
Mike Salazar, Architect
Ocean Park/Santa Monica resident
Support Letter for Item 7B, 1/24/23
runway and fewer aviation businesses than in 2014, non-aviation uses provide almost all of the annual economic benefits of our “Airport Campus,” now bringing in roughly $20 million annually (virtually all from non-aviation leases).
Regarding the financial options for a Great Park, overall, this staff reports takes a top-down/glasshalf-empty financial approach toward the airport-to-park conversion and the creation of a Great Park.
One of three financial scenarios in the Conversion Process report may force a revote or at best some type of conflict with Measure LC, while all may just be trying to do too much at once.
Airport2park hosted an economic workshop/presentation in 2013 that outlined several ways the Great Park can be financed. And perhaps the most realistic path will be a phased built out – one that does not require massive outlays of yet-to-be-sourced cash, and that acknowledges the vast resources that non-aviation uses annually provide.
On its face, a great park is rarely built in one fell swoop, and realistically should be approached as a glass-half-full opportunity, one that recognizes this rare opportunity to take arguably the least sustainable (and least inclusionary) land use and make the “airport-to-park” conversion into the sustainable and inclusionary equalizer that public parks have proven to be. Our city already has an established dearth of parks, and our smaller local parks are lacking in open spaces and are being overprogrammed. With state mandates that 9,000 new housing units be planned in the coming years and our local zoning limits now widely overruled and exceeded, this Great Park will be a great equalizer and a proud legacy.
Even with the staff report’s shortcomings, it should not stand in the way of your unanimous approval tonight of this crucial step to the airport-to-park conversion that Measure LC provides the backup for.
As previously mentioned, this process is well overdue, and there is no reason whatsoever to delay this vote to move the Airport to Park process forward.
Respectively,
Mike Salazar, Architect
Item 7.B
01/24/23
145 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: JORDAN ELLIS <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 5:56 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: 1/24/23 agenda item 7-B Study Session: Public Process to Determine the Future of the Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
Hello,
As a resident of Santa Monica, I want to express my support for the creation of a Great Park that will support everyone in our community and address the lack of much‐needed open space right here in Santa Monica.
Thank you,
Jordan Ellis
1782 Bryn Mawr Ave.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
146 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: Vikas Kapur <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 5:38 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Vikas Kapur
Item 7.B
01/24/23
147 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 c: 408 373 3499
Item 7.B
01/24/23
148 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 Vernice Hankins
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 5:36 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Adjenda item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Council members:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low‐density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn't enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring the development of the parcels is an inevitability.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Sana Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low‐density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances were the Gelson's (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Brent Lowensohn, PHD
Student Pilot
Item 7.B
01/24/23
149 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 Vernice Hankins
From: John Mahany <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 5:34 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Cc: John Mahany
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members ‐
It’s obvious that keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these seven reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents that cannot
be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability.
Since the runway was shortened, there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build
or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has NO appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws.
It is the ONLY ultra‐low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against the state land use legislation are lost if the airport
closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council has opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the
Builder Remedy projects.
7. Santa Monica Airport IS part of the Los Angeles County Disaster Plan. As quoted in the Los Angeles Times; Santa Monica Airport is a “critical and essential” piece of city infrastructure, according to Santa Monica’s own “All Hazards Mitigation Plan,” a blueprint for disaster (read: earthquake or tsunami) recovery.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
150 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
6 John Mahany
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
151 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
7 Vernice Hankins
From: Denny Breslin <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 5:30 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
Keeping the Santa Monica Airport open as an operating airport is best for Santa Monica and its residents. As a pilot who flies Angel Flight missions to the headquarters at KSMO, I strongly encourage you to vote to keep the airport and airport, and not allow it to be given into the hands of developers.
Use of the Consent Decree, while it is at the discretion of the Council, it is a terrible idea and should NOT be used to determine the future of the airport property
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it has been and currently does for the following reasons:
1. It is a viable transportation hub responsible for tens of millions of dollars of revenue to local companies and the county.
2. It is a hub for humanitarian flying - serving the medical needs of folks who must be transported to Santa Monica and surrounding cities for medical care.
3. It is the only ultra-low-density land use that benefits the residents.
4. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents that cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
5. City staff has already admitted insufficient funds to develop or sustain a park, meaning commercial over-development of the parcels is inevitable. o Since the runway was shortened, there has been no progress in building a park in the newly available area - and there will not be because there is no budget to build or maintain a park as you had promised the community.
6. City staff stated it has no intention to fight developer lawsuits over the establishment of a business park.
7. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City, so maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use that would be protected from state acquisition for their purposes. It is the ONLY ultra-low-density land use decision the state cannot challenge.
8. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
9. This is the third time this Council has opened the door for potential over-development. The prior two instances were the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. Once and airport closes they NEVER open one again and all the amazing potential the airport brings our city is lost forever. The businesses that depend on it close and those employees are out of a job! Come on, keeping Santa Monica airport is the ONLY rational choice for the residents of Santa Monica and the local area.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
152 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
8 Denny
‐‐
Denny Breslin
[email protected]
619 980 8941
Item 7.B
01/24/23
153 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
9 Vernice Hankins
From: David R. Stites <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 5:28 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
David Stites
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
154 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
10 Sent from my iPad
Item 7.B
01/24/23
155 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Dennis Brown <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 6:03 PM
To: councilmtgitems
EXTERNAL
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
Dear Council members:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low‐density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring the development of the parcels is an inevitability.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Sana Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low‐density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances were the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Dennis K. Brown
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
156 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Dennis K. Brown
Reno Aerosports
(951) 906‐4155
Item 7.B
01/24/23
157 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Harry Sullivan <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 6:47 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
158 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Sincerely,
Harry Sullivan
Copyright © 2022 CalPilots, All rights reserved.
Our mailing address is:
CalPilots
1809 S Street, Ste 101-254
Sacramento, CA 95811-6736
800 319-5286
Add us to your address book
You can unsubscribe from this list.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
159 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Vernice Hankins
From: John McGowan <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 6:47 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Subject: Agenda Item 7B - A Viable and Realistic Plan for Santa Monica Airport site
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
Given the widespread community opposition to new high-density developments, it is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates with limited adjacent nonresidential development for these reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low density land use that benefits the residents. With increasingly quiet aircraft (including electric and planes burning lead-free gas) the airport will become a better neighbor and community asset.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring high density commercial development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state pro-development laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All local protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
John McGowan
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
160 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 Vernice Hankins
From: Connie Matalon <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 6:26 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: SANTA MONICA AIRPORT
EXTERNAL
TO : Santa Monica City Council
FROM : Connie Matalon
RE : Santa Monica Airport
The Santa Monica has been a community asset for 100+ years. Please ensure that it continues to operate for the benefit of residents, businesses, and pilots.
We do NOT need developers building high‐density and high‐rise buildings in this area.
I live near the Airport and I enjoy the wide‐open space in this area.
The airport has a great safety record . Not one person in the neighborhoods surrounding the Airport has ever been harmed by an aircraft accident .
Santa Monica Airport is irreplaceable !!!
Sent with aloha from my iPad
Item 7.B
01/24/23
161 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 Vernice Hankins
From: Ben Thomson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 6:26 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Ben Thomson
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
162 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Chris Goff <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:17 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
It is clear that keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents that cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels is an inevitable.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment‐‐the prior two being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Sincerely,
Christopher Goff
Item 7.B
01/24/23
163 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: Michael Nelson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:08 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
164 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Michael Nelson
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
165 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 Vernice Hankins
From: Brian Tyler <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 7:56 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Brian Tyler
Santa Monica Airport User
Item 7.B
01/24/23
166 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 Vernice Hankins
From: PWNelson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 7:33 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Paul W. Nelson
Item 7.B
01/24/23
167 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
6 Stakeholder
Sent from my iPad
Item 7.B
01/24/23
168 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
7 Vernice Hankins
From: Martin Guerrero <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 7:10 PM
To: councilmtgitems
EXTERNAL
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
Dear Council members:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low‐density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring the development of the parcels is an inevitability.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Sana Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low‐density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances were the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Martin Guerrero
Item 7.B
01/24/23
169 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
8 Vernice Hankins
From: David Troup <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 7:15 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Agenda Ítem 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmember:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
David Troup
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
170 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
9 Sent from my iPhone
Item 7.B
01/24/23
171 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
10 Vernice Hankins
From: Elizabeth Van Denburgh <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 7:05 PM
To: Gleam Davis; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; councilmtgitems
Cc: David White; David Martin; Susan Cline; Anuj Gupta; Peter James Subject: City Council Mtg. - 1/24/2023 - Item 7B - Friends of Sunset Park letter regarding the "Future of Santa Monica Airport" - SUPPORT
EXTERNAL
Mayor Davis and City Council Members,
The Board of Directors of the Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition (Wilmont) strongly support the letter sent to the Santa Monica City Council below, by the Board of Directors of the Friends of Sunset Park (FOSP). We support the closing of the airport as planned and scheduled per Measure LC and look forward to the development of parks, public open space and public recreational facilities together with the maintenance of existing cultural, arts and education uses. Specifically we support the preservation of the Museum of Flying, the Ruskin Group Theater and the various artist studios currently located near the airport. As well, we note that pickle ball has become a popular and accessible recreational sport for many Santa Monicans and encourage that the public recreational facilities include pickle ball courts as well as other well being outdoor recreational facilities.
We are puzzled by the staff report which states "At present, the community's preferred outcome for the future of the Airport is unclear." The passage of Measure LC which outlined the following "the development of parks, public open spaces, and public recreational facilities; and the maintenance and replacement of existing cultural, arts and education uses." Measure LC won by 15,434 registered voters. We are interested in understanding why staff believe the community's preferred outcome for the future of the Airport is unclear.
Thank‐you for your support on this item.
Best regards,
Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition (Wilmont)
Board of Directors
***********************************************************************************************************
January 22, 2023
To: Mayor Davis and City Council members
Item 7.B
01/24/23
172 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
11 From: Board of Directors, Friends of Sunset Park (FOSP) RE: 1/24/23 agenda item 7-B Study Session: Public Process to Determine the Future of the Santa Monica Airport
Study Session staff report and
recommendation: https://santamonicacityca.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=1352&Media Position=&ID=5303&CssClass=
The FOSP Board supports the staff recommendation to begin a public planning process for the future of the Santa Monica Airport.
FOSP members worked very hard to pass Measure LC in 2014, and we look forward to transforming the Santa Monica Airport into a Great Park after the airport closes at midnight on December 31, 2028.
At one point, the staff report states, “At present, the community’s preferred outcome for the future of the Airport is unclear.” As a gentle reminder, this was the outcome of the election in 2014:
15,434 registered voters in Santa Monica voted “Yes” on Measure LC to “affirm the City Council’s authority to close all or part of the Airport,” winning 60-40. -- https://itsourland.org/ 14,688 registered voters in Santa Monica voted “No” on Measure D, which would have required the city “to continue to operate the Airport,” losing 41-59. -- https://itsourland.org/ Measure LC ballot language also talked about “the development of parks, public open spaces, and public recreational facilities; and the maintenance and replacement of existing cultural, arts, and education uses.” In addition to gaining much needed park space on the Airport property, we also want to preserve the Museum of Flying, the Ruskin Group Theater, and the artist studios that we loved visiting during the pre-pandemic annual Airport Art Walks. https://www.santamonica.gov/press/2019/02/21/13th-annual-santa-monica-airport-artwalkreturns-march-23 Again, the FOSP Board supports agenda item 7-B and looks forward to the process of transforming the Santa Monica Airport into a Great Park!
Item 7.B
01/24/23
173 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: connie schurr <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:46 PM
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
As a former employee of the Museum of Flying, a current member of the Los Angeles 99s, and a current trustee of the Museum of Women Pilots, I beseech you to consider keeping the Santa Monica Airport open as a "green" commuter airport.
Not only will the residents of Santa Monica reap the benefits of short connecting flights from SMO to major hub airports and local destinations but they will be able to do so without incurring pollution and aircraft noise. The aviation industry is poised on the brink of a revolution as major as the coming of jet engines yet without sacrificing air quality and without subjecting the surrounding community to excessive noise.
It's time for the Santa Monica City Council to exercise its commitment to sustainability by becoming one of the first cities to embrace an ecologically sustainable "green" commuter airport. The "green" Santa Monica Airport will not only benefit its residents but will also be a testament to the Santa Monica City Council's commitment to sustainability by moving forward with quiet, pollution-free sustainable aviation.
Sincerely,
Connie Schurr
The aviation industry is on the brink of sustainability.
These are not endorsements.
I have no stake in these companies and only cite them as examples.
Five solutions for sustainability transition at airports Item 7.B
01/24/23
174 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Five solutions for sustainability transition at airports Explore five of the game changing solutions that could transform aviation – and your airport – in the coming dec...
Hybrid-Electric Aircraft | Ampaire Inc. | United States Hybrid-Electric Aircraft | Ampaire Inc. | United States Ampaire is making flying more accessible to more people from more airports by developing electric aircraft that ...
Item 7.B
01/24/23
175 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Vernice Hankins
From: BILL MORINO <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:49 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low‐density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring the development of the parcels is an inevitability.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Sana Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low‐density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances were the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Bill Morino
Item 7.B
01/24/23
176 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
177 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 Vernice Hankins
From: Benjamin Potkin, MD <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:42 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Thank you for your attention and consideration.,
Item 7.B
01/24/23
178 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
6 Benjamin Potkin, MD
Pilot, father of two daughters (professional nurses) and brother (teacher) that work and reside in Santa Monica.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
179 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
7 Vernice Hankins
From: Elizabeth H Lester <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:37 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Elizabeth Lester
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
180 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
8 Item 7.B
01/24/23
181 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
9 Vernice Hankins
From: Barbara Filkins <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:33 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
My response is based on several form letters which list solid aviation and non‐aviation reasons as to why not to close the airport. Bear in mind that exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of this Council. However, the Consent Decree should not be exercised. So here are my reasons:
From the land‐use perspective:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn't enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson's (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
From the essential nature of the airport as part of the Los Angeles County Disaster Plan:
1. As quoted in the Los Angeles Times; Santa Monica Airport is a "critical and essential" piece of city infrastructure, according to Santa Monica's own "All Hazards Mitigation Plan," a blueprint for disaster (read: earthquake or tsunami) recovery. As has been stated in other ‘canned’ responses – KSMO has provided to the Los Angeles community for 100+ years safety, emergency and disaster service response to the Los Angeles community – and should for the next 100 – albeit in a more ‘crippled state.’
2. However, consider the ravages of climate change. Airport closure will result in losing an essential asset, risking more loss of human life and more suffering during mounting tragic events. The math is simple. Balance an increased risk of disaterous events against a uninformed city council decision to removes Santa Monica Airport as an emergency resource – if you vote for closure – consider that you will have blood on your hands for a millennium.
And beyond these points, the ultimate closure of Santa Monica resonates deeper.
This airport is part of the history, the culture AND the dynamic nature of Southern California. The airport has fostered dreams and inspired futures. Handing the airport’s real estate over to developers is – at the end of the day ‐‐ nothing Item 7.B
01/24/23
182 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
10 more than entering into a pac with the devil (pardon any religious connotations…) Developers – for the most part – don’t care about quality of life – they are in the long haul for the money and, most likely, will not bear any responsibility for their actions but will, most likely, leave you – the City Council – holding the bag on needed infrastructure improvements to keep the airport real estate from becoming yet another failed attempt at appropriate housing – look to the failed attempts of NY public housing as well as some of disasters in this state – as well as the necessities for whole person care.
Currently, the city of Santa Monica has a relatively good grade on low‐income housing ‐‐ https://www.ocregister.com/2021/11/28/report‐card‐shows‐how‐badly‐california‐is‐failing‐on‐affordable‐housing/ ‐‐ least through the end of 2020. But caving to development and closing the airport may end all that. Keep the airport open, figure out how to leverage the airport to improve the community, and start focusing on a future that resonates with where we – locally, nationally and (yes) globally – are headed.
Keeping the airport open – with proper planning and visions ‐‐ is the rational choice. Closing it because of the false promise by the development community truly will be the act that leaves blood on your hands for generations to come.
Barbara Filkins
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
183 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
11 Vernice Hankins
From: Moxxie <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:28 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
Item 1
'The airport is a valuable resource to Santa Monica, inexpensive to operate, an asset to our community and is profitable to all of Santa Monica, inviting people to enjoy the local area, shop, eat & use our hotels. The airport brings a much needed economic boost to the community, why are we not taking advantage of it?' Item 2
'The airport finances itself, bringing jobs to our community and could be an incubator for innovation if given the opportunity. Historically, the many businesses at the Airport have offered career opportunities and livelihoods to the community.'
Item 3
'The Santa Monica Airport has provided safety, emergency and disaster service response to the Los Angeles community for 100+ years. Closure of the Airport would result in losing this essential asset, risking more loss of human life and more suffering during tragic events. Closure of the airport would strip the city of the ability to have disaster relief supplies to be directly flown in. Medical flight operations would now have to divert to either Van Nuys or LAX, wasting valuable time to save lives.'
Item 4
'Our existing parks & recreation areas at SMO provide kids & adults with a safe & uncrowded place to play. As the city council knows, there is not funding or public financial support to create a “great park”. It is a cheap political balloon to propagate the myth that a park will be created within one’s political career or even within the lifetime of most of the pro “great park” lobby effortists. Any Park, unlike the Santa Monica Airport, is not a self‐sustaining resource. Parks must be financed by the City and ultimately by residents’ taxes to maintain which is no longer a financially viable option.' Item 7.B
01/24/23
184 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
12 Vernice Hankins
From: Chris Torres <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:21 PM
Subject: Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members:
Dear Council Members:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
Chris Torres Farming & Equipment P.O. Box 349 Princeton, Ca. 95970 530 701 2462 Item 7.B
01/24/23
185 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Anne O'Brien <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 10:05 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Keep KSMO Open!
EXTERNAL
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Anne O’Brien
Item 7.B
01/24/23
186 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: Scotty Weber <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 9:27 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda 7B: Public Process to Determine the Future of the Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
To whom it may concern:
I am writing regarding the upcoming topic to discuss the future of the Santa Monica Airport.
KSMO has been the venue for my hobby, which turned into my now career, and is now home to my place of employment.
The flight that I took at Santa Monica Airport on January 3, 2018 changed my life. It was the first ever flight I took in a small aircraft — at age 30, I was finally acknowledging my lifelong passion for aviation that had been burning in me since I was a young girl.
I quit a very lucrative, “fancy” job on Wall Street to return to Los Angeles to pursue aviation full‐time. All of that happened at Santa Monica Airport. I am now the Chief Pilot at Santa Monica Flyers; my passion has finally cemented itself in the form of a new career.
I finally wake up happy and grateful every day to go to work, to teach people with my passion to pursue their dream — and in some cases, an aviation career. None of this would be possible without this Airport.
The airport finances itself, bringing jobs to our community and could be an incubator for innovation if given the opportunity. Historically, the many businesses at the Airport have offered career opportunities and livelihoods to the community. The Airport has provided quality STEM education for 100+ years, something to be embraced by all who wish to pursue a route that positively enhances one’s livelihood in a healthy and sustainable way. Our existing parks & recreation areas at SMO provide kids and adults with a safe & uncrowded place to play.
As a former real estate professional with extensive experience in the development space, I understand the appeal of this pristine plot of land in the heart of Santa Monica. However, many airports that have been closed still sit undeveloped, untransformed, and underutilized as a profitable resource for decades — not to mention the shame of removing such a historic, interesting, and unique asset to the City and aviation industry as a whole.
Thank you for considering these insights.
Best regards,
Scotty Weber
Item 7.B
01/24/23
187 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Vernice Hankins
From: Steve Renwick <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 9:17 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
Council members,
I recently received an email from the California Pilots Association about a vote on the future of the Santa Monica Airport. Let’s be serious: I don’t live anywhere near Santa Monica and I shan’t bore you with yet another recitation of talking points, intelligently‐written though they are.
I’ll keep it short.
— The airport provides benefit to your community. When there’s an earthquake or a flood that damages roads, you’ll be glad that it’s still there. Meanwhile it’s providing jobs, businesses, and economic benefits. — Opponents to airports typically complain about noise. Yes. Wouldn’t it be nice if LAX, the 405, and the 10 were silent too.
— I suppose some folks think that the airport will be replaced by a giant park. Some folks also believe in unicorns and the Easter bunny. You and I know that the pressure to put up yet another shopping mall or low‐rise office building will be enormous. Then your constituents will be complaining about traffic and auto noise and pollution. California really doesn’t need another mall.
You folks aren’t idiots. You know perfectly well that communities need resources that are pretty and nice, like parks, and those that aren’t so pretty and are still needed, like highways and airports. Please consider those needs when you decide.
THanks,
Steve Renwick
Pilot, not one of your constituents, concerned anyway.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
188 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 Vernice Hankins
From: Andrew S. Pomerantz <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 9:13 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Cc: Andrew S. Pomerantz
Subject: RE: San Monica City Council Meeting, January 24, 2023 / Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Regarding: Agenda Item 7B
Dear Honorable Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low-density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring the development of the parcels is an inevitability.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Sana Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low-density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances were the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
189 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Respectfully submitted,
Andrew
‐‐
Andrew S. Pomerantz, Esq.
Managing Partner / HOFFMAN & POMERANTZ, LLP
4307 Redondo Beach Boulevard
Lawndale, California 90260-3342
(310) 371-2597 – Office
(310) 542-6184 – Fax
(800) 539-3960 – Toll Free Office
[email protected] – E-Mail
www.weappear.com
Please consider the environment before printing this email. Reduce. Re-Use. Recycle.
Licensed to practice law in California, Colorado, District of Columbia, Minnesota and Washington
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected under United States Federal Law.
The 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 for the use of the above-named recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, disclosure or copying of this communication, including all attachments, is strictly prohibited. If Item 7.B
01/24/23
190 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
6 you have received this communication in error, please: (1) notify us immediately by return email and telephone at (310) 371-2597; and, (2) destroy the original message.
To ensure compliance with the Internal Revenue Service Code, we hereby inform you that any tax advice that may be contained in this communication is not intended nor written to be used, and cannot be used, for the improper purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending any tax-related matter addressed herein.
Notice to Debtors: This firm represents creditors in the enforcement of judgments and in the collection of debt. Any information provided by you may be used for this purpose.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
191 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
7 Vernice Hankins
From: Andrew Wilder
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 9:02 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Gleam Davis; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; David White; Rick Valte; Stelios Makrides; Peter James; Diana Hernandez; Jennifer Simmons; Cynthia Hakopian; Ivan Campbell
Subject: Item 7B - Airport Commission Supports
Dear Mayor Davis, Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, and Council Members, At tonight's Airport Commission meeting, we unanimously (5‐0) passed the following recommendation:
The Airport Commission enthusiastically recommends that the Council approve the Public Process to Determine the Future of the Santa Monica Airport and the three recommended actions in the report. The Commission further supports the vision that a large park be the key feature of each scenario.
Thank you!
Sincerely,
Andrew Wilder
Chair, Airport Commission
Item 7.B
01/24/23
192 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
8 Vernice Hankins
From: Widget Moore <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:54 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: The airport is part of my family!
EXTERNAL
Hi!
I am a third generation Santa Monica/Venice girl and I am excited to be raising my children here as well! The airport has been a pivotal part of my childhood and now my children’s lives. The sound the airplanes are a comfort to me and when I left for college I couldn’t sleep because it was “too quiet”. I feel safe knowing we have this airport close by and I have seen it utilized in fire protection during fire season as well as being a safe space for the military and Presidents over the years.
I run enrichment programs for our city’s youth and I have seen many of them grow up and attend flight school because of the inspiration of the Santa Monica Airport throughout their childhood. These students often fly in and give me and my children hugs before flying back to school. One of my youths just landed a job at Alaska Airlines all because of the precious and pivotal role Santa Monica Airport has played in his education.
We love the airport, it is educational, romantic, and such a special and important part of our community.
Please keep it!
᤻᤻᤻᤹᤹᤹᤺᤺᤺
Widget
Item 7.B
01/24/23
193 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
9 Vernice Hankins
From: JIMAXair <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:53 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda 7B: Public Process to Determine the Future of the Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
Hi, my name is Max von Mallinckrodt. I have been around the Santa Monica Airport and have called it my place of work since 2014.
My background in Santa Monica is as follows: I have been educated over several semester in the City of Santa Monica at their education power house, Santa Monica College. I hugely respect the value the City places on harboring and promoting this educational facility. I have learned and grown immensely from the classes I have taken at SMC. I further respect and salute the City for its amazing Big Blue Bus line, without which, my access to education (at SMC) would have been far more difficult to overcome. Providing free access to enrolled SMC students on the Big Blue Bus sets a standard and benchmark that more cities should and could adopt.
However, the above aside, I am writing today with the purpose to express my voice regarding the future of the Santa Monica Airport:
The Santa Monica Municipal Airport has been an asset for over 100 years to our community. Rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable infrastructure even more valuable and compatible with the people of Santa Monica. Any discussion, "to make the best use of this land for many generations to come,” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders. We need the experience and skills of current aviators to have a clear vision into the next 100 years. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process...not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
Thinking back to 9‐11, if the LAX airport is compromised in any way, due to a dirty bomb or any unforeseen event, the Westside of Los Angeles, being void of a port of any kind, would reveal its Achilles Heel rapidly and with detriment to the public. There is no rail road, no sea port, and no airport to facilitate the transportation of goods and cargo. The Santa Monica Airport is the emergency back up and a reliever airport to the services that LAX provides.
The airport finances itself, bringing jobs to our community and could be an incubator for innovation if given the opportunity. Historically, the many businesses at the Airport have offered career opportunities and livelihoods to the community. The Airport has provided quality STEM education for 100+ years, something to be embraced by all who wish to pursue a route that positively enhances one’s livelihood in a healthy and sustainable way. Our existing parks & recreation areas at SMO provide kids & adults with a safe & uncrowded place to play.
The technology to promote green aviation that protects residents from aircraft noise & pollution is now created & rapidly advancing. The future of aviation is certain to be cleaner and quieter for all of our benefit. The advantages of a general aviation airport serving the community for regional travel would consume less resources and bring more revenue to our local economy.
Thank you,
Max von Mallinckrodt
Item 7.B
01/24/23
194 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Cathy Larson and Roger Allen <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 11:20 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Jan 24 Item 7 - b
EXTERNAL
Councilmembers,
I support the City moving ahead with the planning process for the future use of the Airport Land.
I am looking forward to the creation of a Great Park for all to enjoy!! Roger Allen
Sunset Park Resident
Item 7.B
01/24/23
195 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: Carol Ford <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 11:14 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Thank you.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
196 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Carol Ford
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
197 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 Vernice Hankins
From: John Zemke <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 11:04 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre
Subject: 1/24/23 agenda item 7-B Study Session: Public Process to Determine the Future of the Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Davis and City Council Members ‐
I urge you to support City staff’s recommendation to begin the planning process for the future of Santa Monica Airport.
I feel that it's imperative that the city starts preparing for the conversion of the airport to a park, committing the funds and determination needed to make this transition happen.
Santa Monica is an amazing community that is trying to grow responsibly. The buildings, new units, people and their cars are coming. That is a given.
Green space is at a premium. Let's protect or convert it where we can.
The community made it clear when they voted on measure LC that they wanted the airport to be closed and if that happened they hoped it would be converted into some type of open space, park, recreation spot, cultural/art space, or some combination.
These opportunities come about rarely and your decisions will impact Santa Monica for decades to come.
Let's do what we can to keep the natural beauty of Santa Monica ‐ the vistas, blue skies, fresh air, openness ‐ for those that live here (and voted), the people bound to move here as we grow, and all of LA and the world.
Respectfully,
John Zemke
3030 Paula Drive, Santa Monica, CA, 90405
Item 7.B
01/24/23
198 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 Vernice Hankins
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 11:01 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Jan 24 Item 7-b
EXTERNAL
Councilmembers,
I support the City to commence planning for the future use of the Santa Monica Airport Land.
The public has already spoken in passing measure LC that the creation of a Great Park is the priority and should be the center piece of the planning process.
Although there is a tone of pessimism regarding the economic sustainability of a park, let’s be optimistic starting with the knowledge that the most expensive component to a park creation—the purchase of land—is not factor as the City already owns the land!
Ongoing funding will be accomplished by using lease income (currently $20 million a year) and possibly public/private partnerships, grants (similar to the Annenberg Beach House), etc.
The community is ready to embrace the planning process so without further delay, let’s move forward.
Cathy Larson
Sunset Park Resident
Airport 2 Park Boardmember
FOSP Boardmember
Item 7.B
01/24/23
199 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
6 Vernice Hankins
From: John Mikkelsen <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 10:36 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
Item 7.B
01/24/23
200 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
7 Subject: Agenda Item 7B
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultralow density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project Item 7.B
01/24/23
201 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
8 and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
John Mikkelsen
Item 7.B
01/24/23
202 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
9 Sent from my iPhone
Item 7.B
01/24/23
203 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
10 Vernice Hankins
From: Bill Krauch <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 10:06 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Cc: Bill Krauch
Subject: Agena Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Bill Krauch
Item 7.B
01/24/23
204 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
11 Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
205 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Jim Anderson <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 7:01 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious that keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low‐density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring the development of the parcels is an inevitability.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Sana Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low‐density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances were the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
206 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Thank you for your consideration
Jim Anderson
Airport User
Item 7.B
01/24/23
207 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Vernice Hankins
From: Lucy, Donald E <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 7:00 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
The closure of Santa Monica airport is a poor decision that should not come to fruition. This airport serves as a place of commerce and port of entry into your community. The idea of closing it would be like shutting down all exits from the 405 and the 10 into Santa Monica.
To start with, this community and the homes within it were built by Douglas aircraft and the airport played a vital role. When the military signed the airport over to the city, the agreement was that the land would always be used for aviation.
I've heard many reasons calling for its closure, the majority of which have been noise complaints from corporate jet aircraft. The runway has been shortened to the point that the loudest and biggest of those aircraft can no longer land at Santa Monica. Have the citizens who are concerned about noise considered the fact that the airport and its airspace may shield them from jet noise at night? Without Santa Monica, the FAA could lower the arrival corridor into LAX. The Ironman arrival currently crosses Santa Monica at 6000FT and could be lowered greatly if Santa Monica ceases to exist.
The next complaint is environmental concerns. Quite frankly the land and soil around it is already damaged from gasoline spills over the years. This will require a huge cleanup effort if the airport is removed. Newer aircraft are quieter and run cleaner. I feel this issue is null and void considering we are seeing a rise in electric aircraft as well as an introduction of unleaded fuels into the market.
Please don't let big corporations and real estate developers come in and destroy vital infrastructure that cannot be replaced.
Donnie Lucy
(618)406‐7978
Item 7.B
01/24/23
208 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 Vernice Hankins
From: Drew McCoy <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 6:58 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low-density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents that cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring the development of the parcels is an inevitability.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low-density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances were the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Drew McCoy
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
209 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 Vernice Hankins
From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 4:48 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: 7B Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
Dear Council,
Please do not close Santa Monica Airport. Most Santa Monica residents don’t want more development.
Best,
Jodi Summers
Santa Monica Landmarks Commissioner
Field Associate – Paleontology ‐ American Museum of Natural History Author – We Dig Ammonites
[email protected]
land: 310.392.1211
cell: 310.430.9749
**
We pass through this world but once. ‐ Stephen Jay Gould Item 7.B
01/24/23
210 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
6 Vernice Hankins
From: Allan Rempel <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 12:33 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: save Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
I am writing in support of the Santa Monica Airport as a critical component of our national transportation infrastructure.
The Santa Monica Municipal Airport has been an asset for over 100 years to our community. Rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable infrastructure even more valuable and compatible with the people of Santa Monica. Any discussion, "to make the best use of this land for many generations to come,” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders, in order to benefit the community as a whole rather than a tiny minority who would rob the city, state, and country of this asset for their own personal profit.
The Santa Monica Airport protects the entire Westside community from high‐density & high‐rise development due to the airport control zone that encompasses over 50 square miles. The Airport also protects our Santa Monica residents, from larger commercial jet traffic & noise flying into LAX. At the same time, if LAX is compromised in any way or otherwise unavailable, Santa Monica Airport is the emergency backup. Speaking also as a volunteer search‐and‐rescue and emergency management pilot, the Santa Monica Airport has provided safety, emergency and disaster service response to the Los Angeles community for 100+ years. Closure of the Airport would result in losing this essential asset, risking more loss of human life and more suffering during tragic events.
The airport finances itself, bringing jobs to our community and could be an incubator for innovation if given the opportunity. Historically, the many businesses at the Airport have offered career opportunities and livelihoods to the community. The Airport has provided quality STEM education for 100+ years, something to be embraced by all who wish to pursue a route that positively enhances one’s livelihood in a healthy and sustainable way. Our existing parks & recreation areas at SMO provide kids & adults with a safe & uncrowded place to play.
The technology to promote green aviation that protects residents from aircraft noise & pollution is now created & rapidly advancing. The future of aviation is certain to be cleaner and quieter for all of our benefit. The advantages of a general aviation airport serving the community for regional travel would consume less resources and bring more revenue to our local economy.
Santa Monica Airport is where I became a flight instructor, as did countless others. Its value as an airport is enormous, and I urge Council to ensure that it remains and that this asset be allowed to continue to contribute to our community, and the world.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Allan Rempel, PhD, CFI
Item 7.B
01/24/23
211 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
7 Vernice Hankins
From: Greg Klinger <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 11:43 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Save Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
Hi..I am writing to request your help to save Santa Monica Airport. Santa Monica Airport is an essential part of the national air transportation system, allowing countless flights to and from Santa Monica to destinations near and far and providing many hundreds of good aviation related jobs. It is also an essential training hub, helping to train future pilots when the nation is collectively facing one of the worst pilot shortages on record.
Additionally, losing Santa Monica Airport would aversely impact the community. The loss of the airport and the re-purposing of the property would create additional traffic on already overcrowded streets. Additionally, closing Santa Monica Airport would cause the current restrictions on air traffic flying to
Los Angeles to be removed, allowing those jets to fly lower. So with the loss of Santa Monica Airport, we would have more crowded streets and more aircraft
noise caused by jets arriving and departing form Los Angeles International Airport.
As a longtime resident and member of the Santa Monica Airport Association, I ask that you do help the national airspace system, future pilots, and the neighborhood by saving Santa Monica Airport.
Respectfully,
Greg Klinger
Item 7.B
01/24/23
212 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 8:19 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: JORDAN ELLIS <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 5:56 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
Hello,
As a resident of Santa Monica, I want to express my support for the creation of a Great Park that will support everyone in our community and address the lack of much‐needed open space right here in Santa Monica.
Thank you,
Jordan Ellis
1782 Bryn Mawr Ave.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
213 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: jesse white <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 8:16 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Municipal Airport
EXTERNAL
As the city council knows, there is not funding or public financial support to create a “great park”. It is a cheap political balloon to propagate the myth that a park will be created within one’s political career or even within the lifetime of most of the pro “great park” lobby effortists. Any Park, unlike the Santa Monica Airport, is not a self-sustaining resource. Parks must be financed by the City and ultimately by residents’ taxes to maintain which is no longer a financially viable option.
The future is in flux. The Santa Monica Municipal Airport is already significantly changed from what it was just a few years ago, and rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable piece of community infrastructure even more valuable to, and compatible with, the people of Santa Monica. Any “approach that is informed by data, robust and transparent discussion, rigorous economic evaluation and a visionary, far-reaching outlook to make the best use of this land for many generations to come” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders, including current aviation users and the young urban cohort likely to use the airport in the future, as part of the LA DOT Urban Air Mobility initiatives and otherwise. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
Thank you for your time & consideration.
Captain Jesse J White
Item 7.B
01/24/23
214 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Vernice Hankins
From: Jesse J. White <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 8:13 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
The Santa Monica Airport has provided safety, emergency and disaster service response to the Los Angeles community for 100+ years. Closure of the Airport would result in losing this essential asset, risking more loss of human life and more suffering during tragic events. The math is simple. There will be earthquakes, fires and other disaster events multiple times over the next one hundred years. Any city council that removes our Santa Monica Airport aviation land use as an emergency resource will have blood on their hands for a millennium.
During medical flights, I have witnessed people who have died waiting for medical evacuation. I have been in a helicopter as people died en route to a hospital and I have sat next to many people (in helicopters and airplanes) who are only alive today, because they were flown to emergency medical care or to safety.
Thinking back to 9-11, if LAX is compromised in any way, due to a dirty bomb or any unforeseen event. The Westside of Los Angeles is void of a port of any kind. No rail road, no sea port and no airport. The Santa Monica Airport is the emergency back up as a reliever airport to LAX.
Aviation is the safest form of transportation available at this time. It is statistically in fact more dangerous to ride a motorcycle, car, bike or to be a pedestrian in Santa Monica than to be a pilot or passenger on an airplane. Not one citizen of Santa Monica has been harmed by an aircraft accident.
Jesse white
Disclaimer
The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast, a leader in email security and cyber resilience. Mimecast integrates email defenses with brand protection, security awareness training, web security, compliance and other essential capabilities. Mimecast helps protect large and small organizations from malicious activity, human error and technology failure; and to lead the movement toward building a more resilient world. To find out more, visit our website.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
215 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 Vernice Hankins
From: soconnoriv <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 8:10 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Airport Suggestion
EXTERNAL
Good morning,
As someone who resides in northern CA, I am one of the frequent people who enjoys using Santa Monica Airport as my destination.
If Santa Monica Airport were to close, it would severely hinder my travel plans to the immediate area for both of business and recreational intentions.
I understand that residents do not like the amount of turbine traffic in the area, which can create noise. However, Santa Monica is a major destination for smaller, non‐turbine, aircraft owners such as myself.
I'd like to bring up two points:
#1: Aircraft are only getting quieter and more efficient. Every year that passes by, another bunch of old and loud aircraft retire, and get replaced with newer, quieter, and less polluting models. Propellor technology has massively improved as well, making larger turboprops barely noticeable. 10 years from now, it wouldn't surprise me if the average resident couldn't even hear a turboprop aircraft overhead.
#2: If the local residents still insist on preventing large aircraft from flying, I highly recommend putting a weight limit on the airport. The heavier planes are typically the louder ones. I think a ballpark estimate of a 5000lb gross weight limit would be reasonable. The city can always shorten the runway another thousand feet, but I really only see that as last‐ resort option, if neither of my previous points could be utilized. A 2500 foot runway would effectively eliminate most, if not all, turbine aircraft. Again, I only see the latter option as a last‐resort.
Please call me at 203‐885‐5224 if you have any questions, and feel free to message me back for anything else.
Very respectfully,
Stephen J. O'Connor IV, AOS
Airframe & Powerplant Mechanic
FedEx Express
1 Sally Ride Way, Oakland, CA 94621
(203) 885‐5224
Item 7.B
01/24/23
216 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 Vernice Hankins
From: Patrick Renner <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 8:09 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Conset Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Patrick Renner
Item 7.B
01/24/23
217 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
6 Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
218 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
7 Vernice Hankins
From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 8:06 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Santa Monica Airport.
EXTERNAL
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
Dear Councilmembers:
I am a pilot out of KSNA (John Wayne Airport) and fly into Santa Monica once in a while for business. I have a seismic retrofit company that makes buildings stronger for reduction of damage caused by earthquakes.
WE are going to have a devastating earthquake. The first responders will be from out of state and they need all the airports in CA to deliver vital lifesaving equipment and personnel. Cell towers and airports are the first items to repair in an earthquake.
To gain money in taxes and not look at the future is not good for any city. Please do not harm CA more by cutting off lifelines.
Keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn't enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
219 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
8 6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gilson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
7. Santa Monica Airport IS part of the Los Angeles County Disaster Plan. As quoted in the Los Angeles Times; Santa Monica Airport is a "critical and essential" piece of city infrastructure, according to Santa Monica's own "All Hazards Mitigation Plan," a blueprint for disaster (read: earthquake or tsunami) recovery.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
[Your Name]
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
220 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
9 Vernice Hankins
From: John Krikorian <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 8:04 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica airport
EXTERNAL
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
John Krikorian
285 W Shaw Ave #206
Fresno CA 93704
559‐229‐7000
[email protected]
Item 7.B
01/24/23
221 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
10 Vernice Hankins
From: Kyle Ong <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 7:43 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: A Local Citizen's Concerns
EXTERNAL
Good Morning,
Regarding today's City Council meeting, please hear my concerns regarding the Santa Monica Airport Agenda item:
The Santa Monica Airport protects the entire Westside community from high‐density & high‐rise development due to the airport control zone that encompasses over 50 square miles. It’s no secret that developers want access to this land. Once we lose an Airport as an asset, it is not something we can get back. For the sake & benefit of all, we ask that you consider the option of keeping the Airport open as a viable resource beyond 2028 to be included in your current & future Santa Monica Planning decisions.
The technology to promote green aviation that protects residents from aircraft noise & pollution is now alive & rapidly advancing. The future of aviation is certain to be cleaner and quieter for everyone. The advantages of a general aviation airport serving the community for regional travel with air taxis and other future aircraft would consume less resources and bring more revenue to our local economy!
Unfortunately, many airports that have been closed still sit undeveloped, untransformed & underutilized as a profitable resource for decades. There is all‐too‐otten never enough money, planning or commitment to enable a transition for the public good. And in all cases, the city loses financial profit or gain since there is zero revenue being generated.
The Santa Monica Municipal Airport has been an asset for over 100 years to our community. Rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable infrastructure even more valuable and compatible with the people of Santa Monica. Any discussion, "to make the best use of this land for many generations to come,” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders. We need the experience and skills of current aviators to have a clear vision into the next 100 years. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit Kyle Ong
Local Community Resident
C: 909‐534‐4810
Item 7.B
01/24/23
222 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Thomas Perkins <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 9:13 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Santa Monica City Council Member:
Maintaining Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Thomas N. Perkins
President
Lentic LLC
808‐373‐6060
Item 7.B
01/24/23
223 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: Marc Haney <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 9:00 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; [email protected]; Guerra, Yvonne; Christopher Thomas; Andres Gonzalez; [email protected]; jon smalldridge; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Ryan Antoon; Christina Pascucci Subject: KSMO Building Height Restrictions to go away.
EXTERNAL
KSMO Closure opens the door for vertical developmental projects through the entire city.
Dear respected council members,
What needs to be made keenly aware to your constituents of the proposed closure of KSMO is : The removal of the KSMO Class D airspace removes the height restrictions for development. That is, can you say 50 story beach front hotels along the strand, such as Miami? As well as high density housing developed on airport property? Currently the airspace limits the height of proposed projects for air traffic control and safety purposes.
The removal of the Class D airspace restrictions equates to the most valuable property land grab for developers in Ca. History! The current infrastructure will be destroyed.
Two facts need to be embraced:
1. FAA imposed height developmental restrictions go away.
2.The forced Mieg’s Field Airport, Chicago closure: The airports annual 200 million dollar economic driver was reduced to $55k per year from music venue fees, now used as a park.
BTW, the most famous aircraft, the DC 3, that has allowed Santa Monica, and the world freedom from anti democracy ideas , originated from this very airport.
Thank you,
J. Marc Haney, DDS, MS
166 West College Street, Suite B
Covina, CA 91723
626‐966‐5622 Office
626‐966‐8570 Fax
Item 7.B
01/24/23
224 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Vernice Hankins
From: Dave @ GaryAir <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 8:50 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Cc: Your CalPilots Board
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members:
It is imperative for the sake of the future of the idyllic quality of life Santa Monica’s residents should enjoy in one of the most beautiful cities in California, that you look carefully at the benefits that the Santa Monica Airport provides your community before robbing future generation of this irreplaceable asset forever, and caving to greedy developer interests who likely care more about their shareholders’ profit than they do about the future of Santa Monica, the region, or California.
All development is not bad. Thoughtful redevelopment obviously enhances our communities. For example, some communities develop high-density housing and urban villages adjacent to transit in the hopes of reducing the automobile traffic gridlock that past poor land use planning decisions have caused. Some people call that smart growth or smart planning. However, the bottom line is that whatever you think is best for your community, you on the City Council have been entrusted to ensure the profit motive of developers does not get out of control. You on the City Council have the obligation and extremely important responsibility to be sure developers’ profit incentive is balanced by thoughtful consideration of the future quality of life of our communities and our state. You and only you can ensure that balance.
The large open, mostly undeveloped space of airports is highly coveted by greedy developers. A greedy solely profit-driven developer would rather not take the time to consider how to best integrate an airport with its neighbors (which admittedly takes significant effort and care and would therefore make thoughtful development less profitable). Greedy developers want the fast cash they can garner by grabbing an airport’s land at the grave expense of the future transportation needs of generations to come for quick profit today. Greedy developers gave us the automobile traffic gridlock we endure today. It is your obligation to turn around those mistakes of the past. Removing one of the only remining very low-cost alternative transportation solutions (compared to the huge costs of more trains and highways) is absolutely not the answer to improve Santa Monica’s future quality of life, especially as much safer and quieter aircraft are being developed rapidly as we speak.
Please do not exercise the Consent Decree today as greedy developers might ask you to do. Instead, please carefully consider the benefits that the Santa Monica Airport has provided its community for decades and should continue to do for the sake of all our children and their children.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low density land use that benefits the residents.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
225 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities and for the high quality of life in California that we all desperately are trying to preserve.
Thank you for hearing my thoughts. I hope to see you all tonight in person.
Best Regards,
David A. Guerrieri
Santa Monica Airport Stakeholder and Service Provider
David A. Guerrieri
Owner and V.P., Business Development
GaryAir Air Taxi
140 Aviation Way
Watsonville, CA 95076
Cell: 408‐729‐4359
Quotes: 408‐805‐4359, [email protected]
www.garyair.us
[email protected]
Item 7.B
01/24/23
226 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 Vernice Hankins
From: Gregory Hachigian <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 8:40 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Why? Because, like myself, when I was in grade school I used to ride my bike to the airport, I'm sure other children are fascinated by the airplanes as well. As a Santa Monica City College student I would wash airplanes in exchange for flight time at one of the local flight schools. Today I have a commercial pilot license.
The airport is truly a community resource that not many communities can boast. The City should not give up such a resource.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
And what would you put there that would be more inspiring? Gregory Hachigian
Commercial Pilot
Item 7.B
01/24/23
227 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
6 Vernice Hankins
From: Michael Francis <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 8:24 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda item 7B
EXTERNAL
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
Dear Council Members:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents than
cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels
as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few
years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use
protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against
state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for over development. The prior two instances being the
Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
228 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
7 Michael Francis
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
229 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
8 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 8:19 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B Study Session Airport Conversion Report From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 8:01 AM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B Study Session Airport Conversion Report
EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
My wife and I support the planning process and the creation of a Great Park that will support everone in the community and address the lack of much needed open space right here in Santa Monica Sincerely
Tim Bowler and Ishara Bailis
Santa Monica Residents
Item 7.B
01/24/23
230 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
9 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 8:19 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session.
From: Adam Bromwich <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 5:52 AM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session.
EXTERNAL
I wish to express my support for the conversion of the airport to a park and for the planning process proposed. This is a huge opportunity for our town and should be well funded and a focus for our town leaders.
Adam Bromwich
2424 7th Street
Item 7.B
01/24/23
231 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Clerk Mailbox
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 9:26 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: FW: Airports are Irreplaceable Resources
Importance: High
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: Daniel Cascaddan <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 5:20 PM
To: Clerk Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Airports are Irreplaceable Resources
Importance: High
EXTERNAL
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
Dear Council Members:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability.
Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
232 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City.
Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Prof. Daniel Cascaddan, California State University
Social Scientist/Pilot
Professor of Political Science
former US Navy PACE Professor (NAG combat pay)
Faculty Advisor, Campus Science Fiction Club
Parent‐child Model Rocketry Instructor
FCC amateur radio license KN6TRH
Item 7.B
01/24/23
233 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Vernice Hankins
From: Marc Haney <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 9:16 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Marc Haney
Subject: 1/24/2023 agenda item 7B
EXTERNAL
Please publish in preparation for tonight’s meeting, Item 7B, airport.
From: Marc Haney
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 9:01 AM
To: '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; 'Guerra, Yvonne' <[email protected]>; 'Christopher Thomas' <[email protected]>; Andres Gonzalez <[email protected]>; [email protected]; jon smalldridge <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Ryan Antoon <[email protected]>; Christina Pascucci <[email protected]> Subject: KSMO Building Height Restrictions to go away.
KSMO Closure opens the door for vertical developmental projects through the entire city.
Dear respected council members,
What needs to be made keenly aware to your constituents of the proposed closure of KSMO is : The removal of the KSMO Class D airspace removes the height restrictions for development. That is, can you say 50 story beach front hotels along the strand, such as Miami? As well as high density housing developed on airport property? Currently the airspace limits the height of proposed projects for air traffic control and safety purposes.
The removal of the Class D airspace restrictions equates to the most valuable property land grab for developers in Ca. History! The current infrastructure will be destroyed.
Two facts need to be embraced:
1. FAA imposed height developmental restrictions go away.
2.The forced Mieg’s Field Airport, Chicago closure: The airports annual 200 million dollar economic driver was reduced to $55k per year from music venue fees, now used as a park.
BTW, the most famous aircraft, the DC 3, that has allowed Santa Monica, and the world freedom from anti democracy ideas , originated from this very airport.
Thank you,
Item 7.B
01/24/23
234 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 J. Marc Haney, DDS, MS
166 West College Street, Suite B
Covina, CA 91723
626‐966‐5622 Office
626‐966‐8570 Fax
Item 7.B
01/24/23
235 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 Vernice Hankins
From: Rich Prillinger <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 9:13 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Agenda item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
Keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Richard Prillinger
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
236 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Tony McDowell <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 9:37 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
Hello, my name is Tony McDowell. I am a member of the Santa Monica Airport Association. I am writing to you because I care about the Santa Monica Airport even though I live several states away in Colorado.
Small local airports and the general aviation community they engender are the backbone of the aviation industry. Fixed Base Operators (FBOs) and training academies like those based at Santa Monica Airport are what keep the pipeline of trained professionals going. It seems like each day recently we read about "meltdowns" in the commercial aviation space where there are not enough trained pilots or air traffic controllers to meet customer demand. We hear about how there aren't enough options for people to get people from one place to another. For the west side of Los Angeles, the answer is the Santa Monica Airport.
The Santa Monica Airport has provided small business support, aviation training, safety, emergency and disaster service response to the Los Angeles community for 100+ years. Closure of the Airport would result in losing this essential asset, risking more loss of human life and more suffering during tragic events. The math is simple. There will be earthquakes, fires and other disaster events multiple times over the next one hundred years. The Santa Monica Airport is what keeps us prepared.
The airport finances itself, bringing jobs to our community and could be an incubator for innovation if given the opportunity. Historically, the many businesses at the Airport have offered career opportunities and livelihoods to the community. The Airport has provided quality STEM education for 100+ years, something to be embraced by all who wish to pursue a route that positively enhances one’s livelihood in a healthy and sustainable way. Our existing parks & recreation areas at SMO provide kids & adults with a safe & uncrowded place to play.
Many airports that have been closed still sit undeveloped, untransformed & underutilized as a profitable resource for decades. There is never enough money, planning or commitment to enable a transition for the public good. And in all cases, the city loses financial profit or gain since there is zero revenue coming in.
Finally, if we also think back to the events of September 11, 2001 ‐ if LAX is compromised in any way, due to a dirty bomb or any unforeseen event then the west side of Los Angeles is void of a port of any kind. No rail road, no sea port and no airport. The Santa Monica Airport is the emergency back up as a reliever airport to LAX.
Again, I write to you from several states away to underscore the importance of keeping this vital community and business resource open. The future of aviation has never been more vital to the ongoing success of our civilian and business communities. Please provide your support to the community by keeping the Santa Monica Airport open for business.
Thank You,
Anthony (Tony) McDowell
Broomfield, Colorado
Item 7.B
01/24/23
237 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 ‐‐
_________________________
Sent from GMail Web
Item 7.B
01/24/23
238 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Vernice Hankins
From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 9:36 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: SMO
EXTERNAL
The airport finances itself, bringing jobs to our community and could be an incubator for innovation if given the opportunity. Historically, the many businesses at the Airport have offered career opportunities and livelihoods to the community. The Airport has provided quality STEM education for 100+ years, something to be embraced by all who wish to pursue a route that positively enhances one’s livelihood in a healthy and sustainable way. Our existing parks & recreation areas at SMO provide kids & adults with a safe & uncrowded place to play.
Marcello Uga
Item 7.B
01/24/23
239 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 Vernice Hankins
From: Marcello Uga <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 9:35 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: SMO
EXTERNAL
The airport has been financially abused by City staff and the City Council. Millions of dollars have been illegally misappropriated out of the Airport fund and spent on frivolous law suits. Residents who chose to buy homes next to the airport are the most vocal in trying to profit from closing the airport. The airport is a valuable resource to Santa Monica, inexpensive to operate, an asset to our community and is profitable to all of Santa Monica, inviting people to enjoy the local area, shop, eat & use our hotels.
Marcello Uga
Item 7.B
01/24/23
240 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
Council members and Staff
The weight of Government as a whole has never been higher than it is each and every day the sun rises. Many of us normal citizens do not envy your choice of submitting yourself to your accepted tasks to govern. Someone has to and you have found the internal fortitude to do so. So be it.
The citizens trust has been extended to you to represent their interests as a whole. They trust you will consider every position of order over and above the special interest positions.
In the many days, months and now years this Agenda Item 7B has been in debate the real facts and truths have been exposed. The Reputation of the city has been exposed and debated and now about to be put to a vote that will again change it. At the same time the vote outcome will change you and your historical record also. Do you represent "the people citizens" as you were chosen to do? Look into the mirror of your eyes and face who is in there with truth.
All that said, I am on the side of choice that is in favor of voting to maintain the presence of the Airport for the City. I believe the facility to be a positive influence on the city. When properly run and promoted the City will be better prepared for the future. The City will be more complete. Providing full services to its tax base and ensuring its ability to sustain its needs.
Vote to keep its presence. It's openness. Its usefulness. Thus maintaining the Cultural History the City has earned and fought for to make and maintain its viability to all of its citizens.
Thank you for your efforts and time. I don't envy the thanklessness you sometimes experience from your public service. Choices come with consequences.
Don Thompson
Item 7.B
01/24/23
241 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Carol Healey <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 9:55 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: SMO Airport agenda item 7B today
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
I write as a private pilot requesting that you keep the Santa Monica Airport open as an airport. This is the absolute best use for the residents of the community.
I understand that you can choose not to exercise the Consent Decree, and prevent developers ending up with the parcel. The Council is urgently asked to vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. The airport is a low-density land use keeping open space in the community.
2. Using the land for an airport is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park--in other words, development of the parcels will inevitably occur. Since the runway was shortened, there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits that would seek to eliminate any park use for the Airport.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances were the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Please keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Because I care passionately about this airport, its availability and history, I am sending this same email to every Council member this morning.
Carol L. Healey
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
242 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Item 7.B
01/24/23
243 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Vernice Hankins
From: carl mckinzie.us <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 9:53 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: rena mckinzie.us
Subject: Santa Monica Airport (SMO)
EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
As a resident of Santa Monica for more than 50 years, I would like to express by strong support for retaining SMO as the vital community asset it has been for over 100 years.
Rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable infrastructure even more valuable and compatible with the people of Santa Monica. Any discussion, "to make the best use of this land for many generations to come,” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders. We need the experience and skills of current aviators to have a clear vision into the next 100 years. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
With appreciation for considering my views,
Carl W. McKinzie
527 21st Place
Santa Monica, CA 90402
310‐393‐3692 – home/main
310‐393‐5619 – home/office
213‐509‐1695 – cell
[email protected]
Item 7.B
01/24/23
244 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Brice Cooper <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 10:08 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: KSMO FUTURE
EXTERNAL
To whom it may concern,
My name is Brice Cooper. I am a pilot on the field and community neighbor to the south as well.
I would like to be clear that I appreciate your position and the need to plan for the future in the event that your organization chooses to close the airport on the predetermined date. I also want to be clear that to look to the future, we need to look to the past to avoid mistakes and hopefully learn from our past in order to create a cleaner, more friendly environment and world of tomorrow.
I do have to point out that as a branding specialist and marketing executive, I understand popular opinion as well as spin. I also understand the power of false information. Opinions are not facts. And facts submitted by non‐vetted "EXPERTS" should be pointed out in full disclosure as such to not intentionally, or negligent mislead the public as your duty is to serve them.
In the past articles citing environmental risks and damage caused to residents under the flight paths have been submitted by a Chiropractor and presented as a scientific finding as to the effects of using leaded fuel for aircraft. This is not a peer reviewed scientific study funded by the government, or any other empirical data source. This is in the very most true nature of the phrase "FAKE NEWS"
Here we as a country have decidedly and emphatically denounced this tactic as less than credible. Why should this be any different? You are in government. Your duty is to seek advice and counsel from scientists, pilots, homeowners, and other trusted sources in an attempt to find the best solution to serve your constituency.
In this very spirit, you have already sidestepped your duty by presenting this closure as almost imminent as well as presenting a rather biased and potentially misleading statement in this very PDF you have presented to the public in the paragraph below.
"In 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 landing speeds coupled with the relatively short (4,970 foot) SMO runway length. The FAA challenged the City’s enactment of this ordinance and later prevailed in Federal Court.
Here you have presented the phrase " due to their adverse environmental impacts and increased safety hazards resulting from faster landing speeds coupled with the relatively short (4,970 foot) SMO runway length." You then shortened the runway even further by choice.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
245 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 This begs the question as to where this data was compiled from. Opinions are not generally cited as fact. This can sway the public opinion and there are laws in advertising written every day to protect the public from misleading facts such as this.
As you can see in the next part of that statement, "The FAA challenged the City’s enactment of this ordinance and later prevailed in Federal Court."
There was a reason that the federal courts did not find merit in this.
Going forward it is imperative that the government give the local constituents fair and objective information that is presented in a factual and unbiased nature. This is critical to receive valid feedback from all of Santa Monica residents, not just the ones that live under the flight path.
The proximity of the airport continues to serve the President of the United States very well every time they visit. The airport is also a critical evacuation resource should a natural disaster require outside resources to be stationed here.
Just as there is data opposed to the airport remaining open, I assume your committee has done numerous studies and will present factual data as to the environmental impact dense housing communities would bring to the property such as human waste, water and electrical usage and most importantly traffic and pollution along Centinela, Ocean park and other main pathways to access other communities from Santa Monica.
With a surge in break ins at the airport and damage to aircraft that is potentially life threatening to residents as well as pilots, I can only assume you will do an impact study as to how to properly deal with the homeless crisis not making a beautiful public park a haven for unauthorized encampments.
Do you have the resources now to cover all of the park space in Santa Monica? Do you give usage data as to the reasons that residents are not using public space more? Are these safe spaces for residents, or attractive spots for the unhoused to encamp knowing that the city does not have enough resources to properly deter them from doing so as it is? Item 7.B
01/24/23
246 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 I cannot imagine moving next to a cemetery that has been in business for over 100 years and complaining that I live next to a bunch of deceased bodies. We all make choices and residents under the flight paths have made choices that suited their economic needs. I would assume their voices are loud, but are they many? Yes they matter, but are they the majority and do they represent your city as a whole?
As the future of aviation is going greener by the minute with advances in unleaded fuel technology, electric motors, quieter and safer aviation solutions, Santa Monica is positioned perfectly to be a beacon for the rest of the world to adopt these measures and show the positive impact a properly run airport can make on a community.
As it stands, the predetermination of the airport closure has created a chasm between pilots and administration. There is a sense that the pilots on the field that contribute to your $20 Million dollar revenue are second class citizens and only allowed to operate by the grace of a few. This leads to unfavorable problem solving with input form those who actually use the field.
There seems to be building evidence that the city has misappropriated funds over the last few years as well as the fact that the city has in the past received federal funds to improve the airport under the obligation that it remain open in exchange. You cannot have it both ways.
I hope you take into consideration these realities as you are planning for the future in what has been positioned to pilots as the "right to close the field", not the eminent closure of the field.
Look at all sides of the arguments objectively. In light of many Los Angeles planning officials being caught in bribery scandals and unsavory practices, I beg your council to be objective and just in your pursuit for what is best for Santa Monica, not just the residents under the flight paths, the pilots, or the pending developers clamoring to develop the most pristine open space along the shore line.
Potential future co-habitat development could see the airport thrive with restaurants, creative suites, ocean viewing decks along the south and north of the field without closing the airport.
In closing I ask that you form a committee with pilots and airport users included instead of one that is missing these key decision information sources. I would not begin to make decisions without having all possible resources informing my process. I hope your council will do the same. I would love to give a Item 7.B
01/24/23
247 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 personal tour of the airport and some of its tenants, aircraft owners, and businesses should your council be interested in meeting what contributes to your profitability.
Thank you for your consideration.
Brice A. Cooper
‐‐
Brice Cooper
Tiny Mule Creative Studios
847 341 4810
[email protected] To help protect your privacy,
Micro so ft Office prevented
auto matic downlo ad o f this
picture from the Internet.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
248 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Ryan Haid <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 10:09 AM
To: Caroline Torosis; Christine Parra; councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock
Subject: Agenda Item 7B - SMO Closure
EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members:
I hope your 2023 is off to a great start. By way of introduction, my name is Ryan Haid and I am resident of the area. I would like to voice my opinion about the ongoing efforts to close the Santa Monica Airport ahead of tonight’s meeting. In my view, it is clear that keeping SMO operational is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents. A few thoughts below for your consideration:
1. The airport finances itself, bringing jobs to our community and could be an incubator for innovation if given the opportunity. Historically, the many businesses at the Airport have offered career opportunities and livelihoods to the community. The Airport has provided quality STEM education for 100+ years, something to be embraced by all who wish to pursue a route that positively enhances one’s livelihood in a healthy and sustainable way. Our existing parks and recreation areas at SMO provide kids and adults with a safe and uncrowded place to play.
2. The technology to promote green aviation that protects residents from aircraft noise and pollution is now created and rapidly advancing. Electric planes are not far off – in fact, there are some major carriers that are scheduled to take delivery of the first electric commercial jets before SMO’s scheduled closure. The “electrification” of aviation will dramatically reduce noise and pollution, two of the major drivers behind certain Santa Monica residents’ push for the closure of SMO. Once the airport is closed and condos are inevitably built, the decision cannot be undone. The future of aviation is certain to be cleaner and quieter for all of our benefit, and the advantages of a general aviation airport serving the community for regional travel would consume less resources and bring more revenue to our local economy.
3. As the city council knows, there is not funding or public financial support to create a “great park”. It is a cheap political balloon to propagate the myth that a park will be created within one’s political career or even within the lifetime of most of the pro “great park” lobby effortists. Any Park, unlike the Santa Monica Airport, is not a selfsustaining resource. Parks must be financed by the City and ultimately by residents’ taxes to maintain which is no longer a financially viable option.
4. Many airports that have been closed still sit undeveloped, untransformed, and underutilized as a profitable resource for decades. There is never enough money, planning or commitment to enable a transition for the public good. And in all cases, the city loses financial profit or gain since there is zero revenue coming in.
5. The future is in flux. The Santa Monica Municipal Airport is already significantly changed from what it was just a few years ago, and rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable piece of community infrastructure even more valuable to, and compatible with, the people of Santa Monica. Any “approach that is informed by data, robust and transparent discussion, rigorous economic evaluation and a visionary, far-reaching outlook to make the best use of this land for many generations to come” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders, including current aviation users and the young urban cohort likely to use the airport in the future, as part of the LA DOT Urban Air Mobility initiatives and otherwise. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
6. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low density land use that benefits the residents. An airport land use is the only federally-protected ultra-low density land use available to the City and its residents that cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private. The State has taken over every other land use Item 7.B
01/24/23
249 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 decision from the City. Maintaining the Santa Monica Airport is the only land use protected from State laws and is the only ultra-low density land use decision the State cannot challenge. All protections against the State land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
I sincerely thank you for your attention and consideration, and I look forward to continuing to engage on this matter. I apologize for not being attend tonight’s meeting in-person as I am on the East Coast for work.
Best regards,
Ryan Haid
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
250 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Bea Stoykova <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 10:37 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda 7B: Public Process to Determine the Future of the Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
The Santa Monica Airport protects the entire Westside community from high-density & high-rise development due to the airport control zone that encompasses over 50 square miles. The Airport also protects our Santa Monica residents, from larger commercial jet traffic & noise flying into LAX. It’s no secret that developers want access to this land. Once we lose an Airport as an asset, it is not something we can get back. For the sake & benefit of all, we ask that you consider the option of keeping the Airport open as a viable resource beyond 2028 to be included in your current & future Santa Monica Planning decisions. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
The airport has been financially abused by City staff and the City Council. Millions of dollars have been illegally misappropriated out of the Airport fund and spent on frivolous law suits. Residents who chose to buy homes next to the airport are the most vocal in trying to profit from closing the airport. The airport is a valuable resource to Santa Monica, inexpensive to operate, an asset to our community and is profitable to all of Santa Monica, inviting people to enjoy the local area, already existing parks & recreation areas providing kids & adults with a safe & uncrowded place to play.
As the city council knows, there is not funding or public financial support to create a “great park”. It is a cheap political balloon to propagate the myth that a park will be created within one’s political career or even within the lifetime of most of the pro “great park” lobby effortists. Any Park, unlike the Santa Monica Airport, is not a self-sustaining resource. Parks must be financed by the City and ultimately by residents’ taxes to maintain which is no longer a financially viable option.
It will be unfortunate to witness another robbery of a perfectly healthy community because of the interest of those with money and power. They will take something real and precious from all of us and generations to come.
Thank you for your time & consideration.
Bea Stoykova
Employee on the grounds of SMA
Item 7.B
01/24/23
251 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: sabrina Bond <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 10:36 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: The Future Of The Santa Monica Airport - 1/24/2023
EXTERNAL
Good Morning Santa Monica City Council,
I am writing to you today about a very special and historic community in Santa Monica that is close to my heart. My mother was raised in this town and my parents met and got married here. Their wedding reception was at the Santa Monica Airport. Twenty‐Three years later as I find my way in this city, I have found community at this same airport. The Santa Monica Airport is not only a community for Angelenos, this airport is both nationally and internationally recognized. While this airport has a smaller role in my life, it has impacted hundreds of thousands of lives in this community. As a 23‐year‐old "Gen Z‐er" I see a shift happening right now. This shift is between the way politicians and change makers navigate our relationship with the past and the actions we think are best for rebuilding a new future.
While much of this change is positive and beautiful, there must be a sense of humanity and respect for places like the Santa Monica Airport because not only did it represent the future for so long to our ancestors, it is vital in this next step of the city's future. Please save this airport from being wiped away due to capitalistic greed and politics that started years ago by outsiders of this community. Please help it stay open past 2028.
The Santa Monica Municipal Airport has been an asset for over 100 years to our community. Rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable infrastructure even more valuable and compatible with the people of Santa Monica. Any discussion, "to make the best use of this land for many generations to come,” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders. We need the experience and skills of current aviators to have a clear vision into the next 100 years. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
The Santa Monica Airport protects the entire Westside community from high‐density & high‐rise development due to the airport control zone that encompasses over 50 square miles. The Airport also protects our Santa Monica residents, from larger commercial jet traffic & noise flying into LAX. It’s no secret that developers want access to this land. Once we lose an Airport as an asset, it is not something we can get back. For the sake & benefit of all, we ask that you consider the option of keeping the Airport open as a viable resource beyond 2028 to be included in your current & future Santa Monica Planning decisions.
The Santa Monica Airport has provided safety, emergency, and disaster service response to the Los Angeles community for 100+ years. Closure of the Airport would result in losing this essential asset, risking more loss of human life and more suffering during tragic events. The math is simple. There will be earthquakes, fires and other disaster events multiple times over the next one hundred years. Any city council that removes our Santa Monica Airport aviation land use as an emergency resource will have blood on their hands for a millennium.
The technology to promote green aviation that protects residents from aircraft noise & pollution is now created & rapidly advancing. The future of aviation is certain to be cleaner and quieter for all of our benefit. The advantages of a general aviation airport serving the community for regional travel would consume fewer resources and bring more revenue to our local economy.
The future is in flux. The Santa Monica Municipal Airport is already significantly changed from what it was just a few years ago, and rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable piece of community infrastructure Item 7.B
01/24/23
252 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 even more valuable to, and compatible with, the people of Santa Monica. Any “approach that is informed by data, robust and transparent discussion, rigorous economic evaluation and a visionary, far‐reaching outlook to make the best use of this land for many generations to come” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders, including current aviation users and the young urban cohort likely to use the airport in the future, as part of the LA DOT Urban Air Mobility initiatives and otherwise. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
Thank you for your time & consideration.
Sabrina Bond
Item 7.B
01/24/23
253 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 Vernice Hankins
From: Mark Schwinge <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 10:32 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
Greetings,
Please do not close the Santa Monica Airport. It is iconic, the old Clover Field, and the base for Douglas Aircraft's production of many civil and military aircraft. For over 100 years SMO has been an asset to our community.
In the 1970s I was able to start an ongoing education in aviation because of SMO Airport. The Air Scout group, Post 26, taught me discipline to learn, and resulted in an education in flight physics, engineering, aviation law, and airline operations. Instructors donated their time. This led to my career in aviation. Hundreds of other young men and women owe their careers to having earned their wings at Santa Monica Airport.
Everything changes. Preserving important infrastructure is essential. We need the experience and skills of current aviators to have a clear vision into the next 100 years. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
Santa Monica Airport is a wellspring of opportunity for the entire community, and promotes a better today and tomorrow. Please do not discard this vital community asset.
Cordially,
Mark Schwinge
Item 7.B
01/24/23
254 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 Vernice Hankins
From: Daniel Grijalva <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 10:26 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda 7B: Public Process to Determine the Future of the Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
The Santa Monica Municipal Airport has been an asset for over 100 years to our community. Rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable infrastructure even more valuable and compatible with the people of Santa Monica. Any discussion, "to make the best use of this land for many generations to come,” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders. We need the experience and skills of current aviators to have a clear vision into the next 100 years. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
The Santa Monica Airport protects the entire Westside community from high-density & high-rise development due to the airport control zone that encompasses over 50 square miles. The Airport also protects our Santa Monica residents from larger commercial jet traffic & noise flying into LAX. It’s no secret that developers want access to this land. Once we lose an Airport as an asset, it is not something we can get back. For the sake & benefit of all, we ask that you consider the option of keeping the Airport open as a viable resource beyond 2028 to be included in your current & future Santa Monica Planning decisions.
As the city council knows, there is no funding or public financial support to create a “great park”. It is a cheap political balloon to propagate the myth that a park will be created within one’s political career or even within the lifetime of most of the pro “great park” lobby effortists. Any Park, unlike the Santa Monica Airport, is not a self-sustaining resource. Parks must be financed by the City and ultimately by residents’ taxes to maintain which is no longer a financially viable option.
I hope that equal representation can be had to accurately reflect the wishes of the Santa Monica Airport community.
‐‐
Danny Grijalva
General Manager
SANTA MONICA FLYERS
A CIRRUS TRAINING CENTER To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Homepage - Stature Aviation | Flight School | Buy A Plane, Sell A Plane, Access A Plane | Addison, TX 310.800.8050
www.santamonicaflyers.com
Item 7.B
01/24/23
255 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
6 Vernice Hankins
From: Jan Minium <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 10:23 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
We are long time residents of Santa Monica...37 years. We have never felt threatened by the presence of the Santa Monica Airport either for noise or pollution. As a matter of fact, some of my most favorite memories are when my grown children were toddlers it was a point of destination to walk to the park to see the airplanes. They loved watching them take off and land. The helicopters were a special treat. We also experienced some of our nicest dinners at the various restaurants that have cycled thru the airport property. There was no better view of Santa Monica than the view from the Hump restaurant on the runway. The homeowners directly neighboring the airport knew that their location came with a different environment. It seems unbalanced and unfair that a small group can exact their personal concerns and make them seem as if they are really for the greater good. This tactic gets used a lot in Santa Monica City politics. I would hate to see this property in 20 years if the rampant over development of Santa Monica gets a hold of this space.
The Santa Monica Municipal Airport has been an asset for over 100 years to our community. Rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable infrastructure even more valuable and compatible with the people of Santa Monica. Any discussion, "to make the best use of this land for many generations to come,” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders. We need the experience and skills of current aviators to have a clear vision into the next 100 years. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
The Santa Monica Airport protects the entire Westside community from high-density & high-rise development due to the airport control zone that encompasses over 50 square miles. The Airport also protects our Santa Monica residents, from larger commercial jet traffic & noise flying into LAX. It’s no secret that developers want access to this land. Once we lose an Airport as an asset, it is not something we can get back. For the sake & benefit of all, we ask that you consider the option of keeping the Airport open as a viable resource beyond 2028 to be included in your current & future Santa Monica Planning decisions.
A concerned Santa Monica resident.
Jan McCluskey
Item 7.B
01/24/23
256 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
7 Vernice Hankins
From: Alexander Romero <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 10:22 AM
To: Gleam Davis; councilmtgitems; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low-density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring the development of the parcels is an inevitability.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Sana Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low-density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances were the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
257 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
8 Alexander Romero
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
258 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
9 Vernice Hankins
From: Nick Abey <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 10:14 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Airport Discussion
EXTERNAL
Santa Monica City Council,
I am writing this email to try and persuade the city council to keep the SMO airport. The airport provides safe an accessible transportation to LA and the Santa Monica area as well as a safe landing spot on the coastal side of LA if a airplane were to have issues. The airport inspires young children to seek a career in aviation with EAA young eagle rides which are free to the children participating. SMO also is a great airport for aviators to learn at as it is outside of the busy LA airspace. I believe the closure of the airport would be detrimental to young aviators, future pilots, children, and safety of pilots flying through LA. If you have any questions please don’t hesitate to reach out.
Best,
Nick Abey
Item 7.B
01/24/23
259 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Dave Bockholt <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 10:48 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: 7B Airport
EXTERNAL
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
Dear Council Members:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
David Bockholt, Private Pilot.
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
260 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: Alon HaCohen <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 10:47 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Agenda item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear City Council,
I am writing to request consideration of the following in connection with the future of SMO airport:
1. Park funding: How would maintenance of the park be funded? Taxpayer dollars?
2. Airport funding: If the airport is self‐funding, and a source of revenue, can airport fees be used to support the city's other non‐airport operations?
3. Keeping businesses at Santa Monica: Closing or harming the airport is likely to reduce business to the area. Less business traffic, less revenue to the city, less employment.
4. Long term planning: Long term, any noise / environmental impact of the airport is going to disappear completely. Fuel is already moving to unleaded. Electric planes are being tested at Santa Monica airport.
5. Noise & Pollution: The future is electric. When electric emission‐free planes are everywhere, won't we all benefit from an airport that can act as a hub and a departure point for air taxis and other innovative solutions? Wouldn't we want to keep an airport that brings revenue, jobs, and future innovation, without costing us a thing? No financial cost, no pollution, and with electric planes ‐ no noise!
I strongly urge the council to consider the long‐term benefit of keeping the airport as a vital resource for the city, while minimizing the harm, cost, and long‐term downsides of removing a historic landmark that brings revenue, employment, and development to the future of Santa Monica.
We are guardians of the future, for our children, and for future generations. Let's not spoil our opportunity here to be the forward‐thinkers that set us up for a path to greatness in the clean electric future.
Sincerely,
Alon Hacohen
Item 7.B
01/24/23
261 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Vernice Hankins
From: Hal Cunningham <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 10:44 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
262 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 Hal Cunningham
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
263 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 Vernice Hankins
From: Annamarie Buonocore <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 10:39 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
Dear City Council,
The Santa Monica Municipal Airport has been an asset for over 100 years to our community. Rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable infrastructure even more valuable and compatible with the people of Santa Monica. Any discussion, "to make the best use of this land for many generations to come,” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders. We need the experience and skills of current aviators to have a clear vision into the next 100 years. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
The Santa Monica Airport protects the entire Westside community from high-density & high-rise development due to the airport control zone that encompasses over 50 square miles. The Airport also protects our Santa Monica residents from larger commercial jet traffic & noise flying into LAX. It’s no secret that developers want access to this land. Once we lose an Airport as an asset, it is not something we can get back. For the sake & benefit of all, we ask that you consider the option of keeping the Airport open as a viable resource beyond 2028 to be included in your current & future Santa Monica Planning decisions.
Sincerely,
‐‐
Annamarie Buonocore
Associate Publisher, In Flight Publishing
Mobile: 650‐504‐8549
Office: 650‐358‐9908
Fax: 650‐358‐9254
My Biz Card: https://inphone.co/inflight
This em ail and any files transm itted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to w hom they are addressed. If you have received this em ail in error, please notify the sender. This message contains confidential inform ation and is intended only for the individual nam ed. If you are not the nam ed addressee, you should not dissem inate, distribute, or copy this em ail.
Please notify the sender im m ediately by em ail if you have received this em ail by mistake, and delete this em ail from your system . If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing, or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this inform ation is strictly prohibited.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
264 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Anthony Brockliss <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 2:31 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: SMO
Dear City Council Members,
The Santa Monica Municipal Airport has been an asset for over 100 years to our community. Rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable infrastructure even more valuable and compatible with the people of Santa Monica. Any discussion, "to make the best use of this land for many generations to come,” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders. We need the experience and skills of current aviators to have a clear vision into the next 100 years. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
The Santa Monica Airport has provided safety, emergency and disaster service response to the Los Angeles community for 100+ years. Closure of the Airport would result in losing this essential asset, risking more loss of human life and more suffering during tragic events. The math is simple. There will be earthquakes, fires and other disaster events multiple times over the next one hundred years. Any city council that removes our Santa Monica Airport aviation land use as an emergency resource will have blood on their hands for a millennium.
The airport finances itself, bringing jobs to our community and could be an incubator for innovation if given the opportunity. Historically, the many businesses at the Airport have offered career opportunities and livelihoods to the community. The Airport has provided quality STEM education for 100+ years, something to be embraced by all who wish to pursue a route that positively enhances one’s livelihood in a healthy and sustainable way. Our existing parks & recreation areas at SMO provide kids & adults with a safe & uncrowded place to play.
As the city council knows, there is not funding or public financial support to create a “great park”. It is a cheap political balloon to propagate the myth that a park will be created within one’s political career or even within the lifetime of most of the pro “great park” lobby effortists. Any Park, unlike the Santa Monica Airport, is not a self‐sustaining resource.
Parks must be financed by the City and ultimately by residents’ taxes to maintain which is no longer a financially viable option.
Very truly yours,
Anthony Brockliss ‐‐ 222 14th Street, since 1983
Item 7.B
01/24/23
265 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: Bonnie Brockliss <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 2:49 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: SMO on tomorrow night's council meeting agenda To the Santa Monica City Council,
I strongly oppose the effort to close SMO and turn the area into a park.
The Santa Monica Airport protects the entire Westside community from high‐density & high‐rise development due to the airport control zone that encompasses over 50 square miles. The Airport also protects our Santa Monica residents from larger commercial jet traffic & noise flying into LAX. It’s no secret that developers want access to this land. Once we lose an Airport as an asset, it is not something we can get back. For the sake & benefit of all, we ask that you consider the option of keeping the Airport open as a viable resource beyond 2028 to be included in your current & future Santa Monica Planning decisions.
The Santa Monica Airport has provided safety, emergency and disaster service response to the Los Angeles community for 100+ years. Closure of the Airport would result in losing this essential asset, risking more loss of human life and more suffering during tragic events. The math is simple. There will be earthquakes, fires and other disaster events multiple times over the next one hundred years.
The technology to promote green aviation that protects residents from aircraft noise & pollution is now created & rapidly advancing. The future of aviation is certain to be cleaner and quieter for all of our benefit. The advantages of a general aviation airport serving the community for regional travel would consume less resources and bring more revenue to our local economy.
The future is in flux. The Santa Monica Municipal Airport is already significantly changed from what it was just a few years ago, and rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable piece of community infrastructure even more valuable to, and compatible with, the people of Santa Monica. Any “approach that is informed by data, robust and transparent discussion, rigorous economic evaluation and a visionary, far‐reaching outlook to make the best use of this land for many generations to come” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders, including current aviation users and the young urban cohort likely to use the airport in the future, as part of the LA DOT Urban Air Mobility initiatives and otherwise. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
Thank you for your consideration,
Bonnie D. Brockliss
Santa Monica Resident since 1979
Item 7.B
01/24/23
266 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Vernice Hankins
From: Danielle Charney <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 3:48 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; David White; Douglas Sloan Subject: SMO- Santa Monica Airport ITEM B
The Santa Monica Municipal Airport has been an asset for over 100 years to our community. Rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable infrastructure even more valuable and compatible with the people of Santa Monica. Any discussion, "to make the best use of this land for many generations to come,” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders. We need the experience and skills of current aviators to have a clear vision into the next 100 years. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
The Santa Monica Airport protects the entire Westside community from high‐density & high‐rise development due to the airport control zone that encompasses over 50 square miles. The Airport also protects our Santa Monica residents, from larger commercial jet traffic & noise flying into LAX. It’s no secret that developers want access to this land. Once we lose an Airport as an asset, it is not something we can get back. For the sake & benefit of all, we ask that you consider the option of keeping the Airport open as a viable resource beyond 2028 to be included in your current & future Santa Monica Planning decisions.
The Santa Monica Airport has provided safety, emergency and disaster service response to the Los Angeles community for 100+ years. Closure of Item 7.B
01/24/23
267 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 the Airport would result in losing this essential asset, risking more loss of human life and more suffering during tragic events. The math is simple.
There will be earthquakes, fires and other disaster events multiple times over the next one hundred years. Any city council that removes our Santa Monica Airport aviation land use as an emergency resource will have blood on their hands for a millennium.
During medical flights, I have witnessed people who have died waiting for medical evacuation. I have been in a helicopter as people died en route to a hospital and I have sat next to many people (in helicopters and airplanes) who are only alive today, because they were flown to emergency medical care or to safety.
Thinking back to 9‐11, if LAX is compromised in any way, due to a dirty bomb or any unforeseen event. The Westside of Los Angeles is void of a port of any kind. No rail road, no sea port and no airport. The Santa Monica Airport is the emergency back up as a reliever airport to LAX.
Aviation is the safest form of transportation available at this time. It is statistically in fact more dangerous to ride a motorcycle, car, bike or to be a pedestrian in Santa Monica than to be a pilot or passenger on an airplane. Not one citizen of Santa Monica has been harmed by an aircraft accident.
The airport has been financially abused by City staff and the City Council. Millions of dollars have been illegally misappropriated out of the Airport fund and spent on frivolous law suits. Residents who chose to buy Item 7.B
01/24/23
268 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 homes next to the airport are the most vocal in trying to profit from closing the airport. The airport is a valuable resource to Santa Monica, inexpensive to operate, an asset to our community and is profitable to all of Santa Monica, inviting people to enjoy the local area, shop, eat & use our hotels.
The airport finances itself, bringing jobs to our community and could be an incubator for innovation if given the opportunity. Historically, the many businesses at the Airport have offered career opportunities and livelihoods to the community. The Airport has provided quality STEM education for 100+ years, something to be embraced by all who wish to pursue a route that positively enhances one’s livelihood in a healthy and sustainable way. Our existing parks & recreation areas at SMO provide kids & adults with a safe & uncrowded place to play.
The technology to promote green aviation that protects residents from aircraft noise & pollution is now created & rapidly advancing. The future of aviation is certain to be cleaner and quieter for all of our benefit. The advantages of a general aviation airport serving the community for regional travel would consume less resources and bring more revenue to our local economy.
Many airports that have been closed still sit undeveloped, untransformed & underutilized as a profitable resource for decades. There is never enough money, planning or commitment to enable a transition for the public good. And in all cases, the city loses financial profit or gain since there is zero revenue coming in.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
269 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
6 As the city council knows, there is not funding or public financial support to create a “great park”. It is a cheap political balloon to propagate the myth that a park will be created within one’s political career or even within the lifetime of most of the pro “great park” lobby effortists. Any Park, unlike the Santa Monica Airport, is not a self‐sustaining resource.
Parks must be financed by the City and ultimately by residents’ taxes to maintain which is no longer a financially viable option.
I have copied this from the airport group because it expresses everything I feel.... please don't make a mess out of SMO as you have this City .. you need to be smarter here...
The future is in flux. The Santa Monica Municipal Airport is already significantly changed from what it was just a few years ago, and rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable piece of community infrastructure even more valuable to, and compatible with, the people of Santa Monica. Any “approach that is informed by data, robust and transparent discussion, rigorous economic evaluation and a visionary, far‐reaching outlook to make the best use of this land for many generations to come” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders, including current aviation users and the young urban cohort likely to use the airport in the future, as part of the LA DOT Urban Air Mobility initiatives and otherwise. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
270 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
7 Danielle Charney
Item 7.B
01/24/23
271 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
8 Vernice Hankins
From: Ben Sun <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 2:59 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Airport Closure
Hi there,
My name is Benjamin Sun. I live about 2 miles south of the Santa Monica Airport, and I don't think that it is worth it to close the Santa Monica Airport
The Santa Monica Municipal Airport has been an asset for over 100 years to our community. Rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable infrastructure even more valuable and compatible with the people of Santa Monica. Any discussion, "to make the best use of this land for many generations to come,” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders. We need the experience and skills of current aviators to have a clear vision into the next 100 years. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
The Santa Monica Airport protects the entire Westside community from high‐density & high‐rise development due to the airport control zone that encompasses over 50 square miles. The Airport also protects our Santa Monica residents, from larger commercial jet traffic & noise flying into LAX.
It’s no secret that developers want access to this land. Once we lose an Airport as an asset, it is not something we can get back. For the sake & benefit of all, we ask that you consider the option of keeping the Airport open as a viable resource beyond 2028 to be included in your current & future Santa Monica Planning decisions.
The Santa Monica Airport has provided safety, emergency and disaster service response to the Los Angeles community for 100+ years. Closure of the Airport would result in losing this essential asset, risking more loss of human life and more suffering during tragic events. The math is simple. There will be earthquakes, fires and other disaster events multiple times over the next one hundred years. Any city council that removes our Santa Monica Airport aviation land use as an emergency resource will have blood on their hands for a millennium.
During medical flights, I have witnessed people who have died waiting for medical evacuation. I have been in a helicopter as people died en route to a hospital and I have sat next to many people (in helicopters and airplanes) who are only alive today, because they were flown to emergency medical care or to safety.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
272 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
9 Thinking back to 9‐11, if LAX is compromised in any way, due to a dirty bomb or any unforeseen event. The Westside of Los Angeles is void of a port of any kind. No rail road, no sea port and no airport. The Santa Monica Airport is the emergency back up as a reliever airport to LAX.
Aviation is the safest form of transportation available at this time. It is statistically in fact more dangerous to ride a motorcycle, car, bike or to be a pedestrian in Santa Monica than to be a pilot or passenger on an airplane. Not one citizen of Santa Monica has been harmed by an aircraft accident.
The airport has been financially abused by City staff and the City Council. Millions of dollars have been illegally misappropriated out of the Airport fund and spent on frivolous law suits. Residents who chose to buy homes next to the airport are the most vocal in trying to profit from closing the airport. The airport is a valuable resource to Santa Monica, inexpensive to operate, an asset to our community and is profitable to all of Santa Monica, inviting people to enjoy the local area, shop, eat & use our hotels.
The airport finances itself, bringing jobs to our community and could be an incubator for innovation if given the opportunity. Historically, the many businesses at the Airport have offered career opportunities and livelihoods to the community. The Airport has provided quality STEM education for 100+ years, something to be embraced by all who wish to pursue a route that positively enhances one’s livelihood in a healthy and sustainable way. Our existing parks & recreation areas at SMO provide kids & adults with a safe & uncrowded place to play.
The technology to promote green aviation that protects residents from aircraft noise & pollution is now created & rapidly advancing. The future of aviation is certain to be cleaner and quieter for all of our benefit. The advantages of a general aviation airport serving the community for regional travel would consume less resources and bring more revenue to our local economy.
Many airports that have been closed still sit undeveloped, untransformed & underutilized as a profitable resource for decades. There is never enough money, planning or commitment to enable a transition for the public good. And in all cases, the city loses financial profit or gain since there is zero revenue coming in.
As the city council knows, there is not funding or public financial support to create a “great park”. It is a cheap political balloon to propagate the myth that a park will be created within one’s political career or even within the lifetime of most of the pro “great park” lobby effortists. Any Park, unlike the Santa Monica Airport, is not a self‐sustaining resource. Parks must be financed by the City and ultimately by residents’ taxes to maintain which is no longer a financially viable option.
The future is in flux. The Santa Monica Municipal Airport is already significantly changed from what it was just a few years ago, and rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable Item 7.B
01/24/23
273 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
10 piece of community infrastructure even more valuable to, and compatible with, the people of Santa Monica. Any “approach that is informed by data, robust and transparent discussion, rigorous economic evaluation and a visionary, far‐reaching outlook to make the best use of this land for many generations to come” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders, including current aviation users and the young urban cohort likely to use the airport in the future, as part of the LA DOT Urban Air Mobility initiatives and otherwise. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
Thank you for your time & consideration.
‐‐ To help protect your privacy,
Micro so ft Office prevented
auto matic downlo ad o f this
picture from the Internet.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
274 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
11 Vernice Hankins
From: Sam Nozik (XPONENTIAL) <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 4:00 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda 7B: Public Process to Determine the Future of the Santa Monica Airport The Santa Monica Municipal Airport has been an asset for over 100 years to our community. Rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable infrastructure even more valuable and compatible with the people of Santa Monica. Any discussion, "to make the best use of this land for many generations to come,” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders. We need the experience and skills of current aviators to have a clear vision into the next 100 years. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
The Santa Monica Airport protects the entire Westside community from high-density & high-rise development due to the airport control zone that encompasses over 50 square miles. The Airport also protects our Santa Monica residents, from larger commercial jet traffic & noise flying into LAX. It’s no secret that developers want access to this land. Once we lose an Airport as an asset, it is not something we can get back. For the sake & benefit of all, we ask that you consider the option of keeping the Airport open as a viable resource beyond 2028 to be included in your current & future Santa Monica Planning decisions.The Santa Monica Airport has provided safety, emergency and disaster service response to the Los Angeles community for 100+ years. Closure of the Airport would result in losing this essential asset, risking more loss of human life and more suffering during tragic events. The math is simple. There will be earthquakes, fires and other disaster events multiple times over the next one hundred years. Any city council that removes our Santa Monica Airport aviation land use as an emergency resource will have blood on their hands for a millennium.The airport has been financially abused by City staff and the City Council. Millions of dollars have been illegally misappropriated out of the Airport fund and spent on frivolous law suits. Residents who chose to buy homes next to the airport are the most vocal in trying to profit from closing the airport. The airport is a valuable resource to Santa Monica, inexpensive to operate, an asset to our community and is profitable to all of Santa Monica, inviting people to enjoy the local area, shop, eat & use our hotels.The airport finances itself, bringing jobs to our community and could be an incubator for innovation if given the opportunity. Historically, the many businesses at the Airport have offered career opportunities and livelihoods to the community. The Airport has provided quality STEM education for 100+ years, something to be embraced by all who wish to pursue a route that positively enhances one’s livelihood in a healthy and sustainable way. Our existing parks & recreation areas at SMO provide kids & adults with a safe & uncrowded place to play.The technology to promote green aviation that protects residents from aircraft noise & pollution is now created & rapidly advancing. The future of aviation is certain to be cleaner and quieter for all of our benefit. The advantages of a general aviation airport serving the community for regional travel would consume less resources and bring more revenue to our local economy.Many airports that have been closed still sit undeveloped, untransformed & underutilized as a profitable resource for decades. There is never enough money, planning or commitment to enable a transition for the public good. And in all cases, the city loses financial profit or gain since there is zero revenue coming in.As the city council knows, there is not funding or public financial support to create a “great park”. It is a cheap political balloon to propagate the myth that a park will be created within one’s political career or even within the lifetime of most of the pro “great park” lobby effortists. Any Park, unlike the Santa Monica Airport, is not a self-sustaining resource. Parks must be financed by the City and ultimately by residents’ taxes to maintain which is no longer a financially viable option.
The future is in flux. The Santa Monica Municipal Airport is already significantly changed from what it was just a few years ago, and rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable piece of Item 7.B
01/24/23
275 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
12 community infrastructure even more valuable to, and compatible with, the people of Santa Monica. Any “approach that is informed by data, robust and transparent discussion, rigorous economic evaluation and a visionary, far-reaching outlook to make the best use of this land for many generations to come” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders, including current aviation users and the young urban cohort likely to use the airport in the future, as part of the LA DOT Urban Air Mobility initiatives and otherwise. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
Sincerely,
Sam
(A concerned resident who doesn’t want my tax dollars wasted trying by a city council just trying to advance their own careers)
Item 7.B
01/24/23
276 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
13 Vernice Hankins
From: George Sands <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 4:25 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Airport
The airport has been financially abused by City staff and the City Council. Millions of dollars have been illegally misappropriated out of the Airport fund and spent on frivolous law suits. Residents who chose to buy homes next to the airport are the most vocal in trying to profit from closing the airport. The airport is a valuable resource to Santa Monica, inexpensive to operate, an asset to our community and is profitable to all of Santa Monica, inviting people to enjoy the local area, shop, eat & use our hotels.
The airport finances itself, bringing jobs to our community and could be an incubator for innovation if given the opportunity. Historically, the many businesses at the Airport have offered career opportunities and livelihoods to the community. The Airport has provided quality STEM education for 100+ years, something to be embraced by all who wish to pursue a route that positively enhances one’s livelihood in a healthy and sustainable way. Our existing parks & recreation areas at SMO provide kids & adults with a safe & uncrowded place to play.
The technology to promote green aviation that protects residents from aircraft noise & pollution is now created & rapidly advancing. The future of aviation is certain to be cleaner and quieter for all of our benefit. The advantages of a general aviation airport serving the community for regional travel would consume less resources and bring more revenue to our local economy.
Many airports that have been closed still sit undeveloped, untransformed & underutilized as a profitable resource for decades. There is never enough money, planning or commitment to enable a transition for the public good. And in all cases, the city loses financial profit or gain since there is zero revenue coming in.
George Sands
Item 7.B
01/24/23
277 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
14 Vernice Hankins
From: Paul Deason <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 4:38 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Airport
The Santa Monica Municipal Airport has been an asset for over 100 years to our community. Rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable infrastructure even more valuable and compatible with the people of Santa Monica. Any discussion, "to make the best use of this land for many generations to come,” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders. We need the experience and skills of current aviators to have a clear vision into the next 100 years. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
The Santa Monica Airport protects the entire Westside community from high‐density & high‐rise development due to the airport control zone that encompasses over 50 square miles. The Airport also protects our Santa Monica residents, from larger commercial jet traffic & noise flying into LAX. It’s no secret that developers want access to this land. Once we lose an Airport as an asset, it is not something we can get back. For the sake & benefit of all, we ask that you consider the option of keeping the Airport open as a viable resource beyond 2028 to be included in your current & future Santa Monica Planning decisions.
The Santa Monica Airport has provided safety, emergency and disaster service response to the Los Angeles community for 100+ years. Closure of the Airport would result in losing this essential asset, risking more loss of human life and more suffering during tragic events. The math is simple. There will be earthquakes, fires and other disaster events multiple times over the next one hundred years. Any city council that removes our Santa Monica Airport aviation land use as an emergency resource will have blood on their hands for a millennium.
The airport has been financially abused by City staff and the City Council. Millions of dollars have been illegally misappropriated out of the Airport fund and spent on frivolous law suits. Residents who chose to buy homes next to the airport are the most vocal in trying to profit from closing the airport. The airport is a valuable resource to Santa Monica, inexpensive to operate, an asset to our community and is profitable to all of Santa Monica, inviting people to enjoy the local area, shop, eat & use our hotels.
Paul Deason
1726 San Vicente Blvd
Item 7.B
01/24/23
278 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
15 Vernice Hankins
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 4:58 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: SAVE THE AIRPORT
Importance: High
The Santa Monica Airport protects the entire Westside community from high-density & high-rise development due to the airport control zone that encompasses over 50 square miles. The Airport also protects our Santa Monica residents, from larger commercial jet traffic & noise flying into LAX. It’s no secret that developers want access to this land. Once we lose an Airport as an asset, it is not something we can get back. For the sake & benefit of all, we ask that you consider the option of keeping the Airport open as a viable resource beyond 2028 to be included in your current & future Santa Monica Planning decisions.
The airport has been financially abused by City staff and the City Council. Millions of dollars have been illegally misappropriated out of the Airport fund and spent on frivolous law suits. Residents who chose to buy homes next to the airport are the most vocal in trying to profit from closing the airport. The airport is a valuable resource to Santa Monica, inexpensive to operate, an asset to our community and is profitable to all of Santa Monica, inviting people to enjoy the local area, shop, eat & use our hotels.
The airport finances itself, bringing jobs to our community and could be an incubator for innovation if given the opportunity. Historically, the many businesses at the Airport have offered career opportunities and livelihoods to the community. The Airport has provided quality STEM education for 100+ years, something to be embraced by all who wish to pursue a route that positively enhances one’s livelihood in a healthy and sustainable way. Our existing parks & recreation areas at SMO provide kids & adults with a safe & uncrowded place to play.
The future is in flux. The Santa Monica Municipal Airport is already significantly changed from what it was just a few years ago, and rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable piece of community infrastructure even more valuable to, and compatible with, the people of Santa Monica. Any “approach that is informed by data, robust and transparent discussion, rigorous economic evaluation and a visionary, far-reaching outlook to make the best use of this land for many generations to come” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders, including current aviation users and the young urban cohort likely to use the airport in the future, as part of the LA DOT Urban Air Mobility initiatives and otherwise. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
Jeff Wachner
Item 7.B
01/24/23
279 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Dirk Braun <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 11:01 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: KSMO
EXTERNAL
To Whom It May Concern:
I am a pilot, aircraft owner, and tenant at KSMO. The airport that built Los Angeles, KSMO is vital to the health of the community around it. Aviation drives the development of the modern world and in a sense, is man’s greatest accomplishment. Pilots are always needed and keeping airports open allows people to be trained to be them. In a situation of a natural disaster, having an airport nearby can be the reason that that food, supplies, and personnel reach those in need. There is endless potential for good with aviation. Locally, there are many scenarios to utilizing the airport and space around it ways that benefits the community the most. It is with my sincere hope and faith, that you allow KSMO to continue its existence in to the future.
Sincere regards,
Dirk Braun
Item 7.B
01/24/23
280 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Diane Reynolds (MFT) <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 11:10 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Diane Reynolds
Subject: Item 7B – Study Session
EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Davis and City Council Members,
As a longtime resident and community member of Santa Monica, it is with great enthusiasm that I urge your support of City staff’s three recommendations for beginning the planning process for the future of Santa Monica Airport, with a Great Park at the center of the visioning process.
This is an unprecedented opportunity to ensure much‐needed park space and recreation areas are provided for generations to come.
Many thanks to all of you for committing to moving this process forward.
With appreciation,
Diane Reynolds
Resident of 90405
Vice Chair, Airport Commission
Item 7.B
01/24/23
281 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Mark Smith <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 11:21 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Future of Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
The Airport Commission is really a Parks Commission. Not one member on the commission knows anything about aviation and there is never any discussion that deals with safety or operations.
The Airport is the greatest asset for security and safety that the City of Santa Monica has. We do not know the future, other then aviation will become quiet and safer and have zero pollution.
There is no money for a great park, and closing the airport will create a homeless encampment and dead space that will never be utilized for the public good in our life time.
PLEASE include the aviation community in any discussion of the future of the Santa Monica Airport.
PLEASE add a member of the aviation community to the Airport Commission.
There can be a future with more park land and an operational airport.
See the attached pictures. These airports were closed twenty years ago.
It is cheap to dream of a great park, but it is super expensive to build and maintain a park.
Mark Smith
(310) 213 0790
www.solarforward.com
Item 7.B
01/24/23
282 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 The con tent of this email and any files
attached are confidential and intended for the recipient specified in message only. It is strictly forbidden to share any part of this message, email or files, with any third party, without a written consent of the sender. If you received this message by mistake, please reply to this message and follow with its deletion.. Thank you for your cooperation and understanding.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
283 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Item 7.B
01/24/23
284 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 Item 7.B
01/24/23
285 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
William Scherer
CEO
Scherer Entertainment
Stakeholder
Item 7.B
01/24/23
286 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Eve Lopez <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 11:30 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
As City Councilmembers, setting policies, priorities, and a budget for the City of Santa Monica are amongst your most critical obligations. Thank you for taking those obligations seriously – and responsibly, directed by the best interests of us Santa Monica residents.
The Staff Report appears to have been prepared at the direction and under the supervision of several councilmembers who no longer sit on the dais and also under the direction of a different City Attorney and City Manager. Given this, we have the opportunity to view the circumstances fresh with the City’s current financial struggles at the forefront. Because the City’s budget and responsible financial planning is at the forefront of your responsibilities, please consider the following.
Keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra-low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra-low density land use available to the city and its residents that cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra-low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost Item 7.B
01/24/23
287 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Thank you.
Eve Lopez
Resident of Sunset Park
Item 7.B
01/24/23
288 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: T <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 11:32 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Jesse Zwick; Gleam Davis; Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; housing; Jason Elliott; [email protected]
Subject: Item 7B; Santa Monica airport
Attachments: PenmarGolfCourse+SMAirportproposal.TieiraRyder.pdf
EXTERNAL
Hello Santa Monica council,
The Santa Monica airport is public land that all residents of West LA should have access to and usage of. The small plane owners are causing serious noise & fuel pollution over the homes of West Los Angeles residents and though we knew we were moving by an airport, we weren't expecting plane owners to fly in circles over our homes all day. Also, there have been two small plane crashes in less than a year coming from the incorrectly zoned Santa Monica airport. Not only should the airport close, it should close sooner than 2028 so that West LA residents can have dense housing surrounded by a larger park and a car free community. The Santa Monica airport would fall under the SLA and I have already spoken with HCD's surplus land act team about helping residents acquire that vacant land along with Penmar golf course & Oceanview farms so that we get can the housing that we needed 10 years ago. For those concerned about losing the golf course, there is another golf course up the street on Pico blvd. that residents can utilize. We have to use our land space much better than we are and we have to get rid of the asphalt surrounding our communities.
Moving forward we will use every means necessary to prevent Santa Monica from continuing to uphold illegal segregation based on race & class. Blue-collar workers, college students, retirees, etc. all Item 7.B
01/24/23
289 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 deserve access to safe, clean, and affordable housing. Once that airport closes, it should be used under collective communityownership for mixed-income rental housing along with other restorative housing initiatives.
Our team is working on a new design development for the airport. ‐‐
Best,
Tieira
https://htwws.org/santamonicaairport/ To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Walkable, bike-friendly communities that are affordable are the right of every single human being. These communities are great for humanity, other species, and the Earth itself! Everything in the HUE-MANS life does NOT need to be a drive away.
Item 7.B
01/24/23
290 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
When the Santa Monica airport closes…
How The West Was Saved is
committed to structural
policy changes that benefit
the collective of humanity,
other species, and the
Earth herself.
H T W W S
Santa Monica Airport + Penmar Golf Course housing propo… Update: A Letter from HCD (Department of Housing & Community development) to Santa Monica City’s planning team regarding the upcoming housing element.
How The West Was Saved (Tieira R.), along with some other wonderful housing advocates were mentioned as consideration for the comments that HCD gave to Posted On May 30, 2021
When the Santa Monica airport closes… 2 COMMENTS SHARE Y O U A R E R E A D I N G Item 7.B
01/24/23
291 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
Santa Monica regarding the necessary steps the city must take in order to create a compliant housing element. Thank You HCD for rejecting Santa Monica’s noncompliant housing element, we must hold cities accountable for housing production so that residents can finally have the housing that they are owed! https://www.smgov.net/
Taras Grescoe
@grescoe · Follow
“I’ve been living my life wrong.”
—literally everyone in North America.
Watch on Twitter
6:23 AM · Aug 30, 2021
1.3K Reply Share
Read 26 replies
When the incorrectly zoned Santa Monica airport closes, a closure that should be happening in this upcoming housing element cycle (2021-2022), a walkable community that includes a majority of community-owned social housing should When the Santa Monica airport closes… 2 COMMENTS SHARE Y O U A R E R E A D I N G Item 7.B
01/24/23
292 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
be developed. The location is perfect for a walkable/bike-friendly residential neighborhood that includes a variety of housing types for working-class residents, students, seniors, those living with disabilities, and many others in need of affordable housing.
(HTWWS does not own the rights to all of the photos attached) To be clear, this community would include both community-owned rental and homeownership options. This pro-housing advocacy effort should be led by a housing advocate that understands the needs of the local community, someone that When the Santa Monica airport closes… 2 COMMENTS SHARE Y O U A R E R E A D I N G Item 7.B
01/24/23
293 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
likely falls within the working class and has the best interest of the local community in mind. When it comes to renting, rent should never exceed 20-30% of a resident’s total income after taxes. Please keep in mind, the average worker in LA makes about $39,000 a year, this rental housing would be catered to those workers but the community itself would be mixed-income meaning it would also include market-rate units (still cheaper usually than private market-rate housing). Along with market-rate rentals & homeownership opportunities, business placements would be considered throughout the community.
Housing proposal for the Santa Monica airport
(Please note that Penmar golf course is also being requested for this project. The exact community plans would need to be confirmed & this is just a proposed housing plan for the vacant land space.
The proposal was created by Tieira R.)
Affordable Homeownership
Affordable, reasonably priced homeownership for working-class residents, priority for long-term residents living or working in the Santa Monica, Venice, & Mar Vista zip codes.
Consider a set number of market-rate “for-sale” homes.
A variety of home types should be considered for development but especially multi-family housing such as plexes, condos, townhomes, and apartments.
Consider co-op ownership.
Priority consideration should also go to first-time homeowners in LA County, my recommendation is residents that have lived/worked at least 10 years in LA County.
Priority consideration for historically displaced residents from supposed marginalized communities. Consider a 30-40% “right to return”, “right to housing” for ADOS families ( When the Santa Monica airport closes… African descendants of Survivors), & for other 2 COMMENTS SHARE Y O U A R E R E A D I N G Item 7.B
01/24/23
294 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
residents impacted by systematic housing violence. (Google the history of displaced Black families in Santa Monica, Venice, and/or Manhattan Beach if you need more info.)
The millennial generation should also receive a percentage of priority consideration, they currently own a measly 18% of the homes in Los Angeles. “Equity is defined as “the state, quality or ideal of being just, impartial and fair.” The concept of equity is synonymous with fairness and justice.” At no time would a small or large equity firm be granted permission to purchase a home within the community nor would an option be granted to purchase the community as a whole.
My recommendation on income qualifications for residents that are first-time buyers is; working-class residents making between $30,000-$130,000.
If potential owners require financing, ownership could be subject to credit union or bank approval. Consider public, city-owned bank.
The actual cost of homes should match that of the actual average wage of what most working-class residents make. There would likely be re-sell requirements as affordability for affordable homes would be protected by a trust.
Affordable Rental Housing
Community-owned rental housing in mixed-income developments.
The recommended height for apartment buildings is 6-7 stories.
Set an “affordable rental rate” based on what the average person from the bluecollar working class makes. At this moment, most workers in LA make about $39,000 a year. Affordability is usually priced for residents in the $17,000-$70,000 range.
When the Santa Monica airport closes… 2 COMMENTS SHARE Y O U A R E R E A D I N G Item 7.B
01/24/23
295 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
Community-owned market-rate rentals to be included, most likely still cheaper than the private market-rate rental housing.
No income restrictions once residents are housed.
https://www.nhlp.org/resources/lihtc-admissions-rents-grievanceprocedures/ Reserve a portion of the housing for limited to no-income residents. Consider the following; subsidize with HUD and/or new digital voucher program; subsidize low to no income residents with market-rate apartment & business rentals; consider HCID/HACLA westside chapter. Social services for housing, food, and health care should be ONE efficient program.
Affordable bachelors, studios, 1, 2, and 3 bedrooms.
As with affordable homeownership, the rental units & placements would be for various types of community members but especially keeping in mind our core working class which includes the essential workforce, students, seniors, veterans, those living with disabilities, etc. etc.
Student apartments would be bachelor-sized apartments with smaller fridges and MUST have a kitchen area sink and a small area to put a hot plate (or something similar) so they can cook if needed. (Similar to this https://urbanize.city/la/post/micro-unit-apartment-building) More info on the proposed community as a whole
priority consideration for small business placements within the community.
The land will be owned under a municipal, CLT, or co-op trust which basically means if any of the owned homes are sold in the future, a portion of that sale will go back into the respective trust.
Include an open large park and a recreation center within the walkable community. Cars can exist on the outside of the community, not within.
Consider the possibility of needing to build new schools. When the Santa Monica airport closes… 2 COMMENTS SHARE Y O U A R E R E A D I N G Item 7.B
01/24/23
296 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
Consider a quality westside public transit system, especially for college students between SMC and/or UCLA. (cut down on car traffic congestion because students wouldn’t need to drive)
College student housing should have its own small park area that has a WIFI and outdoor/indoor workspace for them.
Consider large home space for displaced minors within the community aka a “group home” to provide stability.
Request consideration for golf course closure(s) as well as other vacant land plots and buildings that have potential use for affordable housing that is communityowned and suits apartments, condos, townhomes, small and/or tiny homes for locals. Request more interim housing and healthcare sites on the westside for residents with long-term behavioral health needs.
The overall progressive housing goal is to adopt a similar social housing policy for each city in California (all of the U.S) with pro-housing community advocates from said cities leading the efforts. The private market can obviously always exist but it can’t compete against itself, forcing residents to beg for housing that is priced much higher than most can afford. That doesn’t sound like freedom to me! California’s Housing Crisis
The current CA housing crisis is literally wiping out and pushing the blue-collar working class, students, senior citizens, and many other residents into poverty! In the last 10 years, rent has gone up well over 65% in the city of Los Angeles, in that same amount of time the number of unhoused residents increased by at least 50%! There are currently 60,000+ unhoused residents in LA County and the median income can no longer afford a rent-controlled studio in cities like Santa Monica! When the Santa Monica airport closes… 2 COMMENTS SHARE Y O U A R E R E A D I N G Item 7.B
01/24/23
297 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
https://www.smdp.com/renters-need-to-earn-95000-to-afford-rent-controlledstudio-in-santa-monicaIt’s time to return ownership to the residents of Los Angeles, our right to clean, safe, and affordable housing is being denied!
Side notes:
Alex Lee 李天明
@alex_lee · Follow
Housing prices making it impossible to live in your
community? Distrust private developers?
Social Housing is your answer
California must become the developer. We will build
beautiful, sustainable, mixed-income neighborhoods
to solve housing crisis
noemamag.com/public-housing…
10:14 AM · Aug 31, 2021
Read the full conversation on Twitter
246 Reply Share
Read 10 replies
https://planning.lacity.org/plans-policies/housing-element (LA City Housing Element)
When the Santa Monica airport closes… 2 COMMENTS SHARE Y O U A R E R E A D I N G Item 7.B
01/24/23
298 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
What is a community land trust?
“Starting at about $600 per month for a studio, rents in the Los Angeles Eco-Village are less than half the price of some comparable apartments nearby, and prices aren’t raised unless community members agree to it. That’s possible because the land beneath the co-op is owned by the Beverly/Vermont Community Land Trust, which has pledged to make the land permanently affordable regardless of rising housing prices.” https://laist.com/2021/02/02/community-land-trusts-los-angeles-affordable.php An email from the Santa Monica planning team regarding use of the airport in this upcoming housing element
“Hi , Thanks for sharing your proposal and thoughts for the airport. Please note that since the airport is slated to close at the end of 2028 and conversion to any other use would take time, the airport is not realistically being considered in the planning for the 6 th cycle Housing Element Update (October 2021 – July 2029). It will most certainly be a consideration in the following housing element cycle (beyond 2029).
However, to get to that point, there will need to be a public process around the future of the airport given the significant community interest and varying views on its future use so I hope you will continue on to be engaged in that separate effort.” Quotes from an LA Times article regarding the Santa Monica airport “The opening of a the 227-acre site on the Westside — in close proximity to jobs, good schools and transit — is a once-in-a-generation opportunity. Housing has to be a part of the equation.
When the Santa Monica airport closes… 2 COMMENTS SHARE Y O U A R E R E A D I N G Item 7.B
01/24/23
299 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
“Since the 1980s, Santa Monica has approved the construction of millions of square feet of office space, transforming it into a hub for both the tech and entertainment industries, with a daytime population that swells by more than 150,000 people. But this explosive job growth has not been accompanied by a proportional increase in housing units.”
“Santa Monica’s estimated population of 92,478 residents in 2019 was only a blip above what it was in 1970, when 88,289 people called the city home. This growing imbalance between jobs and housing has created a massive influx of daily commuters into Santa Monica (even well-compensated tech employees) who either can’t find or can’t afford housing near these job centers. Meanwhile, population in neighboring jurisdictions has swelled, displacing lower-income residents. The result is more and more commuters crowding the freeways from increasingly distant parts of Southern California.”
The plan to turn Santa Monica Airport into a park is irresponsible. The Westside needs housing
(By the way, most of the office buildings mentioned in the LA Times article above in Santa Monica have been empty for over a year during the pandemic, they lay empty as residents head to the streets or to their cars/vans to sleep) https://a25.asmdc.org/press-releases/20210202-assemblymember-alex-leeintroduces-bill-establish-social-housing When the Santa Monica airport closes… 2 COMMENTS SHARE Y O U A R E R E A D I N G Item 7.B
01/24/23
300 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
How Socialists Solved The Housing Crisis
Alex Fumero
@AngryYuca · Follow
Here is @MayorOfLA Eric Garcetti without an ounce of
irony explaining that when the economy is good
homelessness INCREASES as though it’s an immutable
axiom like the Law of Fucking Gravity. (Yes, Newton calles it that.)
Watch on Twitter When the Santa Monica airport closes… 2 COMMENTS SHARE Y O U A R E R E A D I N G Item 7.B
01/24/23
301 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
10:23 PM · Sep 19, 2020
430 Reply Share
Read 34 replies
S H A R E
Bear Writer
You might also like
A U T H O R
“Disband the heavy
usage of LAPD
Reparations for U.S
When the Santa Monica airport closes… ADOS 2 COMMENTS SHARE Y O U A R E R E A D I N G Item 7.B
01/24/23
302 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
Donate to HTWWS
Cashapp Me Venmo Me Paypal Me
© Copyright 2022 How The West Was Saved
helicopters & implement
new public safety
systems”
October 22, 2022
ADOS community
updates & events
September 27, 2022
September 27, 2022
When the Santa Monica airport closes… 2 COMMENTS SHARE Y O U A R E R E A D I N G Item 7.B
01/24/23
303 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Liz DeStaffany <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 11:38 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 7B
EXTERNAL
If our society hopes to continue to learn, educate, collaborate, and exist, then communication, travel, and commerce must continue.
Travel infrastructure is integral to our modern world.
Closing airports is backward thinking and unintelligent.
We must co‐exist with what makes society function.
Focus should not be closing airports on faulty data, but on working in collaboration together to improve infrastructure inextricably linked with the rest of the world.
Sincerely,
Liz DeStaffany
Item 7.B
01/24/23
304 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
January 24, 2023
Agenda Item 7B: Airport Park Master Plan
Dear Mayor Davis and City Council Members:
We are delighted as co-chairs of the Santa Monica Safe Street Alliance to support Airport-2-Park and the planning process outlined in the staff report for the City of Santa Monica to begin envisioning the future use of the Santa Monica Airport land as a “Great Park” when the airport closes at midnight, December 31, 2028.
The long-awaited Great Park will provide a safe and healthy place for engaging community activities, including healthy active transportation. It is important to note that 63% of Santa Monica residents already walk, bike or skate to visit our limited parks*. The community spoke in 2014 with the Ballot Measure LC. A Great Park will affirm our community commitment and support equitable access to open space for everyone, foster social interaction, improve health outcomes, increase green infrastructure, nourish biodiversity, reclaim storm-water runoff, reduce heat island effects, strengthen climate resiliency, and provide sustainable access to recreation and social services.
Transportation generates the majority of Santa Monica’s greenhouse gas emissions. Planning for a Great Park destination can also help maximize active mobility choices. Not only to enjoy the attraction of a lovely open space but also to encourage even more active transportation and help reduce dependency on automobiles throughout our city, the park can also help us support programs such as “Safe Routes to Parks.”
We support the planning for a Great Park that helps enable our community to meet the need and the high demand for parks. The fact is that 60% of our Santa Monica residents currently visit our parks at least once per week*. The 2016 Los Angeles Countywide Comprehensive Park & Recreation Needs Assessment has also identified the City of Santa Monica is lacking in sufficient park space resulting in a "high need" designation.
Designing a Great Park collectively empowers the community and brings to life our vision. This Great Park will help the community to shape Santa Monica to be more environmentally sustainable and a healthier place to live, work and play for current and future generations.
Sincerely,
Cynthia Rose Cris Gutierrez
Co-Chair, Santa Monica Safe Street Alliance Co-Chair, Santa Monica Safe Streets Alliance Director, Santa Monica Spoke
SaMoSafeStreets.org
* 2019 Santa Monica Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report Item 7.B
01/24/23
305 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Jesse Biltz <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 11:51 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Future of KSMO
EXTERNAL
Hey there. My name is Jesse Biltz. I’m a pilot based out Santa Monica, live just under the departure end, and have had a thriving preschool in Santa Monica since 2009. I know Santa Monica doesn’t like the airport as a whole, given the rich history of trying to shut it down for over 50 years, tax payers dollars spent in legal fees, and plans to off‐set pensions and city debt with a land grab for development. From a business perspective, I get it. And I’m sure it runs deeper than I will ever know. I just want to be certain that your moves as a city council are procedurally correct… as there is another rich history of you all seemingly doing what you like with no regard for law or procedure. You’ve been put in place to look after the city… as a whole. Yet, there is very little attention given to concerns from the pilot side. I figure of your residents, 3% hate the airport, 3% love it, and 94% don’t care either way. You’ve got a great little historical airport that is a great little attraction for your residents. With your help, it COULD be so much more while it lasts.
If you choose to have a pilot or two on your committee moving forward, I’d love to help with a voice of reason. In my experience, not everyone there has that, but hopefully with the new blood, some minds will be more open to it.
I look forward to hearing from you all.
Jesse Biltz
310.210.8563
Item 7.B
01/24/23
306 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: Gabriel Zeifman <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 11:45 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Airport for Meeting
EXTERNAL
Hello,
I am a resident and a user of the SMO airport. I own a small aircraft. It is a Cessna 150, which has two seats. I purchased the aircraft for $16,000 and it uses five gallons per hour of fuel. I only share this because I want to emphasize that I am a normal person, and many other users are like me. We are not billionaires, just regular people.
I use my plane for recreation, but I also use it for business transportation and for humanitarian missions. You may or may not be aware, but SMO is home to Angel Flight West, which provides volunteer air transportation to mostly medical patients, but also other people undergoing hardship such as domestic violence. These passengers are often unable to fly by normal commercial methods, or are too far away from commercial service or their healthcare providers for special treatments. These pilots, many of which are based at SMO, volunteer their time and aircraft for these missions.
The security implications are also noteworthy. I was formerly an FAA air traffic controller. The SMO airport is afforded a class delta control zone, under the control of the air traffic control tower on the airport. This airspace extends to a little over five miles from the airport. If the airport is removed, so will this airspace, leaving the airspace uncontrolled.
The airport is also a vital link for emergency services. Medical evacuation flights routinely use the airport as a base for fueling as well as pickups/drop offs.
I wanted to hit on leaded fuel as well. There have been concerns in the past about leaded fuel. I wanted to note that SMO has eliminated leaded fuel sales so this is no longer a major concern here. The entire country is progressing rapidly towards the entire elimination of these fuels. Similarly, I believe the airport community has made great efforts to be a good neighbor and fly quietly.
The airport is a fantastic resource and sustains itself through the fees it collects and the economic opportunities it provides.
Thank you,
Gabriel Zeifman
928‐308‐8173
Item 7.B
01/24/23
307 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: SCOTT CHOATE <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 11:44 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Please use this email instead of my earlier one: Keep Santa Monica Airport OPEN!
EXTERNAL
My earlier email contained my address, which I would prefer not be shared publicly. Please use the version below. Thank you.
Begin forwarded message:
From: SCOTT CHOATE <[email protected]>
Subject: Keep Santa Monica Airport OPEN!
Date: January 24, 2023 at 8:29:44 AM PST
To: [email protected]
To the Santa Monica City Council:
I am not a member of SMAA. But I am a Santa Monica resident with a passion for keeping the Santa Monica Airport open as an airport.
Ours is a diverse city with many interests and amenities of much larger cities, and our airport is no exception.
It makes no sense to me to penalize our city by destroying an institution with tremendous historic and ongoing practical value. We don’t need more development. We don’t need another park. Homeowners, for the most part, who bought property near the airport knew what they were getting into. If people don’t like the noise, put some restrictions on that, but don’t close the airport because of it.
Please preserve aviation as a viable public service, business and emergency resource for our city.
Thank you for your consideration.
Scott Choate
Item 7.B
01/24/23
308 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Joseph Hardin <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 11:58 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: "1/24/23 agenda item 7-B
EXTERNAL
Please start the great park planning now...
Item 7.B
01/24/23
309 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: Christine Hardin <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 11:59 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: 1/24/23 agenda item 7-B
EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
Please let us remember the intent of Measure LC and the original purchase of the land that is now occupied by the Santa Monica Airport. It’s 2023, the year that all grant assurances would have ended even if the city lost its lawsuit with the FAA and before the Consent Decree extended grant assurances until 2028.
There has been way too much visioning and barely no getting to work on planning and building the park that we want and got the vote out for. It’s more of the same questions without moving forward.
Council needs to remember the history. There were two, not one, past council resolutions to close the airport ‐ in the 80s and around 2000 early teens. Then there was LC for a park to which the then council claimed to be committed. It was Gleam and the then City Attorney who inserted the “vote to change” LC uses clause that we were concerned about at the time. Then came the stalls and excuses and now back to the drawing table again with a long report setting up for another vote giving aviation and developers another shot at the land.
The staff report is skewing away from a great big park and doesn’t acknowledge that income from leases alone could pay for ongoing maintenance as well as building it as long as it is built without extravagance from the get go. The report leans towards some development and I believe the door is being left open for some sort of residual airport as well. This is not what the residents want. Please refer to the letter sent by Friends of Sunset Park regarding this agenda item.
Thank you for considering the residents and our longstanding vision which is reflected in Measure LC.
Best regards,
Christine Hardin
2349 Pier Avenue
Santa Monica, CA 90405
310‐428‐3386
Item 7.B
01/24/23
310 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Vernice Hankins
From: Gavin Scott <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 11:57 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: 1/24/23 agenda item 7-B Study Session: Public Process to Determine the Future of the Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Davis and City Council Members,
As Sunset Park Residents my wife Nicola and I strongly support the staff’s recommendation to begin the planning process for the future of Santa Monica Airport.
Not only will this action start the planning for the Airport Conversion Process, but it is also the first step in realizing the full potential of the upcoming parks master plan for the entire City. Our city is park-poor compared to others in the area, and those parks we do have are small to medium size. The Great Park on the airport land will increase the effectiveness of our entire park system by serving as the hub for parks throughout the City.
As population and housing densities increase with each passing decade, park space must increase accordingly. The City is now at a watershed moment. We have a once in a lifetime opportunity, and obligation to future generations to create a livable City of the future. That means a dramatic increase in park space, and is the purpose of the upcoming planning process.
We are impressed by the thoroughness of Staff’s report and its presentation of the many facets of the planning process and possible outcomes, and the conflicting needs that the process will address. This is the reality of any large public planning process.
At the same time we are concerned that language in the report may be interpreted as ‘pessimistic’ regarding the City’s ability to plan, create and operate a Great Park. While we understand Staff’s caution, unwarranted pessimism may lead to public distrust of the intent to keep the promise made at the time of the Measure LC fight to build a Great Park. Yes, financing any great undertaking is complex, but Santa Monica can draw on ample resources to build and operate the park. We should make no small plans. Big plans inspire, and inspirational plans usually find a way to happen. So let's start this multi-year process with optimism, and let's plan to make immediate recreational use of the space after closure.
As the report points out, income from the airport is currently over $20 million per year, virtually all of which is from non-aviation uses. This figure will inevitably increase as aviation uses are replaced and buildings are upgraded, and will continue to grow following airport closure at the end of 2028. These funds exist because the City acted to move loss-making airport operations to a firm financial footing which led to aviation businesses being replaced with market-rate non-aviation tenants. But while the airport remains, airport fund money can only be used for constrained purposes within the airport premises.
The consent decree allowing closure of the airport resulted from both the City’s decision to continue the legal fight and the community’s measure LC victory. These two things ultimately made these funds available for Great Park purposes. The alliance between the City and the community created this opportunity, and LC passed by a large margin for one fundamental reason, and that was the promise of a Great Park. These funds should be ample to cover operating costs, as well as much of development.
Significantly, and as the report notes, parks are built over time, often over decades. The City should not necessarily expect to fund the whole park at once and should not make that an absolute goal. Initial costs need not be prohibitive, as the report shows from examples it cites.
Let’s always keep in mind: the major cost of the park, the land, was paid for almost a century ago with a parks bond. Your predecessors and residents were visionary then, let’s be visionary now.
Ten years ago, after losing the big jets lawsuits, the City was considering throwing in the towel after 50 years of trying to close the airport. The FAA was insisting the City could not close the airport under the 1984 agreement. The City started a process that seemed designed to prepare residents to accept the Item 7.B
01/24/23
311 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 airport’s continuation. And then in 2014 the aviation industry gathered signatures to put Measure D on the ballot to remove all control over SMO's future from the City. But the community fought back and with the support of City Council and virtually every community organization in the area, Santa Monica defeated the aviation industry and the nearly $1 million they spent to keep SMO operating as their private preserve. (Airport2Park board members also served as the board of the Measure LC community organization.) Compared to this past history, we see no reason for pessimism. We as a city and community united, absolutely can and will do this! Let’s be bold!
In the meantime we believe there are still many things that can be done on the existing 12-acre Airport Park expansion to mitigate existing citywide issues (e.g., playing fields, pickle-ball courts, etc.). If any incremental funding for that already designed and approved park space can be found, then that work can and should go ahead. Showing visible progress on already planned parkland at the airport will not only buoy public trust, but may also lay a foundation for other forms of non-city funding to help move the entire process forward.
As always, we thank City Council for its support in closing the airport and using this publicly owned land as a once in a lifetime opportunity to do something truly great.
Sincerely,
Gavin and Nicola Scott
1801 Marine Street
CA 90405
Item 7.B
01/24/23
312 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Travis Michaels <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 1:03 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Airport Closure
EXTERNAL
Good Afternoon,
I believe that the Santa Monica airport should remain open because it creates a large economical impact to both the city of Santa Monica and the State of California. Pilots are needed now more than ever and training for pilots needs to be accomplished as locally as possible to allow people from all walks of life the opportunity to train. Having this training and a robust community of general aviation pilots creates a large boon to the city's economical prospects by increasing tax revenue raised by both aviation fuel taxes and hangar rent charged by the airport. This airport remaining open also acts as a gateway to every other airport in the region. This can be important for traveling doctors, emergency medical transport, and disaster relief basing. Urban Air Mobility is right around the corner and there will be an ever-increasing need to accommodate these personal air vehicles. Santa Monica is in a prime location to house these aircrafts for the people of the community.
Best Regards,
Travis Michaels
Item 7.B
01/24/23
313 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: The Forbes <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 12:17 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Agenda item 7B
EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:
It is obvious keeping the Santa Monica Airport as an operating airport is what is best for Santa Monica and its residents.
Exercise of the Consent Decree is entirely at the discretion of the Council. The Consent Decree should not be exercised.
The Council should vote to keep the airport operating as it currently operates for no less than these six reasons:
1. Keeping the airport operating as currently constructed is the only ultra‐low density land use that benefits the residents.
2. An airport land use is the ONLY federally protected ultra‐low density land use available to the city and its residents than cannot be abridged by any entity, public or private.
3. The city staff has admitted there isn’t enough money to develop and sustain a park, ensuring development of the parcels as an inevitability. Since the runway was shortened there has been no progress in building any park space in the past few years due to no budget funds to build or maintain as promised to the community.
4. The City staff has stated that it has no appetite (and likely no money) to defend against developer lawsuits to eliminate any park.
5. The State has taken over every other land use decision from the City. Maintaining Santa Monica airport is the ONLY land use protected from state laws. It is the ONLY ultra‐low density land use decision the state cannot challenge. All the protections against state land use legislation are lost if the airport closes.
6. This would be the third time this Council opened the door for overdevelopment. The prior two instances being the Gelson’s (Lincoln) project and the Builder Remedy projects.
7. On a personal note, because I live in San Luis Obispo, I wouldn't bother to drive to Santa Monica if you close the airport. But I do fly in there in my small plane because it takes a lot less time and stress. Your local businesses will lose my dollars.
Keep the airport open. It is the ONLY rational choice for the residents and the surrounding communities.
Bert Forbes, pilot
Item 7.B
01/24/23
314 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 Vernice Hankins
From: Lbautista1 <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 12:30 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Keeping SMO open
EXTERNAL
To whom it may concern,
I would like to express my desire for the city of Santa Monica to keep the airport open. I remember the earthquake and the riots that closed the 405. We need the airport not only because of it's historical significance but also because of the emergency relief it would provide to the south land. I continue to fly down to SMO for my doctor visits at UCLA. It's so convenient to land there and Uber to the hospital and literally walk into the building. I live in Modesto about 300 miles away and I am a 2 time graduate of UCLA. The airport is of huge significance to the entire public and as a public resource it should be maintained.
Thank you for your attention.
Sincerely,
Lance Bautista DDS
Item 7.B
01/24/23
315 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Dan Chapman <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 3:58 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: SMO
EXTERNAL
We as a General Aviation community needs the safety, security, availability of this airport. Air ambulance, police. Cancer patients traveling.
Loss and impact would be devastating.
I fully support the Santa Monica Airport.
Dan Chapman
Sent from my iPhone
Item 7.B
01/24/23
316 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
2 Vernice Hankins
From: Loria Roberson <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 3:30 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Thoughts on Santa Monica Airport
EXTERNAL
I’m hoping the council will still take a look at emails from residents regarding the airport. Just realized I missed the noon deadline.
I’ve lived in the same unit in Santa Monica since the late 90s. I love my neighborhood and I love the history here. My building was built in 1936 (actually the first structure on the land my building was built on was built in 1936). I believe the rest of the building was built in 1939 — that’s before the Nuremberg trials. Talk about history.
I have also been fascinated with the history of the Santa Monica Airport. I truly wish that everyone would leave this landmark alone. It is the oldest airport in Los Angeles County with a rich history that has had a very positive impact on the city.
I’m tired of hearing about residents complaining about airport traffic noise — who knew that buying your home near an airport would come with, GASP, airport noise?
I’m tired of hearing about the city council harassing the small business at the airport that have helped provide 1,500 jobs over the years.
I’m tired of the city council giving us lip service that we could put an awesome park on the land instead. Who do they think they’re kidding? The second the airport is gone, some big money developer is going to sweep the city council off it’s feet and build high-rises. No thank you.
And I would love to see all the shocked pikachu faces if something ever happens to LAX and Santa Monica Airport is needed to help provide relief in an attack or natural emergency.
Please leave the airport alone. Here are some words from the Santa Monica Airport Association:
Item 7.B
01/24/23
317 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
3 The Santa Monica Municipal Airport has been an asset for over 100 years to our community. Rapid developments in aviation promise to make this irreplaceable infrastructure even more valuable and compatible with the people of Santa Monica. Any discussion, "to make the best use of this land for many generations to come,” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders. We need the experience and skills of current aviators to have a clear vision into the next 100 years. I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
The Santa Monica Airport protects the entire Westside community from high-density & high-rise development due to the airport control zone that encompasses over 50 square miles. The Airport also protects our Santa Monica residents, from larger commercial jet traffic & noise flying into LAX. It’s no secret that developers want access to this land. Once we lose an Airport as an asset, it is not something we can get back. For the sake & benefit of all, we ask that you consider the option of keeping the Airport open as a viable resource beyond 2028 to be included in your current & future Santa Monica Planning decisions.
The Santa Monica Airport has provided safety, emergency and disaster service response to the Los Angeles community for 100+ years. Closure of the Airport would result in losing this essential asset, risking more loss of human life and more suffering during tragic events. The math is simple. There will be earthquakes, fires and other disaster events multiple times over the next one hundred years. Any city council that removes our Santa Monica Airport aviation land use as an emergency resource will have blood on their hands for a millennium.
Thank you,
~loria roberson
2517 20th St, #B
Item 7.B
01/24/23
318 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
4 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 3:12 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda item 7-B: Study Session
From: Greg Barker <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 12:24 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda item 7‐B: Study Session
EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members ‐
I have read the staff report in detail and wholeheartedly support its proposed plan, and I applaud the City Council for taking action to close SMO and use this once‐in‐lifetime opportunity for the betterment of all Santa Monicans.
Best
Greg Barker
1749 Wellesley Dr
Santa Monica 90405
Item 7.B
01/24/23
319 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
5 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 3:12 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Housing for families once Airport closes
From: Lauren Akmaeva <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 12:32 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Housing for families once Airport closes
EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council Members,
I'm a Santa Monica resident and I also work in DTSM. Please, I hope once the S.M. Airport closes, it will be converted to housing for families.
It's so hard to find a 3‐bedroom in town and an increase in supply will not only help families, but give us an opportunity to move out of our smaller places, freeing up homes for folks who are downsizing, just starting their family, or anyone really.
I'm proud of my family's carbon footprint (aside from air travel). We have one car, most of us commute by foot or BBB, we have no air conditioning, hang clothes to dry, attend our neighborhood school, and four of us live in 1100sqft. But we could sure use another bedroom / 300sqft! Where are the modest homes for families? Homelessness is solved with homes. And, although not suffering, a lot of us would like to move and free up some homes too!
Thank you for your devotion and service to our lovely home city, Lauren
‐‐
Lauren Akmaeva
310‐621‐6286 ‐ cell
310‐260‐9557 ‐ home
Item 7.B
01/24/23
320 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23
6 Vernice Hankins
From: Pamela de Liz <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 2:42 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: SAVE SANTA MONICA AIRPORT
EXTERNAL
Reference: SAVE THE SANTA MONICA AIRPORT FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS!!!!! Aloha,
As an individual involved for decades in aerospace and with air platforms, I have testified to elected representatives and sent numerous letters and emails on the SM Airport topic over the years and so here is one more that I hope will make an impact on the new City Council.
Air Urban Mobility changes are on the horizon and the future is in flux.
The Santa Monica Municipal Airport is already significantly changed from what it was just a few years ago, and rapid developments in aviation and aerospace promise to make this irreplaceable piece of community infrastructure even more valuable to, and compatible with, the people of Santa Monica.
Any “approach that is informed by data, robust and transparent discussion, rigorous economic evaluation and a visionary, far‐reaching outlook to make the best use of this land for many generations to come” must include existing and future aviation stakeholders, including current aviation users and the young urban cohort likely to use the airport in the future, as part of the LA DOT Urban Air Mobility initiatives and otherwise. (Otherwise Includes Regional and Local emergency response services and Climate issues ie: Wildfire responses!!!) I call upon the Santa Monica City Council to ensure the needs and interests of all and future generations are represented in this process, not just a tiny minority who expect to personally benefit.
Thank you for your time & consideration. Please make the best choice for all stakeholders Sincerely,
Pamela A. de Liz (Registered and active non‐partisan SM voter residing at below address.) 520 Pacific Street; One
Santa Monica, CA 90405‐2461
Voice: 310.450.5062
cc: file
Item 7.B
01/24/23
321 of 321 Item 7.B
01/24/23