To me, its frustraiting that "win at all costs" and "he who shouts loudest, wins" have dominated every public sector debate recently. There are some legitimate noise and growth concerns that folks have (there's also plenty of silly complaints). There is also a tremendous benefit to business aviation that I feel isn't being sold well. To me, the debate for an airport isn't about "airport vs park," its explaining why having an airport is better than tearing it up for a condo project.
This has already been done/gone through dozens of times already. The city and a group of vocal residents do not give a crap. It's get rid of the airport or nothing.
Not to mention that there are already thirty (30) parks in SM with plans already underway, to build more. How many parks does one city need? The miles of beach and it's miles of parkway and the 30 (soon to be more parks, numerous bike lanes and miles of walking paths are not enough apparently. Now they want the entire airport (there is already a bike path, a walking path and park next to it) torn down and a park built there. They (the City and it's residents) are willing to sue the FAA (yet again) over this issue. There have already been a plethora of studies examining the benefits financially and in other ways to Santa Monica. The residents apparently do not care.
The economic value/impact of the airport has already been studied and written about for years and years already.
From the latest report this year:
"The annual operation of the Airport Campus includes 177 different aviation and non-aviation businesses spread across 42 different industry sectors,” city staff stated citing an HR&A Advisors, Inc. study.
City staff further added that SMO supports 1,487 total full-time and part-time jobs in the city, including 894 located directly at the Airport Campus.
“This means the Airport Campus ranks among the city’s top 10 employers, equivalent in scale to the number of jobs at RAND Corporation,” city staff stated.
SMO annually has a “total annual economic output impact of $275.2 million in the city’s economy,” of which $187.5 million derives directly from the airport and another $87.7 million via “indirect” or “induced” output.
Putting the $187.5 million is perspective, city staff pointed out that economic impact “is equivalent to the direct economic output generated by 1,855 average-price hotel rooms, or 1.2 million square feet of general retail, or 350,000 square feet of commercial office space.”
The HR&A study concluded the $87.7 million of indirect or induced output has a ripple effect – or “multiplier effect” – in the City’s economy beyond the aviation industry.
For example, the study said a restaurant responsible for 16 jobs would “produce 20 total jobs and $1.6 million in total annual economic output,” the report concluded.
Further, the contributions to Santa Monica and the surrounding region include its positive impacts on the local economy, serving a strategic asset for emergency preparedness, providing a “vital link in the regional transportation system,” and facilitating a thriving arts and cultural community.
Accordingly, the HR&A study concluded 16 jobs in the transportation sector would produce “a total of 29 jobs and $6.7 million in annual economic output.”
“On average, every job in the city’s economy that is supported by operation of the Airport generates $185,000 in annual economic output in the City economy,” city staff said. “Beyond the city’s borders, the Airport Campus also supports a wide range of economic activity in the surrounding West Los Angeles sub region, including transportation of transplant materials for the UCLA Medical Center, operation of the largest citrus grower in the State of California, … and it provides a critical role in emergency preparedness.”
According to a fiscal impact analysis by HR&A, the Airport Campus as a whole “produced about $5.0 million in total revenues” for Fiscal Year 2010-2011, with portions of that revenue deriving from leases, rentals, landing fees, fuel sales, tie-down charges, interest earnings, and various taxes.
The fiscal impact analysis further pointed out that for FY 2010-2011, “salaries, supplies and other general expenses, capital costs, and the cost of services provided by other City departments were nearly equal to total revenues.”
The city comeback?? Whining about what it has cost the city in all their demands and lawsuits over the decades.
"Santa Monica’s Airport has been the subject of many legal disputes between the City and Airport users, Airport neighbors, or Airport businesses, (and the FAA),” city staff said.
“The most recent example is the eight year legal battle (in federal court) over the City’s Aircraft Conformance Program and the corresponding ordinance banning Category C & D aircraft. This dispute cost the City well over $1,000,000 and the C & D ban was struck down.”
And the Feds response: "As published in that federal court decision, Category C and D aircraft, whose approach speeds are 121 knots or greater at maximum landing weight, “make up approximately seven percent of all operations at SMO, (and) are almost exclusively business and executive jets.”
The other 93 percent are Category A and B aircraft, or planes with approach speeds of less than 121 knots at maximum landing weight.
The federal court also stated SMO “functions as a reliever airport for the Los Angeles International Airport” and “serves an important role in the regional and national system of air transportation and air commerce.”
Further, the circuit court ruled closure of SMO would place greater pressure on nearby airports, a pressure those facilities are not equipped to handle.
“It has a vital and critical role in its function as a general aviation reliever for the primary airports in the area. As a reliever facility the Airport attracts and provides services to general aviation thereby diverting aircraft away from the air carrier airports and other heavily used airports in the Greater Los Angeles Area,” circuit judges David Sentelle, Karen Henderson, and Judith Ann Wilson Rogers stated in their January 2011 decision.
“Study and analysis have confirmed this congestion and that other similar general aviation reliever airports in the area are already heavily used and do not have the ability to accept or absorb the service provided by Santa Monica Airport,” the justices continued."
The City Council is preparing to sue the Feds yet again and piss away even more money.
How do you reason with people like this? Dozens of studies are not enough for them. The Feds are not enough for them. Dozens upon dozens of limitations and restrictions are not enough for them. Economic impacts are not enough for them.
This is what the airport is dealing with....