FBOs Evicted At Santa Monica Airport

It would seem to me, that the City of Santa Monica committed malfeasance in
office by permitting residential development adjacent to the airport many years
ago. Perhaps the City should face charges and be held accountable for their
actions, if justice is to be served.

If the City of Santa Monica were found guilty, the homes in question could be
condemned under emanate domain, and raised.
================================================== ============================


http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news...-226962-1.html

FBOs Evicted At Santa Monica Airport

By Elaine Kauh

The city of Santa Monica issued eviction notices to two FBOs on the field, just
days after one of them, Atlantic Aviation, filed a federal complaint in its
fight to remain at the airport. Atlantic, which operates FBOs across the
country, charges that the city’s efforts to limit fuel sales and other
aviation-related activities at KSMO runs against the airport’s long-term
obligation to the FAA to keep the airport operating. American Flyers, which
operates flight schools in multiple states, also received a 30-day notice from
the city, which is trying to close the airport for development. Atlantic’s
lawyers have asked the FAA in the complaint to take “corrective action” against
the city for obstructing its operations, according to a report in the Santa
Monica Lookout. “The City’s objectives are now crystal clear: fight the FAA for
‘local control’ of SMO in the courts and, in the interim, undertake any measure
at its disposal to severely curtail or discourage air traffic at SMO,” the
complaint says.

The FAA has said in the ongoing legal disputes that federal funding obligations
require KMSO to stay open until at least 2023. In a recent letter to the city
reacting to the City Council's decision to shut down the airport by 2018, the
agency said it would take legal action to prevent the restriction of airport
operations. But the city has pressed on with plans to close the field in the
next couple of years and redevelop the land as a park and business district,
vacating airport business spaces and aircraft tiedowns while raising landing
fees. As far as the city is concerned, Atlantic no longer fits the needs there.
"Atlantic Aviation caters to people who can afford to travel by luxurious
private jet," Nelson Hernandez, a senior advisor to the city, told the Lookout.
Anti-airport activists have long argued that aircraft cause noise, pollution
and safety problems for city residents. The Los Angeles Daily News noted in a
pro-airport editorial this week that those complaints have been ongoing since
the post-war era, when Douglas Aircraft was unable to expand there and moved to
Long Beach after building military aircraft at KSMO during World War II.
Meanwhile, business jets increased their activity there over the decades,
fueling calls to close the airport.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.surfsantamonica.com/ssm_s...Notice%20.html


Santa Monica Lookout
B e s t l o c a l s o u r c e f o r n e w s a n d i n f o r m a t i
o n
Columns

The City

Commerce

Links

About

Contacts

editor

Send PR
Major Santa Monica Airport Tenant Issued Eviction Notice
http://www.homesm.org HOME ad for NO on LV Initiative link

Santa Monica Real Estate Company, Roque and Mark
Roque & Mark Real Estate
2802 Santa Monica Boulevard
Santa Monica, CA 90404
(310)828-7525 - roque-mark.com


Harding Larmore Kutcher & Kozal, LLP law firm
Harding, Larmore
Kutcher & Kozal, LLP


Convention and Visitors Bureau Santa Monica

By Jonathan Friedman
Associate Editor

September 16, 2016 -- A major tenant responsible for most of the aviation
operations at Santa Monica Airport (SMO) was issued a 30-day notice to vacate
on Thursday, City officials said.

The eviction notice comes two days after the tenant, Atlantic Aviation, filed a
challenge Tuesday with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) that claims
the City is acting in violation of federal law.

Americaan Flyers Flight School, another fixed-base operator (FBO) at the
airport, also was issued a 30-day notice to vacate on Thursday, City officials
said.

Atlantic Aviation's complaint attacks the City’s refusal to go into long-term
leases with aviation tenants, which it says puts the company in a position that
it could be evicted at any time.

The company also complained about new City restrictions, including on fuel
sales.

"Atlantic Aviation caters to people who can afford to travel by luxurious
private jet," said Nelson Hernandez, Senior Advisor to the City Manager on
Airport Affairs.

"Apparently Atlantic Aviation believes it has a right to be an FBO at Santa
Monica, thus essentially using our land as an active jetport for their private
profit," Hernandez said.

In its complaint, Atlantic Aviation accused the City of launching a two-pronged
attack on the century-old airport, which local officials want to close and turn
into a park.

“The City’s objectives are now crystal clear: fight the FAA for ‘local control’
of SMO in the courts and, in the interim, undertake any measure at its disposal
to severely curtail or discourage air traffic at SMO,” Atlantic Aviation
attorney Tad Allan wrote in the complaint.

Allan asked that the FAA act fast on the matter “given the nature of the
violations” and “the urgency with which corrective action is needed.”

This complaint is just the latest action in an ongoing battle between the City
and aviation interests on the future of the airport property, which the City
owns.

The City Council made a major move last month when it passed a resolution
declaring the airport should be closed no later than 2018 and that the City
take over fuel and aircraft storage, among other services, by the end of this
year (“Santa Monica Council Votes for 2018 Airport Closure,” August 25, 2016).

The FAA quickly responded with a threat to sue the City.

A courthouse battle would be nothing new for two entities which have been
involved in significant litigation against each other over various airport
issues for many years.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.dailynews.com/opinion/201...be-last-resort

Santa Monica Airport closure should be last resort

Posted: 09/15/16, 4:57 PM PDT | Updated: 4 days ago
4 Comments

Historic Santa Monica Airport once again finds itself in the middle of a nasty
fight that never seems to end.

In an unsurprising, unanimous vote last month, the Santa Monica City Council
passed a resolution calling for the closure of the general aviation airport by
2018.

But there is one major problem with that vote. Standing in the way of any
closure is the powerful Federal Aviation Administration, which has ruled that
the airport must remain open at least until 2023.

For years, many residents have complained about the airport’s noise, pollution
and safety problems. That hasn’t always been the case.

At one time, the airport was the home of the Douglas Aircraft company. During
World War II, thousands of C-47 and C-54 military cargo planes were built at
Santa Monica by Douglas ,which employed thousands of workers and invigorated
the city’s economy.

But after the war, the first anti-airport signs surfaced, and Douglas,
frustrated by its inability to extend runways at Santa Monica, moved to Long
Beach Airport.

Since then, there has been an endless series of moves to close or restrict
operations at the airport. Stringent noice ordinances and curfews were passed.
However, as size of private jets increased, so did the anger of anti-airport
residents.

In 2014, Santa Monica voters approved Measure LC, which gives voters a chance
to have a say on how airport land would be developed in case the airport
closes. Many would like to see a park there.

The FAA is basing its decision to keep the airport open at least until 2023 on
a $240,000 federal grant received by the city in 2003. Provisions of that grant
require the airport to stay open 20 years after it was granted, the FAA says.

The city argues the 2003 grant was simply an amendment to the original, larger
federal grant the city received in 1994 and didn’t change the expiration date
of 2014.

It’s unfortunate that this contentious battle continues. Santa Monica Airport
is critical to serving regional transportation needs.

And, if the airport closes, where would the private jets and other aircraft go?
NIMBYism is at work here.

There is no easy answer to this frustrating issue, but other options to reduce
problems should be explored. Closure should be only the last resort.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It would seem to me, that the City of Santa Monica committed malfeasance in
office by permitting residential development adjacent to the airport many years
ago. Perhaps the City should face charges and be held accountable for their
actions, if justice is to be served.

If the City of Santa Monica were found guilty, the homes in question could be
condemned under emanate domain, and raised.

On Tuesday, September 20, 2016 at 3:56:39 AM UTC-5, Larry Dighera wrote:
It would seem to me, that the City of Santa Monica committed malfeasance in
office by permitting residential development adjacent to the airport many years
ago. Perhaps the City should face charges and be held accountable for their
actions, if justice is to be served.

If the City of Santa Monica were found guilty, the homes in question could be
condemned under emanate domain, and raised.

Sure, all the land should have remained orange groves. What planet is this kind of flyer entitlement observed on ??