Advertisement

Burbank officials delay talks on replacement terminal for Bob Hope Airport

By Chad Garland
Share

Officials from the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority, including Burbank’s three commissioners, awaited a City Council discussion Tuesday about a proposed agreement between the city and the authority that would allow for plans for a 14-gate replacement terminal at Bob Hope Airport to move forward.

Officials from both the airport and the city have said they believe the proposal is the closest the two parties have come in recent years to an agreement on the broad terms regarding the proposed 355,000-square-foot building, which will cost an estimated $400 million to be paid for through fees charged to passengers and the sale of land the authority owns in trust near the airfield.

However, because of the absence of Mayor Bob Frutos, who was ill, City Council members decided to delay the discussion until Nov. 16.

“I’m sure Mayor Frutos is watching this evening and wishing he was here,” said Vice Mayor Jess Talamantes, who chaired the meeting. “And hurry back. I miss you already.”

Councilman David Gordon called for the airport discussion to be continued, calling Frutos’ participation “essential” to the discussion because of his involvement in earlier talks between the city and airport over the past few years.

Also absent from the meeting were residents with questions about the terminal project. It’s those members of the public that city and airport officials have said they hope to engage in discussions about the future of Bob Hope Airport.

The terminal project is contingent on a vote of support by Burbank voters as outlined in Measure B, which was passed by voters in 2000.

An overview of the agreement between the city and the authority, though not yet in formal legal documents, was released last week, but Gordon argued that was not enough time for Burbank residents to review and understand the material. He said that delaying a decision even further would give the public more time to consider the proposed agreement and provide input.

However, while his colleagues agreed to continue the matter until Frutos can be present, they rejected Gordon’s call for further delay. They said much of the material has been public for months because the document is largely the same as a proposal put forward by the airport authority at a joint meeting in July.

For example, it includes a provision airport officials offered in late January and again in July, which would change the agreement governing the authority board and increase the strength of Burbank’s voting position on certain decisions, such as an airport expansion or changes to how it enforces noise rules.

Under the proposed terms, such decisions would require a “supermajority” vote of at least two out of three commissioners from each city, meaning a coalition of Burbank commissioners could block an airport expansion.

One new condition in the latest proposal is a requirement that city and airport officials travel to Washington, D.C., to meet with Federal Aviation Administration administrators about implementation of a mandatory nighttime curfew at the airfield.

Regarding the Nov. 16 council meeting, City Atty. Amy Albano clarified that the council would not be “approving anything” at that time, but merely endorsing the set of non-binding terms outlined in the document, which would then lead to the drafting and consideration of formal legal documents and other required documents related to an environmental review.

“This is the starting point,” she said.

Council members also argued that the public will have ample time to learn about the agreement and to weigh in on it as it moves forward through various public hearings regarding City Council approvals and any issues pertaining to bond financing or other matters.

“If we don’t take the next step, we never get to the education, we never get to answer the questions. We have to move the process,” Talamantes said.

Talamantes called Gordon’s arguments “scare tactics,” but said he agrees fully with the need to engage the public. However, Talamantes said he has already received a clear message from the public: “It’s about time ... I’m glad you guys are getting this far,” he said was the general message.

Last week, Dan Feger, the airport’s executive director, said residents have already sent a strong message to the authority, too. That is: Don’t screw it up.

The airport authority is expected to discuss the proposal at its meeting at 9 a.m. on Monday in the Skyroom at the Bob Hope Airport, 2627 N. Hollywood Way. Officials are also expected to discuss restarting the environmental-review process, which had been halted last year as city and airport officials wrangled over issues related to the replacement terminal.

Leaving the City Council chambers this week, Feger said “now more than ever” the public would benefit from the environmental-review process.

A city staff report and both the latest term sheet and the July proposal can be viewed online at the city’s website here.

--

Chad Garland, chad.garland@latimes.com

Twitter: @chadgarland

Chad Garland

Chad Garland covered the city of Burbank and Bob Hope Airport for the Burbank Leader until 2016. Previously, he has covered Arizona’s congressional delegation in Washington, D.C., for Cronkite News Service and Oregon’s Legislature for the Associated Press. His work investigating questionable veterans’ charities as part of the award-winning News21 national investigative project “Back Home” earned a “Best in Business” award from the Society of American Business Editors and Writers in 2013. Before becoming a reporter, he spent more than a decade in various assignments related to national defense. An Illinois native, his first California address was at Marine Corps boot camp in San Diego. He has degrees from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and Arizona State University, as well as a diploma from the Army’s Defense Language Institute in Monterey, where he learned to speak Russian.

Advertisement