City Council vs. Torrance Airport

Hugo Martin’s article on Torrance Airport (June 18) neglected to include the airport users’ point of view and interpretation of the financial condition of the airport.

When the U.S. government agreed to permit the city’s development of some perimeter airport property for non-aviation commercial use, it was with the stipulation that ALL revenues from that property be re-invested in the airport. Over the years, only a small percentage of the millions of dollars that the city receives from this property have gone to the airport.

Instead, the city has diverted airport fund money to the general fund in ever-increasing amounts.


Spurred on by anti-aviation Torrance voters, the City Council has consistently impeded the growth of aviation services at the airport. While airports such as Santa Monica and Hawthorne are thriving on the growth in business and executive transportation, the city of Torrance will not allow the sale of jet fuel or the storage or maintenance of jets even though a majority of modern business jets are QUIETER than the city’s noise ordinance requires.

It is time for Torrance to remove the unreasonable restrictions so that aviation businesses will have a reasonable chance of being profitable and airport users can receive the full spectrum of services that are common at other L.A. basin airports.

Then everyone will benefit from a thriving, modern, quiet airport.

BARRY JAY, president

Torrance Airport Boosters Assn.

EDITORS NOTE: A September, 1988, report by former Torrance City Atty. Stanley E. Remelmeyer said that a 1956 deed from the United States government gave the city clear title to the Torrance Municipal Airport. However, a 1957 City Charter amendment requires revenues from the airport to be used to pay off airport bonds, to pay for operating and maintenance costs and to provide improvements. Any remaining revenue can be used for any lawful purpose, according to the report.