Informed Opinions on Today’s Topics : Airport Plan Referendum Seems Assured

Burbank residents may soon be allowed to decide the fate of the rapidly growing Burbank Airport when a new City Council begins session in May.

Both candidates in the April 11 election for the one open council seat want a referendum to decide on airport designs that would be used for a larger terminal.

Regardless of who wins, then, the election will bolster a newly formed council majority against airport expansion plans in general.

With either former Mayor Mary Lou Howard or retired aerospace worker Ted McConkey winning the election, four of the city’s five council members would be against rezoning land to replace an existing 14-gate, 163,000 square-foot terminal with a 19-gate, 465,000 square-foot facility.

Given this new majority and the fact that residents living under the airport’s flight path have long opposed any airport expansion--saying that it would increase noise and pollution stemming from a larger terminal--a referendum ordered by the City Council seems imminent.

Advocates of the new terminal see it as unfair to allow voters from one area (Burbank) to determine the outcome of a project that would benefit travelers throughout the San Fernando Valley region. They also say that the expansion would create new jobs and benefit the economy.

Because the number of actual voters cannot be predicted with reliability, the airport backers say, referendums are not an accurate depiction of public sentiment.

*

Should Burbank schedule a referendum election on airport expansion plans?

Bob Kramer, newly elected Burbank City Council member.

“When I ran for office, my position was simple: Keep the size of the airport as it is now. The citizens of Burbank elected me with 64% of the vote. At least that many people agree with my position. It is such an important issue for residents because it will severely impact the quality of life in this city. If they want to vote on it, they should be allowed to do so.”

David Engelbach, spokesman for Citizens for Fair Airport Noise, a Burbank homeowners association.

“It would be a big surprise for the Airport Authority to find out how much public opposition there is to its grandiose plans. The majority of commercial flights are channeled over a small corridor, impacting a selected portion of (the Valley.) More flights do not affect those cities that would get all of the (economic) benefits from a larger terminal.”

Victor Gill, Burbank Airport spokesman

“Referendums . . . are largely campaign driven, which means the wrong message can get out. An example of this is the common misconception that we’re out to triple the number of flights going into and out of the airport every day. The frequency of flights is strictly market driven. A larger terminal would maintain an adequate level of service for estimated 1998 passenger loads. (As more people move into the area,) it’s been estimated flights per day will go up from 93 now to 106 in 1998.”

Chris Holden, Airport Authority and Pasadena City Council member.

A larger terminal “would create job opportunities both during construction and after it is completed. We’re trying to make the airport more efficient for the growing number of travelers who’ve come to rely on the airport. We shouldn’t allow its direction to fall into the hands of a small number of people who may or may not turn out at the polls.”