Burbank Airport

* Re “Spirit of Cooperation Would Let Burbank Airport Plan Fly,” Feb. 16.

With the exception of one issue, your thoughtful editorial on the proposed expansion of Burbank Airport was right on the money.

The statement, “the other cities [Glendale and Pasadena] need to maximize their return on investment in the airport” is not accurate. None of the three cities involved with the airport have any investment in it. The FAA provided a grant to purchase the airport from Lockheed at the time the three cities formed the Airport Authority.

The FAA does not allow any of the three cities to participate in any of the revenues produced by the airport. Any income generated by the airport must remain with the airport for maintenance, improvements, future expansion, etc. Burbank does derive some income from property taxes assessed on airplanes headquartered at the airport, and from sales and fuel taxes, but nothing from airport operations.

While neither Burbank, Glendale nor Pasadena will profit from the construction or operation of the enlarged terminal, one private company will. A Pasadena-based firm has been awarded a contract for construction of the new terminal.

The underlying motivation of Glendale and Pasadena Airport Authority members in expanding the airport terminal is to rapidly utilize approximately $300 million in FAA grant monies to construct the new terminal. By so doing they will be able to forestall the development of any new airports in fast-growing areas such as Ventura County and thereby maintain the monopoly, which is shared only with LAX.

For the sake of the residents of the eastern portion of the San Fernando Valley, as well as those in Burbank, let’s hope that the Glendale and Pasadena airport commissioners come to their senses and quit putting the interests of a private company before the interests of the many residents who will be negatively impacted by expanded operations at the airport.

RON VANDERFORD

Burbank