Airport Suit Against City Dealt Setback

In a blow to Burbank Airport officials, a federal judge Monday in effect upheld the constitutionality of a state law restricting airport expansion.

U.S District Judge Lourdes G. Baird dismissed the case involving the airport governing board’s lawsuit against the city of Burbank, which contends it has veto power over any plans by the board to expand the airport’s passenger terminal.

The judge held that the issue is outside federal jurisdiction, declaring it an “open and shut” decision. She did not rule on the substance of the long-running battle between Burbank and the airport board over expanding the terminal.

City officials, who for months have said in and out of court that provisions of the state Public Utilities Code give them veto power over airport construction within city borders, hailed the judge’s decision.

“This is an important victory for the people of Burbank in what the airport authority has acknowledged is the key issue in our dispute,” said Mayor Bill Wiggins.

Airport officials, who had hoped a favorable decision would speed their efforts to build a new, larger passenger terminal, minimized Baird’s ruling, saying it would only delay the inevitable.

The dismissal will be appealed and, if necessary, the lawsuit will be refiled in state court, said Richard K. Simon, the lawyer representing the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority.

Simon said all efforts to purchase about 130 acres near the existing passenger terminal from Lockheed Martin Corp. will continue in order to build the larger facility as soon as possible.

“The only issue for us is, will we be able to build the terminal in the [Lockheed] property?” he said. “And we will.”

Airport officials insist that because the airport authority is an independent agency, it is not subject to city regulations. Each city appoints three commissioners to the nine-member panel.

But the Burbank City Council in October formally rejected airport officials’ plans to buy the Lockheed property and build a larger terminal with at least 19 gates. The current terminal has 14 gates.

Residents who oppose the expansion are concerned about increased noise, traffic, pollution and other problems. Supporters of the airport authority’s plans say a new terminal is needed to handle increased passenger loads and for safety reasons.

The airport currently serves about 5 million passengers a year.

Peter J. Kirsch, the lawyer handling the dispute for Burbank, said the judge’s ruling strengthens the position taken by city and state officials.

“Right now the law remains intact,” Kirsch said. “This is certainly the biggest success we’ve had. . . . It upheld the validity of that law.”

Kirsch and Wiggins said the city is willing to negotiate a resolution to the expansion dispute out of court.

The city is eager for the airport authority and officials from Glendale and Pasadena to talk over Burbank’s recent proposal, which officials call the Burbank Airport 21st Century Plan, they said.

The proposal calls for a 16-gate terminal in return for a mandatory nighttime curfew and a 10% cap on additional flights. It was deemed unacceptable by representatives of airlines that fly out of Burbank and called overly rigid by airport officials,

“We continue to believe that the [Burbank plan] offers the best chance of resolving our differences over airport expansion,” Wiggins said. “We remain committed to this approach.”