Airport Feud on Wrong Course

On paper at least, the city of Burbank won a round in its fight against proposed expansion of the airport that bears its name. A federal judge last week threw out a lawsuit filed by Burbank Airport’s governing board challenging the authority of Burbank officials to stymie plans to build a new, larger passenger terminal at the airfield. But the victory is Pyrrhic at best in a fight so noisy it threatens to drown out the jet roar at the heart of the dispute.

The Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority--the independent agency that runs Burbank Airport on behalf of the three cities--wants to build a larger passenger terminal, but Burbank City Council members oppose current plans out of fears that a bigger facility will bring more planes, more noise and more traffic to their community. After unveiling a compromise proposal earlier this year, Burbank officials have gone on the offensive trying to sway representatives from Glendale and Pasadena to support a less ambitious terminal expansion. At the same time, airport managers and airline executives have wasted no energy pointing out the flaws of Burbank’s proposal and proceeding at full steam toward their goal of a modern terminal. The result: lengthy, costly court fights like the one tossed out last week. Even though Burbank won that fight, the Airport Authority plans to appeal or even refile the case in state court.

Neither side is blameless. Both have staked out unwavering positions that virtually guarantee countless millions of public dollars will be dumped into the sewer of litigation. We supported Burbank’s compromise as a possible way out of the current stalemate. Yet even as airport officials say they want to work with Burbank, they move forward aggressively on the very plans Burbank officials despise. Burbank, though, wants the airport commission to guarantee conditions the agency has no power over--such as mandatory flight curfews, which are subject to approval by the Federal Aviation Administration.

Even on a fast track, a new terminal is a decade away from opening at Burbank Airport. Costs will only balloon over time as Burbank and the Airport Authority hemorrhage money year after year in legal fees. Both sides agree that a new terminal is necessary. The current building is too small and potentially dangerous because it sits too close to the runway. Both sides agree that the new terminal should be bigger than the current 14 gates--Burbank supports 16 and the authority wants 19.

The points of disagreement include a mandatory flight curfew and a cap on flights and noise levels. Both are problematic, but it is inconceivable that the two sides cannot find common ground if they are willing. That willingness to compromise seems absent as the two sides talk over, rather than to, each other. Without cooperation, though, the legal bills will only continue to pile up as one side or the other wins some minor squabble in court. The ongoing losers will be the passengers of Burbank Airport and the residents of Burbank. We continue to support a compromise like the one proposed by Burbank. It needs some work--notably with regard to flight curfews and caps--but can serve as the foundation for a productive truce. The current brinksmanship strategy is bad business and bad governance.