Valley Perspective : Burbank Council Gave Away a Victory Over Airport Expansion : A voter initiative, prompted by residents’ outrage, could allow the people to decide the fate of the facility at the ballot box.

There should have been rejoicing in the streets of Burbank when the state Court of Appeal recently affirmed the city’s ability to control airport expansion.

Essentially, the court said that the city could deny the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority’s plan to acquire vacated Lockheed Martin land for expansion purposes.

Even more joy should have followed the California Supreme Court’s decision to let the appeals court ruling stand.

Instead, the victory for long-suffering residents of Burbank and communities to the west turned to ashes. Despite being in a position to demand mandatory nighttime and early morning curfews and a cap on future operations at the airport, the Burbank City Council negotiated everything away.

In the deal recently struck between the city and the Airport Authority, there will be no curfew and no caps for years, if ever. Under a so-called framework agreement, aircraft can still fly outside the voluntary curfew hours without penalty. The number of flights could dramatically increase at the new terminal even though the number of gates would be held to 14.

In short, and in the opinion of many residents, the City Council chose surrender over principle. What Burbank Mayor Stacey Murphy and Councilman Dave Golonski termed a “tremendous victory” for the city was in fact a stunning win for the Airport Authority, the airlines and the city of Glendale (because the agreement prohibits takeoffs to the east).

No question, airports can bring substantial economic benefits but they can also cause major environmental problems. Late night and early morning flights wreak havoc on homes and businesses in Burbank, Studio City, Sherman Oaks, Valley Village and other neighborhoods in the East San Fernando Valley.

Every reputable study of noise has demonstrated how damaging excessive noise can be to the mind, body and social fabric of our society: Increased divorce rates are common, as are more incidents of spousal and child abuse, absenteeism and physical illness. Add to these serious health problems related to airport pollution and we have a witches’ brew of unacceptable conditions.

In its arrogance, the Airport Authority has refused to recognize state law or the state Constitution in planning expansion, telling the courts that it had no intention of obeying those authorities. In a brief filed in support of Burbank’s position, the attorney general said about the Airport Authority: “Rarely has the state seen such open and avowed defiance of the law by a public entity.” That office went on to urge the court to “send a clear message to both public and governmental entities throughout California that no one, especially not a public agency, is above the law or may ignore it with impunity.”

Communities throughout Southern California that already have an airport, and others that may be considering one, should take note of those words. Don’t expect agencies like the Federal Aviation Administration to accommodate residents over commercial airlines and general aviation interests. You must usually fight the battle yourself.

*

That’s why we in Burbank have taken the only course open to us. We will take the fight to the voters through a mandatory initiative. If sufficient voters are outraged at the council’s actions--as we believe they are--residents will decide the fate of the airport expansion at the ballot box.

Don’t be fooled by advisory votes that mean nothing. Residents were seduced by that siren’s call 20 years ago when the airport promised never to expand or to increase noise impacts. It was quickly violated with impunity.

A voter initiative is a serious step but one that must be taken. The Burbank City Council has already accelerated the process for approval of airport expansion. Once authorized by that body, the long and costly battle will be over for noise-abused residents. We can’t and won’t let that happen.

To paraphrase the attorney general, we have to send a message to our representatives that no one, especially a public agency, can neglect the legitimate interests of its constituents or may ignore them.

Whether or not you agree with our position on airport expansion, few can deny the public’s right to have a voice in such a crucial matter.