City Suspends Work on Deal for Airport

Charging that federal officials had caved in to the airlines and abandoned a “local solution” to the expansion of Burbank Airport, Burbank Mayor Stacey Murphy said Friday that the city would suspend work on a development agreement for a new terminal.

Murphy said the city would resume working toward an agreement only after receiving assurances that federal authorities would work with the city to settle any potential legal issues, according to a Feb. 3 letter to Carl Meseck, president of the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority.

In her letter, the mayor criticized Federal Aviation Administrator Jane Garvey, saying the official had called for the airport and the city to reach a local solution but then made “unwarranted and irresponsible attacks against the agreement,” when it was concluded.

“We are not going to continue spending money to draft a development deal, when Jane Garvey won’t tell us what’s illegal, why it’s illegal and what we can do about it,” Murphy said.

While not addressing specific charges in the letter, FAA Deputy Assistant Administrator Louise Mailett said that the government had been clear all along about potential legal problems and still stood ready to help reach a solution.

“We’ve given hours and hours of direction, and we will continue to do that,” Mailett said. “We’ve always advocated for an agreement that complies with the law.”

Burbank’s move comes nearly six months to the day after it ended years of intense fighting by signing a preliminary deal, called a framework for settlement, to build a 14-gate, $300-million terminal.

*

As part of the draft agreement, the airport agreed to close the terminal building between 11 p.m. and 6 a.m., link ultimate expansion to 19 gates to a mandatory overnight curfew, permanently ban easterly takeoffs and limit the number of passengers using the terminal.

In the weeks following the agreement, those provisions drew heated criticism from the airlines, local politicians, residents and the FAA.

The airlines argued that closing the terminal and linking growth to a curfew violated federal interstate commerce laws, while residents south and west of the airport complained that an easterly takeoff ban would stick them with more aircraft noise.

Murphy accused the FAA of blocking progress toward a final agreement in response to a “siren call from the airlines.”

In response, FAA officials said Friday they talked to all parties in the controversy and spent most of the time in meetings with officials from Burbank and the airport.

The Burbank City Council passed a measure calling for an advisory vote on the draft agreement, but no date has been set. Other residents have been collecting signatures for a hard-line city ballot initiative requiring a mandatory curfew and limiting the size of the new terminal.

Last month, after a long silence, Garvey weighed in, calling the agreement only a first step, because of potential legal issues and the fact that many parties were left out of the initial negotiations.

“Everyone with a significant interest in the outcome must be at the table,” Garvey said in a letter to The Times last month. “Issues that affect parties who were not included in the discussion--such as the proposed ban on eastbound takeoffs--should be removed voluntarily from the framework.”

Referring to the letter, Murphy criticized Garvey for directing city and airport officials to come up with a local solution during her visit to Burbank in August 1998 and then failing to support the solution they reached.

Officials say the airport development agreement they are working on is important because it lays out the parameters of the project, as well as penalties against the authority should it not live up to the rules of the agreement.

*

To proceed with those efforts, Murphy said the city needs a commitment from the FAA to work cooperatively on the framework, get its help to solve existing legal issues and ensure provisions of the draft agreement could withstand legal tests.

“Up until now, it’s been a guessing game for everyone as to what is or isn’t acceptable to the FAA,” said Burbank Airport Commissioner Charles Lombardo. “We are looking for unambiguous direction so we can proceed with the development agreement. Just tell us.” Other airport officials had a more subdued reaction.

“We are looking at the broader picture,” said Airport Authority spokesman Victor Gill. “All of the parties have recognized the common goal of pursuing a new terminal, and it’s a matter of finding the right parameters to achieve success.”

Gill added that the Airport Authority would continue to urge the FAA to review and approve the terms of the agreement.

In addition to potential legal hurdles, the agreement still must be approved by the Burbank City Council.

City officials had estimated a vote on the measure would take place this April. Those plans, however, appear to be on hold.