CIVIC CENTER -- Critics of the city’s tentative terminal deal are
finding an ally in Councilman Bob Kramer.
At Tuesday’s meeting, in a 4-1 vote, the council voted to transfer 49
acres of land to Burbank Airport. Kramer opposed it.
Kramer, who has successfully pushed for a public advisory vote on the
Aug. 4 Framework for Settlement, said he didn’t believe the airport’s
promise to leave the 49-acre property vacant. After reading aloud
excerpts from a city staff report supporting the airport’s claims, he
deemed the report “less than honest.”
“I just seems to me that they shouldn’t take title from the land until
we’ve heard from the voters,” Kramer said.
Other council members strongly disagreed with Kramer. Councilman Dave
Golonski acknowledged that the title-transfer papers are convoluted but
he said they bolster the city’s legal right to control what is built on
the 49-acre property, which represents more than a third of the 130-acre
parcel the airport has purchased from Lockheed Martin Corp.
“You can’t take the individual sentences out of context,” Golonski
said about Kramer’s remarks. “It’s spelled out pretty clear here that the
application before us doesn’t allow construction.”
Kramer’s statements came on the heels of a hailstorm of public
criticism of the proposed framework deal Tuesday. Many of those who spoke
before the council didn’t specifically comment on the land transfer,
which was the matter at hand, but instead voiced their displeasure with
the expansion plans in general.
Burbank resident Kevin Muldoon said council members other than Kramer
brushed off the criticism because they have already made up their minds
to support the framework.
“This (hearing) wasn’t for framework input,” Muldoon said Thursday.
“Their strings are being pulled by someone and they’re going ahead. I
really don’t think my public input will change their minds.”
Councilman David Laurell, however, said he has not reached a final
decision about the framework and still has concerns. Laurell said he
valued the public remarks.
“Is the framework the perfect thing? That is not what the framework
is,” Laurell said. “What we’re trying to do is get (the terminal
expansion dispute) resolved without conceding our core principles.”
Kramer comments Tuesday were his most critical yet on any aspect of
the proposed expansion deal. He said he remains unconvinced the 49-acre
parcel will not be used for airport expansion.
“Who are we kidding when we say they are not buying the land to build
a terminal,” he said.