LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

NBC apologizes for intrusion

On behalf of KNBC, I want to apologize to our neighbors for the

incident where our news helicopter hovered over residential homes at 6:30

a.m. Tuesday. There is no excuse for what happened, and I regret the

early morning intrusion in your homes.

I assure all our neighbors that something like this will not happen

again. It was a mistake. Thank you for your calls both to me and to your

city representative.

JACK O’NEILL

Vice-President, KNBC-TV

Burbank

Elian affected all of us

While this is not a local issue, I think the matter of Elian Gonzalez

is one that we have all been subjected to, for better or worse, and I for

one am glad to see it finally move toward some sort of conclusion.

I am in complete agreement with the Justice Department’s desire to

reunite the boy with his father and applaud the government’s bold action.

The behavior of those who attempted to hold on to Elian has been nothing

short of despicable and, despite bitter rhetoric of their lawyers and

fawning politicians, it was they, not the Clinton administration, who

have been negotiating in bad faith all along.

After consistently stonewalling all attempts to meet with the father,

and repeatedly challenging the authority of our (and their) government,

Janet Reno was ultimately left with no choice but to use force.

Of course, the obnoxious relatives will not let it rest there, but at

least Elian is out of their clutches. The mentality of those “freedom”

loving Cubans in Miami appears to be no different from that of their

“enemy” Fidel Castro, and has now been exposed as such.

BOB LOZA

Burbank

Plenty of aviation history at local museum

Regarding Joe Santo’s letter about the lack of Lockheed memorabilia on

display in Burbank, I call your attention to the Gordon Howard Museum at

1015 W. Olive Ave., Burbank. (“Turning our back on aviation heritage,”

April 22)

The Burbank Historical Society has maintained a large display of

Lockheed photos, models and other items the company donated years ago. I

invite Mr. Santos and the public to visit the museum any Sunday afternoon

from 1 to 4 p.m. at no charge and enjoy this display and those of Warner

Bros., Disney, NBC and others, plus our 12 antique vehicles, three of

which will be in Burbank on Parade.

Enter the parking lot off of Clark Street and Lomita.

HERB VINCENT

Burbank

How about some real changes at the airport

Has my sense of well-being improved since the bold action by the

Airport Authority to eliminate luxury travel? (“Airport grounds 1st-class

flying,” April 19) No, but it would sure help if the Authority worked

half as hard to reduce, rather than increase, the number of hazardous

takeoffs and landings over our congested urban area.

Unfortunately, it will never happen as long as Burbank can be outvoted

two to one by Glendale and Pasadena, the Burbank City Council continues

the myopic view that a regional airport produces more benefits than costs

and the powerful Air Transport Association has more clout with Congress

and the Federal Aviation Administration than do the residents of San

Fernando Valley.

PAUL H. WANGSNESS

Burbank

A bigger Burbank is not necessarily better

Regarding three segments on the editorial page of Saturday, April 22:

As usual, the cartoon by Chris Crunco was brilliant. In addition to

the insight in his drawing, Mr. Crunco has scooped all the reporters who

cover the airport issue by correctly noting that the proposed new

terminal is 365,000 square feet rather than the 330,000 square feet the

airport claims.

Ostensibly, the difference of 35,000 square feet in the proposed new

terminal is for “administrative space.” But, by moving their

administrative offices to an off-site location, the airport could just as

easily use this extra space as a customs facility for international

flights, or to provide room for at least 1 million extra passengers per

year.

Most of us involved in airport issues are well aware that an FAA Part

161 study will be required to gain a curfew, or to gain a limit on the

number of passengers and/or flights. The editorial alongside Mr. Crunco’s

cartoon provides a worthwhile glimpse into the 161 process (“161 reasons

to care about the airport,”).

What is missing in the editorial, as well as pronouncements from the

airport and the Burbank City Council, is any reference to a limit on the

number of passengers or flights. A curfew alone will not do it. Some

reasonable limit has to be set to prevent Burbank from becoming another

Inglewood.

In his letter, Wesley Greene practically squawks with delight when he

proclaims that “FAA Chief Jane Garvey calls the shots.” (“The truth is

out at long last.”) Where’s the news in that statement?

An FAA Part 161 study has been required since Congress passed the

Airport Noise and Capacity Act in 1990. Many were critical of the Burbank

City Council last August when they tried to bypass a Part 161 study and

institute a de facto curfew with their ill-fated “Framework for

Settlement.”

I am elated that Mr. Greene has now learned about the 161 process and

the role of the FAA.

What Mr. Greene overlooks though, is that the California Public

Utilities Code provides the city with the absolute right to determine

whether or not a new terminal can be built on the proposed site. This

land use right totally supersedes any rights of the FAA.

If the Burbank council plays our land-use card correctly, they can

obtain both a curfew and some reasonable limit on the number of

passengers or flights. From the tenor of his letter, I have to wonder if

Mr. Greene wants either a curfew or limits. He appears to care only about

a bigger, not a better, Burbank.

RON VANDERFORD

Burbank