June 26, 2006 The Honorable Michael D. Antonovich Board of Supervisors, County of Los Angeles
869 Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration
500 West Temple Street Los Angeles, CA 90012 E-Mail: FifthDistrict@lacbos.org
RE: Agua Dulce Airpark - SP1404- (5)
Board of Supervisor Hearing June 27, 2006 Dear Mayor Antonovich,
Of the people testifying today, I am one of the few who have been in the Acton-Agua Dulce area longer than the airport (1946 v 1959).
The airport has been a festering cancer that has gone into long periods of remission but now violently stands to destroy the rural community. Its first permit started because the airport was built without a permit and the airport operators have continued to totally ignore LA County law and the community ever since. And the County has simply rolled over and approved violation after violation, with one of the most egregious changes claiming that helicopters (rotor craft) are propeller driven aircraft without even holding a public hearing.
One of the most important things the Board of Supervisors can do would be to schedule a vote on what the registered voters in the community want. The community should vote on the continued operation of the airport at historic levels or expansion to what is claimed to be the airport's rights under a defective and embarrassing series of County permits.
In the early 1990s the same claim that the community wants the County's purchase of the airport was only decided when the community voted by over 60% to oppose the County purchase. The current process is based on who will spend the most money on breakfast and lunch and the best buses to show support. Without a vote of the people this airport will continue to be litigated over the foreseeable future.
1404 clearly calls for the revocation of the permit for violations or if any portions of the permit are considered invalid. The RPC sidestepped the issue by claiming violations were not “material” or that the violations had to be adjudicated in court. 1404 is silent on both these issues. The language in 1404 is not an option but is a shall statement requiring a permit to be voided.
You must revoke the permit now; require a new application to be filed and a full EIR be prepared over the impact of this airport in a quiet rural community.
The proposed modification of the permit clearly violates CEQA. The exception that RPC claims to CEQA is so lame that is laughable. The permit gives a vast expansion and a few highlights are:
1. The airport changes from a private airport to a public airport Unlimited helicopters (rotor craft) are allowed, when the original permit is restricted to propeller driven aircraft only.
2. Landing lights and other navigational aids are allowed which allows 24-hour operations of the airport, instead of a restriction to daylight only.
3. The definitions of what violations are are now changed to “material” violations with no definition of material.
4. There is no definition of proof required for the public to report violations.
5. It appears the entire penalty provisions against the airport operator for violating the rules are so vague they are unenforceable.
6. 1404 and 1352 are still unclear that the change from 20 to 30 aircraft to 300 to 400 aircraft clearly is a vast expansion no matter how much dancing around the so-called Exhibit A approvals can be made.
The Federal Preemption error Lastly, the County's position that all regulations concerning the airport are pre-empted by the Aircraft Noise and Capacity Act (ANICA) is wrong. The FAA rules specifically states that rules established prior to its enactment stand unchanged.
The argument that FAA pre-emption is what insulates the County from CEQA is laughable.
Do your duty and revoke the permit and require a full new application be filed including an EIR to allow the continuation of this airport.
Airpark permit/revocation Issues Index
Vanguard News Home page