By Michael E. Tennenbaum Santa Monica
Ladies and Gentlemen [of the City Council], When I requested an opportunity to address you, I was told that I would only be permitted three minutes and that my appearance could not be scheduled for a firm time and might be delayed until late at night. Therefore, I have elected to send you this letter as a more practical way of getting on the record [about] the effect of your efforts to thwart the use of the Santa Monica Airport by aircraft owners like me. My office is directly across from the ramp at Atlantic Aviation, which is the point of take off for most of the jets. Consequently, it is one of the nosiest locations in town. I can tell you that none of the noises impact my doing business and I don’t believe that others near the airport can honestly disagree with that.
About five years ago I acquired an aircraft and based it at the airport and relocated my firm [there]. A major consideration was the time efficiency of being able to work up to flight time and to be able to go to my office immediately upon landing; this efficiency has been shared by other members of my firm. Now you propose either to ban my aircraft, or to make it impractical by shortening the runway with special installations. This reduces the appeal to my firm and me to stay in Santa Monica.
Since moving, Tennenbaum Capital Partners, LLC (TCP) has expanded from about 20 persons to about 75 persons and has a multi-million dollar payroll. A number of our executives now live in Santa Monica and we spend millions of dollars in the community. In addition, we have been paying gross receipts tax of about $200,000 per year. In addition, we have been exceptional citizens because every member of our firm is required to do community service every year.
We have scrupulously obeyed the noise limits and our advanced and carefully maintained instruments virtually eliminate any chance of an accident. In fact, I understand that for the entire existence of the airport, no jet aircraft has ever had an accident.
Because of overloads at LAX, and decreasing hangar availability at Van Nuys, it would be both burdensome and expensive for me to relocate our plane. Certainly, I would be extremely discouraged that the Santa Monica would discriminate against people who do no harm, pose no credible threat, and contribute so much to the community.
When moving here, I relied on the contract that the FAA has with the city and believe that it would be honored by both parties. I even planned to build a green office building in Santa Monica as a permanent home for our firm. To say that I am disillusioned would be an understatement.
I believe that the general economy is going to cause significant contractions in Santa Monica’s tax collections both from retail sales and from other sources. At the same time, I have been dismayed by the reductions in your budget for public schools. I believe that some other businesses currently housed in Santa Monica are suffering reversals that will greatly reduce their level of employment. I don’t think that it is a wise move to drive away people like me, especially given the outlook for your revenues and costs. Ask yourself who the beneficiaries are: a windfall gain for houses near the airport. Are there members of your council who are so indebted to these property owners so that they are uncaring about the economic impacts on the city?
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on May 15, 2008. Read the original PDF.