> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.smdp.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # FAA finds jet ban illegal - URL: https://www.smdp.com/faa-finds-jet-ban-illegal/ - Published: 2008-05-30T15:00:00.000Z - Updated: 2026-10-24T19:44:05.000Z - Author: Melody Hanatani - Tags: Government & Politics, Santa Monica Airport, #archive-import *FAA says airport must operate 15 more years* CITY HALL In an expected turn-of-events, the Federal Aviation Administration ruled this week that an outright ban on private jets at Santa Monica Airport is illegal, a determination that could put future transportation grants in jeopardy. The FAA released the results of its nearly six-year internal investigation on Tuesday, concluding that an ordinance prohibiting category C and D aircraft from SMO would put City Hall in violation of its federal obligations to the aviation agency. The administrative review started in 2002 when the Airport Commission recommended that the City Council adopt a ban on the fastest jets. The review was placed on hold soon thereafter as both city and federal officials began negotiating several runway safety enhancement options. “We put it on hold while we tried to come to an agreement with the city and when that failed and when the city passed the ordinance \[banning C and D jets\], we resumed the investigation,” Ian Gregor, the spokesman for the FAA, said. The initial determination came as little surprise to city officials as the FAA had been arguing all along that the ordinance was most likely unlawful. Both City Hall and the FAA are currently entangled in a legal battle over the ordinance. “The basic claims are not new to us and were what we expected,” Kate Vernez, assistant to the city manager for governmental relations, said. The FAA directed City Hall to present within the next 20 days a plan on how it intends to address the agency’s concerns by doing away with the violations outlined in the report. City Hall will not be allowed to receive any new FAA grants until the action plan receives approval. While city officials say they do not plan to apply for any new federal airport grants, the results of the internal investigation could have some bearing on grants for other modes of transportation, including funding requests to the Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration. Gregor pointed out that the FAA could make these departments aware of its determination. “The other modes can consider Santa Monica’s noncompliance on the airport issue when deciding whether to award their own grants to the city, or to award grants that other agencies would pass along to the city,” Gregor said. City Hall will have the option to either request a hearing or appeal the initial determination to the FAA within 30 days. If neither action is taken, the determination becomes final. City officials say they are opting for the former. Meanwhile an appeal to a preliminary injunction on the jet ban remains in the California Appellate Court. One new piece of information in the report is a statement by the FAA that City Hall is obligated to operate SMO as an airport until 2023, not 2014 as previously argued by city officials. City Hall received a grant in 1994 to pay for various improvement projects, including paving, installing runway signs and refurbishing the airport. The grant legally obligated City Hall to continue operating the facility as an airport for the following 20 years. But the FAA argues that City Hall received a grant amendment for $240,000 in 2003, increasing the total grant to $10.2 million and extending SMO’s obligation through at least 2023\. The FAA has argued that the ordinance amounts to an unreasonable discrimination against jets. Vernez said the $240,000 was a payment received for the conclusion of the projects and not an additional grant. “It could not have extended the city’s obligation to operate the airport,” she said. “The 20-year condition expires in 2014 and not a year beyond that.” City and federal officials have been at odds the past several years about runway safety issues at the airport, which is considered a reliever for LAX. SMO is unique in that there are homes within 300 feet of both runway ends. Sunset Park residents have expressed concerns about the possibility of an aircraft one day overshooting the runway and colliding into homes, a potential for a fatal accident. The FAA has pointed out that such accidents at SMO have involved the slower and smaller A and B planes. Among the safety proposals made by the FAA is an option to install a 70-knot Emergency Material Arresting System that would be designed to stop roughly 97 percent of operations at the airport and 90 percent of categories C and D jets, which approach the runway at 121-140 knots and 141-165 knots, respectively. The council dismissed the proposals as being insufficient and opted for the ordinance in March. The ban was set to go into effect at 12:01 a.m. on April 24 but was suspended later that day by City Hall after the FAA filed a temporary restraining order, which was granted. The order was continued when a U.S. District Court judge issued a preliminary injunction against City Hall on May 16\. That decision was subsequently appealed by City Hall. The restraining order remains in effect until the FAA makes its determination final. The FAA has also issued a cease-and-desist order against City Hall, which is petitioning the appellate court to review the order. Gregor pointed out that the determination will lay the groundwork for the final cease-and-desist order. If the final decision and final cease-and-desist order are appealed by City Hall, the FAA can seek a court order preventing the enforcement of the ban during the appeal process. Vernez said the determination will not affect the current appeal to the preliminary injunction. *Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on May 30, 2008.* [Read the original PDF.](https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/smdp%5Fbackissues/053008.pdf?ref=smdp.com)