City Hall could appeal court ruling
DOWNTOWN L.A. A U.S. District Court judge on Friday issued a preliminary injunction barring City Hall from enforcing a stoppage on the fastest jets at Santa Monica Airport, forcing it to comply with the Federal Aviation Administration’s cease-and-desist order while the agency examines the legality of the ban.
Several court filings by City Hall are likely next week as officials are considering an appeal to Judge George Wu’s ruling and could also petition the California Appellate Court to review the administrative cease-and-desist order issued by the FAA last month.
“We’re going to ponder that today and make a decision next week,” Deputy City Attorney Martin Tachiki said.
The ruling came a day after both parties met in the U.S. District Courthouse in Downtown Los Angeles to argue the FAA’s request for a preliminary injunction. The judge had granted the FAA’s request for a temporary restraining order on April 28.
The ban was set to go into effect at 12:01 a.m. on April 24 but was suspended by City Hall later that day after the FAA filed for a temporary restraining order. The federal agency requested the restraining order in an attempt to enjoin City Hall after it indicated plans to proceed with the ban despite a cease-and-desist order issued the day before the ordinance was to go in effect.
“We’ve been constant about our legal position regarding the cease-and-desist order all along and we’re gratified the court agreed,” FAA spokesman Ian Gregor said. “Litigation is always the last resort for us but when our efforts to settle this dispute amicably failed, we had to resort to litigation to protect our system of airports.”
Runway safety has been a bone of contention for the FAA and City Hall for the past several years, both parties at odds over how safety measures should be instituted at Santa Monica Airport. The airport is unique in that there are homes located within 300 feet of both ends of the runway.
Sunset Park residents for years have expressed concerns about the possibility of an aircraft one day overshooting the runway and colliding with homes.
The FAA has made several runway safety proposals in the past, including most recently 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 classified jets, which is the type of aircraft that was to be banned. The enhanced safety measures would consume more runway than the 40-knot EMAS, which the FAA previously proposed. City officials turned down both options as being insufficient.
The City Council adopted the ban in March of this year. “We’re disappointed,”Kate Vernez, the assistant to the city manager, said about the court ruling. “This is about safety for Santa Monica and we intend to pursue it.”
The FAA has contended that irreparable harm would exist with the ban, disrupting 9,000 aircraft operations a year at SMO, affecting 20,000 to 30,000 passengers. The ban would impact aircraft such as the Gulfstream IV and the Citation X.
Santa Monica city attorneys urged the judge not to issue the preliminary injunction, asking it take public safety into account. The FAA has pointed out that the runway incidents that have occurred at SMO involved the smaller class A and B jets.
Brian Bland, a Sunset Park resident who attended the court hearing on Thursday, said he was not surprised at the outcome given some of the judge’s comments, including one remark that planes fall out of the sky all the time.
“I thought the statement was insensitive and completely ignores the unique situation at SMO,” Bland said.“All we can do is hope that the appellate court will look at not only the procedural questions involved here but look at the merits of why the public needs relief on those larger jets.”
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on May 17, 2008. Read the original PDF.