It’s been 10 years and counting. Now the Burbank Airport Authority has yet one more hurdle that could delay any expansion deal it reaches with the city of Burbank. Last week, Burbank voters approved Measure B, which provides that any airport expansion deal the city signs with the authority must also be approved by a majority of Burbank voters. While airport foes say the measure makes it tougher for an expansion plan to pass, airport officials and advocates say the only impact the initiative will likely have is to delay the passage of any expansion deal by however long it takes to call an election about three months. “We don’t know (what it will mean),” said Victor Gill, spokesman for the Airport Authority. “It will make (the timeline for expansion) lengthier.” But at this point, any additional time may seem insignificant compared to that already invested. “We’ve been in this legal fight for 10 years,” said Burbank City Manager Bud Ovrum. “Three months doesn’t seem like that big a deal.” Burbank runs the airport with the cities of Glendale and Pasadena. While Glendale and Pasadena have pushed for expansion, Burbank has sought flight restrictions on airlines to reduce the noise impact on nearby residents. The Airport Authority is seeking to build a larger, new terminal but the two sides are no longer negotiating a deal. Glendale City Councilwoman Ginger Bremberg, who supports expansion, called the vote and the measure an emotionally driven public relations ploy, but said in the end it will have little impact. “I think it’s an embarrassment,” Bremberg said. “But it doesn’t change the dynamics.” Bremberg said the measure gives residents in Burbank more say over the future of the airport than those in Glendale, Pasadena and even people in the San Fernando Valley who use the airport the most. She warned it could encourage airlines to look to Southern California airports other than Burbank when considering additional flights to Southern California. No big deal Ovrum downplayed the significance of Measure B, saying the City Council would likely vote the way most Burbank voters would anyway “There was concern among voters that the city would reach a back-room deal,” Ovrum said. “I think if the council came up with a package they were comfortable with, it would pass because they are elected by the same people who would vote on it.” Measure B was put on the Nov. 7 ballot by the City Council after ROAR (Restore Our Airport Rights) submitted 7,400 ballots to the city for an initiative that would require two-thirds of Burbank voters to approve any airport expansion agreement. ROAR’s petition was thrown out by the Burbank city clerk because the group did not properly identify itself on the petition. Ted McConkey, a former Burbank councilman and member of ROAR, said Measure B is important because it is possible that a future council with a pro-airport majority would sign an expansion deal without mandatory flight curfews. “It’s a fallback,” McConkey said. “We know there will be no expansion now unless the people say yes.” ROAR is now collecting signatures for another ballot initiative that would bar the City Council from giving the Airport Authority expansion approval unless mandatory curfews and caps on future flights were in place. All of this is just the latest obstacle for the Airport Authority in its expansion quest. Ongoing fight Burbank has been deadlocked with the Airport Authority for the last decade over the authority’s desire to build a new, expanded terminal to meet growing air demands and update safety issues in the current terminal. It appeared the two sides had reached an agreement in fall 1999 for a 330,000-square-foot terminal with 14 gates and an informal flight curfew. Burbank has sought mandatory flight curfews for any expansion plan because of the noise concerns of neighboring residents. However, the FAA ruled last year that only it could pass a mandatory flight curfew and then only after a noise study was done. The Airport Authority has since applied to have a noise study done at Burbank, but it won’t likely be complete until 2002. The Airport Authority already owns 49 acres at the airport that would be used for expansion and has an option on an additional 81 acres on former Lockheed property. But the city of Burbank must approve any expansion plans for those sites. This summer, the Airport Authority filed an application in Burbank to build a 250,000-square-foot terminal with 14 gates. If that does not move forward soon or is rejected, the Airport Authority will likely sell the 81 acres, Gill said. And whether Burbank citizens ever vote on an expansion deal also depends on what happens this spring when the city councils in Burbank, Glendale and Pasadena each elect two new members to the authority board. That could swing support either way on airport expansion.
