Speaker 5: Okay. Item 17 is a report from Long Beach Airport. Recommendation two received direction from the City Council concerning the performance of a feasibility study for the potential development of a Federal Inspection Service facility at the Long Beach Airport District five.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. I'm going to turn this over for the staff report. Mr. Mayor, council.
Speaker 2: Members are well know we're here for the Federal Inspection Service. This all started back in August of 2013 when the previous airport director received a request from JetBlue for this facility. We then received a memo from the airport director, the staff and city council that they would do a study on this study to determine it determined where they would go with it. In November of 2013, a study was delivered to the city manager and the City Council shortly thereafter, in March of 2014. Our airport director approached me stating that he was going to be leaving the city of Long Beach to go someplace else. At that time, I made the decision to shelve the report and wait until we had a brand new permanent airport director in place. That's Mr. Bryant Francis. Mr. Bryant Francis came on board at the beginning of 2015.
Speaker 0: In February of 2015.
Speaker 2: Mr. Bryant brought to our attention and to the City Council attention the situation and where we're going to go with this request from JetBlue. At that time, the city.
Speaker 0: Council took the action.
Speaker 2: That at this time we did not have a sitting council member in District four. So the council directed staff not to pursue this until District four was seated. And then 60 days after that, to give District for the opportunity to. Get plugged into the background and the issue here. So that brings us tonight, July 7th. So we're here to get direction from the city council regarding this issue.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I know that we are going to a lot of members here from the public, the ones that want to speak on this issue. And so unless there's objection from the maker of the motion, I'm going to go to the public first. Okay. And so the public would go first and well, obviously, everyone has 3 minutes. Please will line up on the item and then we'll just go as efficiently as possible. And I know there's obviously people with very different opinions. And so I just want us to be respectful of the person at the podium, regardless of what they're saying. And hopefully we can make this an efficient process. So if you're here to speak, please come up to the podium and 3 minutes and we'll have the timer start.
Speaker 11: Mr. Mayor? Yes, sir. Point of information. What is the motion?
Speaker 0: I know no motion has been made. You can have public comment before the motion, Mr. Mister City Attorney.
Speaker 2: It's the discretion of the chair. Generally speaking, you have a motion on the floor for public comment.
Speaker 0: Vice-Chair Longford, do you want to make the motion on the floor or do you want to?
Speaker 3: I can do that. Okay, good. I'm happy to do that. I would. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and I appreciate the members of the public that are here. This is going to be an evolving conversation, I'm sure, but I'd like to go ahead. How about this? Louder.
Speaker 0: Yeah.
Speaker 3: Okay. So I would like to make the motion to authorize the city manager to proceed with the work necessary to determine the feasibility, financial or otherwise of a Federal Inspection Service facility at the Long Beach Airport.
Speaker 0: Okay. And there's a second. The second by the motion. Councilwoman Mango was a motion and a second on the floor. I'm going to go ahead and go to the speakers to the speakers long. A lot of speakers will be a lot of counsel conversation, sir, and make sure that everyone introduces their name for the record. My name is Greg Herwig, my addresses on file. I would like to speak to the Patrick West City Manager.
Speaker 2: He basically broke down.
Speaker 0: What was the Fresca and Associates feasibility study? This feasibility study is basically can it can this be paid for? There's no doubt it can be paid for by either the city of Long Beach or the airport or JetBlue or somebody. But feasibility to me, is it feasible.
Speaker 2: For the community? I'm going to read from.
Speaker 0: Patrick West's synopsis of this report. And it states in the second paragraph it is staff's opinion since additional debt and expense could negatively affect the financial solvency of the airport. That's the the the previous airport managers assessment of the whole assessment. So his assessment is negative. The disincentives were not only.
Speaker 2: Increasing.
Speaker 0: The airport's financial exposure, but also increasing its exposure to international threats. This is out of his report, his summary of the report. So this report was commissioned by JetBlue. If we're going have a feasibility report, can we please have an independent feasibility report? And can it focus on the community, not just whether or not we can pay for it? So what I'm here to ask you today for is a seat at the table to make sure that it's feasible for the community to absorb this international terminal. Regardless of my opinion, there are 20 schools that are directly impacted by this airport. And what I mean by directly impacted.
Speaker 9: They have to shut down.
Speaker 0: Classes while airport, while airplanes land or take off. There are 49 schools that are impacted and total. The last time there was an a feasibility study, an environmental impact report on this, there was one school that was going to be retrofitted with windows, and that was my kids school minivans. But I know.
Speaker 2: That the ninth, the eighth and the seventh.
Speaker 0: District on the take off, I believe there's three other districts that are on the take off that are that weren't.
Speaker 2: Represented in in that in any way, shape or form.
Speaker 0: So the feasibility to me is, can it be paid for? Of course it can be paid for. Everybody already knows that. But is it feasible for our community to be able to absorb more flights? Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please. Hello.
Speaker 2: Good evening, Mayor. City Council staff. My name's Jeremy Harris, senior vice president, Long Beach Area Chamber of Commerce. We have the chamber, our leadership and member businesses. We strongly support the staff, recommended action and respectfully urge you to move forward. JetBlue's formal request to the city to conduct this feasibility study and for the potential development of a customs facility.
Speaker 0: JetBlue has waited patiently for full representation of the council to be.
Speaker 2: Completed, along with the direction of the.
Speaker 0: Council to wait another 60 days for full council was seated.
Speaker 2: It's the process that was put into place and we respect the process. The chamber, along with many of our members, including JetBlue, believe in established noise ordinance and its purpose as a guide for operations along Beach Airport. However, the fact remains that such request to study and only a study, the feasibility for potential development of a customs facility at the airport does not tamper with directly or impact the current noise ordinance. Many speakers here tonight will take. We'll talk about the noise ordinance and I'll reserve those comments to those who wish to do so. We, the Chamber, will like to talk.
Speaker 0: About the good faith.
Speaker 2: Of a great corporate citizen that provides good paying jobs and continues to be a major positive economic factor for Long Beach. JetBlue has waited patiently for the process to unfold since their original request. What type of message will the city of Long Beach send to business and potential businesses if JetBlue's request is ignored now? After the process has been fully vetted and come full circle, this is a major concern for us at the chamber now and in the future. We agree with JetBlue and we respectfully ask that you lift the ban on staff to conduct the necessary due diligence of a customs facility. If we are to become an international.
Speaker 0: City that so many of you.
Speaker 2: And us quite, quite frankly, continue to promote, we need to at least take that step in that direction. We know the custom facility is feasible.
Speaker 0: We hope you agree.
Speaker 2: And will consider lifting the ban on staff, support the necessary study process and work with all of us and all stakeholders to make our airport and our city a wonderful place to do business. Thank you for the opportunity to address you tonight. I respectfully ask your support on the staff. Recommend position. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, Mr. Harris. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: My name is Cory Jensen, and I am quite puzzled is why Mr. West is asking council direction on how to proceed with a federal inspection facility. City staff have been working on the facility with airport staff and JetBlue in secret for over two years without formal council authorization. So much for open and transparent governance. And why do you need another feasibility study when you already have one? Mayor Rodriguez delivered a study to Mr. West, performed by Franken Associates on November 14, 2013. I assume the council received a copy. Or did you? So I suspect you may not know that the study indicates the incremental income that the terminal might generate is severely limited, will barely cover cost, and exposes the city to millions of unfunded costs and operational expenses. And I suspect you may not know. The consultant said the development of a fast terminal would generate at most a limited amount of incremental passenger traffic, as significant international activity would likely require some reduction in domestic activity. I cannot emphasize enough that it is vitally important for you to recognize that the salient issue is not if the facility is feasible, but is it advisable. Given the need to protect the noise ordinance, you must manage your downside risk. It is clear that the very real financial risk is dramatically overshadowed by the risk to our noise ordinance. The FAA certainly will not strengthen the ordinance as adding more facilities and services to our terminal will in fact increase the chances another airline or operator will challenge our policies and ordinance in pursuit of flight slots that are not currently available. Remember, do we have we do not have any flight slots to give as all are taken. Most are held by JetBlue. That's 32. All I need to remind you is to recall what happened in 2002 when American Airlines threatened to sue and challenged the ordinance and the flight allocation procedure. It was triggered when we gave all the available slots to JetBlue. We lawyered up and a devastating outcome was was averted when the cooperative settlement was reached. If you allow this facility, you are almost guaranteeing more conflict. Do you really think that the airlines that currently fly internationally to other airports will welcome and play nice with a new competitor flying out of LGB? I don't think so. It is clearly not in the best interest of the city to risk permanently losing control of the airport by providing a terminal expansion that will provide so little benefit to the city and the airport. This should be a nonstarter. I respectfully urge you to reject the pressure to further study the facility and make what I believe is a strategically ill advised and irreversible bad decision. There is so much to lose and so little to gain if you make the wrong decision. If you are wrong, the potential consequences to the homeowners in five of the nine council districts and the students that are in the 20 schools impacted by the airport could be permanently and irreversible harmed. And you will be held accountable. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 12: Mayor Garcia. Members of the council. My name is Robert Land and I'm senior vice president of government affairs, associate general counsel of JetBlue Airways, a corporate citizen based at the Long Beach Airport. I'm delighted to be here this evening to have the opportunity on behalf of JetBlue to comment on this resolution, which we support, and to be joined by so many friends, supporters and most importantly, crew members of JetBlue Airways. Not long ago, President Obama challenged JetBlue CEO, along with other members of the president's travel and Tourism Advisory Board to help him, the president, with his job creating national tourism policy. And that policy's goal, according to the president, was to grow international visitors to the United States. I'm here tonight to reiterate JetBlue's long standing desire to partner with the city of Long Beach and work to simply gather all of the facts and explore all of the ramifications of adding international and international customs facility to the airport. Let me be crystal clear on behalf of JetBlue. We are and we remain and always have been committed to the ordinance, the noise ordinance. If the FAA believes that a change to the airport, including customs, would jeopardize the ordinance, we would support it. But let me also be clear that JetBlue is not asking you to support a Customs facility tonight. We're not doing that tonight. Not yet. All we're asking you for tonight is to simply begin the exploration process, to gather the facts through a thorough Fact-Finding mission. How much will it cost? Who's going to pay for it? How big will it be? What will it look like? What will its impact be on operations and the budget of the airport? What will the economic benefits, if any, be to the city? And most importantly, what effects will it have on our noise ordinance? These questions all deserve to be answered. They can't be answered unless the city staff begins the work table since February. And now, councilman, the fourth District is here. We welcome the city moving forward. After all that information is gathered and shared with all of the stakeholders in the city. You'll actually have enough facts to then make a reasoned up or down decision on whether to move forward with the facility. This council has shown it can do its due diligence and answer tough questions, like the ones I just mentioned on a number of new projects, including the proposed new civic center and new aquatics facility. JetBlue is simply seeking that same courtesy. We merely want to explore having the flexibility to fly the same planes we do today. Using the same number of slots were allocated today simply to different destinations. To reiterate, JetBlue respectfully ask you to lift the ban on staff and begin working on our request to gather all of the information and then come back to the council so you can make an informed decision. Thanks for the opportunity.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Next speaker, please. Hi. My name is Michael Bell, and I live in Los Altos. My. My address is on. On record. Um, I guess I've been a part of this.
Speaker 2: Story for a while. Actually made one of the original videos that showed what it's.
Speaker 0: Like to actually live under the flight path. Um, we've actually owned a house for 12 years in Los Altos. Um, I guess, first of all, I want to thank, you know, Vice Mayor Lowenthal and also Mayor Garcia for some of the great steps you've made to make it more of a livable city, a green city, an indoor outdoor lifestyle, I think is important to some of the things that is on your agenda. And that's really part of the reason I moved to Long Beach is to actually enjoy that indoor outdoor lifestyle. I'm the guy that's known as being on my bike pretty much 100% of the time out in my city. And so I really kind of get a feel for what it's like with the noise above, what it's like to live in it. And like I said, we really moved to Long Beach to enjoy that indoor outdoor lifestyle, to enjoy this weather. And I know a lot of people say, Well, why don't you just get windows that block out the noise? Why don't you just stay inside? And the whole point is, that's why we moved to Long Beach. Otherwise, we might live in the Inland Empire, where it's 105 degrees. So we're here to enjoy this beautiful weather. And I think.
Speaker 2: This affects not just that, but.
Speaker 0: It affects hundreds of residents. It affects hundreds of kids in schools. I've also got kids at Michigan, and it's like being interrupted constantly throughout the day. And this is our kids learning. And like Greg said, we've got 20 schools that are affected by these flights. And I think if we go and move towards this international terminal, we're basically opening up a Pandora's box, something that can't be closed, and it may look shiny on the outside and very inviting. But it's a problem because it's something that once you open it, you can't close it. And I don't think that this terminal is a good fit for the city, and I don't think it's a good fit for the residents. So I really urge the City Council to consider that I'm going to keep mine short because I know we have other speakers. Thank you. Appreciate that. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Very good. Kirk is the address. Full disclosure, though, I've lived here for over nearly over three decades and have used the airport because of not voting centric. I really haven't followed it that much, but we certainly appreciate Blue JetBlue coming here. I know that. And we're looking forward to having them fly all the the people from Boston. To Los Angeles and to Long Beach in 2006 for the next Olympic Games. And I think they'll play a good role in that. But not having followed all the details. But I still realize it's a major issue. And without going into the all the details that I set forth in the closed session earlier today, which you can access online. There's no question this is going to be a seminal change. One way or the other. Given given the seismic change the leadership of the city. Both elected within the elected and the staff will undergo. Through starting in about 60 to 90 days and will complete probably in October or November. I would suggest you wait. Until. The new mayor is in. The new city manager is in. And the federal consent decree has been fully implemented. These are the the findings of the FBI and the Department of Justice, which will be following up on the criminal ruse and getting initiated by Robert Garcia and Camilla Harris. Once that is done and that is on track, and if you haven't read the Los Angeles Times in the last week relative to the special prosecutor being appointed by the L.A. district attorney's office, who is not warranted to prosecute and a state attorney general, you'll get the sense of the seismic change we're going through or will be going through and what the end result will be. So I would suggest we wait. The three or four months, then you'll have a firmer handle and will have more astute leadership to guide us through this situation. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. The next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: I can't take that.
Speaker 6: Hello, my name is Christine Fischer. I am a lifelong resident of the Lakewood Village area right there.
Speaker 3: Next to the airport. Growing up.
Speaker 6: Lobby, City College and the airport.
Speaker 3: Were practically part of our backyard.
Speaker 6: We considered it my whole life. The airport has just been there. It's like the airport was always around. It was kind of like a good neighbor. The airport was there. I know the airport has been around much longer than my 54 years. In 1920, it was that municipal field that was dedicated by the city. Then more land was purchased by the then Wise City Council, old wise city council back then.
Speaker 3: And they rededicated in 1942.
Speaker 6: 1942. And it's been here to stay like a good neighbor. It was here to stay. My very first flight on an airplane was out of the out of Lombard Airport. I consider myself privileged and lucky to have been raised near the airport. And then I was able to raise my own family, my rather large family right in the neighborhood, too. One inexpensive family outing was to watch the airplanes take off and land less than two miles from our home. Great family bonding times like a good neighbor.
Speaker 3: The airport.
Speaker 6: It was there. I have worked part time while raising my family to supplement our income. I taught business law here at Brookes College in Long Beach for ten years until they closed. After that, I was looking for something. It's good to have part time close to home, near my home in Long Beach. So six and a half years ago, I kind of on a fluke. I applied a Jet Blue and it has been an incredible ride ever since.
Speaker 3: Like a good neighbor, the airport was there for me.
Speaker 6: I want to emphasize that I'm here on my own, not as a representative of JetBlue. I wasn't asked to speak or anything like that. It's just me, me, myself. And I'm a community resident. You know, I live right next to the airport, a daughter whose elderly parents still live next to the airport, a wife, mother and hopefully soon a grandmother. Now my kids are starting. Family is also living next to the airport and they can count on the airport to still have a positive impact.
Speaker 3: On the community. Like a good neighbor, I am confident that the concerns that a few.
Speaker 6: Will not come to be. I'm very confident about that. I can't wait to see the possibilities of exploring the options of a federal inspection station. And I am confident yes, confident that any changes in destinations we're talking about, destinations are not changing for number of flights or anything will have a positive impact on our community. And I could not and I would not support it if I felt otherwise. This is my community. It's my neighborhood.
Speaker 3: I feel strongly about that. I would not be giving my $0.02 here if I didn't believe it, because like I said before.
Speaker 6: Like a good neighbor. The airport is there.
Speaker 0: Thank you, ma'am. Next speaker, please. Good evening, Mayor Garcia. Members of the Council. City manager, manager. City attorney. It's a privilege to speak before you in regards to my support of your approval for Customs Service facility consideration. I'm Myron Campbell and I love Long Beach. I work here in the city of Long Beach as ground operations leader for JetBlue. On an average day, I can be found pushing, loading, moving our aircraft. However, more of the joy. And what I do is found welcoming Long Beach residents back home. Welcoming the Long Beach visitors to this wonderful, wonderful, flourishing city. Now, I recognize tonight the issue discussed is not only examining whether the further JetBlue's request for customs facility, but also having a concern for the noise ordinance that has been in place for some time now. As you may know, due to the ordinance, Long Beach air carriers have been slapped, restricted and restricted a number of flights out of Long Beach. The ordinance invariably limits the noise. And JetBlue has always respected the city's noise ordinance and to boot. We also operate some of the most environmentally responsible aircraft in their class. This ordinance reminds me of the one I grew up with as a kid with my father. My father had his very own customized ordinance in our household. Now he would say to me sometimes, Hey, you better keep that noise down down there. Now, Myron, when you have your buddies over, if there's more than one, you guys got to take that outside. And so. Most of the time they didn't want to go outside. I also always follow my dad's rules. One fan at a time. Those are his rules. And JetBlue. JetBlue doesn't want to go outside. It wants to stay in the house right here in LGB. I'll say it again. JetBlue has always respected the city's noise ordinance, which governs the noise which governs the number of flights operating at the airport and does not wish to seek to see this increase or change. It simply seeks to operate. It's designated amount of slots, given nothing more in the location to which they fly, has nothing to do with the increased noise or the ordinance. Adding customs at Long Beach will always will also allow all airlines here to have the ability to serve the international markets will to generate jobs and economic activity for the city. Now, in addition, I believe it will enhance the use and enjoyment of this thriving and prideful community. This is why I strongly urge the Council to embrace the higher principle for which you all were called. By fulfilling your duty to ensure the city fulfills its duties, by ending the five month delay and how the city do its job. The necessary work of conducting due diligence on JetBlue's request. That's been pending. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Time's up. Thank you very much. But next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Hello, counsel. My name is Danielle and I have been in airports. Customer service crew member with JetBlue for six years. As of July 1st, I have been a resident of Long Beach for the past four years. When I first moved out to Long Beach, I resided in Bixby Knolls off of San Antonio Drive. Currently, I live near Redondo and Broadway. Since working at the Long Beach Airport, I've seen three different terminals. And I can honestly say the only thing that has changed is the quality of air travel we offer to our customers. We still receive the same amount of compliments on convenience and charm as we have from day one. We love our airport and we do not want this to change. JetBlue respects the city's noise ordinance and does not wish to see this change either. Nor do we wish to add any additional flights per day. We solely wish to operate the allotted slots given to us by the airport. I am in support of building the FISA customs facility. By doing so, we will be able to serve international markets that will generate jobs and revenue for our community. I strongly urge the City Council to reconsider and research on JetBlue's request. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 11: Hi. My name is right here. I am a JetBlue employee, but more so I'm a Long Beach City resident. I first moved to this town in 1969. You know, I'm not sure where most of you were in 1969, but I was right here in Long Beach. I went to elementary school here. Junior high school here. High school here. All my children went to elementary school here, junior high school here and high school here. One of my sons just graduated last month, Long Beach City College. My granddaughter goes to elementary school here now.
Speaker 10: My mom.
Speaker 11: Retired from Boeing aircraft right.
Speaker 8: There at an airfield. She worked for.
Speaker 11: Douglas since 1965. She put me through school, put a roof over my head and clothes on my back.
Speaker 8: Through that airport. I work there now.
Speaker 11: I take care of my family.
Speaker 8: Through that airport.
Speaker 11: Now I understand about noise. I understand about pollution. I lived here when you could taste the air from the air pollution, when kids couldn't go outside or people couldn't go outside because of the the the looks that they used to have. From the smog smog alerts. What that said, I do consider all that. I live in a sixth district. I am a constituent of the Andrews. She was.
Speaker 0: Here.
Speaker 11: But anyway. I live in and owned the same house my father lived in an old. I live right in between.
Speaker 0: Three.
Speaker 11: Major or two major.
Speaker 8: Medical centers and three emergency.
Speaker 11: Rooms. I live a block away from a four hour fire station. I live a block away from an elementary school two blocks from the Metrorail. Okay, so believe me, I know about noise. The flight path southbound out of the airport goes right off my house. I know about noise. Airport is not that noisy. My mom built DC nine DC twins, MDA 11 KC tents she built in the eighties. I know how loud airplanes sound. I was based right at El Toro. I know what 79 when I F-4 Phantom sound like. Full afterburner taking off. Okay. That airport is important to this city. Every major.
Speaker 0: Corporation, when they consider.
Speaker 11: Where they're going to put a a business, they consider location to.
Speaker 8: An airport and seaports.
Speaker 11: Just ask Mercedes Benz what they finish in a facility to just put over here on Lakewood Boulevard. Okay. It's not just JetBlue. Is everyone who benefits. My next door neighbors are from Costa Rica. Grandma makes two round.
Speaker 0: Trips to Costa Rica.
Speaker 11: Every year. Okay, so international travel is not just for. Vacations.
Speaker 2: What is? People visiting friends and family is.
Speaker 11: Very important to the city and everyone in my house. I got five rich, devoted in my house. All my kids and my wife. And, yeah, we did vote for you. So.
Speaker 0: Okay. All right. So please take that into consideration. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening, Your Honor. And council members. My name's Ken Robinson, and I've been a lifelong resident 50 years in Long Beach. I've had the pleasure of living under the flight path of Long Beach Airport for many of those years. I have to say, yes, I do get used to it, and I know it doesn't really bother me that much. Rarely does it bother me. I consider the airport to.
Speaker 2: Be very important.
Speaker 0: To not only the economy of Long Beach, but what somebody has not really.
Speaker 2: Spoken much about tonight.
Speaker 0: Is.
Speaker 2: The convenience of our airport and how great.
Speaker 0: It is to.
Speaker 2: Be able to just travel down the street a short distance and.
Speaker 0: Get on an airplane. Doesn't take very long to get through and get checked in and go where you got to go. And I travel pretty frequently and I do want to travel internationally out of Long Beach. I think it would be a great plus for us. And so considering a feasibility study, a full feasibility study, rather than a rushed feasibility study, I think it would be a great thing. All it is is just a feasibility study, people. It's nothing to be afraid of. And yes, you may not get your exact answer that you want to hear from it, but I see a lot of opportunities for the city and for the airport and for the people that live in this city. If we did have an international terminal and I am all for it, I'm not going to use my full time. And thank you very much. And, Mr. Mayor, kick ass. Keep going. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Good evening, John.
Speaker 2: Each 3600 Pacific.
Speaker 8: Avenue. I'm a soon to be 73 year old native of this city. And I'm here to express my mortal opposition to the motion before you. Because airport issues go directly to the integrity and credibility of Long Beach City government. When my late wife and I were looking for a house to buy in 1970. We found a house that I currently occupy. My dad was then on the city council and was the leading advocate for jet service from Long Beach Airport. I asked him before buying the house, Do I have to worry about airport noise? He says, Son, you'll only have to worry about not more than 19 flights in perpetuity. And those were commuter flights, by the way, not heavies. I would challenge each and every one of you to spend even a Saturday morning. In the Bixby Highlands neighborhood in the north west quadrant of Cherry and Carson. About a year ago, a very bright realtor sponsored a whole load of garage sale yard sales in that neighborhood. I spent the entire morning there. I love going to yard sales. It was absolutely deafening. If you folks, any one of you were to spend a morning over there like I did. You could not in good conscience vote to inflict any more harm on the people who live there year round. I would also like to remind you that the JetBlue general counsel, I believe the third speaker, said that JetBlue has always supported the noise ordinance.
Speaker 0: That's a crock.
Speaker 8: JetBlue is on the record as having lobbied every thing where they could in the past to try to get to use heavies for those 25 commuter flight slots. Is that my idea or your idea of somebody supporting a noise ordinance to try to wheedle their way into using heavies that are disallowed by the noise ordinance? I don't know where he was when that was going on, but I remember it full well. Lastly, in your current zeal to have Long Beach perceived as a business friendly city, you've gone too far. You have become neighborhood unfriendly.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Honorable Mayor and City Council.
Speaker 1: My name is Herlin to Chico. I'm a fourth.
Speaker 3: District resident.
Speaker 1: And my addresses on file. I'll make my comments brief.
Speaker 3: Because a lot has been said here. I got to tell you that I'm hearing about the convenience of this international terminal. I'm hearing about the responsibility of our city government to do this feasibility study. And with all due respect, our city government's priority, our utmost priority is.
Speaker 1: The health and safety of our residents.
Speaker 3: By the very nature, the definition of going forward with this feasibility study to possibly change the municipal airport.
Speaker 1: To an international airport, we are opening.
Speaker 3: Ourselves up and we do not want to do that. We cannot go back. We have been told over and over, we have been warned not.
Speaker 1: To make any changes.
Speaker 3: So I would much rather have, rather than having industry experts come in, we have a lot of neighborhood experts here that can give you the opinion that this is not going to be good for our neighborhood. So if we haven't been clear, if we haven't been loud enough, I think Terry Jensen was was.
Speaker 1: Amazing in.
Speaker 3: His synopsis of the impacts of this. But if we have.
Speaker 1: Not been clear or loud enough.
Speaker 3: Please know that there are hundreds and hundreds of us that are opposed to this feasibility study and the possibility of an international terminal. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Mayor Garcia and City Council. My name is Jane Naito. I'm a 17 year resident of Bixby Knolls, and I'm also a board member of Hush to proponents of the airport expansion and the customs facility have stated people knew there was an airport when they bought their homes under the flight path. This is true. However, many neighbors, many residents made their home investment when our noise ordinance was capped at 15, then capped at 18 flights, then capped at 32 flights. And finally, what we live with today, a minimum of 41 commercial and 25 commuter flights each and every day. When I purchased my home blocks away from under the takeoff pattern of the airport, I learned about the noise ordinance and I felt protected. Using the same logic of understanding the impacts or limitations. All commercial carriers, including JetBlue, were aware of our unique noise ordinance when they chose to move to Long Beach Airport. They repeatedly state they don't want to do anything to jeopardize our noise ordinance. And yet they keep pushing the envelope with wanting to expand. JetBlue's request for a customs facility will require another expansion to our airport. This enhancement will open the door for other airlines to look at our unique airport with renewed interest and could decide to pursue another challenge to our ordinance. I became involved in the airport issue in 2003, when JetBlue and other airport related businesses thought super sizing the airport was the right thing for the city and its residents. Thanks to the hard work of Hush Two and the dedicated neighborhoods, we were successful in reducing the expansion size to a reasonable 103,000 square feet. In 2004, two council members in the impacted airport districts lost their seats because they didn't understand the importance of listening to the residents. Who they represented. Each and every district could be impacted by future changes to our airport. This means each council member and the mayor could have their political futures in jeopardy if they choose not to put the quality of life concerns of the neighborhoods first. Especially when studies have shown there would be little economic impact for the general fund. And yes, there are risks associated with any change. I encourage you to receive and file this agenda item and move on to other, more important city issues, such as public safety and budget concerns that directly impact residents regardless of their districts. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you, ma'am. Next speaker, please. Hello. My name is German is. Excuse me, I'm here on behalf of the L.A. Orange County Building Trades.
Speaker 8: We just we're here to support the feasibility study. We think it'll bring a lot.
Speaker 0: Of jobs to Long Beach, and that's pretty much it.
Speaker 8: It's good for business.
Speaker 0: A lot of people are looking forward to this. I fly all over the country and I hear people talking about what airport languages.
Speaker 8: And what a better way to make it better than to add international flights.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening, Mayor Garcia and council. I'm Dr. Marshall Lisowski. And I just. I'm a I live on Linden Avenue in Bixby Knolls. Uh, I moved to Cal Heights in Bixby Knolls in 1984 and moved to my present residence. I've been there since 1986, and I also see a lot of different new people, younger families. I raised my family there, and my kids went to poly. They just. You know, I see a lot of new families moving in. And I just want to say that for some of us, our homes are the most important investment that we can make in our lives. Our. Our our retirement is is caught up in as part of our homes and to see our the possibility that because of this feasibility study, which I think this is a great time to nip it in the bud, to stop it right here, and to not have it go forward, because once the ball gets rolling, you know, it just gets rolling. So I see that our families, you know, this is almost like an attack on the middle class. This is an attack on working families who have put their hearts and lives into their homes and are planning on their retirement. And the younger people who have been able to buy homes and there aren't that aren't a lot of them are also want to build their equity and want to have a good lifestyle and want to be part of the American dream. And I don't think we should elect this corporation who says one thing and then does another thing. I don't think we should let this corporation dictate to our city what kind of quality of life that we will have. And I wanted to thank you for allowing me to speak. I wanted to just welcome Darrell Sue Bernard to the the council and and thank Al Austin for everything he's done for our neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Yes. Good evening, Mr. Mayor. And good evening, counsel. And I want to thank you for giving us the opportunity to speak on behalf of this issue. I also wanted to thank the many neighbors and registered voters that are behind me, whether they are for or against this, for coming out this evening, because voters are really what it's all about.
Speaker 7: In this city or any other city.
Speaker 0: I considered many topics to to bring to the table this evening for my comments. The first one came up was why we're visiting this after so many times that that the hushed and citizens in Long Beach have fought this back and it's time we've come to the table. We've lost a little more ground, a little more ground and wondering why we're doing this. The other comment that I was thinking of was why JetBlue is really the only one at the table, because it makes me wonder about the dozen or so airlines over the past 20 or 25 years who've called Long Beach Airport. They're home and they're no longer here. They're not represented in this room. Had at least ten or 12 airlines were represented here in the city. And they came they made the same comments and commitments to the city and the airport, and they really abandoned this airport over time. And I'm sure that there are other carriers that are standing behind JetBlue and letting them take the brunt of this. But really what came up to me was this evening, many of you probably came here directly, came from your council offices or the mayor's office or from work. So you probably haven't had an opportunity to check your mail at home and each of you check your mail at home. I had a few minutes to check my mail. And, you know, we got the Beach magazine from Cal State, Long Beach, and I got my Costco coupon. So I'm really happy about that. But I got a couple of other things. I got all my my local neighborhood newspapers for State of Brothers and, and Ralphs and, and then I then I received quite, you know, a few real estate listings from local real estate agents who are promoting neighborhoods and beautiful homes in my neighborhood, in adjacent neighborhoods in Long Beach. And I got this really nice catalog called Rejuvenation because there's a tremendous amount of business to keep homes looking wonderful and to keep property values up. And the last thing that I got, which all of you residents will have, are about the 2015 summer concerts in the park. And and this is part of the beauty and the wonder about Long Beach and the wonderful neighborhoods that we have. And I strongly urge the council not to take any action, any step that will destroy those neighborhood feelings. It's very important to everyone here and everyone that will live here in the future. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: I don't know whether I should say ditto or if anybody could have said it better than that gentleman. I'm Linda Sobel. I live in the fifth District and my address is on file. It's been a few years since I've had to get up here and come and share my thoughts about our community and why I live here . And one of the things that I loved about Long Beach is that I lived in the other beach cities around L.A. After I moved in from Northern California, I lived in Redondo. I lived in Santa monica, I lived in Malibu. I lived in all those places. And when I started dating my husband, he said, You have to check out Long Beach. I was like, Long Beach and this is 30 years ago. So long beaches had changed a lot. And the only experience I had of Long Beach was downtown. And the smog that you would set between, you know, Catalina and Long Beach and San Pedro. That's all I knew. And when I actually got here, I have watched this city transform. And the truth is, is that there were many areas that were great then, and I found that out. But many other areas have improved. But so many of our best areas really are affected by the airport. My question tonight is, why are we here again? Seems like we're doing this about every four or five years. We are putting the neighborhoods up against the city about the airport. And I thought that the lady that spoke earlier, who works for JetBlue, who grew up by the airport, said it beautifully about good neighbor, good neighbor. Good neighbor. Well, my experience the last time around when we were talking about tripling the airport was that we had to fight and fight and fight the people who were supposed to be taking care of us. We had to get to the point where the PTA had a lawsuit, that the school district had a lawsuit. And I will never forget, Dr. Lowenthal. Suzanne, at that time, who was I think you're the president, that point at the school board getting up here very eloquently, talking about the fear that the schools in the neighborhood had and why we needed to not supersize the airport. The feasibility study was already done. Mario was a great city manager. I mean, a great airport manager. He did the feasibility study. This the we love the airport is beautiful. I went to the you know, the christening. It was it's fabulous. Why do we continue to do this and why do we continue to do it in such a way that it creates this sense of distrust among our our districts, among us, with you? We're all in this together. We'd all like this to be a city that future generations will come to and want to live here. I don't understand why we continue to always feel like we're going to get it shoved down our throat. We're not really going to be here. We're being silly. I like JetBlue. It's fun to fly. I have nothing against anybody who works for JetBlue. I want JetBlue to be successful. But if other people, one person who worked there said, hey, other airlines are going to want to do this, too. Exactly. They're going to want to do international flights to what's to stop everybody else going, hey, they've got a great gig over there. What's to stop it? So I really hope you consider those things. And those of you who are new to it, you have to know we fought a long time.
Speaker 0: Time's up to.
Speaker 1: Get that great airport.
Speaker 0: Thank you so much. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Alexis Amador Moreira, 2314 Roycroft I live in the fourth District. I want to address something that I read in the newspaper. The Press Telegram, dated June 24th and it was the title of the article was Digging Our Graves with Fossil Fuels. And one of the columns that they had there that I thought was of interest was it said Long Beach is dirty air. And it said in Long Beach, where one out of six children has asthma, youth and older people are urged to to stay indoors, which is counterproductive to a healthy lifestyle, said Kelly Calliope, director for the Long Beach Department of Health and Human Services. So I think we need to maybe and both sides, all of us need to address what is this going to do? Excuse me, if they increase flights, especially internationally, I think we need to do our due diligence and you need to do your due diligence. And for your constituents, what is the aircraft emission standards set by the EPA for the city, for the Long Beach Airport? In other words, all these airplanes emit something. I know I walk my dog at Los Altos Park and you can't see it. You can't touch it. But, you know, you can throw a rocket these airplanes and you know, there's something coming out of them. So please, I encourage you to do an environmental impact report regarding our health and what it might be doing to us. Airplanes emit carbon dioxide contributing to global warming. They dump massive amounts of dangerous pollution over our homes and into our atmosphere every day. A single roundtrip flight from New York to Europe or San Francisco produces 2 to 3 tons of carbon dioxide per person. Please just do your due diligence and, you know, make sure that, you know, everything they've talked about today is accurate, especially our health. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please, Mr. Mayor and council members. My name is John Apple Quest. I live in the fourth district.
Speaker 2: I live over by Cal State, Long Beach Pyramid. So I get to watch the.
Speaker 0: Aircraft come in every day. And I've lived there. I've graduate. I went to Cal State, I graduated from Millikan High School. I've been in the area for quite a while, so I kind of know what the airport's been like. And lately it's.
Speaker 2: Been getting louder and louder and louder and. I'm afraid that if we allow this.
Speaker 0: Facility to come in, that it's going to really reduce the quality of life in my neighborhood. And one thing I have to say about the fourth District is it's a very beautiful place. It's got a lot of very beautiful homes.
Speaker 2: We pay a lot of.
Speaker 0: Property taxes over there. So if this facility comes in and it impacts on the quality of life of the residents, it's going to definitely impact on the.
Speaker 2: Value of the homes in.
Speaker 0: That area, which is going to have a direct.
Speaker 2: Impact on the taxes that are collected.
Speaker 0: So from that viewpoint, I would like for you to consider, uh, you know, not passing this item because I would like to see this thing stopped. My kids went to Michigan school. You know, we're kind of used to when the jets come over, we quiet down. It's the main runway for landing. And I'm really afraid if you start getting that general going on, a lot of these general aviation aircraft use the same runway, you know, the larger ones, the corporate jets, because it's the longest runway. And that traffic is going to increase as they come into the United States and use this customs facility. And it's going to really affect and impact the quality.
Speaker 2: Of our life in the fourth District.
Speaker 0: So I am definitely opposed, and I hope that you will consider that trying to trying to make things good for the residents of Long Beach, because we do have a lot of voting power and we are going to consider who votes to go ahead with this. And, you know, I like Jet Blue. I've used Jet Blue, okay. But I don't want a customs facility in there. And I'm really afraid of the general aviation traffic that increases that could occur. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Mr. Mayor. City council members. City staff. You know, I remember a body of people like yourself back in the eighties. They wanted to do what was right for Long Beach and. They made a mistake. They voted for those eight and 16 unit apartments over on the east side and throughout the city. They thought that was a good idea because it would increase taxes to the city coffers. You can make a mistake. This is real important. And your vote tonight will show the community how you keep your promises. You remember the promises. You gave it freely. You gave them freely. That was it was on the campaign trail. You were asked your position on the airport noise ordinance and you couldn't wait to get it out. I'm going to protect that noise ordinance, so help me. I'll do whatever it takes, because it also protects the neighborhood quality of life. We are here tonight to keep that promise. You can't have it both ways. You can't have quality of life. Protect the neighborhoods. And then have a study like this and start that ball rolling. I suggest. I urge you that you receive and file this. How many international airports do we need? See, we've got John Wayne. We've got L.A.X.. How many more do we need to. All our airports need to be international airports. Isn't that enough? There are two people that are much wiser than than us. Our assistant city attorney and our city prosecutor, they're really wise on this subject and what they say. And they've spoken to you and they've said it's not if, but when our noise ordinance is going to be challenged. If you proceed tonight and vote for this study, you're starting that ball to be rolling in and it will be on you. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Good evening, Mr. Mayor. And Council John Mellow, Los Altos, Senator. Adjacent neighborhoods. And it's kind of like a reunion. I know so many people here from so from so, so long ago and I know a lot of you weren't here. I'm not going to repeat what everyone has said tonight, but my neighborhood's concern is not financial feasibility. It's the noise ordinance feasibility. And we're not against JetBlue. I know probably everyone in here has flown JetBlue. It's not about jobs. JetBlue's has their slots. They're going to keep on flying those slots. It's just they're going to be going to different places and hopefully not international, because we really feel in my neighborhood and across the city that the noise ordinance will be challenged if you proceed down this road. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Hi, I'm Jeanie Williamson and I live at 4228 Pine Avenue in the lower Cerritos area of Long Beach. And I wasn't going to speak tonight, but a couple of things have come up that it's really hard for me to obviously be quiet about. This is about a feasibility study, according to Long Beach report. In the first speaker, the first speaker that was here tonight, there's already been one, if not two other feasibility reports. So I know when we all get done speaking that that is your opportunity that as city council members to speak up on the issue. And I want to know exactly what you expect to find out in another feasibility report that you don't already know unless it's just that they did not give you the answers that you wanted to hear. The other point that since I was back here also in the eighties and went through all this process again, that makes me so sad is how JetBlue is pitting neighbors against neighbors. You know, I've sat up there and I'm sitting next to people that are a pro getting this feasibility study. And I can't stand it anymore in that they think of divide and conquer. An incident is is like if JetBlue is such a good neighbor, why do they have a baggage handler coming up here, this poor gentleman, and thinking that he's going to lose his job? You know, we don't want to decrease the airport. We don't want the airport to leave. And the Chamber of Commerce is up here thinking like, we're not pro-business. Oh, excuse me. No one in Bixby Knolls or nobody in Rosarito or nobody in Cal Heights have businesses in Long Beach. We all have businesses. We support businesses in Long Beach. Why are they pitting us against them? It's not the issue is the quality. Like what? I have a bigger question to the Chamber of Commerce is why do you not care about our quality of life in Long Beach? We live on this flight path. And as a point of clarification, because I'm a good neighbor, I am a good neighbor on my block, captain. I'm active in our local organization. That Lakewood Village is not on the flight path. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker. And before we get to the next speaker, obviously applause is okay, but anything beyond applause, guys, as far as booing and other things, please. None of that. Not appropriate in this discussion. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 9: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Ms.. Vice Mayor. Appreciate the opportunity to exercise the First Amendment. Right? Right, sir. Longtime resident of Long Beach. My name is Kevin Mceachran. I was born and raised here. They had a business here for 43 years. I have lived in Long Beach continuously and are very supportive of this feasibility study and in fact the establishment of the office facilities here. I think just a couple of things should be should be mentioned again, that probably were mentioned earlier in our in our public comment period. Number one is all of the flights, whether they're domestic or international, will be governed by the ordinance which we all seek to protect. So the ordinance, in fact, does not discriminate. If you're a domestic flight or international flight, everything falls under the same ordinance, which, again, we've protected many times here. I think we had we had a mayor not too long ago, Beverly O'Neill, who talked about the future of Long Beach. She talked about trade, technology and tourism. And I certainly believe that the issue here before you tonight is is promoting all of those. We have a very diverse ethnic community here as well. And I think that linking Long Beach Airport to Mexico to Central American destinations is a great thing. I think that we need to look at. The difference, you know, you might say, well, San Jose, Costa Rica, for instance, one of the ladies mentioned here, I think, during one of the comment periods. That's a long ways from here. Well, it's about the same distance as New York or Boston or Anchorage, which JetBlue, a great corporate customer and partner for the city of Long Beach, serves presently. So it's not like we're taking larger aircraft going further than than we have at the present time for the series of flights that we do operate out of Long Beach Airport. And I think it's important we look at those figures. Facts in an unemotional way and in fact, support this resolution tonight to do the feasibility study. The only further comment I have is sometimes would think those things go into feasibility studies and consultant studies at Long Beach . They take forever. I'm hoping that this wraps up in a in a not an inordinate period of time so that we're aware and you good folks on the city council can can vote to approve this FISA facility. So thank you very much. And enjoyed being able to contribute here tonight.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 2: Eric Garcia and city council members. My name is James Ewart. I'm the secretary treasurer for the Airline Pilots Association International.
Speaker 0: Would you mind moving your might just a little bit? Thank you.
Speaker 2: Council 199 for Long Beach and I'm also a captain for JetBlue Airways. I'm also a fourth generation Southern California who grew up in this area. I live on the approach path to runway three zero. My father was a stress engineer for McDonnell Douglas on the Y C 15 program, bought the house, put us through college and is now enjoying a nice retirement based on that service with Douglas and eventually Boeing. I have aircraft flying over my house and fortunately at 1600 feet most of the day, Long Beach. And as a resident of Huntington Beach, I also get the pleasure of having all the traffic going into John Wayne from the northwest, crossing my house at 5000 feet, and all the aircraft coming from the Pacific and from South America going to L.A.X., crossing over my house at 7000 feet. So if we were here to debate increasing the number of slots into Long Beach, changing the noise ordinance, I would not be here in this uniform on my day off, willfully saying that I think this feasibility study is warranted. If you look at John Wayne Airport, when they added an FAA facility over there, there was no bomb rush to get international opportunities in there. In fact, you only have one U.S. airline that's flying an international route out of there in that Southwest and one Mexican carrier. And that's it. None of the earlier airlines from South America or anywhere else are trying to get any change to the noise ordinance to get into that FISA facility. In fact, it's underutilized right now. So for JetBlue to say that they'd like to use some of the slots they currently have to fly international destinations, I think is the issue at hand and needs to be totally supported. If it's a change to the noise ordinance, then that's an entirely different matter and I wouldn't support that. Thank you very much.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Honorable Mayor, City Council members. Just because we are again faced with the desire to make changes to the Long Beach Airport. I'd like to, first of all, take this away from being about JetBlue, even though they're the ones who made the request. You've all received a package with historical reasons why we do not need another study and the impact any changes could have on our noise ordinance. As many of my neighbors have stated and some probably more will state any changes, puts our air noise ordinance at risk. My question to you is why do we need another to spend more money on another study? It is. Is it because that study showed no economic benefit for the city and puts the airport at financial risk, as stated by Joe Merritt, Dino Economists. The economic impact was left out of the study because the impact of the visitor expenditures on the Long Beach economy will be small. A few of his supporting comments and remarks include. Most of the anticipated 150,000 international passengers will be leisure, leisure travelers, a large number of them will be U.S. citizens and live within the region having little impact on the expenditures beyond those within the airport facilities.
Speaker 2: Foreign travelers are likely.
Speaker 8: To use the airport as entry into SoCal rather than visiting Long Beach per se. Since foreign passengers are leisure travelers, their destination.
Speaker 2: Is not a convention.
Speaker 8: Hosted in Long Beach. As for flight crews, the numbers will not include were not included since their proposals to add foreign flights to domestic flights, which I think some of you already felt going to D.C.. I think somebody has said. The current study that we already have from Fresca. Their recommendation is, as we read, that is a review of the airport's funding capacity and the financial feasibility and risks associated with the FISA project indicate that the airport should require and this because we can't afford to do it, a significant capital funding commitment from JetBlue using its reserves for the project. In other words, we already know the airport's encumbered until 2025 because of other projects to a commitment from JetBlue to pay all the own expenses for the facility. Airport and city are on the hook. Basically, if that does not work out or if, let's say, the market shifts and international is no longer needed. Who's going to pay for that? We are. Three. A reserved right to allow other carriers to use the office in a fair manner with reasonable fees charged to offset JetBlue's funding and own obligations. So this puts not only our noise ordinance at risk, like the 2002 lawsuit, but it also puts our city at financial risk. I think the AOPA, a gentleman just said right now they're not even utilizing John Wayne. So what happens if we can't utilize Long Beach Airport with a FISA? Who's going to pay? Again, this is not about JetBlue. We all agree JetBlue is a fine business partner in Long Beach who came here to with the knowledge of our noise ordinance and the knowledge that we do not have in FISA. If you follow the guiding principles, it was left for all of you.
Speaker 0: I'm sorry. Time is.
Speaker 8: Okay. Please vote now.
Speaker 0: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please. My name is Richard Ivey. My address is on file.
Speaker 2: I'm President Las Vegas Neighborhood Association.
Speaker 0: I had a friend come to me and ask me about moving to Long Beach. What do I say to him? How do I ethically address this issue? L You live in my neighborhood. Do I do I tell him we have 41 flights a day and we have a have a current noise ordinance that we've tried to enforce . Do I ethically tell him to come and buy a house in Long Beach? This good friend. Do I be honest with him? Do I say, well, guys, are you got to come down here every four years and we got to re visit this issue. You know, you guys know the history of this. You know what it involves.
Speaker 2: You know that it could turn into 136.
Speaker 0: Flights a day. Do I say the truth and say, you know, I think he'd be making a mistake. I think he should.
Speaker 2: Look someplace else to live. That's the honest, ethical answer that.
Speaker 0: I would give to my friend. And now you have to sit here tonight and vote and.
Speaker 2: Make an honest ethical answer.
Speaker 0: I can't go away and say, Well, we're still waiting for the city council to decide they're going to drag this out for a whole long time. You need to decide. You need to. You need to give. It's all about respect. It's about respect for our neighborhoods. It's about respect for our college students. I was a student at Cal State Long Beach. We stopped class twice an hour, a couple of times an hour because we couldn't hear the professor when the planes were going over. I don't know what I'm going to tell my friend, but what you decide tonight will definitely determinant. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 8: Good evening, honorable members of the Council of Turkistan in Long Beach Airport Association. Good evening. First, thank you for talking about this subject and for taking the time that you took to wait until Councilman Supernova was in office. Thank you for the city attorney's and the prosecutor's role and going out in the community and taking input. That shows good faith. We're here to support you tonight. Our business association, over 200 businesses at the airport, over 18,000 employees tonight. They're represented here. I think the last time we met in this council, when the motion was delayed, it wasn't as balanced. And I think that what you see tonight in the audience is a balanced input. What I hear in the room a lot tonight is a lot of fear. A lot of fear of the unknown. Questions about feasibility of finances, who's going to pay for it. I hear discussions about noise and how that's going to be managed. I encourage you to move this matter forward and study all those issues. There's no risk for you to do that before you come back, before any issue comes back for any FISA facility. You will have more facts. You will be able to provide a more educated decision, and there will be other steps to have this balanced group in the room tonight. But we're not here to talk about noise tonight. We're not here to ask for more flights. We're not here to ask for anything that the noise ordinance that's been in place for 20 years doesn't permit the businesses at the airport to operate under. We're just asking for the feasibility of studying how we can maximize the benefits that we can achieve under those regulations. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Next speaker. Sir, I think you're ready. You spoke first. Can I read one line? Sir, I cannot do it. I can't do. I have someone else in queue up behind and speak. Has to do with this. Sir, I can't. I can't do that. So I have to take the next speaker, please. Has to do with the gentleman. Sorry, that's not the process. I have to follow the process. So next speaker. But he'll be able to queue up at the end of the line.
Speaker 2: Yep. Name is Jim Meyer, 4109 Cedar Avenue. And all of you council members are going to vote for this thing. How about meeting at my house on my front patio during fly take off and then see if JetBlue's really an honest broker? I think JetBlue is a liar. I think they lie about their commitment to the the noise ordinance. No, they don't fly out over here. Down here. They fly right over my house. They fly down San Antonio. They fly down the Alamo. I mean, don't. Not Alamo. Yeah. Stewart. No, they do not keep their word. If they don't keep the word here, then how are we going to trust them down the road? Remember, you lie to me once, the fool or you. You lie to me twice. You guys are fools. Number two, you let the camel get its nose under the tent. Is that what we're doing here? Let the camel get his nose under the tent. So I suggest come over to my house during flight, take off and see if you think JetBlue is really, really a good neighbor in that respect. I just ask them. I call almost every day and complain about this. Of course, nobody hears your call. You speak to a recording, but please come over to my house. You're invited for wine at 4:00. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: City mayor. City Council. City staff. My name is Britney Steiner. I was born and raised in Long Beach. Long Beach has given me many opportunities. I am a homeowner, a business owner in Bixby, Northern California Heights, District seven and District eight. I also have a six year old son that it sends Longfellow Elementary. I have worked very hard to have what I've created as a young woman. We, as the community, have made Long Beach a better place. I wish I wish to keep it that way. I was a special that teacher near LAX Airport and then in the Lenox School District for five years. I have seen the consequences of having an international airport. The community, the people are very unhappy. The noise, the contamination, the illnesses and the value of the property is decreasing. I do not want that for this city. That community that we have built. I will defend my city and opposed to an international airport. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 3: Good evening. My name is Gloria Hemsley. I live at 6902 Seaway Circle in Huntington Beach. I think this is a curious situation where Long Beach is acting as if it's the hole in the donut. Your planes go right over my home. And I live in Seacliff, which is a rather nice community. And Huntington Beach. And I'm curious that we're not a part of what's going on here. If you're going to put an international airport in Long Beach, that's going to increase the flights over my home and many other people's homes in the Huntington Beach. Have you thought about that? Probably not, because you think you're the hole in the donut. You need to listen to your constituents tonight. They are here for themselves. I own a home also in Long Beach. I have a disabled son in that home. I visit. Many can't school frequently. And I was a teacher for many, many years. And I cannot believe the noise those teachers are putting up with. And those poor children are putting up with the noise. Again, you need to go beyond the city of Long Beach. You need to look around you. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker, please. My name is John Hemsley. I live in Los Altos. Excuse me. I'm very nervous. No problem. No problem. Couple of things I'm going to carry on a message from a friend of mine, a neighbor, Greg. And a comment on Kurt. He said that tonight we were equally represented here in the crowd. I completely disagree. I don't know the last time that this many people from a business that's directly affected has been here. I don't come here that often. I work a lot and I don't have the free time. But what I do know is that there was a line of 30 to 40 people outside that are residents of this town primarily that weren't given access to this meeting until other people left that most likely were residents. So for starters, when you guys are when you have an agenda that has so much community interest, maybe you should consider some manner to invite everybody that wants to be here present to voice their opinion, not the representatives of JetBlue. I use the airline. I think it's a good airline. I don't I don't agree. And my community, my neighbors have all talked to we don't agree with this.
Speaker 2: Moving.
Speaker 0: Forward. I'm going to now to carry on for Greg and I can't claim the legitimacy of this. This is an email from Curt Castagna. He is a. He is CEO or someone involved with one of the major companies. What is the place called? Greg Echoplex. This is an email that he sent out, as I understand, on July 1st. Our City Council and staff only hear from a vocal minority of 100 to 200 homeowners, often absent. Truth and fact. I can't I can't legitimize this comment, but this is from a corporate leader that has great interest at the airport. If this expansion of the airport has been such a great thing for our community, why didn't these ideas originate in the community? They originate in corporate offices that are looking to increase their financial gain. They're not thinking about us. I own my own business and I think about my financial gain through the efforts of my business. And when I pushed too far, people pushed me back in my community where I work, which is in L.A. and I think and I respond to that push because I have a conscience and I have ethics, but I'm not so sure that's what's happening here. Thank you very much. You, sir. Next speaker, please. Before. Before you go, are there other speakers that want to line up? Because I'm going to if not, I'm going to close the speakers list. Please line up if there's other folks I want to speak. Okay. That's okay. So continue, sir. Good evening. My name is Jim Carter.
Speaker 2: I'm a 50 year resident of Long Beach, the last 15 in California Heights. Mr. Mayor, council members, thank you.
Speaker 0: For this opportunity to speak with you tonight. In the mid.
Speaker 2: 1980s, there were a series of movies that were made that seemed to tell and retell and retold the Vietnam War. And there was a critic at one point that said, well, gosh darn it, we're going to keep retelling this story until we win that damn war.
Speaker 0: It's not unlike us having to continue to do feasibility study after a feasibility study in hopes that at some point it's.
Speaker 2: Going to deliver different results or the results that.
Speaker 0: Maybe this present council wants.
Speaker 2: Wants to hear. I will tell you that in light of the.
Speaker 0: Representative from the Chamber of Commerce who seemed to imply that the council should be concerned about the relationship that the that the city council has with businesses, I would submit.
Speaker 2: To you that this council should also be equally, if not more concerned with the relationship.
Speaker 0: That they have with their citizens and residents of the city. If this feasibility.
Speaker 2: Study is allowed to move forward, it would likely.
Speaker 0: Set into place a chain reaction of events that might very well likely change our present airport into an international airport. And if that were to happen, I would beg to for you.
Speaker 2: To consider the following.
Speaker 0: Results. If this airport were to expand into an international airport, it would have no positive impact on the economy of the city. There would be no moneys that would be generated from this facility that would be lining the city coffers or that would go to infrastructure or some of the other things that the city desperately needs. There would be no positive impact on the economy of the city. There would be no positive impact on the quality of education of our children. It would most likely do just the opposite. There would certainly be no positive impact on the quality of life of our citizens, especially those that live in the landing or take off parts of the airport. There certainly be no positive impact on our property values, nor would there be any positive impact on the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the city. I am not anti JetBlue. I like JetBlue. Like many of the other people who have spoken tonight, I have flown JetBlue. It was a very enjoyable experience. I only wish I could get from here to Houston in one solid way, but that's beside the point. And frankly, I like the airport. I love the airport. But I like the airport. I love the airport the way it is. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please. So what I'm going to do is I'm going to cut off the speaker's list. There's no one else in line. So the lady behind. Behind Reagan, which actually someone else back there. So I. Okay, so you will be the last speaker. Okay. Officially? Nope. That's it. Speaker's list is closed, please.
Speaker 13: Your Honor. Members, my name is Bob Gil. I'm the vice president of the Los Cerritos Neighborhood Association. You all have in your packets a letter that was coauthored by three neighborhood associations Los Cerritos, Castle Heights and Country Club Manor. We represent about 3000 homes in the Long Beach area, mostly within pretty much within the flight paths. One of the main reasons we are. I guess I'd say against this motion and don't want it to move forward is that we're concerned about unintended consequences. Yes, there is a noise urgency in place. Yes, there is a maximum of 41 flights. And of course, we all have heard and know that it used to be fewer flights and that's moved up and moved up, but currently it's at 41 plus the 25. Is that the unintended consequences of what might happen? I know others have brought it up. I just wanted to reinforce that it's not that the status quo is that is bad. May be for some people they're very much against the status quo. But we're concerned about not the status quo. We're concerned about what will happen, what the challenges might do, what could happen in the future. With a customs facility, there's a lot greater risks of what might happen. If there isn't a customs facility, then no one's going to sue to use more of it because it doesn't exist at John Wayne. As others have said, it's not being fully utilized. We spend millions of dollars to build it here, to staff it here, to maintain it here, and it isn't utilized. We're stuck with those costs and it just the unintended consequences are just not worth it. So please do vote no and just table this.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 7: Mayor Garcia, council members, thank you for taking.
Speaker 0: Time to hear us today.
Speaker 2: There's been so much misinformation permeating the fabric of this environment here. I can't even start to address that. My name's Louis.
Speaker 7: Anthony. I'm the general manager for JetBlue Airways here in Long Beach. I live in Keel Heights underneath the departure path for most of our aircraft and every airline. It flies out of here.
Speaker 0: As well as aircraft.
Speaker 2: Helicopters, small little propellers. My primary concern is the welfare and.
Speaker 7: Future of each of my crew.
Speaker 2: Members. We currently have around 700.
Speaker 0: Well-Paying jobs here in Long Beach. Most of.
Speaker 2: Our crew members do.
Speaker 0: Live in or near Long Beach.
Speaker 7: By the way, a number of my crew members are here today on their own time. We didn't make them come. They volunteered to come. And just to set one kind of record straight here.
Speaker 2: Myron, the baggage handler is actually a crew member who volunteered to come in here. And I think he's very proud to be here. He's also in law school, a law school that he.
Speaker 7: Can go to because he's gainfully employed by a good company.
Speaker 0: We want to continue. We want to continue.
Speaker 2: Providing that good job for as.
Speaker 0: Many crew members as we can. A number that we expect to.
Speaker 7: Grow if we're lucky enough to get an this.
Speaker 0: Facility. But even so, that's not why we're here today.
Speaker 7: We just want a feasibility study started. That's all. Let's find out what the truth is.
Speaker 0: Let's find out where it goes.
Speaker 7: And let's move on from today. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next speaker.
Speaker 3: Good evening, Honorable Mayor and City Council. I have to apologize. I might be a little nervous and stumbling here because I kind of threw out my prepared speech. Everything has been said over and over again. But I do want to reiterate just what I see as the main points. Again, it's not about JetBlue. It's not about being anti-business. In fact, you know, it is for business because we're not talking about just airport business. For example, my husband and I, we are apartment owners, landlords. And, you know, we have concerned tenants that are concerned about noise and air pollution. We have businesses in in Bixby Knolls and in Calle Heights and on the other side of the airport, restaurants that have outside seating that are concerned about airplanes coming over and disturbing the enjoyment of their patrons. Those are all businesses. So really, I mean, we're we're not anti-business in any in any way, shape or form. We are trying to protect the business that we have and that we are trying to grow. The other thing was that that I think it was a general counsel from JetBlue. He said, let's move ahead with this feasibility study because we have all these questions. Just to step back a bit. This is you know, tonight is not about deciding, you know, whether we want to challenge the ordinance or whether we want to protect it or how we might protect it. It goes back to the questions that JetBlue has and the questions that we have and the questions that you should all have and I'm sure you do have. From what I have learned and I and it's all in your packet, I believe that you've received the questions have been answered as far as the economic impact, the positive economic impact to the city. It's not it's not there. But the the financial challenge or the financial exposure to the city is definitely there if JetBlue decides to leave or their business goes down. And I almost gentleman that just spoke before me almost made a veiled threat. I think maybe, well, we need this because we want to protect the jobs that JetBlue right now has at the airport. That almost tells me that if they don't get it, they're not even sure if they're going to make any money here. And they might be they might be moving. So I want to also, just in wrapping up, I want to quote the article that was published in the Gazette by U Little, where Mr. Rodriguez, the airport manager, was quoted in saying future revenues from a customs facility will only serve to mitigate the cost of the facility and will not further enhance the airport's financial position. He also states that any other benefit, such as marketability, is negated by the fact that all flight slots are currently assigned. So why should the city put our neighborhoods at risk when only existing airport operators benefit from a customs facility?
Speaker 0: Thank you, ma'am. Time is up. Sorry about that. Thank you so much. Next speaker, please. I know you. Hi. My name is Thor Carlson. Should be on file with the clerk's office. I live in a wonderful neighborhood of a wonderful community. I live in Ridgewood Heights. I'm a part of the Greater Bixby Knolls community. A lot of you know me. I've volunteered for the city. I've been on the Cultural Heritage Commission. I have owned a small business in the city. I have volunteered at countless tree plantings, so thank me for all the fresh air over the years. I'm the past president of the Bixby Knolls Business Improvement Association. So again, I am not anti-business. I am pro community. I moved to this city 21 years ago. I chose this city because of the community, because of the environment, because of the people, because of the diversity. I didn't choose to live in Westchester by the lakes. You know, I didn't choose that. I chose this because we have a wonderful community here and my neighborhood is directly under the flight path, not like Lakewood Village, not adjacent to it is directly under the flight path. I'm, I believe, a mile and a half from the end of the runway. And when the planes fly over, it is loud. You pause the TV, you stop talking. You have to do all these things if you want to, you know, go on with your life in a reasonable way. What I see here is somebody mentioned it before, the camel's nose under the edge of the tent. If we do this feasibility study, it starts the ball rolling and the next step will be the push for the facility because it will be feasible to build it. There will be money to build it and it will get built. And then we will have to. Two choices will happen. We will. Either lose our we will our noise ordinance will be challenged and we will lose, as we have always lost historically on the noise ordinance. Every time it's been challenged, the flights have gone up and the impact to the communities and the neighborhoods has been dire. The other option is that. Miracle of miracles. The noise bucket, you know, the noise ordinance remains intact. Then we're going to lose all of our domestic JetBlue flights. They will move all of their flights to international. The convenience of that airport will completely evaporate for our communities and our neighbors and our friends. You know, it just won't be there anymore. It'll be great for vacationing Orange County ers, but it won't be good for the city of Long Beach. So I urge you not to even consider this and vote no on this immediately and stop it. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Good evening, Mayor Garcia and city council members. I'd like to say I'm delighted to be here, as did Mr. Land, but that's not quite accurate. I'm a 38 year resident of the eighth District. I had a 35 year career with the friendly skies, and I have been actively involved in Hush for 30 years. I've decided that what I'd like to do tonight to put on the record is the letter. I'm going to read the letter that I wrote to each one of you last night. As elected officials, your first priority should be to provide appropriate public safety to all citizens of Long Beach. Following that, your direction should be to protect your neighborhoods and all neighborhoods across this 50 square mile city. This particular decision on whether or not to further study and possibly approve the request for a Customs facility for Long Beach Air Show Airport should be an easy decision to make. That is, if you are not simply looking at the borders of your individual districts, but doing your due diligence on the history of our airport battles and looking at all Long Beach neighborhoods.
Speaker 3: As a whole.
Speaker 1: Long Beach is a city of neighborhoods, many neighborhoods that are strong, established and in several areas historical. The challenges and the litigation battles that Long Beach confronted from 1985 to 2006 should be a tool that you personally use when determining your vote. Each of you have received a packet of documents that follow the litigation journey from the mid 1980s to the most recent assault of 22. Each of the nine districts and the mayor's office have been invited to sit with those of us who have traveled this path for nearly 30 years. Whether you chose to engage at that level or not, educating yourself with the paths of the past, with the paths of the past should be your top priority. Any enhancements to Long Beach Airport that encourage future challenges or litigation threats should be denied. What serves the population as a whole? Not the few annual family trips to Cabo should be your deciding factor. I truly do not know how to make it any clearer for you. Long Beach International will not improve. Public safety concerns within your districts, will not enhance retail opportunities for your constituents, will not grow recreation activities for your families. And is one of the respected economic economists from our own Cal State, Long Beach has stated the economic impact to our city will be minimal at best. I recognize that there are a lot of shoulds within the body of my message. A word no one likes to hear directed at them, but one that we could all live by when it comes to common sense and doing our best to support strong, healthy, vibrant communities for Long Beach to raise our families. If you feel you need to better understand the repercussions and possible unintended consequences, then I encourage you to meet with your city attorney or your city prosecutor. And my time is going to be up. So I'll put the rest of the comments up online at Long Beach Neighborhoods, first, wsj.com. And you have a feasibility study. Read it. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. And our last speaker, please.
Speaker 1: Good evening. I live in Cao Heights. The airport is basically my backyard. I hear the blaring, annoying noises all the time. The loud noises has shocked everyone, including students trying to learn. Learning is important because without learning we will have an ignorant society and we need our society smart because we need to be able to communicate through writing and we need a smart society and make smart choices. The second reason we don't need to have an international.
Speaker 3: Terminal is because of.
Speaker 1: Pollution. If we have an international.
Speaker 3: Terminal, we can.
Speaker 1: Increase the population of people with asthma. The third.
Speaker 3: Reason is because Long.
Speaker 1: Beach is not big enough to have an international.
Speaker 3: Terminal.
Speaker 1: Unlike Los Angeles, San Diego, New York, etc. and the Long Beach Airport is in the middle of the city, which makes it easier for the residents.
Speaker 6: Of Long Beach and other.
Speaker 1: Nearby cities to hear the planes take off. I like to understand that this international terminal is a horrible idea because of pollution and noise distractions. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Okay. Thank you. A lot of testimony there. Thank you all for that. I'm going to move on now and just go through the speaker's list. We have a current motion and a second on the floor was made by Vice Mayor Lowenthal and Councilwoman Stacey Mango. Vice Chair Lowenthal, do you want to speak to that or you want to just go down the list that we have currently? Okay. The second councilman, Mongo, you're going to go down the list. Do you want to speak at this time? Oh. Okay.
Speaker 6: First, I want to recognize everyone for coming out tonight. I really, really appreciate it. I know that I've been reading some of the online posts related to this matter. I've also been receiving many emails, along with talking with constituents at concerts and parks and other events around town where there's this very split idea. The idea of the international terminal is split. But what I haven't seen until tonight was a huge distrust in the idea of getting information. I do appreciate that so many people came out on both sides because I do know that on some of the comments related to the news articles, people who are for the international terminal just said, I don't want to go, I give up. It sounds like there's going to be a bunch of people that aren't going to be accepting of my ideas and that I'm going to be booed and I won't show up. And if you read those blogs and post, you'd read that, too. So I appreciate everyone on both sides for coming. Let's start with that. I want to address some of the comments that were made. I do care about the quality of life. There's always snippet comments from neighbors that say things like, Oh, you don't know, you don't live there. You haven't walked a mile in my shoes. You would see it differently if you lived where I live. I lived at Carson and Cherry, and my family still owns a home there and has owned a home there since it was initially built with my grandfather's hands. And my uncle lives in the flight path and my mother lives in the flight path. And back when I had free time, I used to lay in my backyard and sunbathe. Good thing we got rid of that with all the new responsibilities. No cancer for me, but all the gay airplanes would fly right over my backyard every single day as well. And by the way, I live by the 605 airport I'm sorry, the 605 freeway in a community adjacent to where my parents were, original homeowners and a605 freeway did not exist. Then they bought a home and a community and and that was built up around them. What I care about is. Facts I want to know. Pro and con. Financial viability, community viability, as mentioned by one of the residents here today. I want to know about all the components in the current market that we're in, which is much different than the previous time. And I want it from an independent source not influenced by any member of this city council. I want to review the other communities across the country that have added international terminals and whether it has been positive or negative for them. Because what I don't want is what has happened to us in the past with closed minded city council members that were anti-business. And now we have a Costco. Yes. Thank you for your Costco coupons. It sounds like you don't shop in Lakewood all the time. I'm sorry. In Long Beach, you shop in Lakewood or Signal Hill because now we have a Signal Hill. We have a Costco on every border of our city. We have a Home Depot on every border of our city because we were close minded to business. At least give everyone a fair shake. No one on this council is saying that they're going to vote yes or no when they have the information. But what I'm saying is I want the information for all of us to have a dialog about the facts, the specific facts of this environment today after the recession that we've had and the facts as I see them. So with that. I want to make one more comment. There was a discussion about how much more noisy the airport is than ever before and that some of our tenants are liars. And that's just not true. We have Decibel readers that are independent and operated. If I could get a moment from our executive director of the airport, could you tell us a little bit about those noise readers and the decibel meters that we have at the airport to protect our residents?
Speaker 8: Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of council and everyone in chambers tonight. We do have a total of 18 meters that read the noise levels around the airport at the ends of the runways. So that is data that is collected throughout the day and night and is made available to visitors to our website. We produce monthly, quarterly and annual reports that in essence reveals the type of operations that have occurred, the amount of noise that has been generated by those operations. And when there are violations, we have procedures that we follow to ensure that those violations are rather the violators are made aware. And if they're repeat violators and there are actions that we can take in the appropriate way through the city prosecutor.
Speaker 6: Thank you. I would like to say one more thing, just because I think it's important that we talk about facts. I love all of my neighbors. When neighbors say certain things that aren't factually based, I'm hesitant to want to correct them because I want to have a dialog. But so many neighbors said this today that I think it's a point worth mentioning. I want all of you to stay in the homes you're in. But quite frankly, if you moved, the city would actually increase its property tax revenue because of Prop 13 and your protections. We are not making a decision to get rid of you or move you. And it is not.
Speaker 0: All right, guys. Guys, everyone. I can't.
Speaker 3: As the budget director.
Speaker 6: I just have to tell you the facts.
Speaker 0: Okay? So, guys, thank you. And you are done, councilman. Okay. Okay, guys. Hey, everybody. We you know, we've we've been very good so far. We've got to respect everyone's opinions. Please. Councilman mangled everything else at this time.
Speaker 6: I just want to say that I hope that each and every one of you are going to be here for a dialog about the facts of it when we have them. And that I'm very appreciative of the house that I live in, in the flight path, along with every one of my family members. And it's a tough decision, but I think information is needed.
Speaker 0: Okay, next. Next, we have Council Councilman Austin.
Speaker 11: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I, too, want to thank everybody for coming out this evening. It's it's really nice to see so many of my neighbors here. I've had countless amount of conversations with residents. I exchanged emails of have had one on one conversations, whether it be at first Fridays in the coffee shops, in the parks. I recognize so many faces out here. It is it's really amazing to see so many neighbors here this evening. And yes, I've been very vocal about my concerns about moving forward with international an international or federal inspection station here at Long Beach Airport. I've heard both sides. The gentleman spoke earlier about his family coming and working in aerospace and McDonnell Douglas and Boeing. I share that history. I my family came here from Detroit and we made a good living in the aerospace industry. I think those are apples and oranges, though. We live in Long Beach and quality of life is is really the paramount factor of the decision before us here this evening. It is. It his neighborhoods over profit. We have a business who who moved to Long Beach under certain circumstances. And yes, the business requested that the airport be expanded and improved. And it was. And there is there was a lot of history and and struggles that went into getting that airport the most. I think one of the best looking airports in the country and unique airports in the country. I'm very proud of the airport that we have. Yes. There was a lot that went into making it the way it is. And then here we are several years later and we're asking for more. That's the nature of business. Businesses is about profit, and business is always going to ask for more. I want to commend the residents for coming out today and making a stand. I had prepared remarks, but I want to say that everything that I've just about prepared has been said so eloquently by our residents here today, the residents and in the eighth District , the residents in the fourth District, the residents who have struggled with this, this this this issue of airport noise for four decades are extremely informed on this issue, and oftentimes more so than our city council members. And so you guys did a great job today, so give yourselves another hand. Thank you. During our study session a few months ago in February, no one was ever, ever able to provide any assurances that our airport noise control ordinance is rock solid and can withstand any legal challenge. And it was said here many times on both sides that that airport can be our noise ordinance can be challenged at any time. Why open the door? Why do that? Why do that? Why? Why risk? I think the the the the the risk is greater than the reward. And that was actually outlined in the feasibility study. In October of 2013 by Fresca and Associates. It basically said that that that the there's extreme risk to security, to international threats and financial solvency of the airport. Why take that risk? I don't see it. The city council was previously concerned so much. I mean, and I think this council needs to also be consistent. Right. I can remember about two years ago, this this this this chamber was filled and it was there was plenty of media here. And we were so concerned about noise disruptions to certain neighborhoods to the extent that we passed an ordinance here restricting when ice cream trucks could play their music. And and and and my question is, does the the the potential noise disruptions of more airplanes flying overhead, other neighborhoods in our cities not merit the same consideration. QUESTION Somebody said here that the city that that it's our job to do our due diligence to to move forward with this feasibility study. I don't think it's necessary, and I don't think it's the city's job. Many of our neighborhood associations in my district, I've heard from leaders and residents and several of them, and you heard from a couple of them here today. You heard from the Little Cerritos Neighborhood Association. You heard from Country Club Manor. You heard from the Cow Heights neighbors, Ridgewood Heights, Jane Addams neighborhood, the Carmen Lidos. There are other neighborhoods that aren't represented here that that that that are impacted significantly and have great concerns about this, this, this issue moving forward. We are not only risk to our neighborhoods, and I think that's that's very important for us to understand here and to the residents and to property values. But there are financial security risks to the city as well. We are creating if we move forward with this feasibility study and we're open the door to doing that. I know you're hearing. Well, we just want to hear more get more information. Getting more information is opening the door. It's the next step. We've already taken great risk as a council already. I mean, we are undergoing some major improvements, things that I voted for. Our Civic Center project, we're moving forward with that. That is a significant risk. A new aquatic center. Belmont Pool. Over $100 million. Another significant risk. At some point we have to pump the brakes as a council and say and look to our neighbors and say, this is an understanding that our neighborhoods is our truly are our most valuable asset in our community, in our city. Given the volatility of the airline industry, I don't believe we can take another such risk, especially when the airport manager concluded in November 2013 that the federal inspection facility. Would increase the airport's financial exposure and also increase exposure to international threats. And what are those threats? You know what those threats are. I've heard loud and clear from my residents in my district that we don't want to play a game of Monopoly with one company. We don't want lobbies to be played in that game. So therefore, I will ask that we. Move forward with a substitute motion to receive and file this motion tonight.
Speaker 0: Thank you. I'll second. Okay. There's a there's a motion in a second to receive and file Captain Bronson. Did you want to continue or were you done?
Speaker 11: I did have a couple of questions. No, you know what? I'm going to hold my questions until later. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Okay. So there is a subsidy motion on the floor. And in the original motion on the floor, the substitute motion council member Austin. The original the motion by Vice Mayor Lowenthal. Next up to speak I have customary Ringo.
Speaker 4: Mr. Superdad, did you second that motion?
Speaker 8: Yes, I did. You want to.
Speaker 0: Go see who it was? Second by Councilmember Darryl. Super. Now. Hold on 1/2. Could you add the. Did you really push the temperature? No, no, we got it now. It wasn't coming through. Councilman Ringa.
Speaker 4: Well, I do want to thank all of you for being out here tonight. We've heard on both sides of the issue, and I received tons of emails and phone calls on both sides of the issues dealing with increased international flights. Because we are an international city and that's become a true international city. We are an international city. Our port made us an international city. We don't need to be an Internet city because of our airport. We already international, in fact. All right. If I were to say one about one of our models is the international hometown. And I'd like to keep my hometown with international as much as oxymoron as I think it is. But that's an that's another story. That's English. The other thing that I want to take also, I want to thank my mayor associations in my neighborhoods and my district, the Car Heights Neighborhood Association, the Los Cerritos Neighborhood Association, and all the leaders that they came here today. And also, I want to thank the business leaders and the JetBlue for coming out here, for sharing their viewpoints because it's important. This is part of democracy. We we listen, we assess, we evaluate. And then we make a decision based on what we've heard. A few months ago, there was a proposal put out on the floor to do a survey of the city in terms of what do the residency as important issues that we need to address. I did not support that that motion because I thought it was a waste of money being that we are in tough economic times, we don't have the money or the resources to conduct a citywide survey that basically addresses issues that we already know we have out there. It's just a matter of whether we as a city council can have the courage to move forward with some of those. This is one of those situations. I don't think that we have the resources nor the need to conduct another survey, another feasibility study, because we already had some visibility studies out there that have already told us feasibility studies. And he told us that is not economically feasible. We already have a study that told us that the airport is not going to really benefit from any increased revenue. It's only going to mitigate current facilities that are there. And the possibility of having increased income financial benefit from flights coming here is negligible in regards to whether people come here to visit Long Beach or visit somewhere else. Because Disneyland visit L.A., I don't know. What I do know is, is that if we propose this feasibility study and we go forward with it, we are putting endanger our noise ordinance and we are putting in danger our our flights because there is going to be a change. There will be change. And I don't want that. I love my airport. I love the way it is. And in saying that I love JetBlue. I fly JetBlue every opportunity. I have a chance. You know, I wish that they would reconsider their business plan to keep the east west flights because there's there's a lot of need for that. And I'm not so sure the benefit of a North-South business plan would be as beneficial as what they have now. So I'm still perplexed with that. So having said all that, I'm not I'm not convinced that our noise ordinance would be would not be jeopardized by a customs facility. And I am not willing to support anything that has a chance of negating something that significant to the quality of life of my residents. I do not support the customs facility. In the city of Long Beach. And I do not believe that we need to spend additional staff, time and resources studying this issue and therefore I do not support the need for a feasibility study. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next up is Councilwoman Mongo.
Speaker 6: Our current terminal was opposed by. All the members of this community that are booing tonight. And so. Yes. Okay.
Speaker 0: All right, guys. All right. Let's look. We got to. We have. Councilman Mongo has the floor, so please, councilman.
Speaker 6: And I'm very proud of the terminal we have today. And so with that, I will make a substitute substitute motion, authorize the city manager to proceed with the work necessary to determine the feasibility, financial and otherwise of a federal inspection services facility at the Long Beach Airport, and require that the study include a minimum of two community meetings, including the communities that will be most impacted by the potential facility so that they would have input, including their perspectives on including the surrounding neighborhoods, and that any decision regarding the Federal Inspection Services Facility require a full vote of the city council. Come back to City Council with that report.
Speaker 0: Okay. You click in the motion. Okay. There's been a motion in a second. So just to just to make sure that the substitute substitute. But Councilman Mongo is similar to the main motion with the change that it would include a minimum of two community meetings as part of the this part of the of the study of the feasibility that it is another part of that. Or was that the only.
Speaker 6: And that the community meetings include the neighborhoods.
Speaker 0: Include the neighborhoods. So that is the substitute substitute on the floor. The motions are closed. I still have speakers I'm going to keep continue to go down the speakers list. Councilmember Supernova.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. First of all, I'd like to echo Councilmember Austin's comments. Thank you all for being here tonight. There is nothing I can add to what you said here. You're very articulate, and it seems like we've done this before. We're getting good at it. I think the. The residents of the Fourth Council District have made it abundantly clear that they do not want this facility. So then you might ask, well, why not just do a study? We're not building the facility. And I think my response to that would be that it would not be ethical or probably legal for me to vote for a study of a facility that I know the residents don't want. Now it's been mentioned by my colleagues here that we received a lot of emails. We all got group emails. And at last count, there were over 370 of them for the study, and they were from all over the country. And in fact, the last one I got was at 9:08 p.m. by Jim Basin and a zip code is 33409. Now of those 370 odd emails, I saw ten from nine awake for one five and I didn't recognize a single one from my fourth council district. So I really have no input for the facility from my constituents. It was also mentioned about. Hearing about the facts. So I'll just give you a couple of facts. Years ago, we hired outside legal expertize to address these issues. If we are going to go up against the FAA on this, we should get legal advice on this. From an outside, sources say, hey, how will the FAA treat this ultimately? That we haven't done. I would think you would do that before you'd ever do a study. But since they don't want to do the study, I'll leave it to my colleagues to advise on getting legal advice. Finally, I just like to say I consider myself very pro-business. If if a constituent were to come to me and say, Hey, let's do a buy local campaign, I would say, you know, there's two parts that we can get you that campaign, but you have to make good on this promise that it's worthwhile to shop locally. You have to give a good customer experience. And, you know, otherwise you're killing me. If I promote you, you're killing me. Well, one week ago, JetBlue made a decision to take off at 3:52 a.m.. That was on June 30th, and they flew out of here. So this is just a practical aspect of being a council member. We have a a concert in the Park Municipal Band concert last Tuesday night, and that's what I get to hear from my constituents. Why in the world of that plane take off at three in the morning? So that's it's that's anecdotal, I realize that. But that is the life here that we're going to have to tolerate. And I know it is anecdotal, but you have to wonder if this is what they're going to do one week before a vote when maybe they should be on their best behavior. It just makes me wonder. It's like I said, you're killing me. It's really tough to support that. And as I said, everything else I was going to say tonight has been said. So for sake of time, I'll close my comments with that.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Next up, I have Councilmember Austin and then Councilman Price.
Speaker 11: Thank you. I will. I have a few questions for staff in that regard, in regards to the last feasibility study that was conducted in October of 2013. Can anyone tell us how long that study took to complete?
Speaker 0: Staff.
Speaker 8: I believe it took several months for all of the work to be completed, and that work was based on data from 2012 that was then combined to come back compiled in the 2013 study.
Speaker 11: So several months, meaning five, six, seven months.
Speaker 8: I'm not exactly certain of the time frame. We certainly can research that get back to you on that. But I believe that full process I can't.
Speaker 2: Say that right now. Council Member It was August of 2013 when the previous director stated he would do the survey and it was completed in November. So I'm about 2 to 3 months.
Speaker 11: Okay. Um. And in terms of the feasibility study proposed here this evening, what will be included in the scope of that study? Because I don't see anything in the staff report that that addresses the scope of study.
Speaker 8: The scope would entail ultimately six steps, the first of which would be the terminal enhancement facility definition. The second being facility planning and design. The third being project cost estimates. The fourth being facility demand and traffic forecasts. The fifth being financial proforma and funding plan. And the sixth being the feasibility report, which would be the compilation of steps one through five. That draft report on the feasibility of the potential project would then be brought back to City Council.
Speaker 11: So Mr. Francis and Mr. West, why wasn't that information included in this report to the Council?
Speaker 0: Mr. WEST.
Speaker 2: Yes. I don't believe that Mr. Rodriguez intended this to be a full on report. We used an internal consultant that we had on call. We didn't go out to a bid to get a consultant that does this type of stuff nationally. So I think this was just something a just a quick study that Mr. Rodriguez did to bring to our attention and bring the council's attention. So it certainly was not the study that we would do to bring the council for a vote.
Speaker 0: I think. Mr. Wise. I think Councilman Alston's.
Speaker 11: Go ahead. Yeah, my question is regarding the study before us being proposed as to what the scope of that study would be. He gave me six points and those six points aren't included in our packet here or staff report.
Speaker 2: Again, I do not believe that. Mr. Rodriguez says the study that we utilized back in August of 2013. It didn't use an outside consultant to use the consultant that we had on the payroll and was done really quickly in order to give us and the council a quick look at this. It was not a very, very comprehensive study using the appropriate consultant that would do this. And look nationwide. It basically just looked at one airport.
Speaker 0: Mr. West, I think let me I want to rephrase the question. I think Councilman Austin's question was, is that the six points that Mr. Bryant just went down as far as areas that the study could look at or areas that the feasibility would look at, that he says that they weren't included or in his in his council report. I think that's what he's saying. And his question was, is, why weren't they in the report? I think that was your question.
Speaker 8: So we are in our council agenda item. We're asking simply for direction of city council on whether to proceed with the feasibility study in the last couple of days. I've compiled this information to determine what those steps would be so that if the question were asked tonight, I would be able to give you that information.
Speaker 11: Potentially on their motions on the floor to approve something that we don't even know what we're really studying yet. But. I tell you, I have a real problem with that. And I just appeal to my my, my, my colleagues for greater wisdom here. Again, inconsistency. There also being some some press reports that the industry experts that that the city hires would be would work with JetBlue on a feasibility study. Is that a that actually correct will. Will the JetBlue be a major stakeholder in the feasibility study?
Speaker 8: They would only be involved in the portion that would surround the funding. Of the facility in terms of having discussions about the scope of the funding for the facility.
Speaker 11: Okay. And what other airport users in other stakeholders be engaged in this study. Since the. The federal inspection station would affect the airport beyond just JetBlue. If so, what other stakeholders will do you foresee being engaged?
Speaker 8: That is not my understanding. I believe that we would have some discussions with the general aviation community, but specifically I think the discussions with JetBlue would likely be the the most involved. Again, that would really revolve around the funding concepts.
Speaker 11: Okay. I'll get back to that. And what about the residents who live in the impacted neighborhoods that are that are that have spoken here this evening, the many neighborhood associations? Is there any any effort to engage them in terms of your feasibility study.
Speaker 8: Or with the motion that is currently on the floor? There are two meetings that would be a minimum of two meetings that will be required to be held within the community. And so those meetings would be held and the input from the community at those meetings would be gathered and presented to council.
Speaker 11: Well, who would do the meet the meetings? Would that be the airport or would that be the airline?
Speaker 8: We would take the direction of city council on that in terms of who to involve.
Speaker 11: The motion before us is unclear and so maybe we can clarify that. I don't think two to neighborhood meetings or community meetings is is enough based on what you see here. I think the process is the process is fatally flawed from the very beginning. The fact that we have this this kind of division leading up to this, this this, this issue, and we've known for months that that we were we were headed here. JetBlue has known for months that we were headed here. They've done very little outreach, very little community education. And I'll just just put it out there. Mr. Francis, I've invited you to come to community meetings on a few occasions, and you haven't even been available. I don't think we should be moving forward with this because our community hasn't been engaged.
Speaker 0: Mr. Webster cued up.
Speaker 2: Mr. Mayor, council members, I want to make it very, very clear that Mr. Francis, the city council, directed us not to get involved in promoting this or studying this until we were told to the council to do that. So I specifically have given Mr. Francis direct input not to go out and do community meetings and do anything that would lobby for or against this. We had a gag order. Until tonight.
Speaker 11: I didn't listen. I made the motion, Mr. West, and I respectfully disagree. It wasn't a gag order. There was there was no gag order. There was no engagement with the airline on this issue. Nobody said anything about not talking to the community. Right. And so I just don't don't don't agree with you on that. I do have another question. What was the cost of the feasibility study conducted in 2013?
Speaker 8: That study was conducted primarily by Frank and Associates, which was on retainer by the airport at that time. So we were trying to determine what the amount of hours was that went into into that work. But I don't believe we have a specific answer on that for you this evening.
Speaker 11: So with the outline that you have laid out with the six points, which I don't remember and I don't have before me, so I really don't know what's being studied here. I would ask, do you have any sort of a ballpark figure on what it would cost to to to do the feasibility study that is before this council today?
Speaker 8: So because we would go through the purchasing process, either an RFP or an RFQ process for the work to be conducted, I would not be able to put a dollar figure out there in terms of what it might cost, because there could be firms that are listening to us, watching us right now that might propose to perform that work and giving them any sort of inside information would would not be in the spirit of the purchasing process.
Speaker 11: Okay. And so if the city council approves moving forward this evening, which is the motion before us, would the contract to hire the industry experts still need to come back to the City Council for approval before proceeding with the feasibility study. After you get your piece accused.
Speaker 8: It would be dependent upon the cost in terms of the the overall scope of the project, what the cost would be that would determine whether we would need to return to city council for further, further approval or.
Speaker 11: Direction. Councilmember Mongeau, would you be open to a friendly amendment to allow for that study to come back before the Council? Before final approval.
Speaker 6: You're asking if the bid would come back.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 6: And I think that there was one other thing you were going to add. You said you were going to add.
Speaker 11: Well, I have about six other things that I want to show you.
Speaker 6: Let's let's do them as a group. Let's hear them as a group.
Speaker 11: You want to hear them as a group? Yeah. So do you remember the six points that he just raised?
Speaker 6: I met with staff in advance, to be sure I was prepared on the item. Yes.
Speaker 11: So you know what the scope of the study is?
Speaker 6: Yes.
Speaker 0: All right, guys, we're trying to please. We can't do that.
Speaker 6: We just have different style.
Speaker 0: I just I just want to make sure. Okay, so hold up, guys. Councilman Austin, you have the floor. And I think are you asking Councilman Mongo a question to the motion? Hey, you're my son.
Speaker 11: Yes, I'd like to add that it come back because I think it was very, um, we, we, we stated very clearly a few months ago when this issue was before us that we wanted this to be a council driven process. And I think this in the spirit of transparency and the fact that we have so much community interest here, that it would it would it would behoove us to to have a transparent process.
Speaker 6: I would like to have a transparent process. The concern I would have initially and I'd have to think about it for a minute, is that I don't want to change the process for a particular item and not for others, so that council members would have the ability to lean on particular bidders on the contract. We want someone who is completely independent and not for or against one side or another. And so I think that I'll consider that. And I will let you know before we vote. I hear you have others, though, and I know we have quite a long speakers list.
Speaker 11: Okay. I'd also like to make I've got several friendly amendments. We'd like to of a forecast of additional general aviation flights to be included in this feasibility study, including corporate and personal jets that will utilize the federal inspection facility.
Speaker 6: I definitely would would agree to that. I would expect that that would be included.
Speaker 11: I just want to make sure the city attorney's.
Speaker 0: Can I have. Mr. Stewart, are you writing these down as as if the councilman is kind of accepting them? Are you writing them down so we can. Yes.
Speaker 2: Well, I have the general aviation study for use of the FISA is accepted. And the any contract for the study to come back for approval has not been accepted.
Speaker 0: That's correct. So far. And I want to make sure the second of the motion is Vice Mayor Lowenthal. So I'll ask you if Councilman Mongo just accept that that friendly. You're fine with that. Okay. Back to Councilman Brosnan.
Speaker 11: Okay. Secondly, I'd like to amend the feasibility study to include a risk assessment of potential threats to the airport noise ordinance and to a plan to indemnify impacted neighborhoods from environmental and health impacts. Should the airport noise ordinance become invalidated?
Speaker 6: That makes sense. I think that the wording on it could be a little bit more objective. Maybe if it should show the assessment of the risk whether or not the noise ordinance is at risk, not say that it is in the motion. But I think that Charlie can.
Speaker 11: Well, it says I said potential threat.
Speaker 6: Potential. Thank you. Right.
Speaker 11: So and I haven't written down I'll be more than happy to submit them to the clerk and make sure that the city attorney.
Speaker 0: But we've got to go through each one if we're going to do it. So once that councilman else Mr. de attorney, I want to show you have that. So we're organized here.
Speaker 2: And I will need some clarification. I got the potential threats to the noise ordinance. And then the second part of his.
Speaker 11: Any plan to indemnify impacted neighborhoods from environmental and health impacts should the airport noise ordinance become invalidated?
Speaker 2: And I'm not sure what you mean by indemnify. I mean, that's pretty wide open. I don't know how you what options or what it is your direction you're looking for.
Speaker 11: Well, I'm here looking out for the best interests of neighborhoods and residents who are impacted in the flight path. There were efforts in the past to mitigate noise to to many homes in the impacted area. We'd like to see that that included and potentially expanded. But we need to understand what the feasibility is of of of doing that.
Speaker 8: I.
Speaker 0: Mr. City to make.
Speaker 2: It a mitigation of noise impacts.
Speaker 11: So you know you don't you don't have to use the word indemnify. How about mitigating?
Speaker 2: Yeah. Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 0: So I think I think the at the ask is councilman to look at if if there is.
Speaker 3: A high risk.
Speaker 0: If there is risk and if there is somehow damage that done to the quality of life, to the neighborhoods because of the impact of the noise ordinance or change, what would mitigation possibly look like for those neighborhoods? Is that right?
Speaker 11: Yes, absolutely.
Speaker 0: Okay. So so that is an ask of the maker of the.
Speaker 11: Motion and who would pay for it, by the way.
Speaker 6: And let's make it neighborhoods and schools.
Speaker 0: Okay. So it impacted neighborhoods and schools. So, Councilman Mongo. Yeah. Okay. So you're accepting that friendly Vice Mayor Lowenthal. Yes. Okay.
Speaker 11: And then the third friendly amendment that I'd like to include or the fourth is a. A review of the current city resolution defining the operations requirement to maintain slots for airline slots.
Speaker 6: I think I'd want that one to be separate, a separate study, because I don't know. I think we need that.
Speaker 11: We can come back with an agenda item.
Speaker 6: I think let's do that somewhere. Okay.
Speaker 11: And you. We can work on that together.
Speaker 6: Great.
Speaker 11: The the fifth would be a contract with the selected consultant to conduct a feasibility study analysis. They must come back to the City Council for approval with the cost for conducting this study. And I think we've done that already. In the original.
Speaker 0: Mr. City attorney. I think that was actually your first motion. One that was the first. That was the first one that Stacy is not accepted, at least at this point. Correct. Do you have any more, Councilman?
Speaker 11: Yes, indeed. To include a study of any additional security list risk associated with international flights.
Speaker 0: So inclusive of security risks in having international flights.
Speaker 6: So I'm going to defer to the executive director. I know that we've been working a lot on security at the airport, and there's some things that cannot be published at this time. Is that going to be a additional issue?
Speaker 0: Mr. Francis?
Speaker 8: Yes. I don't see that as being an issue. I mean, we certainly can look into that. And there is information out there with respect to airports that have international facilities and the type of security enhancements that come along with those. So that's certainly something that we can include.
Speaker 6: For those of you who don't know, we're undergoing a comprehensive security assessment now that we cannot completely share because then our adversaries would know our security procedures. So that'll be a yes. Thank you. Council Member Austin.
Speaker 0: And then Councilor Austin, you still have the floor. Do you have any other additional questions?
Speaker 11: I don't have any additional questions. I thank council member Mongo for accepting the friendly amendments. I am still not convinced that this is the best move for the city moving forward and. I would really. I really think you should think long and hard and reconsider this motion because. Once the Pandora's box is open, there's no closing it.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Now. Next up, we have Councilman Price.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I actually have a question for staff. We've heard some comments tonight and some concerns regarding legal challenges. And I think Councilman Superstar made a reference to possible outside counsel. I know that staff has done a great amount of work on this and especially our city attorney's office. Can you speak at all to the legal fears or the speculation regarding legal challenges and what your thoughts are on that?
Speaker 2: Let Mike Mays address this, who's been dealing this for a number of years. Here. Garcia Councilwoman Price, I'm not sure where you want me to go with this, but we are in a much better position than we were when the ordinance was adopted in 1995. As far as legal challenges, because we do have some protection for our ordinance now by virtue of Congress's enactment of the Anka Law and our specific exemption from the normal rules that would apply at most airports throughout the country. So in that respect. We are in a better position. I think it would be speculative, quite frankly, on either side of the argument to know what would happen if an IFRS facility came in. My experience with the airport on these types of matters over the last 20 years, it all seems to be when we get a challenge , it's economically driven. So if there was an economic reason for an outside carrier to challenge the ordinance, that's possible. When we look at potential challenges, what we look at is not just the possibility of someone suing the city, but whether or not they could do that successfully. And as I said, we are in a better position now than we were when we embarked on restricting the number of flights in the eighties, because we do have some additional protections. But I don't think anyone could give you any assurance on a going forward basis that no matter what we do, there's not a possibility of a lawsuit being filed against the city.
Speaker 3: Okay.
Speaker 1: Thank you for that clarification. And Councilman Austin, this question's really directed at you. I understand that you would be opposed to doing a study to begin with, but the amendments that you've just articulated for Councilwoman Mongeau and reach an agreement reached a meeting of the minds between the two of you. In terms of those amendments, is it your understanding or your position that those amendments would mitigate some of the issues that you're concerned about in regards to the study? What's the purpose behind the amendments if you're going to be voting or if you're going to be opposed to it anyway? I'm just curious.
Speaker 11: Well, we went through a process in the eighth District, met with a number of my residents, convened an eighth District advisory group on this particular issue. We met about a week ago, and these are amendments that our residents wanted to see and in any sort of feasibility study. But to be quite honest with you, they don't want to see a feasibility study, but it has to go forward. It would have to go forward. And we requested to have these these items study. Mm hmm.
Speaker 1: Okay. So basically, the amendments that you've proposed are a product of some community outreach that was done. Absolutely. Okay. And in regards to that, I do I just want to take a moment. You know, I voted with you. On the item that delayed the feasibility study until Councilman Supernova was seated. And I felt very strongly at the time that that was a very well-reasoned decision to wait because it was important for me and I believe for the city to have the fourth District residents represented through an actual vote by their representative. So I'm glad that we did that. Having said that, I also as as a person who voted in favor of that, my intent at the time that I voted on it and my belief and understanding was that what we were saying to staff was very clearly, do not do anything until Councilman Supernova gets here. So I want to. Really come to their defense a little bit in the sense of this community outreach concept, because I think staff acted directly in response to what my intent was when I voted on that item, which was, do not do anything, don't do outreach, don't talk to JetBlue, don't talk to anybody. I want to wait until my colleague is here and then we can start the process if we're going to start the process. And I think they did that literally. So the fact that there wasn't hasn't been any outreach from that point until now, I think is probably a result of our directive. I could be speculating about that, but I think our directive was very clear to them not to do anything. I know that in the meantime, community organizations have met. Groups have met. I myself have had multiple meetings with people who have asked to meet with me during that time. But I know that council was basically directing staff to freeze. And so, you know, I do want to stand up for and defense of staff on that issue and say that I think had we asked for community outreach, they would have done it, but we asked them specifically not to. So with that, thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Councilmember Richardson.
Speaker 8: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So I'm glad to see the direction that the conversation is has taken. I think it's it's more pragmatic and reasonable and fair to find some sort of a compromise motion. So I'm happy that that's happened. The last time this came, the city council, after the discussion, you know, I thought the most reasonable, fair, pragmatic approach was to wait until the fourth District was seated. And so now that it's happened. So I will be in support of the compromise motion. I just have a couple questions quickly. So what is the actual timeline of this study? We believe that based upon the the early stage, which would be working through the purchasing process and then actually bringing a firm or firms on board that will complete the work. And then having all of that work compiled to bring back to city council is roughly six or seven months because of the procurement process on the front end. Okay. And then and I understand that that that they will come back with is it going to come back with, hey, we're going to do a facility and this is what it looks like and this what it costs or is going to have some options for it. What I would expect is that it will take a an all encompassing look at the feasibility of such a facility being put into place at the airport, and that we would provide a breadth of information to you that was compiled throughout the process on the financial side, on the scope and scale of what a facility might look like in terms of the scale, potential location and the funding sources, pretty much an all encompassing look at the project is what would come back to you. And we would have industry experts that perform that work in the audience to answer specific questions. And we would take your direction from there. Thank you. So so, yeah, I will come back with different options that we can look at. In terms of scope and scale, it will take a look at what is what is optimal in essence. So that's one optimal option. Or like other alternatives, we we would likely come up with with a couple of options in terms of also what the Customs and Border Protection requirements are on minimum scale, things of that nature. Okay. And then just the last thing and this is the council member, Mango, thanks for the part about engaging the neighborhood groups and everything. I did get a call from a very concerned call from my airport commissioner that they are not allowed to even talk about it. So it was. Where did you have that in mind as well?
Speaker 6: Absolutely. They could be at the meetings and participate and be engaged. I would hope that they would want to do that.
Speaker 8: That would be great. I mean, like they're not allowed to talk about it at the commission, are they good to talk about it now?
Speaker 6: Oh, yes.
Speaker 8: Okay, great. So that's it. I'll be involved and support things.
Speaker 0: Okay. And the last person they were going to a vote is somebody oranga.
Speaker 4: What was the emotion before this one?
Speaker 0: You mean your your your before. That was that was Councilmember Austin's received promotion.
Speaker 4: I want to go back to that receivable file. We don't need to spend any more money than we already have. It's already been done. Let's. Let's stop here. Okay.
Speaker 0: Okay. Now we have we're going to take a vote on the substitute substitute motion, which is a motion by Councilwoman Stacy Mango. And that which includes the variety of friendly amendments that have been accepted that have been noted by the city attorney.
Speaker 2: Mayor, I still don't have clarification on any contract for study to come back for approval prior to beginning that, depending on the pricing that wasn't accepted.
Speaker 6: It's correct. It's not accepted.
Speaker 0: That's not been accepted. The other the others, as were noted, were accepted. Okay. So we have a we have a motion on the floor. Please cast your votes.
Speaker 5: Motion carries 63.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. Motion carries. We'll go back now to the regular agenda. I'm going to take a five minute recess because everyone needs a quick restroom break. And we'll return with the regular agenda. Thank you very much for. Thank you. We're going to go ahead and call the council meeting back to order. I'm going to need everyone that's in the audience, please, to either grab a seat or can't be in the aisle there. If we can take roll call, please. Here.
Speaker 5: Councilwoman Leena Gonzalez. Vice Mayor Sujan Lowenthal. Councilwoman Suzy Price. Councilmember Darryl Spooner. Councilwoman Stacey Mango. Councilman Dee Andrews. Councilmember Roberto, your outcome. Councilman Al Alston. Councilmember Rex Richardson. And Mayor Robert Garcia.
Speaker 0: I am here. Thank you. So we did consent. We moved up that one item, which was 17. So now we're going to go back to, I believe, Madam Kirk is that item 1515.
Recommendation to receive direction from the City Council concerning the performance of a Feasibility Study for the potential development of a Federal Inspection Service Facility at the Long Beach Airport.  (District 5)