SUNSET PARK — Supporters of the Santa Monica Airport suffered a loss on election night, with the failing of Measure D. Measure D would have required a public vote on any changes to aviation uses on the airport land. Two national aviation groups spent more than $500,000 combined in support of the measure. All told, more than $800,000 was raised in support of Measure D.
Measure LC, which was introduce by City Council to compete with Measure D, will retain council’s right to control the airport land but will require land-use guidelines to be approved by voters before anything can be built on the airport land.
Nearly 60 percent of the electorate favored Measure LC. Only about 42 percent of the electorate voted in favor of Measure D.
The mood was jubilant at the party in support of Measure LC after early results were released showing the initiative ahead of the competing Measure D.
Dozens of supporters decked out in “Yes on LC/ No on D” t-shirts and hats gathered at the home of John Fairweather, a few blocks from the controversial Santa Monica Municipal Airport.
Fairweather, the chair of theCommittee for Local Control of Santa Monica Airport Land, couldn’t hide his smile as he received shouted updates about the progress.
“I feel like we have the majority on our side across the city,” Fairweather said. “People are motivated by the issues here.”
Residents from near the vicinity of the airport came to the house to celebrate and trade stories about the negative effect that the air traffic has on their daily lives and property values..
“I think the truth of the matter with (the Measure D campaign) was there was so much material that looked so expensive and was so full of questionable information that people took a step back,” Fairweather said. “Measure D is history.”
Susan Hartley was less willing to be optimistic, preferring to wait until results were in before celebrating. The former city council candidate said she knew better than to prematurely call the election that early.
Fairweather said the passage of the measure is still only one step toward closing the airport and turning it into a park.
“It’ll be our greatest work to turn nothing into something,” he said.
Local airport activist John Jerabek said that voters “bought the fabrications” put forth by the Measure LC supporters.
“The campaign is disappointed and will fight on,” he said.
Well I guess that even that LC passed, if the contract expired in July, it will STILL need FAA permission to close the airport. This is a landmark in history! It should not close!
The truth of the matter is this, SMO is not going to close. Back in 2001 the City of Hawthorne tried to close their airport and as we know, it is still open today. Hawthorne is also one of the Federally deeded airports as well as a reliever airport. The same language is in their deed as it is in SMO’s deed; the property is to remain aviation. The City already has filed an appeal to the case that was dismissed earlier this year. Given that every other situation I have read about involving other airports with deeds, I am not worried about the outcome.
The voters of the city of Santa Monica, Ca have spoken. Soon Santa Monica Airport will close at the will of the people and the real estate developers to make room for new: Condos, Shopping malls, Night clubs, bars, strip clubs, skyscrapers, and 20,000 new automobiles into the area. Soon Venice and Santa Monica will look like Miami beach.
So, can you please book me to DJ in some of your new night clubs, maybe some of the new strip clubs too. I am looking forward to the new venues that will enter the area. Next we need to close Van Nuys, then Burbank and Whiteman, Long Beach, etc… Close them all down. Kill aviation. We do not need airplanes in this world. They are all noisy polluters.
People claim to be able to see into the future and know with 100% certainty what will happen with the litigation between the FAA and the City of Santa Monica. I have a question for everyone who claims to be able to see into the future. Why haven’t you used that unique skill of seeing into the future to make yourself rich on the stock market or to give advance warnings of disasters so that lives could be saved? After all, if you know with 100% certainty what will happen with the airport land, then surely you would have known to buy stock in eBay, Paypal, or Intel during the first public offering. Right? If I could see into the future, in would have warned the FBI about the 9-11 attacks. If I had the ability to see into the future, I would use that ability for something more important to the world than the Santa Monica Airport. If I could see into the future, I would have warned about the Ebola outbreak and the tsunami that hit Japan and the earthquake that struck Haiti.
James Sloat: No one is coming after anyone’s airplane – including yours. You don’t even live around here. Your airplane is safe and no one has declared war on anyone, despite your claims to the contrary. The worst that can happen to you as a result of last night’s election is that when you fly your plane to our part of the state at some time in the future, you may have to land at Torrance or Hawthorne Airport if the Santa Monica Airport is closed. For a man such as yourself – who flies all over the Western United States – going a few miles down the road to Hawthorne Airport should be something you can easily handle.
The anti-aviation, anti-American terrorists have drawn a line in the sand. I can’t wait until they come after my airplane. Act like a terrorist and start a a war then those consequences will be their responsibility. War is hell sometimes.
Thank goodness the people of Santa Monica once again proved that our votes are not for sale by outside interests.
what people fail to realize is that general aviation is an American birthright! This is one of the only countries in the world where a common man has the right, and can afford to fly an airplane for pleasure, travel, or business.
Great news for our community!
“controversial Santa Monica Municipal Airport.”
What exactly is controversial about the airport? It’s been there for many years and quite frankly, is a historical landmark. Correct me if I’m wrong but doesn’t this pave the way for the SM City Council to “suffocate” & close the airport as they see fit?
The people have spoken and have rejected Measure D by a wide margin, proving that Santa Monica is NOT for sale; that elections in Santa Monica CANNOT BE BOUGHT by corporate interests; and that the people of Santa Monica support local control for the airport which is located on OUR land — land which was purchased with bond money and was intended to be used for park and recreational purposes. The developers of the proposed Miramar project should take heed – SANTA MONICA ELECTIONS CANNOT BE BOUGHT. Big Aviation spent a million dollars trying to have Measure D passed, and it failed miserably – by a wide margin. Santa Monica voters are smart and are engaged, and won’t be fooled by deceitful campaigns such as the campaign waged by the proponents of Measure D.
My idea of a best result out of all of this? Keep the airport but get rid of the jets. I’m sorry, because I’m sure that’s a big profit center. But the amount of jet traffic seems to have increased enormously over the last 10 years, and it’s a blight. I live just a couple of blocks East of the airport, and the sound of jets idling is very annoying. I have called the noise control officer on a couple of occasions, and I pity the poor guy – he sounded just like any underpaid bureaucrat whose job is to pester powerful rich guys; and then, presumably be brushed off by them and their staff of lawyers. Totally ineffective. The noise rules are useless against powerful people who can throw a lot of money into delaying tactics. The only way to moderate the use of jets is to get rid of them completely.
Actually the final quote should be “turning something into nothing”…..
It was a simple choice. A simply simple choice so simple in its simplicity.