Dan Pressburg's Annual Community Xmas Party -- "Meet, Greet & Eat" -- Is This Sunday (Dec. 6)

LBReport.com

Background / Perspective

Here's What LBREPORT.com Encountered When We Requested Public Records Act Release Of Airport's Documentation Showing Basis For Adding Supplemental (1 Yr) Flight Slots

LBREPORT.com is reader and advertiser supported. Support independent news in LB similar to the way people support NPR and PBS stations. We're not non-profit so it's not tax deductible but $49.95 (less than an annual dollar a week) helps keep us online.

(Dec. 7, 2015) -- Here's what LBREPORT.com encountered when we sought release under the CA Public Records Act of documentation regarding Airport management's decision to increase LGB large commercial aircraft flight slots (aircraft over 75,000 pounds) by nearly 22% (supplemental flight slots applicable for one year.)

We presume comparing last year's noise documentation report with this year's report will show why the cumulative noise decreased. The "why" is one of the five basic "W's" needed for a well reported news story.

We were surprised that Airport management didn't attach that documentation to its agendized materials, which first became visible at the end of the business day on Nov. 30. It attached summarizing memos with plenty of mathematical details but vague verbiage..

On the morning of Tuesday December 1, LBREPORT.com asked LGB's public affairs office (first by phone, then by email) for last year's report. "Thanks for the request. I'm working on getting some information for you. I’ll be in touch soon," the LGB rep swiftly replied. We waited, and waited, and nearing the end of the business day, we emailed a somewhat larger Public Records Act request that included a request both last year's and this year's documentation reports as well as some other items.

Two days later on Dec. 3, the Airport rep informed us by email, "We are currently collecting the responsive documents to your public records request. You will receive the requested information upon completion."

But there's no need "to collect" the noise budget analysis reports; they were and are in the Airport's possession. They're almost certainly in emailable form.

[Scroll down for further.]

Accordingly, we emailed the Airport rep, thanked her for her email and cited CA Government Code section 6253(b) which states that with the sole exception of records exempt from disclosure by express provisions of law [which shouldn't apply to a report on airport measured noise], a government agency "upon a request for a copy of records that reasonably describes an identifiable record or records, shall make the records promptly available..."

Our email also added for clarity: "We acknowledge that the larger Public Records Act request seeks items that may take longer to provide, but we believe there is no defense to releasing the two years' noise budget analyses forthwith. Digital copies are requested and we believe these are also in the Airport's possession. We ask that these two items be emailed by the end of today's business day (Dec. 4.) Thank you."

Remember: we first asked for these materials on Dec. 1.

At end of the business day Friday on Dec. 4, LGB's rep replied: "Thank you for citing the Public Records Act. We are very familiar with it. The Airport consistently strives to honor and respect the intent of every law. Several of your questions as well as others will be answered on Tuesday, Dec. 8 when the City Council holds a study session on the topic."

But we didn't ask any questions. We requested access to public record documents that we believe the Airport is legally obligated to release promptly. The records are directly relevant to what Airport management contends and will presumably tell the Council and the public on Tuesday December 8.

In our opinion, the public, the press and Councilmembers doing their jobs shouldn't trust "answers" from management that isn't transparent about the basis for its public contentions.

We believe the Airport and the City were legally required to produce the documentation reports in the Airport's possession days ago and we believe there is no meritorious defense to their withholding. We believe Airport management should produce the documentation reports it has in its possession without further delay today (Dec. 7) to allow some minimal time for independent analysis before the Dec. 8 Council study session.

Opinions expressed by LBREPORT.com, our contributors and/or our readers are not necessary those of our advertisers. We welcome our readers' comments/opinions 24/7 via Disqus, Facebook and moderate length letters and longer-form op-ed pieces submitted to us at mail@LBReport.com.