Councilwoman Rae Gabelich: OK, EVERYBODY RELAX BECAUSE THIS IS GOING TO TAKE ME A WHILE.

FIRST, I'D LIKE TO EXPLAIN TO EVERYBODY IN THIS ROOM HOW WE GOT HERE TONIGHT.

ON TUESDAY, JANUARY 4, IT WAS THE SECOND TWO-HOUR STUDY SESSION ON AIRPORT EXPANSION PRESENTED TO THE COUNCIL. DUE TO TIME CONSTRAINTS THERE WAS LIMITED DISCUSSION BY THE COUNCIL OR THE PUBLIC. EIGHT OF THE NINE COUNCIL MEMBERS VOICED CONCERNS ABOUT THE PROPOSED INCREASE IN TERMINAL SIZE.

FOLLOWING THAT MEETING ON WEDNESDAY JANUARY 12, I DRAFTED A MEMO ALONG WITH COUNCILMAN COLONNA TO THE CITY MANAGER TO PRODUCE BASICALLY WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR TONIGHT...I'LL READ IT.

"WE WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST STAFF TO PROVIDE MORE DETAILED INFORMATION TO ALTERNATIVE TWO AS PRESENTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON JANUARY 4. THE PURPOSE IS TO EVALUATE THIS ALTERNATIVE AS THE MAXIMUM BUILDING PROPOSAL AND TO REVIEW THE FEASIBILITY OF TWO ADDITIONAL BUILD ALTERNATIVES BETWEEN THE NO-BUILD PROPOSAL AND THE NUMBER TWO ALTERNATIVE THAT COULD REDUCE BUILDING 10% OR MORE."

IN ADDITION TO THAT WE WANTED TO SEE DESIGN OPPORTUNITIES THAT WOULD ENHANCE AND SHOW MORE EFFICIENT UTILIZATION OF WHAT WE HAVE TODAY.

WE WOULD LIKE SUGGESTIONS FOR ALTERNATIVE OFF-SITE LOCATIONS TO PROVIDE OFFICE SPACE WITHIN REASONABLE PROXIMITY TO ANY NEWLY MODIFIED TERMINAL AND FUNDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED TERMINAL IMPROVEMENTS.

THAT WAS ON JANUARY 12.

ON THURSDAY, JANUARY 13 I RECEIVED A MEMO FROM MR. MILLER DENYING THE REQUEST AND ASKED THAT IT BE PRESENTED TO THE COUNCIL WITH ALL OTHER MATERIALS ON FEBRUARY 8.

I RECEIVED THIS TOO LATE TO BE ABLE TO PUT IT ON THE AGENDA FOR THE FOLLOWING WEEK. THAT MEMO SAYS:

FOLLOWING A CAREFUL READING OF THE MEMO AND A MEETING TODAY OF PUBLIC WORKS, CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE AND CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE REPRESENTATIVES I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT IT WOULD BE MOST APPROPRIATE FOR ME TO INCLUDE...YOUR MEMO ALONG WITH OTHER BACKGROUND DOCUMENTATION IN THE MATERIALS TO BE GIVEN TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE FEBRUARY 8, 2005, AIRPORT TERMINAL DELIBERATIONS.

AS YOU KNOW THIS MEETING WILL ENABLE THE COUNCIL TO SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS THE SCOPING OF THE PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR AIRPORT TERMINAL IMPROVEMENTS WITH THE CONCURRENCE OF THE MAJORITY OF THEIR COUNCIL, THE AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS COULD BE ACCEPTED, REJECTED OR REVISED TO ADD TWO SMALLER ALTERNATIVES FOR CONSIDERATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE E.I.R.

EVEN THEN HOWEVER, PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT CONCEPTUAL PROJECT DEVELOPMENT BEYOND THAT WHICH IS NEEDED TO ASCERTAIN THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF AN ALTERNATIVE IS GENERALLY NOT DONE TO CLAIMS THAT A PROJECT HAS BEEN PREDESIGNED PRIOR TO COMPLETION AND CERTIFICATION OF THE E.I.R.

STAFF WILL RESPECTFULLY TAKE UNDER ADVISEMENT YOUR VIEW AND BEGIN ASSESSING WHAT STEPS NEED TO BE TAKEN WERE I DIRECTED BY THE ENTIRE CITY COUNCIL TO PROCEED WITH YOUR REQUEST.

ON MONDAY, JANUARY 24 I WROTE A MEMO TO MR. MILLER.

IN RESPONSE TO YOUR MEMO, I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE WITH YOUR DESIRE TO WAIT UNTIL THE FEBRUARY 8, 2005 MEETING TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE E.I.R. SCOPE.

I, ALONG WITH COUNCILMEMBER COLONNA, WAS REQUESTING THE FURTHER DETAILS ON ALTERNATIVE TWO WITH TWO SMALLER ALTERNATIVES IN ORDER TO HAVE THE INFORMATION AS PART OF THE DISCUSSION ON FEBRUARY 8.

I BELIEVE THAT IT IS IMPORTANT TO KEEP THE PROCESS MOVING AND WAS HOPING TO AVOID ANY UNNECESSARY DELAYS BY REQUESTING THE INFORMATION IN ADVANCE OF THAT DATE.

I WANT TO WORK TOWARDS A CONSENSUS PLAN THAT ADDRESSES THE NEEDS AND CONCERNS OF THE AIRPORT USERS AND THE IMPACTED NEIGHBORHOODS. I BELIEVE THAT THE PLAN RECOMMENDED BY SIX OF THE AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSIONERS AND PREPARED BY CITY STAFF AND HNTB DOES NOT WORK TOWARDS REACHING A CONSENSUS PLAN.

THE CURRENT PROPOSED PROJECT IS A 133,000 SQUARE FOOT PLAN WHICH IS 380% LARGER THAN THE CURRENT PERMANENT FACILITIES AND 75% LARGER THAN THE ORIGINAL N.O.P. [Notice of Prepartion for EIR] ISSUED IN SEPTEMBER 2003.

EIGHT OF THE NINE COUNCILMEMBERS VOICED CONCERNS ABOUT THE PROPOSED INCREASE IN TERMINAL SIZE. ALREADY THERE HAVE BEEN MANY DELAYS TO THIS PROJECT. CITY STAFF PROCEEDED FOR SEVERAL MONTHS IN 2003 WITH THE PREMISE THAT IT COULD EXPAND THE AIRPORT WITHOUT AN E.I.R. ONCE STAFF LEARNED THAT AN E.I.R. WAS LEGALLY REQUIRED, THE FIRST NOTICE OF PREPARATION, N.O.P., WAS ISSUED FOR A 75,960 SQUARE FOOT FACILITY. THE ORIGINAL N.O.P. WAS THEN DISREGARDED SO THAT THE PROCESS COULD BE REFERRED TO THE AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION.

SINCE YOUR PREFERENCE IS TO RECEIVE COUNCIL DIRECTION BEFORE PREPARING ANY FURTHER ALTERNATIVES, WE WILL BRING SUCH A REQUEST BEFORE THE FULL COUNCIL.

I AM ANXIOUS TO SEE A WORKABLE SOLUTION REACHED FOR THE AIRPORT TERMINAL IMPROVEMENTS IN AS EXPEDITIOUS A MANNER AS POSSIBLE. HOWEVER, THE DECISION ON THE E.I.R. SCOPE SHOULD NOT BE REACHED WITHOUT THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION GIVEN TO ALL OF THE OPTIONS WITH THIS THOROUGH INFORMATION AS POSSIBLE. I LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING WORKING WITH YOU TO REACH A CONSENSUS PLAN ON THIS IMPORTANT ISSUE.

AND THIS WAS COPIED TO ALL CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.

WE WERE DARK ON THE 25TH. THAT'S WHEN WE HAD THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES MEETING.

ON JANUARY 27 I SUBMITTED ALONG WITH MY COLLEAGUES ITEMS NUMBER 20 AND 22 AS THEY READ TONIGHT.

THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF PUBLIC DISCUSSION, A LOT OF PHONE CALLS, HOURS OF PHONE CALLS, AND WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT I AM TRYING TO SLOW DOWN AND DELAY THE PROCESS OF THIS AIRPORT PROJECT. ALSO THAT THERE ARE MOVES THAT WILL TRIGGER THREATS FROM THE F.A.A.

NONE OF THIS IS TRUE.

I WOULD LIKE TO QUOTE SOME INFORMATION THAT WAS SUBMITTED IN APRIL OF 2004 FROM OUR [Ass't City] ATTORNEY MR. MIKE MAIS AND FROM OUR AIRLINE ATTORNEY MR. GATZKE.

THE QUESTION IS WHAT ARE THE THREATS AGAINST THE AIRPORT NOISE COMPATIBILITY ORDINANCE. ACCORDING TO MR. MAIS, THE F.A.A. IS NOT LIKELY TO DO ANYTHING DIRECTLY TO DISTURB THE ORDINANCE. THE F.A.A. DOES HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO BRING AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING AGAINST THE CITY IF IT DETERMINED THAT THE CITY WAS SOMEHOW UNFAIRLY DISCRIMINATING AGAINST A PARTICULAR AIRLINE OR A GROUP OF AIRLINES.

HOW DO THE PROPOSED TERMINAL IMPROVEMENTS RELATE TO THE NOISE ORDINANCE? IS THE CITY REQUIRED TO CONSTRUCT ANY IMPROVEMENTS? MR. MAIS STATED THAT THERE IS NO SPECIFIC REQUIREMENT BY THE F.A.A. OR ANY OTHER FEDERAL AGENCY THAT THE AIRPORT MUST BUILD THIS PROJECT TO ACCOMMODATE ITS PERMITTED ACTIVITY LEVEL.

MR GATZKE STATED THAT IT WOULD BE HIS OPINION THAT IF THE CITY DECIDED TO DO NOTHING RELATIVE TO TERMINAL IMPROVEMENTS, IT WILL NOT MAKE THE ORDINANCE MORE VULNERABLE.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE EVERYBODY FEEL THAT THEY ARE NOT JEOPARDIZING OUR NOISE ORDINANCE WHEN WE'RE TRYING TO FIND BALANCE BETWEEN THE COMMUNITY AND THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY OF THE AIRPORT.

IT IS MR. GATZKY'S OPINION THAT NONE OF THOSE GRANT ASSURANCES WE HAVE RECEIVED, MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, WOULD REQUIRE ADEGSAL FACILITIES AND THERE IS NO OTHER PROVISION OF FEDERAL LAW THAT EXPRESSLY REQUIRES THE CITY TO BUILD ANYTHING OR TO MAKE ANY PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENT TO THE FACILITY. IT HAS BEEN SUGGESTED THAT NO ONE HAS EVER WON ON THAT PROPOSITION [from] MR. GATZKE, OUR AIRPORT LEGAL COUNSEL.

I'D LIKE TO DISCUSS THE DELAYS. IN SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 2003, 400 RESIDENTS SPOKE TO THE N.O.P. PROJECT. 400 PEOPLE EXPRESSED THEIR CONCERNS AND THEIR WISHES ABOUT WHAT THEY'D LIKE TO SEE INCLUDED IN THE SCOPE OF THE E.I.R. IN OCTOBER OF 2003, THE E.I.R. SCOPING WAS REFERRED TO THE AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION ["AAC"] TO REMOVE FROM THE TABLE THROUGH ELECTION TIME.

DECEMBER 2003, THE AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION ACCEPTED PROJECTS UNDER 100,000 SQUARE FEET FOR THEIR REVIEW. I REVIEWED THAT TAPE TODAY, THE DECEMBER 2 CITY COUNCIL MEETING. AND MR. SALK [AAC then-chair] STOOD AT THE PODIUM AND HE SAID AS HE WAS ACCEPTING HIS RESPONSIBILITY, HE SAID WE ARE A FACT-FINDING GROUP THAT IS GOING TO WORK TOGETHER. WE'RE GOING TO HEAR FROM THE COMMUNITY, THE AIRLINES, AND THE F.A.A. WE'LL GO DOWN THE CENTER. NO BIAS. HOW DO WE MAKE IT WORK IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE COMMUNITY AS WELL AS COMMERCIAL ASPECTS. OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL AREAS OF COMMUNITY TO TURN A PROBLEM INTO AN OPPORTUNITY. WE WON'T PLEASE EVERYBODY. THERE WILL BE COMPROMISES. BUT WE WILL START WHERE THERE IS AGREEMENT.

I DONT BELIEVE THAT THESE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE A.A.C. START WHERE THERE IS AGREEMENT.

[Public Works Director] CHRISTINE ANDERSON SAID THE COUNCIL NEEDS TO FIND A COMFORT LEVEL SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING.

WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE REVIEWING ALL OF THE MATERIAL THAT'S BEEN PRESENTED. WERE NOT SUPPOSED TO MAKE A DECISION BASED ON RECOMMENDATIONS. THIS [the AAC] IS AN ADVISORY BOARD, AN ADVISORY BOARD TO THE COUNCIL.

OCTOBER 3 OF 2003, COUNCILWOMAN RICHARDSON REQUESTED A CUMULATIVE HEALTH REPORT. IT'S STILL NOT HERE. IT'S BEING COMPILED WITH OUTDATED MATERIAL BUT IT'S STILL NOT HERE.

ON THE 14TH OF OCTOBER WE ASKED OUR CITY MANAGER TO COME BACK ON DECEMBER 2 WITH A COST AND CONTENT FOR A HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT. IT WAS SUPPOSED TO INCLUDE THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS WERE SUPPOSED TO COME BACK AT THAT SAME TIME AS WELL.

BACK TO DECEMBER 2ND COUNCIL MEETING. MR. MILLER APOLOGIZED. HE MISUNDERSTOOD. JACKIE [directed to Vice Mayor Kell], YOU ASKED FOR A STAND-ALONE REPORT ON AIRPORT POLLUTION AND THE EFFECTS ON OUR RESIDENTS. YOU ASKED THAT IT BE RETURNED IN 45 TO 60 DAYS. OUR CITY MANAGER STATED THAT THAT HAD BEEN INCLUDED IN OTHER MOTIONS. THROUGH THE CHAOS AND THE CONFUSION, THAT STANDALONE REPORT WAS SET ASIDE. WE STILL DONT HAVE IT.

SO THE A.A.C. BEGINS THEIR PROCESS IN JANUARY OF 2004. IN EARLY 2004, THE AIRPORT STAFF HIRES HNTB. IN JUNE 2004 HNTB PRESENTS THE STAFF RECOMMEND DESIGN.

IN JULY 2004, ONE OF THE A.A.C. MEMBERS REQUESTED TWO SMALLER ALTERNATIVES SUPPORTED BY TWO OF HIS COLLEAGUES.

IN SEPTEMBER OF 2004, THE AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION VOTES 6-3 TO RECOMMEND THE STAFF RECOMMENDED FACILITIES PLAN THAT IS 30% LARGER THAN THE N.O.P. PLAN THAT THEY BEGAN WITH. IT WAS FIRST PRESENTED TO THE COUNCIL IN NOVEMBER OF 2004.

THE DELAYS TO DATE HAVE BEEN DRIVEN BY THE PAST COUNCIL AND THE CITY STAFF, NOT BY THE COMMUNITY, NOT BY HUSH AND NOT BY ME.

AN E.I.R. IS A TOOL FOR DECISIONMAKERS. IT ALSO IS A MEANS TO HOLD YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS ACCOUNTABLE. THERE IS NO DEADLINE. THERE IS PROCESS, AND THE PROCESS AND THE INTENT SHOULD BE TO GET IT RIGHT FOR THE BEST OF THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY.

BEFORE YOU BEGIN THE E.I.R. PROCESS, YOU SHOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO REVIEW ALL DESIRED ALTERNATIVES. IT IS APPROPRIATE TO START WITH THE PREFERRED SIZE, FOLLOWED BY ALTERNATIVES.

THE PREFERRED SIZE OF THE PROJECT IS GIVEN THE MOST ATTENTION IN THE E.I.R. REVIEW. THE ALTERNATIVES ARE NOT GIVEN THE SAME WEIGHT OF EVALUATION.

I SPOKE WITH A WOMAN THAT DOES THIS DAILY. WE MUST DECIDE, WHAT IS OUR PREFERENCE WHAT CAN OUR CONSTITUENTS LIVE WITH THE 133,000 SQUARE FEET SUPERSIZE THAT IS LARGER THAN WHAT WAS PRESENTED TO THE COMMUNITY IN 2003, THAT THREW US ALL UP IN ARMS BACK THEN? OR, PERHAPS, THE MORE REASONABLE YET ACCOMMODATING AAC RECOMMENDATION OF ALTERNATIVE TWO.

IF FURTHER GROWTH IS DESIRED DOWN THE ROAD, THEN A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DEC [Declaration] CAN BE USED FOR LIMITED INCREASES.

A QUOTE FROM THE E.I.R. EXPERT I SPOKE WITH TODAY, "IT IS WISE TO CAREFULLY DEFINE THE PROJECT AND THE OBJECTIVES, IF NOT, BY THE TIME YOURE INTO THE PLAN YOU MAY BE SO DEEP THAT YOU WANT TO VIOLATE CEQA."

TODAY WE MUST DECIDE, THE MORE CONTROVERSY THAT WE CREATE BY STARTING THIS PROJECT WITH A FACILITY THAT IS TRIPLE WHAT WE HAVE TODAY -- TRIPLE -- THE MORE MONEY IT'S GOING TO COST AND THE MORE TIME ITS GOING TO TAKE. SO I SAY THAT WE PICK OUR BATTLES WISELY.

I'D LIKE TO HAVE A BRIEF DISCUSSION WITH OUR STAFF ABOUT THE SAFETY AT LONG BEACH AIRPORT. I HAVE BEEN ADVISED THAT WE HAVE AN INADEQUATE POWER SUPPLY. FOR GPU'S, GROUND POWER UNITS. THEY ALLOW THE AIRPLANE TO BE PLUGGED IN WHILE THEY'RE AT THE GATE VERSUS RUNNING THE ENGINE WHICH WASTES FUEL AND CREATES ADDITIONAL POLLUTION.

I ALSO WAS INFORMED THAT WE HAVE AN INADEQUATE POWER SUPPLY THAT HAS CAUSED OUTAGES ON OUR GLIDE SLOPE AND LOCALIZER. THATS A SAFETY HAZARD. HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE BEING PUT AT RISK IF WE DONT HAVE THE POWER TO PROVIDE THE SAFE ENVIRONMENT FOR OUR AIRLINES?

NOW COMFORT AT LONG BEACH AIRPORT. WHY ARE WE NOT DOING ROUTINE MAINTENANCE TO AVOID LEAKING ROOFS AND WATER SETTLING AT THE BASE OF JETBLUE RAMPS TO THE AIRCRAFT? WHY ARE PEOPLE WALKING THROUGH PUDDLES?

IT'S NOT MY FAULT. WHY AREN'T THEY [Airport Mgt.] DOING SOMETHING SO THEY'RE NOT GETTING ON AN AIRPLANE WITH FIVE HOURS WITH WET FEET? I THINK WE HAVE ENOUGH SMARTS ON OUR STAFF TO BE ABLE TO CORRECT THAT.

I THINK WE SHOULD BE CONSULTING SOMEBODY FOR BETTER DRAINAGE FLOW THROUGH THE WALKWAY AREAS.

WHAT ABOUT THE R.F.P. FOR CONCESSIONS UPDATE THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ON FASTER TRACK, IT WAS PROPOSED TO HAVE STARTED A YEAR AGO?

AND THE TENT CITY TEMPORARY IMPROVEMENTS, I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT DOING THAT. WE CAN GIVE THEM A MORE CARED-FOR EXPERIENCE SO THAT OUR CUSTOMERS MAY ACTUALLY ENJOY BEING HERE AS WE GO THROUGH THIS E.I.R. PROCESS. THESE ARE ITEMS THAT AIRPORT STAFF SHOULD BE ADDRESSING TODAY AND YESTERDAY.

NOW BACK ON TRACK, EVERY DECISION THAT WE MAKE AS INDIVIDUALS, AS A COMMUNITY, AS A GOVERNING BODY HAS A RIPPLE EFFECT FOR GENERATIONS TO COME. WHAT I AM ASKING TONIGHT IS THAT WE MAKE THIS DECISION ON THE SIZING OF THE LONG BEACH AIRPORT BASED NOT ON SIMPLY EMOTION FROM EITHER SIDE OF THIS ISSUE, BUT ON A VISION AND UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT LONG-TERM IMPACTS, BOTH POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE, THIS GROWTH WILL HAVE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITIES AND ULTIMATELY THE CITY AS A WHOLE.

TODAY, WE HAVE AN AIRPORT THAT SUCCESSFULLY ACCOMMODATES 41 COMMERCIAL FLIGHTS EVERY DAY. BY OUR NOISE ORDINANCE, WE MUST BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE AN ADDITIONAL 25 COMMUTER SLOTS. EVEN THOUGH STAFF HAS BEEN DIRECTED TO NOT MARKET THESE VACANCIES, I'M SURE MANY OF YOU READ AMERICA WEST HAS IDENTIFIED AN INTEREST IN SECURING TWO OR THREE OF THOSE POSITIONS.

WE MUST HAVE A PLAN, A PLAN THAT THE CITY, THE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES AND THE AIRPORT TENANTS CAN LIVE WITH. THIS PLAN SHOULD DEFINE PROTECTION OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, EFFICIENCY OF SERVICE AND RETURN TO THE CITY.

I HAVE PLANNING DOCUMENTS FROM OUR STAFF, FROM 2002 TO PRESENT THAT ASK FOR ANYWHERE FROM NINE AIRCRAFT PARKING POSITIONS TO TODAY'S HIGH OF 16 FOR THE SAME 41/25 FLIGHTS.

FROM THE CURRENT HOLD ROOM SPACE OF 6,500 SQUARE FEET TO A MAXIMUM OF 30,070 SQUARE FEET.

FROM OFFICE OF SPACE OF 12,000 SQUARE FEET TODAY TO 35,470 SQUARE FEET FOR TOMORROW.

THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE ECONOMIC ENGINE THAT THIS AIRPORT IS SUPPOSED TO PROVIDE FOR US. MANY LIKE TO REFER TO THE WORDING IN OUR STRATEGIC PLAN UNDER ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL THAT STATES, DEVELOP A STRATEGY FOR LAND USE AT THE AIRPORT THAT MAXIMIZES THE ECONOMIC BENEFIT RETURNED TO THE COMMUNITY.

YET IT ALSO STATES, DEVELOP A CITYWIDE PLAN FOR BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT THAT ENSURES THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS.

THE 2010 STRATEGIC PLAN MENTIONS AIRPORT FOUR TIMES, QUALITY OF LIFE EIGHT TIMES AND NEIGHBORHOODS 77 TIMES.

JOBS. REALIZING THAT WE ARE CURRENTLY AT OUR 41 FLIGHT SLOT REQUIREMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGING MANY OF THESE JOBS ARE AT ENTRY LEVEL, WHAT IS THE PROJECTION FOR ADDING MORE WORK FORCE?

CONCESSIONS. ONSITE RETAIL? MAINTENANCE? BASED ON THE INCREASE IN JOBS SINCE THE FILLING OF ALL 41 FLIGHT SLOTS, WHAT ECONOMIC SURGE HAVE WE EXPERIENCED? OUR PREVIOUS CITY MANAGER ALLUDED TO A GAIN IN REVENUE TO THE CITY OF $25 MILLION. THIS AIRPORT GROWTH PROCESS BEGAN IN 2001, YET IN 2004 WE FOUND OURSELVES AS A CITY TO BE IN OVER $100 MILLION IN DEBT.

SALES TAX REVENUE TO THE CITY FOR EXPANDED CONCESSIONS. WHAT IS THE FORMULA TO PROJECT WHAT THIS MEANS? WHEN WE HAVE THAT DOLLAR AMOUNT, THEN WE DECIDE IF THAT IS WHERE WE PUT OUR EFFORTS TO BUILD ECONOMIC RETURN OR COULD POSSIBLY FOCUSING ON nEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL IMPROVEMENTS BE A MORE VIABLE ALTERNATIVE THAT WOULD BENEFIT LONG BEACH RESIDENTS? I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE CHAMBER TO TAKE THAT ON. (Applause)

I WANT TO SAY A COUPLE OF WORDS IN SUPPORT OF JETBLUE. IN JULY 2001, THE OFFICE OF OUR [former] CITY MANAGER IDENTIFIED TO JETBLUE AIRWAYS A COMMITMENT OF $44,130,000 IN AIRPORT IMPROVEMENTS TO BE DELIVERED BY 2003. THAT WAS THE TIME WHEN THE COMMUNITY WAS FIRST REALIZING THE POTENTIAL IMPACT OF THE JETBLUE AGREEMENT.

I COULD READ YOU SPECIFICS, BUT I'LL SPARE YOU. NO, I'M GOING TO DO IT. THEY WERE PROMISED RENOVATED TERMINAL BUILDING, ELECTRICAL, MECHANICAL, AIR CONDITIONING. REPLACEMENT OF TERMINAL HOLD ROOM, CARPET, PAINT, FURNITURE IN ADDITION OF HISTORICAL MOTIVE FACADES TO BE COMPLETED BY THE END OF 2001. CONSTRUCT HOLD ROOM ADDITION TO BE COMPLETED IN 2002. CONSTRUCT BAGGAGE CLAIM FACILITY ENHANCEMENTS TO BE COMPLETED IN 2002. CONSTRUCT NEW FOOD COURT, HISTORICAL PLAZA AND NEW GROUND TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES TO BE COMPLETED IN 2003. CONSTRUCT A PARKING STRUCTURE TO BE COMPLETED IN 2003.

NO WONDER JETBLUE IS UPSET. I WOULD BE UPSET TOO. WE'RE NOT LIVING UP TO OUR BARGAIN.

JETBLUE HAS BEEN PROMISED MUCH AND IS UNDERSTANDABLY UPSET WITH THE POOR PROGRESS, HOWEVER JETBLUE CAME HERE KNOWING THE CONSTRAINTS AND THE COMMUNITY ATTITUDE.

I SUPPORT JETBLUE HAVING A SAFE, EFFICIENT ENVIRONMENT TO DO THEIR WORK, BUT I ALSO WANT TO REMIND THEM THAT AS A CORPORATION, THEY AS A CORPORATION ARE NOT CONSTITUENTS OF LONG BEACH BUT TENANTS OF OUR FACILITY. THEY ARE HERE, AND WE WILL SERVE THEM, BUT IT IS THIS COUNCIL THAT WOULD DECIDE THE PARAMETERS OF THIS EXPANSION THAT WILL INFLUENCE OUR CITY FOR YEARS TO COME.

AS STATED EARLIER, I HOPE THAT WE CAN IMPROVE ON SOME OF THESE CONDITIONS PRIOR TO THE BUILDING OF THE NEW TERMINAL.

I SPEAK ABOUT TRANSPARENCY, PARTNERSHIP, NOT BUSINESS AS USUAL, NOT THE BAD DEALS FROM THE PAST. SIZING IS IMPORTANT FOR THE LONGTERM PROTECTION OF OUR HIGH TAX-PRODUCING NEIGHBORHOODS, OF BIXBY KNOLLS, LOS CERRITOS, CAL HEIGHTS AND LOS ALTOS. IF WE DO NOT PROTECT THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS IT WON'T BE TOMORROW, IF WON'T BE FIVE YEARS FROM NOW, BUT IF AND WHEN...THAT AIRPORT STARTS TO GROW BECAUSE THE DEMAND REGIONALLY IS ON US TAKING MORE TRAFFIC, THEN WE ARE GOING TO START TO LOSE THE BASE OF THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS, AND THAT IS THE NUMBER ONE SOURCE OF INCOME FOR OUR GENERAL FUND.

SO I ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO CONSIDER WHAT WE ARE ASKING, AND THAT IS THAT WHEN WE REVIEW ON FEBRUARY THE 8TH ALL OF THE OTHER MATERIALS THAT ARE TO BE INCLUDED IN THE E.I.R., THAT WE DO THE FOLLOWING:

THAT WE CONSIDER ALTERNATIVE TWO, THE SMALLER AND MORE RESPONSIBLE MODERNIZATION PLAN PRESENTED BY HNTB TOTALING 102,980 SQUARE FEET AS THE LARGEST ALTERNATIVE CONSIDERED WITH THE FOLLOWING MODIFICATIONS: A MAXIMUM OF 11 GATES AND 12 AIRCRAFT PARKING POSITIONS.

THE NEXT POSITION TO LOOK AT WOULD BE THE ORIGINAL STAFF RECOMMENDATION FROM SEPTEMBER 22ND OF THE N.O.P. TOTALING 93,500 SQUARE FEET.

A STAFF-GENERATED ALTERNATIVE SMALLER THAN THE N.O.P. AND AN ALTERNATIVE THAT MAKES EXISTING TEMPORARY FACILITIES PERMANENT FOR A TOTAL OF WHAT WE HAVE TODAY, 58,320 SQUARE FEET AND THEN FINALLY, AS IN ALL E.I.R's A NO-BUILD OPTION.

I ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT AND I TURN IT OVER TO MY COUNCIL MEMBERS.

[Audience applause with standing ovation, nearly 30 seconds]

---

Return To Front Page

Contact us: mail@LBReport.com