Waxman Amendment Insufficient

FacebookTwitterGoogle+TumblrShare

To the editor:

Today I received from Lisa Pinto, the District Director for Congressman Henry Waxman, the email (see below). The amendment does not seem strong enough to me. What do you think?

Where is the legislation put forward that would offer protection to airport neighbors from the toxic jet emissions that Santa Monica Airport neighbors have had shoved into their throats for more than twenty years. The City of Santa Monica has refused to make air pollution an important issue.

With all due respect, Congressman Waxman’s amendment is weak. At best it will continue the useless polarized discussions between the immovable FAA and the City of Santa Monica. If Santa Monica yields on runway safety, how will that benefit the community?

We would like for Congressman Waxman to once again address the environmental issues as he did in a May 2000 letter to the FAA. Air pollution impacts are not speculative. They happen daily and they need immediate attention. Congressman Waxman should initiate a rule for the FAA to enact a minimum distance from jet blast and the front doors of airport neighbors, like Los Angeles and Santa Monica residents experience from SMO. Please Congressman Waxman, we implore you to do something strong, now to address air pollution at SMO.

Martin Rubin, Director of Concerned Residents Against Airport Pollution


Comments

Waxman Amendment Insufficient — 3 Comments

  1. “Congressman Waxman should initiate a rule for the FAA to enact a minimum distance from jet blast and the front doors of airport neighbors”
    I couldn’t agree more.  But that is the job of the city, not the FAA, and it is Santa Monica that failed here.  What do you expect to happen when you allow developers to build right up to the runway?  And then there are the people who moved to an airport (and got a better price on a house for it) and are now calling for the airport’s closure.  That’s typical ME ME ME at the expense of everyone else, a staple in Santa Monica.
    So you’re right, there should be a safe distance between airport and homes.  Therefore, Santa Monica should get rid of the homes that shouldn’t have been built there in the first place.  Then we can all find something productive to work on, and suffer no more these efforts to destroy an important part of our national transportation system.
    Here’s an idea for your next project, since you’re so worried about pollution: Shut down the 10.

  2. Why don’t you just move? Why did you buy a house next to an airport in the first place? If you succeed in shutting down Santa Monica, where will all those planes go? The airport took federal (taxpayer) money for improvements and entered into a contract with the government. Raise the money to pay the taxpayers back and you can do anything you want with the airport. And when you call in a political chit and get your congressman to go to bat for you, you shouldn’t be demeaning his efforts.
     
    I find it interesting that the acronym for your organization is CRAAP.
     

  3. I am a pilot whom has flown in and out of Santa Monica.  There is nothing unsafe about the runway, the traffic pattern, or approach path into the airport.  Residents just don’t want the noise.  Perhaps you shouldn’t have moved next to an airport.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>