2020 Santa Monica City Council Candidate Statements
Regarding Public Land and the Closure of Santa Monica Airport
(Last updated September 20, 2020)
Please note: On September 3, 2020, all Santa Monica City Council Candidates were emailed an open-ended request for their Position Statement on this issue. Additionally and concurrently, the Santa Monica Neighborhood Council sent candidates a questionnaire that included a specific question about our public land and the closure of SMO. The Neighborhood Council question was, "Do you support the vision of transforming the Airport land into park and recreational space for the benefit of park-poor Santa Monica, 60% of which lies within 2 miles of the Airport? If not, why not? If so, how will you lead the City in achieving that goal?" The written responses to both requests are posted below in alphabetical order. If a candidate statement or answer is not below, no reply was received to date.
Please forward and share this webpage -- www.smofuture.com/vote-2020. For corrections please email election.subgroup@smofuture.com.
Please forward and share this webpage -- www.smofuture.com/vote-2020. For corrections please email election.subgroup@smofuture.com.
Phil Brock
https://www.votebrock.org/issues/our-parks-are-our-lungs
Position Statement:
The Great Park (SMO)
In 2014, Santa Monica's wise electorate passed Measure LC. It paved the way for the next incarnation of the land currently occupied by Santa Monica Airport (SMO). While it was a hotly contested measure at the ballot box, there was no question that SMO's time had passed. It had once been an essential municipal airport with Douglas Aircraft and numerous small aviation aircraft anchored there. However, the community grew up around the airport boundary, and jets began to land on this dense piece of land without a sufficient buffer to protect residents from potential harm. For over forty years, the battle raged. That battle is over. The runway is condensed, the interim open space in use and an extension of Airport Park designed.
The City Council will approve the Recreation and Parks Master Plan in 2021, and the outline of a Great Park at SMO will begin to form. Over the next few years, a master plan for the over 190 acres can be formatted. Simple will be better. Let's do what Chicago residents did to Meigs Field. Make sure the ground is safe and sprinkle a lot of grass seed. We can add elements as we develop funding. Our parks in Santa Monica often have undergone too much planning, and the costs have been astronomical.
Let's use common sense in developing the Great Park at SMO. Our descendants will thank us for the hard work of all those park advocates who came before them and wisely voted to close an obsolete airport.
Answer to Neighborhood Council Question:
In 2014 Measure LC passed. It paved the way to close SMO and honor resident wishes. The runway is condensed, the interim open space in use and an extension of Airport Park designed. The outline of a Great Park at SMO will begin to form. Simple will be better. Let's do what Chicago residents did to Meigs Field. Make sure the ground is safe and sprinkle a lot of grass seed. Our parks in Santa Monica have undergone too much planning, and the costs have been astronomical. Let's use common sense in creating the Great Park at SMO. I served on the Recreation and Parks Commission for fourteen years. It will be my honor to shepherd our new multi-use park connecting our existing Clover Park to Airport Park.
Position Statement:
The Great Park (SMO)
In 2014, Santa Monica's wise electorate passed Measure LC. It paved the way for the next incarnation of the land currently occupied by Santa Monica Airport (SMO). While it was a hotly contested measure at the ballot box, there was no question that SMO's time had passed. It had once been an essential municipal airport with Douglas Aircraft and numerous small aviation aircraft anchored there. However, the community grew up around the airport boundary, and jets began to land on this dense piece of land without a sufficient buffer to protect residents from potential harm. For over forty years, the battle raged. That battle is over. The runway is condensed, the interim open space in use and an extension of Airport Park designed.
The City Council will approve the Recreation and Parks Master Plan in 2021, and the outline of a Great Park at SMO will begin to form. Over the next few years, a master plan for the over 190 acres can be formatted. Simple will be better. Let's do what Chicago residents did to Meigs Field. Make sure the ground is safe and sprinkle a lot of grass seed. We can add elements as we develop funding. Our parks in Santa Monica often have undergone too much planning, and the costs have been astronomical.
Let's use common sense in developing the Great Park at SMO. Our descendants will thank us for the hard work of all those park advocates who came before them and wisely voted to close an obsolete airport.
Answer to Neighborhood Council Question:
In 2014 Measure LC passed. It paved the way to close SMO and honor resident wishes. The runway is condensed, the interim open space in use and an extension of Airport Park designed. The outline of a Great Park at SMO will begin to form. Simple will be better. Let's do what Chicago residents did to Meigs Field. Make sure the ground is safe and sprinkle a lot of grass seed. Our parks in Santa Monica have undergone too much planning, and the costs have been astronomical. Let's use common sense in creating the Great Park at SMO. I served on the Recreation and Parks Commission for fourteen years. It will be my honor to shepherd our new multi-use park connecting our existing Clover Park to Airport Park.
Tom Ciszek
https://www.tomforsantamonica.com
Answer to Neighborhood Council Question:
The conversion of the Santa Monica Airport grounds into park and recreational space would not constitute the highest and best use of this prime real estate. I’ve never thought of our city as “park-poor” and this space hosts a 4 acre park (and APX is 12 more acres) - with lighted fields, over 100 parking spaces, the largest of our four off leash dog parks. Park utilization should be measured. To the extent that a portion of the Santa Monica Airport land is transformed into parks or something else, it should be done with voter approval. I support expansion of these existing parks to accommodate the recreational needs of residents in those new units.
Answer to Neighborhood Council Question:
The conversion of the Santa Monica Airport grounds into park and recreational space would not constitute the highest and best use of this prime real estate. I’ve never thought of our city as “park-poor” and this space hosts a 4 acre park (and APX is 12 more acres) - with lighted fields, over 100 parking spaces, the largest of our four off leash dog parks. Park utilization should be measured. To the extent that a portion of the Santa Monica Airport land is transformed into parks or something else, it should be done with voter approval. I support expansion of these existing parks to accommodate the recreational needs of residents in those new units.
Gleam Davis
https://www.gleamdavis2020.com
Position Statement:
I support closing the airport at midnight on December 31, 2028. I also support using the 229 acres of airport land for recreational and cultural purposes. I supported Measure LC and, in fact, I proposed the operative language in LC as the matter was being considered by the City Council. I voted in favor of the Consent Decree and Resolution 11026 which implemented it. With the runway shortening allowed by the Consent Decree, Santa Monica has seen a dramatic decrease in jet traffic.
As part of that consent decree and in compliance with other legal rulings, the City has had to adjust the airport financing model to make it more sustainable. I do not see that changing in the near future. Of course, that does not mean that the airport still does not burden the neighborhood. Over the next few years, the City will need to be vigilant to make sure that SMO's impacts continue to decrease. Although the City remains embroiled in some disputes regarding the airport, it has been relatively successful in reducing airport operations. To the extent that it legally can, the City should examine placing further restrictions on airport operations. Also, the City needs to continue to look for a way to fund the already-approved improvements to surplus airport land.
As the City moves towards converting the airport into park space, I know that there will be pressures to use this large acreage for other purposes. In order to reduce those pressures, I think that the City should undertake an airport area master planning process that not only addresses the future of the airport but of the public and private land surrounding the airport. For example, if such a plan facilitated the building of housing on airport-adjacent private property rather than on the land currently occupied by the airport, that might mitigate some of the pressure to build housing on airport land. The public and multiple bodies including the Recreation and Parks Commission and the Airport Commission should be part of this planning effort. As this may be a lengthy process, I think that the City should begin the planning process prior to the closing of the airport, perhaps even by 2025.
Answer to Neighborhood Council Question:
I support converting the airport into a park. In order to reduce pressures to use the airport land for other purposes, I think that the City needs to conduct a regional plan for the airport that includes the airport land and other nearby properties. This inclusive planning process hopefully will allow important needs such as housing and neighborhood-serving commercial to be placed near the airport but not on actual airport land.
Position Statement:
I support closing the airport at midnight on December 31, 2028. I also support using the 229 acres of airport land for recreational and cultural purposes. I supported Measure LC and, in fact, I proposed the operative language in LC as the matter was being considered by the City Council. I voted in favor of the Consent Decree and Resolution 11026 which implemented it. With the runway shortening allowed by the Consent Decree, Santa Monica has seen a dramatic decrease in jet traffic.
As part of that consent decree and in compliance with other legal rulings, the City has had to adjust the airport financing model to make it more sustainable. I do not see that changing in the near future. Of course, that does not mean that the airport still does not burden the neighborhood. Over the next few years, the City will need to be vigilant to make sure that SMO's impacts continue to decrease. Although the City remains embroiled in some disputes regarding the airport, it has been relatively successful in reducing airport operations. To the extent that it legally can, the City should examine placing further restrictions on airport operations. Also, the City needs to continue to look for a way to fund the already-approved improvements to surplus airport land.
As the City moves towards converting the airport into park space, I know that there will be pressures to use this large acreage for other purposes. In order to reduce those pressures, I think that the City should undertake an airport area master planning process that not only addresses the future of the airport but of the public and private land surrounding the airport. For example, if such a plan facilitated the building of housing on airport-adjacent private property rather than on the land currently occupied by the airport, that might mitigate some of the pressure to build housing on airport land. The public and multiple bodies including the Recreation and Parks Commission and the Airport Commission should be part of this planning effort. As this may be a lengthy process, I think that the City should begin the planning process prior to the closing of the airport, perhaps even by 2025.
Answer to Neighborhood Council Question:
I support converting the airport into a park. In order to reduce pressures to use the airport land for other purposes, I think that the City needs to conduct a regional plan for the airport that includes the airport land and other nearby properties. This inclusive planning process hopefully will allow important needs such as housing and neighborhood-serving commercial to be placed near the airport but not on actual airport land.
Oscar de la Torre
https://www.vote4oscar.com
Position Statement:
I support providing more park and green space at the SM Airport. I want to immediately address the environmental concerns and find ways to mitigate noise and air pollution. I do not trust the current council’s intention to “close the airport” as they have continuously rolled over on every development project before them. If by “closing” the airport this means opening the flood gates to more irresponsible development then I am not for closing the airport. I do believe that we can expand green and open space and mitigate the problems at the airport and also I believe that we will have cleaner technologies that will allow us to use the airport without the noise & air pollution.
Answer to Neighborhood Council Question:
Yes, I support expanding green space at the Santa Monica Airport. I would also move to prohibit jets from flying out of the SM Airport. I would like to see cleaner and quieter technologies to eliminate the noise and air pollution emanating from the airport.
Position Statement:
I support providing more park and green space at the SM Airport. I want to immediately address the environmental concerns and find ways to mitigate noise and air pollution. I do not trust the current council’s intention to “close the airport” as they have continuously rolled over on every development project before them. If by “closing” the airport this means opening the flood gates to more irresponsible development then I am not for closing the airport. I do believe that we can expand green and open space and mitigate the problems at the airport and also I believe that we will have cleaner technologies that will allow us to use the airport without the noise & air pollution.
Answer to Neighborhood Council Question:
Yes, I support expanding green space at the Santa Monica Airport. I would also move to prohibit jets from flying out of the SM Airport. I would like to see cleaner and quieter technologies to eliminate the noise and air pollution emanating from the airport.
Mario Fonda-Bonardi
No Website Link
Position Statement:
I fully believe a regional park needs to be built and funded when the airport is closed. The park's roads can also be productively used to reduce the traffic gridlock at the south east corner of Sunset Park relieving Pico, Ocean Park, Bundy and 23rd street. The park planning should involve a robust community process including differentiated park activities, a unifying theme, funding sources, environmental cleanup if required and a credible timeline.
Answer to Neighborhood Council Question:
I fully believe a regional park needs to be built and funded when the airport is closed. The park's roads can also be productively used to reduce the traffic gridlock at the south east corner of Sunset Park relieving Pico, Ocean Park, Bundy and 23rd street. The park planning should involve a robust community process including differentiated park activities, a unifying theme, funding sources, environmental cleanup if required and a credible timeline.
Position Statement:
I fully believe a regional park needs to be built and funded when the airport is closed. The park's roads can also be productively used to reduce the traffic gridlock at the south east corner of Sunset Park relieving Pico, Ocean Park, Bundy and 23rd street. The park planning should involve a robust community process including differentiated park activities, a unifying theme, funding sources, environmental cleanup if required and a credible timeline.
Answer to Neighborhood Council Question:
I fully believe a regional park needs to be built and funded when the airport is closed. The park's roads can also be productively used to reduce the traffic gridlock at the south east corner of Sunset Park relieving Pico, Ocean Park, Bundy and 23rd street. The park planning should involve a robust community process including differentiated park activities, a unifying theme, funding sources, environmental cleanup if required and a credible timeline.
Ana Maria Jara
https://www.anamariajara4citycouncil.com
Answer to Neighborhood Council Question:
I support a great park at the former Airport. It is an opportunity for a landmark multi-purpose use and open space. It will not be ‘cheap’….but we must not lose the opportunity.
Answer to Neighborhood Council Question:
I support a great park at the former Airport. It is an opportunity for a landmark multi-purpose use and open space. It will not be ‘cheap’….but we must not lose the opportunity.
Jon Mann
No Website Link
Position Statement:
Answer to Neighborhood Council Question:
I was the first candidate for City Council to advocate for closing the Airport in 2015 when the lease expired in 2015 and to use the property as a park as was originally envisioned by the 1926 bond! If elected I will fight for residents to make all decisions about the park, and block attempts by scurrilous developers!
Position Statement:
- Charter Amendment LC -- I was the first candidate for City Council to advocate closing SMO immediately after the lease expired in 2015.
- Consent Decree -- Santa Monica residents and only residents should determine any and all development of Airport to Park!
- Resolution No. 11026 (CCS) -- I have long advocated a Virtual Town Hall on the City website so residents can participate in the decision making process. We have expert accountants in our city who can audit the budget line item at a time to reach consensus on how to streamline the bloated budget and terminate overpaid bureaucrats!
- Community and Environmental Impacts (noise, pollution, dangers, costs) -- City pays all noise, pollution, dangers, costs and/or sues for reimbursement!
- Airport Finances (aviation vs. non-aviation revenues, leases, landing fees, debt to general fund, operating losses, public subsidies, self-sustainability requirements, etc.) -- Increase fees!
- Airport Operations (hours, flight schools, pattern flights, private jets, historical trends) -- NO JETS! Limit operations; no more flight schools, no pattern flights, practice takeoffs and landings, etc.
- Aviation and Airport Litigation (Part 16, Part 13, lawsuits) -- Proceed til settled and for all future challenges!
- Public Land Uses (excess aviation land) -- The 1906 bond was originally for this land to be a park, NOT as an airport! There will be a battle with developers over this valuable property; they will LOSE!
- Santa Monica Park Plan, General Plan, and Environmental Review -- Work closely with residents; we must have final say!
- Private Aviation, NBAA, AOPA -- Helicopter pad for emergency only.
Answer to Neighborhood Council Question:
I was the first candidate for City Council to advocate for closing the Airport in 2015 when the lease expired in 2015 and to use the property as a park as was originally envisioned by the 1926 bond! If elected I will fight for residents to make all decisions about the park, and block attempts by scurrilous developers!
Todd Mentch
https://www.stopbeingshocked.com
Answer to Neighborhood Council Question:
YES! I voted for that Measure LC in 2014. And I agree that this quadrant of SM is truly "park poor-ish" We need to remember the location: more Los Angeles city residents will use that park than Santa Monica residents. How can we ensure that the SM taxpayer is represented well by services provided at the future park? Can we partner with LA in funding open space creation?
Answer to Neighborhood Council Question:
YES! I voted for that Measure LC in 2014. And I agree that this quadrant of SM is truly "park poor-ish" We need to remember the location: more Los Angeles city residents will use that park than Santa Monica residents. How can we ensure that the SM taxpayer is represented well by services provided at the future park? Can we partner with LA in funding open space creation?
Terry O'Day
https://www.terryoday.com
Thanks for your continued vigilance as we make progress toward our vision of an SMO Park. I am proud that the council during this last term took the historic step of closing the airport, reducing jet access, and staying focused on the clear consensus in the community for parks and open space at the airport property. The results are remarkable in a short time and the quality of life around the airport has improved palpably.
Over the next four years we must start the planning process for the park land. This will include community engagement, land use planning, architecture, costs estimates, identifying funding, and more. At the same time, we will continue to tighten operations to reduce the pollution and noise impacts residents still face and make a smooth transition to the airport’s future. With reductions in our city’s workforce, we have to ensure that we have staff that are committed to this effort and understand the community’s resolve.
We cannot be naïve to think that the fight is over at the airport. Aviation interests continue to challenge our every step at the FAA. Although we have won at the ballot box, they still threaten with ballot measures. Again, this is why I appreciate your continued vigilance.
Answer to Neighborhood Council Question:
The vision to transform our park into a great regional park for the westside is one of the most compelling reasons to continue to serve on the council. We need to start now with planning, architecture and civic engagement.
Thanks for your continued vigilance as we make progress toward our vision of an SMO Park. I am proud that the council during this last term took the historic step of closing the airport, reducing jet access, and staying focused on the clear consensus in the community for parks and open space at the airport property. The results are remarkable in a short time and the quality of life around the airport has improved palpably.
Over the next four years we must start the planning process for the park land. This will include community engagement, land use planning, architecture, costs estimates, identifying funding, and more. At the same time, we will continue to tighten operations to reduce the pollution and noise impacts residents still face and make a smooth transition to the airport’s future. With reductions in our city’s workforce, we have to ensure that we have staff that are committed to this effort and understand the community’s resolve.
We cannot be naïve to think that the fight is over at the airport. Aviation interests continue to challenge our every step at the FAA. Although we have won at the ballot box, they still threaten with ballot measures. Again, this is why I appreciate your continued vigilance.
Answer to Neighborhood Council Question:
The vision to transform our park into a great regional park for the westside is one of the most compelling reasons to continue to serve on the council. We need to start now with planning, architecture and civic engagement.
Christine Parra
http://www.christineparra.com
Answer to Neighborhood Council Question:
I fully support the vision of transforming the Airport land into a park and recreational space. I also think it would be a perfect location for a combined Senior and Child Care Center. But at the end of the day, I am in full support of what the residents want.
Answer to Neighborhood Council Question:
I fully support the vision of transforming the Airport land into a park and recreational space. I also think it would be a perfect location for a combined Senior and Child Care Center. But at the end of the day, I am in full support of what the residents want.
Ted Winterer
https://www.tedforcouncil.com
Position Statement:
When I first ran for City Council in 2008 I was one of only two candidates advocating for the closure of SMO (the other was Jon Mann, to give him credit where credit is due). Consequently, of the three meager endorsements I received that year one was from Marty Rubin’s group CRAAP (the other were The Sierra Club and the LA County Democratic Party). I haven’t changed my tune since – SMO is an unsafe and polluting relic from a bygone era and a park which serves many is a much better use of public land than an airport for very few. In fact, SMO supporters have harassed me with both a subpoena and a FPPC complaint, both of which were dismissed.
When aviation proponents put Measure D on the ballot in 2014 I voted to place the countermeasure LC on the ballot; raised a significant portion of the funds for the Yes on LC campaign; steered the Yes on LC committee to campaign consultant Sharon Gilpin who waged a successful effort despite being outspent 10-1 by the proponents of Measure D; and celebrated with SMO opponents when LC passed. I do think those of us who want to close SMO should anticipate a “Son of D” measure sponsored by funding from AOPA and NBAA some time prior to 2028 – we should be prepared to once again campaign against such an effort.
I voted to approve the Consent Decree and Resolution #11026 and I’m pleased we have a clear path to SMO closure at the end of 2028 along with a reduction in jet traffic which significantly exceeds our initial projections of the beneficial consequences of runway shortening. And I look forward to starting the planning and environmental/financial analyses required to move forward with a park on the SMO land. I know some have concerns about possible changes to the State’s Surplus Land Act requiring housing production instead of a park, but I will use what influence I have with our legislators to oppose such revisions.
In the interim we have removed the excess runway and taken back for non-aviation uses the former tie-down parcel for a future expansion of the existing Airport Park. We also continue to contest Part 16 claims brought against the City by AOPA, NBAA and others. And the increase in landing fees and their application to both takeoffs and landings have reduced the annoying touch-and-go operations by flight schools. Now that we rid ourselves of master leases at SMO which directed profits to private aviation rather than the public, the Airport Fund is running in the black and the debt to the General Fund is being repaid. The big outstanding issue is what happens to the dollars in the Fund when SMO closes: the City claims we retain the use of those funds while the FAA asserts otherwise.
Finally, I look forward to the day when the Airport Commission is obsolete and its oversight of SMO replaced by the Recreation and Parks Commission.
Answer to Neighborhood Council Question:
Yes, of course. When I first ran for Council in 2008 Jon Mann and I were the only candidates advocating for SMO closure and one of the few endorsements I received then was from CRAAP. To prepare for SMO closure on 1/1/29 the City will as soon as our reduced staffing allows develop a plan for the Great Park and financing tools to build it (revenues from existing leases no longer allocated to airport operations; possibly bonding against that revenue stream; State and County grants; private philanthropy, etc.).
Position Statement:
When I first ran for City Council in 2008 I was one of only two candidates advocating for the closure of SMO (the other was Jon Mann, to give him credit where credit is due). Consequently, of the three meager endorsements I received that year one was from Marty Rubin’s group CRAAP (the other were The Sierra Club and the LA County Democratic Party). I haven’t changed my tune since – SMO is an unsafe and polluting relic from a bygone era and a park which serves many is a much better use of public land than an airport for very few. In fact, SMO supporters have harassed me with both a subpoena and a FPPC complaint, both of which were dismissed.
When aviation proponents put Measure D on the ballot in 2014 I voted to place the countermeasure LC on the ballot; raised a significant portion of the funds for the Yes on LC campaign; steered the Yes on LC committee to campaign consultant Sharon Gilpin who waged a successful effort despite being outspent 10-1 by the proponents of Measure D; and celebrated with SMO opponents when LC passed. I do think those of us who want to close SMO should anticipate a “Son of D” measure sponsored by funding from AOPA and NBAA some time prior to 2028 – we should be prepared to once again campaign against such an effort.
I voted to approve the Consent Decree and Resolution #11026 and I’m pleased we have a clear path to SMO closure at the end of 2028 along with a reduction in jet traffic which significantly exceeds our initial projections of the beneficial consequences of runway shortening. And I look forward to starting the planning and environmental/financial analyses required to move forward with a park on the SMO land. I know some have concerns about possible changes to the State’s Surplus Land Act requiring housing production instead of a park, but I will use what influence I have with our legislators to oppose such revisions.
In the interim we have removed the excess runway and taken back for non-aviation uses the former tie-down parcel for a future expansion of the existing Airport Park. We also continue to contest Part 16 claims brought against the City by AOPA, NBAA and others. And the increase in landing fees and their application to both takeoffs and landings have reduced the annoying touch-and-go operations by flight schools. Now that we rid ourselves of master leases at SMO which directed profits to private aviation rather than the public, the Airport Fund is running in the black and the debt to the General Fund is being repaid. The big outstanding issue is what happens to the dollars in the Fund when SMO closes: the City claims we retain the use of those funds while the FAA asserts otherwise.
Finally, I look forward to the day when the Airport Commission is obsolete and its oversight of SMO replaced by the Recreation and Parks Commission.
Answer to Neighborhood Council Question:
Yes, of course. When I first ran for Council in 2008 Jon Mann and I were the only candidates advocating for SMO closure and one of the few endorsements I received then was from CRAAP. To prepare for SMO closure on 1/1/29 the City will as soon as our reduced staffing allows develop a plan for the Great Park and financing tools to build it (revenues from existing leases no longer allocated to airport operations; possibly bonding against that revenue stream; State and County grants; private philanthropy, etc.).
-- END --
To learn more about the future of our public land and the closure of Santa Monica Airport visit: www.smofuture.com.
