Dear Carl:

For the last several months, the City of Burbank and the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority have devoted many hours and substantial public resources in an effort to resolve the dispute over replacement of the terminal and expansion of the Airport. After almost a generation of animosity, we knew that this would be difficult but I do not think that anyone anticipated the obstacles that have been put in our way by the very parties who encouraged us to reach a settlement in the first place. I am, of course, referring to the Federal Aviation Administration and the airport users. After several months of vague references to FAA’s concerns with the Framework, FAA Administrator Garvey recently made the agency’s position abundantly clear by stating in a letter to the Los Angeles Times that "several elements of the agreement violate federal law."

In the face of these unwarranted and irresponsible attacks, we do not believe that it would be a wise expenditure of public funds or time to continue to work at this time to negotiate implementation of the Framework.

The City and the Authority worked hard to reach an agreement that would serve the people who use the Airport, while still protecting the community around it. Burbank felt that striking that balance was the most responsible way to exercise its power, as confirmed by state and federal courts, to decide the conditions under which a new airport terminal will be built in our community.

We spent months of tough negotiations seeking a solution that would serve both local and national interests. We invited the FAA and the air carriers to participate in those discussions but they repeatedly refused to do so. The Authority and the City came up with workable and practical solutions to our local problems. That is what FAA Administrator Jane Garvey had encouraged us to find.

Now, the FAA once again appears to have caved in to the pressures from the airlines. The air carriers requested that the FAA block the Framework from becoming an enforceable agreement and the FAA abandoned its commitment to a local solution in response to that siren call from the airlines. The FAA launched its own attacks immediately after the Framework was signed, but the agency never has identified the specific elements of the Framework that it thought would violate federal law, nor has the agency suggested a better means by which the Authority and the City could achieve the "local solution" sought by Administrator Garvey. Administrator Garvey capped her agency’s remarkable record of ambivalence with her recent letter to the Los Angeles Times that several unidentified elements of the Framework violate federal law in unspecified ways.

While the FAA and the carriers certainly have the prerogative to criticize our Framework, that prerogative carries with it a responsibility to work with the parties to develop an alternative approach to build a new terminal that meets the tests that the City of Burbank has the legal right to apply. Let me be clear, though on two points: First, the FAA and the carriers know the City’s minimum requirements and they should not waste their time devising an approach that does not provide the kind of permanent certainty and legal guarantees contemplated by the Framework. Second, Burbank is ready and willing to continue negotiations toward a Development Agreement but the FAA’s statements hang as such a cloud over those efforts that we do not believe that there is any realistic chance of success absent affirmative FAA support.

The City has concluded that it is imprudent to proceed with the negotiation of the development agreement until the FAA has formally told us that the Framework is viable. Specifically, in order for the City to move forward, the City needs for the Authority to secure a explicit commitment from the FAA that: (1) it will work cooperatively to implement the Framework; (2) it will help find creative and productive solutions to any legal problems it presents; and (3) it will commit to helping ensure that the preconditions to terminal development are drafted and implemented in a legally defensible manner.

The City continues to believe that the settlement outlined in the Framework represents a responsible resolution to our dispute. We do not believe, however, that the City and the Authority should continue working toward its implementation unless the FAA actively supports that effort. Time does not allow us the luxury of waiting any longer for a concrete response from the FAA. We need clear direction from the agency by the end of February 2000 if we are to have any probability of negotiating a Development Agreement within the time constraints imposed on us.

Sincerely,

Stacey Murphy

Mayor

cc:

FAA Administrator Jane Garvey

FAA Acting Associate Administrator Louise Maillett

Congressmen Howard Berman, Brad Sherman, James Rogan

State Sen. Adam Schiff

Pasadena Mayor Bill Bogaard

Glendale Mayor Ginger Bremberg