AIRPORT TO PARK

I have been following and commenting for months now about the cry for the closure of the SMO airport. I have read the hundreds of unfounded claims of many emotional people that obviously do not understand the implications of closing this historic and valuable treasure of the Los Angeles basin. Many have claimed the pollution is the concern. Hanging their hat on a report by some UCLA group that claims to have determined there is a serous health concerns that the residents are faced to endure. The problem is Santa Monica has the best air quality in the LA basin. In addition most fail to read between the lines on this report where it clearly indicates that the pollution levels, while they exist are the lowest of any in the basin. So pollution yes, but clearly not as serious as made out. Many claim that the Jets send a " noticeable plume of black smoke that blankets the local neighborhoods with this terrible black soot". I remember at one meeting a local home owner bringing in an orange from his tree in the back yard claiming the black on the orange was soot from the jets. The reality was the soot was a fungus that orange trees have been getting in this region for decades, not related to any pollution source. So hysteria seems to be the tool of many. Never mind that engine manufacturers over the last decade have produced the most efficient engines known to man that are not only quiet but are polluting less and less every year. Mandates in this country require constant improvements to these engines, so the claims of many are again false and misleading. The latest attack on the airport is coming from our trust worthy politicians is the claim that the airport is a financial drain on the city. That it operates at a loss of well over a million dollars a year. Well again this is another misleading claim. The airport revenues as provided by the Santa Monica Airport Commission indicate a out of pocket estimated expense of around 1.5 for 2012. What it does not indicate is the revenue stream as provided by the actual dollars fed into the local economy by way of taxes and jobs. Santa Monica Airport averages, even in these hard economic times a documented 275 million dollars. Throw in the 1475 jobs and its pretty clear the airport is a major revenue stream for the City of Santa Monica. So throw out the false claim of the airport wasting city money. The last thing I would like to cover is the claim that a park would be a logical replacement for the airport. This of course seems to be agreed upon by those screaming for closure. Well lets look at the park idea for a moment. A park does not generate a positive cash flow any kind from its use. Yes there are park programs and sports events of which never seem to cover the actual costs for those events. One only has to look at the Los Angeles County park and recreation statistics to see that the operating budget for a large park is astronomical. LA alone has a 43 million dollar budget just in simple upkeep costs alone. Santa Monica's proposed park would be the largest in the city, so imagine the costs associated with the operating budget on that. How do we plan on paying for that, taxes? Do people really want to reach into their pockets in these down economic times? So a park is really a pipe dream. No the only solution viable in these economic times if not remaining an airport is high density living and or mall. So throw out the reducing pollution idea. Cars and trucks are the number 1 cause of pollution my fellow citizens in this fine city we live. Add a tremendous traffic increase and you will be blanketing the already burdened neighborhoods with parking and traffic issues not to mention the serious increase in pollution.