FIS Study Results Meeting

10/25/2016

As most are aware the FIS study has been released and was presented last week to the AAC and the public. According to the Gazette it was attended by nearly 200 people - some who had never attended an airport meeting before. The public asked questions and the AAC panel and the tw0 Jacobs representatives advised they would not answer any questions. That did change after most of the audience left out of frustration, but few were left to address the group. Maybe tonight the format will be different?

The second meeting is scheduled for today at 6:00 and is being presented to the Economic Development Commission. Both agenda items are to receive and file. These two bodies are not being asked for their input or recommendations. We believe the two meetings are being held to relieve pressure from the city council.

Very interesting that the study which 6 of the council members voted for, stating they valued having more information to help them make their best decision, did not attend the first meeting. We shall see how that holds for tonights meeting being held at City Hall in the council chambers.

We have requested that the city council hold a study session on November 15th rather than taking the vote without a full vetting in public - regardless of their decision it will important that the public demonstrate their opinions at that time. Mark your calendars! Jet Blue and other LGB tenants who will benefit from this action will be there en masse, so plan accordingly.

More details to follow.........

Raman Vasishth

11/10/2016 06:14:58 pm

I wanted to let you know that the CD 5 office has agreed to address the FIS in an open community meeting in the future. Because of the City laws, she is not allowed to speak on her position and must remain neutral. I have requested that she also request that other Councilmembers come to the meeting and the office said they would try. If one comes, it appears that with be District 4. CD 5 office agreed they would also extend the Q&A time if more time was needed.

There is no specific time designated yet. The mayors office is aware it's a hot button issue for District 5 and has agreed to extend the council person deadline to 12/16/16 as I previously mentioned.

Respectfully, I know many of the people reading this will talk about the noise ordinance, but IMO, if you do, it will not resonate with any of the elected officials. Even if I can't get people to accept that statement, I ask that everyone actually read the physical study and go through the presentation and find a set of questions you have that you don't thing answers the mail if you are against it.

A major problem other Council Members have already stated is that the report does not address LB issues and appears more regional. Then when you look into the hard numbers, there is no back up to support the conclusions reached and numbers reached other that the company subtracted to another company who used a computer model they developed. This type of data generation has no way of being validated and can be manipulated to support any set of numbers people may want. Also, there is also no analysis to what the risks are if the city doesn't go with the FIS. If you can ask specific questions along similar lines of thinking, perhaps the city will feel compelled to get the true figures.

Some of the increase in city revenues reply on higher hotel occupancy. It seems strange since the numbers of flights cannot increase and there is no data if international travelers (from wherever they are going to or coming from) will chose to stay in this city. If that is so, there is no data presented that would shows, even today, how many international traveler come to Long Beach for business as most business travelers travel as close as possible to the business they are working with.

I'm just trying to help those that are against the expansion do develop alternate roads and strategies while you have the time.

Comments are closed.

FIS Study Results Meeting

Categories

Archives