My take on Rep. Jackie Speier's townhall meeting on airport noise back in October 2018 is here. In the interim 14 months we have been pursuing legal, small claims recourse in hopes of getting the City of SF's attention (you can read all about it using the SFO Airport link on the lower right hand side). We will hear the City and the airport's latest defense on January 21st. The parallel effort on governmental action occurs at the Airport Roundtable "Ground-based noise" subcommittee. In my post about that meeting, I noted that we need a greater sense of urgency on the issue of engine back blast. Right on cue, Jackie Speier has authored proposed legislation described by a member of our SFOrunwaynoise.com group who attended the last Airport Roundtable meeting like this:
• The most important point at this meeting was that Kathleen Wentworth (retired United Pilot working with Jackie Speier’s office) surprised us by announcing that Congresswoman Speier has introduced EIGHT pieces of legislation aimed at helping communities address AND CHANGE noise issues that affect them. Currently, curfews, flight paths, number of flights, etc. are all under the control of the FAA and there is no way for an impacted community to bring about change or force SFO or the FAA to negotiate policies that affect surrounding neighborhoods.
• Passage of any of these bills would be beneficial for all of us, as well as for the thousands of Americans across the country who are fighting similar issues with their airports. If passed, this legislation would give the public the ‘teeth’ to get something done. Please let Congresswoman Speier know that you appreciate her efforts on our behalf by contacting her office. While there are 8 bills, HR 5112, the LEAVE Act, specifically addresses GBN:
"As an airplane leaves from an airport, its takeoff generates significant amounts of ground based low-frequency noise and vibration impacting residents in the vicinity. While measurement, standards, and mitigation of airborne flight noise is well defined, low frequency noise and vibration caused by an airplane on the runway at high thrust levels accelerating for take-off is not yet established. The bill would lead to the establishment of standards and remedies related to ground-based noise (GBN).
If enacted, the bill would permit a state cause of action for GBN if a state has undertaken a study of GBN at an airport, determined the amount of GBN, and identified a level of substantial negative impact and any diminution in real property values caused by such GBN. Before a cause of action would be permissible:
a. the state must complete a study of ground-based noise at the airport in question
b. the state must set a limit for ground-based noise emanating from the airport
c. the airport would have to be shown to have exceeded that limit"
Rep. Speier and her colleague to our south, Anna Eshoo, held a press conference on Friday that the Daily Journal is reporting included these comments:
San Mateo County Supervisor David Pine said years of work by local officials about the problem have left them frustrated. “We haven’t moved the needle,” Pine said. “The FAA cares very little about noise.” Burlingame Councilman Ricardo Ortiz, who along with Goethals and Pine serves on the San Francisco International Airport Community Roundtable, said he welcomes Speier’s proposed legislation. “We can recommend little changes,” Ortiz said of local officials — who he said don’t really have any power over airport traffic.
And in the "This Should Get Their Attention" file:
SFO spokesman Doug Yakel said of the proposed legislation that, “We are reviewing the impact of the proposals and look forward to working with Congresswoman Speier to appropriately address the issues.”
I will follow-up with more details as they come available, but this is clearly progress! I'm looking forward to ensuring the judge is fully aware of this legislation since it buttresses our point about the continuing nuisance--a legal term that understates the problem.
Recent Comments