The Pinocchio Chronicles #1: Palomar, County & FAA, #288

How many Washington Post Newspaper Pinocchios did Supervisor Jim Desmond earn last Wednesday at the Board of Supervisors meeting?

He opposed rescinding the McClellan-Palomar Airport Master Plan. Opposed decertifying the PMP ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT. And made some rather amazing statements. Let’s see how accurate he was. We list his claims from the BOS 5/5/21 BOS hearing tape. Then comment. Our Pinocchio scale goes from one to four growing noses.

JD Claim 1. I’ve heard a lot of comments today saying don’t change Palomar from an [FAA] B-II classification. The designation is not up to us or Carlsbad. The FAA has taken full control of airport classifications.

JD Claim 1 Reply: 3 out of 4 Pinocchio noses. JD’s statement has a grain of truth: The FAA does determine airport classifications. The FAA uses aircraft size and speed to decide how new and expanded airports should be designed. It is also true that the FAA relies on pilots to choose the airports they use. And pilots can, if safe, land larger, faster aircraft at lesser rated airports.

But the FAA has said for many years that it does not force airports on communities. If a “local airport sponsor” (FAA term) like the County of San Diego wants a larger airport, the FAA will likely fund an expansion if the sponsor wants it, applies for an FAA grant to improve the airport, and documents the need for it.

But – contrary to JD’s claim – the local planning decision is that of the local airport sponsor unless the airport sponsor has chosen to share responsibility with other entities (as in the Joint Powers Agreement among Burbank, Glendale, and Pasadena and as in the CUP 172 agreement that county has with Carlsbad). Easy to prove.

Proof 1: Go to YouTube. Search for the FAA YouTube 2018 Video entitled FAA 101 and lasting 6.41 minutes. Go to about 3 minutes to hear what the FAA Airport division does and to see the screen shot included in this article.

As the FAA YouTube video says, and the screen shot shows, when reviewing proposed airport projects, the FAA considers economic and environmental factors to protect the public investment but “preserves local proprietary rights.” In other words, the FAA does not force land use decisions on the local airport sponsor.

Proof 2: When local airport sponsors like county receive FAA airport improvement program (AIP) grants, the sponsor must accept the FAA Grant Assurances. A standard Grant Assurance provides that – after accepting FAA grant monies – the sponsor must keep the airport open for at least 20 years. The city of Santa Monica announced two years ago that it was refusing more federal monies and closing its airport when its FAA grant stranglehold ended, in part because it was so close to LAX – just as Palomar is only 3 minutes air time from San Diego International Airport.

If – as JD implies – the FAA exercises full powers over airports and local airport sponsors, the Grant Assurances would not need to say that local sponsors will keep the airport open as a condition of receiving federal airport-improvement money.

IF Supervisor Desmond or Board members or the County Director of Airports Cameron Humphres disagrees with anything said above, the solution is simple.

Let’s have the Board of Supervisors write the FAA and ask: Must the County of San Diego convert CRQ [federal designator of Palomar] from a B-II airport to a D-III airport, and if so, please state the federal law that the FAA relies on for that position and explain how it is consistent with the U.S. Constitution 10th Amendment, which reserves certain decisions to the states?”

If the Board won’t write that letter, you know what that means. The BOS wants to pull the wool over your eyes. It may also explain why the FAA has been unwilling to send representatives to the Palomar Airport Advisory Committee to answer community questions.

Tomorrow: More JD inaccuracies.