AGUA DULCE AIRPARK ISSUE

ACTION PLAN OUTLINE

Date Submitted: 3/7/05

Name of Group: Concerned Citizens of Agua Dulce (CCAD)

Contact Person(s): Patrick Green, Ramona Hall, Kaye Kirkwood

Mailing Address: 33201 Agua Dulce Canyon Rd #4, Agua Dulce, CA 91390

Email Addresses: psgreen@flash.net, rahpsych@aol.com, kayekirkwood@aol.com

GOALS:

• Revoke the airpark’s current SP 1404 permit, which has not been and cannot be enforced
• Temporarily close the airport, which has been operating in violation of said permit since it was reopened approximately 4 years ago
• Require a full disclosure of “the Master Plan” for the airpark facilities (is it an airpark, is it a recreational membership club, is it a planned housing community?)
• Require a full Environmental Impact Report, per CEQA regulations, if and when the airpark applies for a new permit
• Establish very specific guidelines regarding airpark and flight operations, prior to allowing the airpark to reopen
• Establish a community “watch” group to oversee operations and report violations
• Establish an enforceable procedure for dealing with violations (if this is not possible, as with SP 1404, then the airpark should remain closed permanently or be converted for other usage)

MISSION STATEMENT:

The mission of CCAD is to protect our homes, our families, our school, our environment and our natural resources from excessive noise, transient traffic, air traffic, dangerous flying, dust, disruptive and abusive activities and anything else that negatively impacts our lives and our properties. We are dedicated to maintaining the peaceful, quiet, rural and dignified community we live in and love.

Article II of CCAD’s bylaws confirms our mission:

“Concerned Citizens of Agua Dulce is proudly dedicated to the preservation of country life in Agua Dulce. The purpose of CCAD is to maintain Agua Dulce’s rural, equestrian lifestyle. CCAD shall promote and protect Agua Dulce’s natural habitat, provide for the health and safety of its residents, and serve as an information resource for our community. CCAD will also use all means and methods necessary for achieving our goal of maintaining Agua Dulce’s peaceful, country environment.”

POSITION STATEMENT:

The Agua Dulce Airpark is operating under a permit that is out dated and non-enforceable. The original use of the airpark, established in 1957, was intended as a very small, private landing strip for local residents to commute to work and for recreational weekend flying, at a time when the Santa Clarita and Antelope Valleys were still considered remote and our freeway system was not yrt available to this area. Throughout it’s turbulent history, the residents continually banded to fight expansion or changes that would be detrimental to the community. Over the years, the number of houses and the population of the town have increased significantly. This adds an additional question as to the safety of the airpark and landing zones in 2005 and in the future. Larger aircraft and extended flight operations adversely affect our environment, our homes and our community and must NOT be allowed.

CCAD does not support an airpark that is intrusive to the health, safety and lifestyle of this community!

CCAD does not support:

• Construction, grading, extension of tie-down areas or runways that may impact our water and other resources
• Pumping gas and oil that may be seeping into our aquifer
• 55 new hangars built over our aquifer and blue line stream
• 65-based aircraft, guest and commuter traffic, with 1000’s of sanctioned flight operations
• Turbo-props, turbo-jets or any plane that produces unacceptable noise levels
• Instructional or flight school operations
• Air traffic directly over our school
• Our town used as a weekend recreational facility for out-of-town pilots in total disregard of the peace and quiet our residents would like to enjoy
• Aerial acrobatics, low flying aircraft, operations before or after sunset, or any other flight operations that could endanger or homes and families
• Using excessive water on fields, runways and other areas
• A clean-hands waiver, or any waiver, with respect to any prior construction that was either un-permitted or found to be in violation of permits or county regulations
• Night filming or activities of any kind that disrupt or annoy residents, due to noise, lights or hazards (such as fire)

CCAD does not accept the supposed negotiations between individuals of the Civic and the airpark. CCAD does not accept the proposed drafts or “MOU” resulting from these supposed negotiations. CCAD maintains that these meetings and resultant proposals were held in violation of the Civic’s bylaws and in NO WAY represent the desires or wishes of this community.

REASONING:

The airpark has continued to operate with no regard for the excessive violations incurred or repeated complaints from nearby residents. Since the airpark reopened, the owners (whoever they actually turn out to be!) and airpark management continued to ignore residents’ complaints and offers to meet. They continued to act in a “screw you” attitude to this community. Only after the county agreed to hold a public hearing did the airpark agree to meet. The 11^th-hour “proposal”, concocted by airpark counsel and a few misguided individuals in our community, was virtually dropped in our laps at the hearing. The commissioners were lead to believe this draft proposal was sanctioned by the community. It was NOT. To make matters even worse, each successive draft of this proposal has allowed additional airpark demands with little or no concessions in return. CCAD maintains that the individuals involved do not represent the community, do not support the needs of the community, and certainly are not trained negotiators who even understand the process. Finally, it is CCAD’s supposition that the “Memorandum of Understanding”, that some would have us believe is tantamount to a legal and binding contract, is in fact NOT a contract and not enforceable. Its only purpose is to give the commissioners a false impression that the airpark is altruistically working with the community and therefore they do not need to be involved. If the county and commissioners withdraw their support now, the airpark is left to do as it wishes!

Closing the airpark, reviewing the effects of the airpark on this community and the environment and evaluating noise and safety issues before allowing it to reopen…that is the only viable and acceptable action for Agua Dulce at this time.

LEADERSHIP:

This action will be lead by the CCAD board, on behalf of it’s growing membership, and other residents in this community who are willing to fight for their homes and lifestyle.

SUPPORT:

This community may be divided in how best to accomplish the means, but we are not divided on what we all want: our town as it was before the airpark tried to change it! This community has repeatedly and unequivocally stated that it does not want unlimited and unchecked flight operations. We do not want the increased noise and dust resulting from turbo-jets and helicopters permitted to land at the airpark. CCAD membership has voted on 3 separate occasions to revoke SP 1404 and take whatever steps necessary to prevent expansion of the airport. A random mailing conducted by the Civic Association showed an overwhelming agreement with regard to airpark issues. Approximately 1000 surveys were mailed. Of those responding:

· 95% said NO turbo jets

· 84% said NO helicopters

· 95.8% said NO night operations

· 56.8% favored revocation of SP 1404!

ACTIONS TO ACHIEVE GOALS:

This community and its various organizations MUST take the time to “regroup” and join forces for the good of the community. We have made significant strides with the county and regional planning; the public hearing was a major coup for our little town! That means we are finally being heard. This is the only reason the airpark is so intent on getting us to agree to their demands NOW!

We can use this leverage if we:

• Do not give in to veiled threats that this is the “best deal we can get”
• Band together to fight this fight, as we have never done before
• Take the time to develop “our” demands and proposal first; only then do we sit down to negotiate
• Recruit members of the community who have a working knowledge of the negotiating process; perhaps even direct experience
• Continue sending letters and emails to the Journal, to the commissioners, to the county and other officials, making sure they know what we want
• Continue documenting and reporting every airpark violation, disruptive noise and low-flying planes to the proper authorities
• Continue voicing our complaints directly to airpark management
• Keep up the momentum and the pressure so that regional planning and the county MUST stay involved and respond to our issues

To make this work will require suppression of egos and a willingness to work together. Unfortunately, that will not be easy. But we can do it! The alternative is NOT acceptable.

DON’T give up and DON’T give in

PROCESS:

1. County revokes SP 1404
2. Airpark may request a temporary permit to maintain current operation
3. AD residents will vote approval or denial
4. Airpark will apply for new permit, which will trigger EIR and CEQA study
5. Airpark will conform to all EIR and CEQA regulations and any limitations noted
6. Representatives from ADTC, Civic and CCAD will form a small airpark committee to meet regularly to propose acceptable airpark operations
7. Airpark committee will keep detailed minutes, open to any resident, and will send written status reports to the county
8. Proposals will be voted on by members first (ADTC, Civic and CCAD) and then the community before presenting to airpark
9. Airpark committee will have the authority (if so granted by the community) to enter into negotiations with the airpark
10. Retain legal counsel acceptable to the 3 community groups (not each independently) to represent the entire community in negotiations

TIMELINE:

Steps 6 through 10 can commence immediately and should remain ongoing. Timeline to complete a new permit is subject to various factors; what and when applied for, scheduling, conducting and completing EIR and CEQA, implementing EIR and CEQA requirements, etc.

EXPERT ASSISTANCE:

Legal assistance for advice and negotiations is recommended. May be a combination of hired and pro-bono work. Source of funds may be varied. “Chain of reporting” to be determined.

ANTICIPATED AND KNOWN COSTS:

Unknown or currently not available.

COMMUNICATION PLAN:

Letters, emails, newspaper articles, websites, community meetings and presentations, published minutes of “tri-group” airpark committee. Periodic surveys and feedback to continually gauge community awareness and temperature. Whatever is necessary to keep the community and residents informed of the issues, proposals, actions and recommendations.

CONTIGENCY PLANS:

Impossible to predict. Community MUST stand firm and united to achieve goals. Keep lines of communication OPEN so concerns can be shared and heard.

KEY SUPPORT GROUPS/PEOPLE:

• Everyone who has a stake in this community!
• County and Regional Planning
• ADTC, Civic, CCAD “triumvirate” - and other community groups (acting together for the benefit of this town)

END RESULT:

Desired:

· Airpark operations either eliminated or airpark remains a small, quiet, respectful, law-abiding business entity available for our local pilots or emergency traffic only

· Airpark owners and management retain community standards and cognizant of our resource issues

· Limited “other” activities that provide a benefit to the community without annoying or disrupting neighbors

Alternatives:

· Too many to speculate. None acceptable.

Worst Case:

· Unlimited growth of airpark

· Increased air traffic and noise

· More violations

· Proposals/agreements/permits that cannot be enforced

· Resulting decrease in property values

· A town not fit to live in

SUMMARY:

Don’t be meekly led to the slaughter house! Our homes and our town are worth fighting for. If the airpark is truly willing to be an asset to this community; if they have any scruples; if they care one iota for this town and the people who live…then we can and will resolve our differences and find a compromise that we can all live with. However, if the airpark’s agenda is solely motivated by personal profit, then it is unlikely we can resolve our issues and the airpark needs to be permanently shut down!