Long Beach Ends Talk of a Customs Facility, Will JetBlue Walk?

If there’s one thing we learned during the last election, it’s that misinformation, fear-mongering, and bullying are now a blueprint for success. The local anti-airport group here in Long Beach took that to heart and has now successfully killed any chance of a customs facility at Long Beach Airport in the near future. The level of misinformation and bullying was astounding (and frankly, impressive), and the city council fell for it by a surprisingly lopsided vote of 8 to 1 (kudos to Councilmember Dee Andrews for holding strong). With the decision having been made to not do anything, now the question becomes… will JetBlue bother sticking around?

If you want the long backstory, you can read this previous post of mine. In short, JetBlue wanted to be able to use some of its slots to go down to Mexico and Central America. It was willing to pay for most of the customs facility. To me, this seemed like a good opportunity to lock JetBlue in for awhile while getting concessions to help the city. If JetBlue was willing to agree to terms that made sense for Long Beach, this was a no-brainer. But yesterday was supposed to be a vote to allow the city to enter into those financial discussions. That will not be happening thanks to some very aggressive tactics by the local anti-airport group.

That group started probing months ago on ways to make its message stick that a customs facility was horrible. It coined the change an “expansion” despite the fact that the noise ordinance wouldn’t have changed and the number of commercial flights would be no different. It just would have changed where those airplanes were allowed to go after departing. After the study that the city council commissioned came out, the anti-airport folks decided to pick and choose which facts were acceptable. The report said that there wouldn’t be demand for all that many flights and it wouldn’t impact the noise ordinance. The anti-airport folks screamed that this wasn’t true. Yet when the report said few jobs would be created in the city, the anti-airport group treated that like gospel. Anything to support the narrative, and that was just the start.

The group threatened councilmembers (and the mayor) who dared to vote for the facility. If they voted for it, then this group would build “an army” to do everything possible to make sure they didn’t get re-elected. The group also threatened mass litigation efforts on behalf of residents. But wait, there’s more.

The group went on the attack against JetBlue. In general, I’d say nearly any community in the country would drool over the prospect of having JetBlue create a focus city at their airport let alone an international gateway, but not here in Long Beach. JetBlue is generally considered a good corporate citizen wherever it goes. It puts a lot of money into the community by building parks, sponsoring events, etc. But here in Long Beach, the anti-airport group made JetBlue out to be a villain, a prime example of an evil corporation. All that money the airline put in the city? It was only to bribe councilmembers to do their bidding. With this kind of climate, it’s a wonder any airline would bother sticking around.

Of course, JetBlue is a business, and it needs to make decisions based on the viability of any operation. After the vote last night, Rob Land, Senior Vice President Government Affairs & Associate General Counsel for the airline gave what I can only call a terse statement.

We are profoundly disappointed that after years of delay and a city-mandated study validating the safety, security and economic positive nature of the project, that the City Council would reject the development of a Federal Inspection Station at Long Beach Airport. JetBlue will evaluate its future plans for Long Beach, the greater Los Angeles area and California.

So will JetBlue stick around? The airline is in a really tough spot. See, despite the fear-based claims of the anti-airport group that so many airlines would want to fly to Long Beach, it’s really not a hugely desirable airport. Sure the customer experience is great, but the fares are low and that’s not what an airline likes to see. After having tried many different tactics to serve the airport, JetBlue had found a happy place flying short haul markets with a reduced schedule, especially in the winter. But last year, things changed.

When Southwest announced it was coming to town and it would gladly use slots temporarily not being utilized, JetBlue had to make a decision. It could have let Southwest ramp up and make life worse for JetBlue (11 of JetBlue’s 35 slots are used to fly to Vegas and Oakland, markets Southwest competes in) or it could have ramped up and tried to keep Southwest out. The downside to that, of course, is that with more capacity, fares would suffer even further.

JetBlue chose the latter option and has ramped up, but many assumed that was simply an effort to keep Southwest at bay until JetBlue could start using those slots to fly internationally. With that option off the table, at least for the foreseeable future, JetBlue has to make a decision once again.

With no option for international service on the horizon, JetBlue now has to justify its existence in Long Beach. That may be hard to do. This will go hand-in-hand with what JetBlue decides to do for an overall West Coast strategy. You can be sure Ontario started calling JetBlue about 5 minutes after the vote was done, but there aren’t any perfect options for JetBlue in Southern California right now. The only thing that is clear is that Long Beach doesn’t really want to help the airline with its future plans. It would not surprise me in the least to see JetBlue start to scale back its operation. I wouldn’t even be surprised if JetBlue eventually walked away entirely.

If JetBlue were to leave, it would be a huge loss for this community, though the anti-airport group would likely cheer the demise. The only good news is that today, there is another interested party. Southwest seems keen on scooping up slots to do more flying, but if that were the case, the destination footprint would be a lot less compelling. Judging by what we see at other surrounding airports, I’d expect a fully built-out Southwest would do the Bay Area, Vegas, Denver, and maybe Phoenix. I suppose there’s a long shot at Chicago or Dallas, but I’d be surprised. That’s a far cry from the breadth of options JetBlue provides today.

The only thing we can do now is wait and see what JetBlue decides to do on the West Coast in general. My guess is Long Beach is no longer going to be central to those plans. It’ll be lucky to be a part of them at all. It’s ironic to see this happen considering Long Beach’s motto is “The International City.”

Get Posts via Email When They Go Live or in a Weekly Digest

Leave a Reply

126 Comments on "Long Beach Ends Talk of a Customs Facility, Will JetBlue Walk?"

avatar
Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
abc
Guest

Bad decision by the LGB council. Really good write up Cranky.

jetBlue would be wise to pull out entirely.

davidp627
Member
What was the opposition’s rationale? That eventually allowing this type of international service will lead to larger planes, noise and traffic congestion? I’ve always thought it will get harder and harder for this type of “deep in the neighborhood” airport to be viable in the long run. i.e. the small airport built in a different era that has seen a lot of residential and commercial development encroachment, right up to its borders. Burbank is perhaps the best example. You are on a busy thoroughfare and it’s as if you turn left to enter a shopping center and right to enter… Read more »
Don Kemp
Guest
HUSH had person after person after person complain about noise, pollution, health risks and how this would all lead to the demise of the noise ordinance. They jammed the council chambers. Others were able to talk in favor now and then, but not many. It was clear at the outset what was going to happen when Councilperson Stacy Mungo made a motion to “receive and file” the FIS study, which means they were voting to table the issue indefinitely. I thought if you didn’t know better, you were watching a hearing on whether there should be an airport at all.… Read more »
Don Kemp
Guest
I’m sorry, my ranting got me lost answering your question. Bottom line, HUSH convinced residents a customs facility would lead to the loss of the precious noise ordinance and there would be larger planes taking off and landing 24/7. More noise, no sleep, more pollution, more disease and death. Seriously. They even had people saying on local blogs business travelers would be the only people flying internationally and business travelers bring prostitutes. (!) Long Beach would be the next LAX. Forget entirely the aviation industry has never considered this to be an option for KLGB. Forget Jet Blue will never… Read more »
Don Kemp
Guest
The anti-airport mafia even went so far as to unapologetically harass people on the local Next Door sites. I should know because i was one of them. They got me banned from my local site for posting in favor of the facility. They learned to flag or report every comment I wrote, whether or not it was about the facility. I got e-mails from Next Door telling me I needed to “get along with my neighbors”. Next Door inadvertently sent me a list of people who complained and all of them claimed no affiliation the HUSH mob, yet several of… Read more »
Itami
Guest

This really hits home how good VX would have been for B6’s West Coast presence.

LGB was always the most “JetBlue 1.0” kind of market in my opinion, but if the only alternatives are duking it out with WN in a bigger airport like SNA or BUR, moving to a smaller airport like ONT, or shrinking in the West Coast as a whole, what can they do?

Erik Griswold
Guest

Since when is ONT a smaller airport? It has no slots, can handle any size aircraft (does already for UPS and FedEx) and currently has mothballed gates. Oh, and it has an FIS already too.

Itami
Guest

Thanks. I had meant/thought it was a smaller market/catchment, but that would be wrong as well as I just learned. ONT has more passenger movements and destinations.

It’s good to be proven wrong if you get to learn something in the process.

GringoLoco
Member

Nothing that happens in People’s Republic of California surprises me any more. Disclosure: I am a native to San Diego, home to somewhat similar airport dramas lasting decades.

Long long long time ago, I was part of the group pushing for converting El Toro into a mixed used facility — as an attempt to further assuage the angst suffered by the “fat cats” living in Back Bay Newport. It was a total cluster**** made worse by having several layers of Feds also involved.

B6 has no good options.

BigDaddyJ
Member

Agreed. This is a specific variant of the usual California NIMBYisms that stem, indirectly, from the usual Prop. 13 stuff. Property values are all that matter, and any kind of potential hint of change that may or may not affect this is greeted with indignation.

How is Long Beach with regards to zoning? Are they like the rest of California in being extremely anti-growth?

IMO JetBlue should concede LGB and slowly build up LAX as space permits (or pick a different West Coast airport—since AA is pulling back from PHX, maybe there’ll eventually be space there…)

Bill
Guest

Prop 13 and anti-airport NIMBYism are totally separate issues. Don’t muddle the issue.

BigDaddyJ
Member

Is it? I agree it’s distinct from direct zoning and growth issues, but in general Prop. 13 fuels NIMBYism and generally encourages a lot more homeowner participation in neighborhood issues. Basically, homeowners are very keen on being aware (and resisting) any changes that might affect, amongst other things, their home value.

My perspective is obviously not of a local (I’m in the Bay Area), but at least up here everything tends to gel together. Happy to hear from a Long Beach resident otherwise.

Don Kemp
Guest

Actually HUSH managed to tie it in. So many of them complained that they would be forced to move and lose the precious Prop 13 protections, ignoring the fact a vast majority of residents who lived in the same area and who bought after 1978 don’t have Prop 13. The complaints came from people who inherited the protection when they moved into their parents’ house. That in and of itself highlights a problem with 13.

Spirit FF
Member

Part of the problem with El Toro was, 10 year earlier, they invested heavily into SNA to build the new terminal. They didn’t anticipate El Toro closing so soon. If they had not built the new terminal at SNA, I bet El Toro would have been a slam dunk!

NathanP
Guest

Perhaps JetBlue should now lobby for Mexican and central american airports to build pre-clearance facilities similar to those in many Canadian airports. If airports in the US cannot build the needed facilities, outsource them!

Having been to Cancun several times, I always wonder why that airport doesn’t have pre-clearance on one of the terminals. During peak times, it seems that half of the flights are US bound. I am sure that Cabo and Puerto Vallarta are in a similar position.

Stu
Member

This was my thought as well.

According to Wikipedia (FWIW), DHS already is considering: Mexico City International Airport (MEX); Buenos Aires Ministro Pistarini International Airport (EZE), Argentina; El Dorado International Airport (BOG) in Bogota, Colombia; Rio de Janeiro-Galeão International Airport (GIG), Brazil; and São Paulo-Guarulhos International Airport (GRU), Brazil. Perhaps JetBlue could get more Mexican cities, and perhaps Costa Rica, added to the list.

Spirit FF
Member

Yes, correct! They plan to have up to 30% of international cities pre-clear. Right now LGB could receive flights from the Canada, Bahamas, Ireland, and now Abu Dhabi has pre-clear. Perhaps we could interest Etihad in coming into LGB!!!

XJT DX
Guest

One of the requirements of Preclearance is that the destination airport must have customs available, and the capacity to strip international garbage, so LGB would still not be a usable destination.

A
Guest

Cranky, I take issue with your opening paragraph trying to tie this into national politics. This reeks of typical California NIMBY-ism. If anything the politicians have taken a page from the “California Activists Guidebook” on how to shut down your opponents argument. Anyone who deals with development, employment law, code enforcement or a whole host of other fields knows full well that in California things are more difficult, time consuming and always cost more.

I’m sure JetBlue knew full well this was a distinct possibility and has their contingency plans.

Don Kemp
Guest

FWIW, most, not all of the HUSH group here is heavily GOP leaning. There’s a LOUD vocal minority on the East side of Long Beach that is very much anti-tax, anti-regulations, free use of the “libtard” pejoratives. Council District 5 is on the East side, and the council rep is the sole GOP councilperson. Ironically, she is one of the council members who took tons of heat over this.

A
Guest
The political affiliation of the opponents is irregardless. California has a history of opposing any kind of development be it through regulation or NIMBY activism that started long before our most recent election cycle. If the HUSH group used ques from the presidential campaign or not it doesn’t change the fact that California is a difficult place to start and/or run a business. I have clients that openly refuse to do business in California due to this. The state has a population and economy of critical mass to mostly brush it off but it doesn’t bode well for the long… Read more »
Nick
Guest

If you listened to the comments at the council meeting so many of the people from HUSH used the new administration as reasons to oppose it.

Don Kemp
Guest

Yes they did. They mentioned, and I’m paraphrasing, that Trump is a loose cannon who might scuttle all regulations, somehow endangering the ordinance if there was a customs facility.

James
Guest

Good for Long Beach for not being bullied by JetBlue.

Having FIS at LGB provided no real benefits for the airport, matter of fact it opened a bunch of questions including funding, cost, staffing, and potentially most importantly legal challenges to airport noise regulations.

If JetBue wants to walk, let them go. The city will not fail because some airline wants to throw a tantrum.

BigDaddyJ
Member

What legal challenges? How do port of entry facilities affect the noise ordinance, specifically?

Al
Guest

Did you read and consider what Cranky said? Really, how would the FIS affect noise ordinance, if at all?

Don Kemp
Guest

This is laughable. Jet Blue followed protocol. HUSH bullied to the point of criminal behavior.

Spirit FF
Member

Right! That’s the attitude to have. That’s how Long Beach lost Disney!

George
Guest

Troll

JAXBA
Guest

“…the anti-airport folks decided to pick and choose which facts were acceptable.”

#AlternativeFacts

A Finn In Texas
Guest

Hey Cranky,
I am not familiar with the housing around the airport. Is it mostly single family, condos or apartments. If they are apartments the residents are more transient so would it be possible to revisit this in a few years?

Also is SNA an option for B6?

David SF eastbay
Member

What a bunch of idiots that group is. What difference does it make where people go or come from. All customs means is passengers go in a secure area before leaving the building.

Like was said, it doesn’t change how many airplanes use LYN, but where people are funneled to after the plane lands.

Ben Fredericks
Member

Would like to get daily emails. Thanks !
Super LGB article!!!!!
Thx, Ben

George
Guest

No wonder CA is called the Granola State-the land of Nuts and Flakes. Good article as always Cranky-and it took Ontario 5 minutes to call Jet Blue?-I’ll bet it was under a minute!

Eric
Guest
Blues LGB operation has always impresses me as a hub that exsists ‘because it has to’. LAX, BUR and SFO were/are too space constrained to open a turnkey base. LGB was selected due to its relative proximity, relative costs and relative catchment area. It reminds me of NW & MEM; it was far from optimal but necessary if they wanted a toehold in the southeast. My question is that if B6 decides to cut and run where will they go? Will the reconfigured LAX give them the space to shift ops? Will they abandon the idea of a west coast… Read more »
phllax
Guest

There’s potentially 3-4 additional gates in Burbank (A6-8), although WN is using A6 sometimes and AA is down to 4-5 flights per day at A5, so that also could be used, and almost an entire terminal at ONT if they wanted. The real issue is they’d be head to head with WN on most of the intra-state and regional routes. I suspect if they wanted int’l out of SNA they could get it.

W Scott Moyer
Member

Well, misinformation and fear-mongering didn’t work for Hillary! –Scott M.

ASflyer
Guest
Thanks Cranky for an awesome article. I too was disappointed by the outcome but not entirely shocked. With that decision, what are your thoughts on moving over to BUR? I hear they are eager to talk to carriers for increased flights. Also, with SFO/ LAX maxed out and AS/WN increasing SJC, I’ve often wondered why no one expands SMF and fees WN competition. B6 could come in and offer: 1x AUS 2-3x DFW 3x SEA 2x PDX 3x SAN 3x BUR 1x MCO (seasonal?) 1x MEX, PVR, CUN, SJD 3x PHX 2x SLC 2x DEN 2x ORD 2x ATL And… Read more »
cblock2
Member
No one gives much attention to SMF because…well, it’s Sacramento. Much smaller catchment area than any of the Southland airports. You might as well ramp up FAT (said the silly former Fresnan), Allegiant is the only non-network carrier there. And if memory serves (and I could be wrong on this), B6 doesn’t base E190s in the west, and at least initially the A320 would be too much airplane for some of your proposed routes. If B6 wants to expand intra-West flying further, it may have to consider its fleet positioning, but that in turn plays into whether or not they’re… Read more »
adf55
Member

it’s long puzzled me why Fresno doesn’t have better air service. It’s the fifth largest city in California. And its metro-area population is almost a million, making it larger than quite a few places that Southwest serves, e.g. Boise, Albuquerque, El Paso, Little Rock and Albany.

cblock2
Member
FAT has always been plagued with “drive-offs”/”drive-aways”, as lots of locals believe that to get decent fares, they’re better off just driving to SFO or LAX, since they’re going to wind up connecting there anyway. I’m not sure the math always works out when you really price in parking and petrol, but to some extent it’s just an ingrained habit now. Part of it is also a bias against smaller planes, but SkyWest’s Brazilias are gone (I had a soft spot in my heart for them myself), and there are plenty of connection opportunities other than SFO/LAX, particularly AA’s 2x/day… Read more »
cblock2
Member
The main problem for JetBlue is that the reshuffle at LAX will leave it (as I understand it) with no gate capacity to support increasing their presence there that much. They tried ONT before, but unless the new management there is able to bring substantially lower costs, I don’t see that working – too far out from the primary catchment area. SNA doesn’t have the room to handle a full-blown relocation of JetBlue’s LGB operation, and BUR doesn’t have a FIS either. And in terms of domestic flights, WN is at all of them in a big way. Can B6… Read more »
Garrett
Guest

As 42 year resident of Long Beach I can say JetBlue has done nothing but cause trouble for the community.

Per airport director himself, JetBlue violated the airports curfew noise ordinance over 130 times in 2016 alone.

Next time JetBlue or any airline other wants something from the community, how about they first have the common courtesy and abide by the most basic regulations they agreed to when they commenced service LB to start with.

jmd757
Member

Does the LA area really need 4 airports? Maybe it is time to think what role should the airport play in Long Beach and if the community does not want it, time to repurpose the property. In a ideal world, airports should be located on the outskirts of the city like DIA.

David M
Guest

There’s already an airport at the outskirts of the city. It’s called Ontario, and nobody wants to fly there.

Bill
Guest

Including LGB, the LA area actually has five air carrier airports:

LAX
BUR
LGB
ONT
SNA

This does not include GA-only airports (or Hawthorne)
With its small number of available slots, LGB could go away with little impact on the region’s air service. Still, those NIMBYs make me sick.

Erik Griswold
Guest

No love for PSP and CLD? ;-)

Bill
Guest

If you’re going that far afield, how about SBA?

Yo
Guest

Don’t forget PMD! Its the other (very far away in the middle of the turkey farms) LA airport!

Don Kemp
Guest

A prime example of the misinformation and fearmongering HUSH propgated.

Phil
Guest
Garret — Wow, so about once every 3 days Jetblue subjected you and your community to a few seconds of unexpected airplane noise! No wonder you are so fired up. Setting aside the proper answer Cranky provided to your baseless, myopic, NIMBY-oriented remarks, here’s a fact to consider. The airport has been in operation since approximately 1940, long before your 42-year residency began. The next time you consider moving to a community near an airport, how about you have the common courtesy to abide by the notion that airlines may want to serve the community through the public asset that… Read more »
gabeandino
Member

You sir, are an idiot.

Patrick Goddard
Member
Thanks for this great post. As someone who lives directly under the alternate flight path, and who used to live close to the main one, I’m very aware of the noise issues. BUT I was able to wade through the misinformation (and actually read the Jacobs report) to realize that the FIS was a good investment in our community. FIS would have helped JetBlue operate more effectively, and the opportunities for general aviation seemed overwhelming positive. Making LB more desirable to companies similar to Mercedes and Virgin Galactic is essential to the economic health of the city. But I fear… Read more »
J
Guest
What a refreshing read….thank you cranky! I am a elgb resident, and I had no issue for the addition of the customs facility. I live close enough to the flight path to read tail numbers clearly. As a member of the nextdoor forum, I was repulsed by the lies of the HUSH group….I agree that their tactics were unfair, and full of misinformation. I tried many times to call out the wrong information (a new runway would be built, flight paths were being changed to fly over more houses), but in the end, it was to avail. Whenever they were… Read more »
Richard
Member

There are 3 things that will now happen at LGB:
1. B6 will start to reduce it’s flying out of LGB as it looks for another airport to accommodate it’s desire to add international flights.
2. WN will try to grab all the abandoned slots to become the dominate player at LGB, try force everyone else out, and then leave to expand it’s LAX operation.
3. LGB becomes the new ONT as an underutilized, mostly abandoned airport, while ONT becomes B6’s new focus city with international flights.

Mike Kowal
Member

Hoping your right!

realist
Guest

Hey cranky, remember that time you said the AA/US merger would “solve their labor problems? I do

TC99
Guest
What does this have to do with this story of JetBlue and Long Beach? Now to get back on topic… B6 had a similar issue in FLL, and IIRC they helped to pay for an expansion of the Customs facility here. Since it’s inception, the FIS facility was based in a trailer near terminal 4. Now with terminal 4 expanding and a new FIS facility on the 3rd floor, they are able to expand their International operations to South/Central America and the Caribbean. Unfortunately, this did lead to an increased number of flights out of FLL as their demand grew.… Read more »
Bill
Guest

I don’t see any parallels between FLL and LGB. The former has been expanding capacity, while LGB seems to be content with the status quo.

Wes
Member
Cranky, Good article. Only thing that I’m scratching my head about is how you figure that fear-mongering has been proven by the election to be a recipe for success. It would appear to many that the opposite is true. That said, everything else in the article made perfect sense to me. As for your picture of the Long Beach airport, I know that your images are light-hearted and tongue-in-cheek, but usually there’s some logical nexus to the substance of the article. I’m not getting that nexus here, as there’s nothing in the body of the article that supports that the… Read more »
Tim Dunn
Member
Remember that Dallas Love Field has no international service and cannot have it even though WN has made the same argument that a 737 to Mexico City produces no more noise than one to Boston. While there are other reasons that have influenced the City of Dallas in its decision, if the neighborhoods around Dallas wanted international service, AA’s objections to it wouldn’t have prevailed. Not every city sees value in having an international airport at their doorstep. A whole lot of communities in California don’t want any more airports or for the ones that do exist to grow. This… Read more »
Dana
Guest

Land use decisions are one of the most basic rights afforded to cities in the California constitution.

Long Beach and its residents very much can decide the details about how its airport functions, the same way they can decide on building a shopping mall, large residential development, a power plant, expanding the port, etc.

What happened this week, is a city council that acted responsibly in the best interest of its citizens.
Having international flights at LGB would have been lose-lose. The best action was to follow community wishes and reject the idea.

Alex
Guest
I applaud you Dana. Everyone must respect the wishes of the council and the residents who live under the flight path. It was difficult decision to make. I remember there was only 18 flights a day in the 70’s and some how the airport survived. I just came back from a recent trip and arrived at Long Beach Airport. The new terminal looks great! Other areas such as baggage claims, car rental facilities need to be updated. Long Beach Airport started upgrade there parking lot A. Eventually, JetBlue will make some big changes in the coming weeks to Long Beach.… Read more »
Erik Griswold
Guest

LGB was only able to finance the improvements you cite thanks to having all the “mainliner” slots being used. Go back to 18 flights a day and those bonds issued to build the new stuff are going to be junk.

Mike Kowal
Member
Cranky… get over it. Misinformation works both ways. As you have proven with your one-sided remarks! Sure, both sides shared their share of their ‘alternative facts’. Problem is LGB happened to end up in the middle of desirable “pride of ownership” residential housing. Hey, I know the airport was there first and people were aware. Blame the developers and city planners, not those who have made their largest investments only to watch flights increase over law suits brought by airport interests, while their quality of lives decline. Personally I’ve seen them go from 9 maximum to the now 50! What… Read more »
southbay flier
Guest

Where is the misinformation in that article?

Mike Kowal
Member
Really? Let’s start with the most blatant “half-truth” statement out there. “International Flights will not increase flights.” True with Commercial (now at 50), as all flights are accounted for. However the powers that be along with the consultant failed (forgot) to mention or glossed over the other 4 categories contained in the ordinance. So you tell me… how many Commuter, Industrial, Cargo and General flights would a FIS attract? Remember the already impacted neighborhoods are not interested in filling all (or any), of the noise buckets. It’s our intent to keep the impacts at a minimum. Truth. Give me some… Read more »
Don Kemp
Guest

It’s sheer idiocy to expect any airport to remain stagnant. The airport is a business. Businesses need to grow in order to remain viable. This constant “I remember when there were only 18” mantra is garbage. Over time, as people move in and people age, the needs of the community shift. The airport shifts with them. If realtors such as yourself would just be honest about this indisputable fact HUSH would need to continue to lie, threaten and bully to get their way.

Mike Kowal
Member

Mr. Kemp, agreed municipally owned property should be used at “highest and best value”. It’s apparent an airport at this location is a travesty in generating revenue!

Don Kemp
Guest

Typical of you to brag about it since you helped cause that.

RMartinez
Guest
Mike how SHAMEFUL you Joe Sopo, Rae Galebich, and the WHITE ELITE in Bixby rule this city and the airport. Perhaps, you WHITE ELITE don’t realize Long Beach is over 40% Hispanic (primarily Mexican) according to the most recent demographic information. Did it ever occur to the RACIST WHITE ELITIST that the working class Hispanics would like to have flights to our homeland from Long Beach? It’s funny how everyone of the anti-airport has a conflict of interest. You and Sopo are involved in real estate, and Rae is on a major airline’s (that does not serve LGB) payroll. There… Read more »
tvmccabe
Member

It will get even more interesting in So Cal as Alaskan and Virgin America merge and hit their stride

southbay flier
Guest

I live within 5 miles of a curfew controlled airport and for the most part, I really don’t notice the noise because I’m on the approach path. Even during takeoffs it isn’t too bad. The only planes I really notice still are the DC-10 and the A340. Both of them are loud.

However, SJC, is in a position to encourage more usage instead of trying to cut itself off since it realizes that more flights is more money for the airport. What LGB did is just senseless.

John C
Member
As a fellow SJCer, B6 should move its focus city from LGB to SJC. SJC has FIS and plenty of gate space, and since the curfew is time based, there are no slot issues. The catchment area overlaps the other Bay Area airports, but LGB has the same issue with overlapping catchment areas. As a bonus, SJC rarely has the fog issues that plague SFO/OAK. I used to live on the departure corridor (Rivermark area before Rivermark) and the only I plane I would notice was the 7am UA 727, Stage 3 planes are just so much quieter.
Bill
Guest

I also live near SJC (2nd and Bassett) and don’t get anti-noise NIMBYs at all. I knew the airport was there when I bought, I like being close to flights and figure that air travel’s positive benefits to the economy are good for my property values.

BigDaddyJ
Member

AND SJC has customs, and international widebody connection opportunities.

As a local, I’d love this. Already looking forward to the SJC-EWR flights coming up in a few months, so I have East Coast options that aren’t redeye!

Tim
Guest

Fog plagues SFO, not OAK. OAK rarely has any sort of weather delay.

Spirit FF
Member

You know, as I look what happened and digest it, this could turn into a racial issue. Long Beach is 41% Hispanic. The people that make up HUSH and the anti-airport “elite” are in Bixby or other prominent areas of the city. It’s clear JetBlue did their homework planning flights to vacation destination in Mexico, as well as ethnic destinations such as Mexico City and Guadalajara.

It’s clear the city either doesn’t know their base, or can be bought off by NIMBY protesters that don’t support local business!

car(e)-free LA
Guest

Personally, I don’t think it would be a bad thing if LGB shut down and it’s operations were shifted to SNA and LAX. It is such a tiny airport on a chunk of valuable property that could probably be put to better use. Airport consolidation is the future, and that’s a good thing. Big hubs are best for everyone.

David M
Guest

LGB is a significantly better passenger experience. Just getting in and out of LAX on World Way, Sepulveda, and Century can be a nightmare.

Big hubs are among the most delay-prone airports: SFO, JFK, ORD…

adf55
Member

Yes indeed…. ground transportation from LAX is a nightmare, even if you’re not driving. Not long ago at LAX I stood at the curb waiting 45 minutes for the Supershuttle that was going my way (and really felt sorry for the agent, who has to stand there all day amid the car exhaust and horn-honking). I’d rather fly LGB, even though it’s a long odyssey on public transit (bus – Blue Line – bus) from there to my destination.

ConcernedCitzen
Guest

Stupid Trailer trash were the ones that kept this happening, and it was really good for the city. Why were they needs of a few whiney people taken over the good of the community? I hope JB fights these losers. Get a life trailer trash. Find a hobby.

Don Kemp
Guest

They weren’t trailer trash, they were homeowners.Stupid, misinformed brain dead homeowners but homeowners nonetheless.

Spirit FF
Member
There is a silver lining! Though the FIS was voted down, how many people, including HUSH, Rae Gaeblich, Joe Sopo, and the rest, know international flight CAN and do take place from LGB. Outbound flights are not impacted by FIS. There are flights that frequently fly to international destinations from LGB. Also, there are several cities that ‘pre-clear’ custom at origin. And the list will grow! Currently, flights from most major Canadian cities, Bermuda, Bahamas, Aruba, Ireland (Shannon and Dublin), and Abu Dhabi in the UAE. LGB could currently handle flights from these cities since US Customs and Immigration are… Read more »
Spirit FF
Member
OK Mike Kowal, please don’t insult me and the people that support the airport and businesses of this city. You want us not to hurl insults, then quit insulting the pro airport and business groups. We DO NOT sniff anything, as you indicate! Do you want to talk about economic impact? Let’s talk. I’m tired of hearing there is no measurable impact from the airport, despite the city’s own studies which shows $6 million annually per flight is generated. Fact! There are 8 planes that overnight at LGB. That’s 40 crew members overnight in LB Area hotels. With an average… Read more »
Mike Kowal
Member
Good morning Tom, Just read your comments. First I will apologize for any insults you find directly intended towards you. If you re-read my remarks they were addressed to Spirit FF. It is not my MO to throw the first stone nor are all HUSH members anti airport, pot smokers. We just want to protect and abide by the noise ordinance while keeping the impacts created by aviation operations at the absolute minimum to protect our families and property values. And yes I do understand unfilled capacity and the unintended consequences associated with having an FIS. Now as for the… Read more »
wpDiscuz