City Council Candidates’ Statements

Sky Posse is extremely grateful for the generous support our City Council has offered over the past year or so. Their involvement has helped move us forward in getting the attention of the Federal Government. We particularly acknowledge the help of Councilmen Eric Filseth, Greg Scharff and Senior Management Analyst Cash Alaee.

There are currently eleven candidates running for 4 seats in the election on November 8th. About a month ago, we asked each of the candidates to comment briefly on their views of the airplane issue. Their responses are attached and are organized in alphabetical order by candidate.

Sky Posse does not feel it is appropriate to endorse any particular candidate in this election. All the responses we received expressed concern and support for the effort to solve the noise issue. We should point out, however, that Stewart Carl is one of the original founders of Sky Posse and has been with us since the beginning. Clearly we can rely on Stewart’s unwavering commitment to work with all levels of government to quiet the skies.

 

 Stewart Carl    

1.  To what extent do you consider there to be an airplane noise
problem in Palo Alto?

With three of the five major air-routes into SFO passing over Palo Alto Aircraft, and the implementation of the lower, noisier “nextgen” flight profiles, noise has become a significant problem in Palo Alto. Aircraft noise is also a public health issue. Aircraft noise interrupts sleep and has been shown to be related to increased cardiovascular disease.

Aircraft noise interrupts concentration, and has a negative impact on the productivity of our students, and knowledge workers. Aircraft noise also effects our residents ability to rest and relax in their homes, and rejuvenate at Palo Altos outdoor recreational facilities.

2.  Should the City use its resources to address airplane noise in
Palo Alto? If so, which resources would you consider to be appropriate?

Yes, the City should apply all of its many resources to the problem of aircraft noise. The City has considerable financial, legal, and political resources that it can bring to bear on the problem of aircraft noise. The City Manager and staff, the City Attorney, the City’s lobbyists in DC, contracted technical experts, and the City Council all need to work together to solve the problem.

3.  What action plan would you suggest to address airplane noise in Palo
Alto? Please consider current actions as well as contingency plans if the current process put in place by Representatives Eshoo, Farr, and Speier does not improve significantly the situation for Palo Alto residents.

The City needs to continue to support the process put in place by representatives Eshoo, Farr, and Speier, and push for a regional solution like the over-the-bay solution proposed by Sky Posse. Piecemeal solutions that only address one region, or one small community, could obstruct timely, and effective implementation of a regional solution.

If the process put in place by representative Eshoo, Farr, and Speier does not produce a regional solution that includes Palo Alto, then the City needs to continue to use all of its many resources to advocate for a solution, and may need to consider legal action. The City may also need to reconsider its relationship with the FAA at PAO.

 

Len Ely  

I wake up and have woken up to SurfAir for the last 3 years. When we were building our house and were renting on Cowper and California at breakfast we would say “there goes SurfAir”. I really don’t know what the City can do because this is a Federal issue but I can assure you I understand the problem. Be assured I would help in any way that I could.

 

Adrian Fine 

1.    To what extent do you consider there to be an airplane noise problem in Palo Alto?

There clearly has been a change over the past few years, which seems to have been implemented hastily and without local input. The airplane noise problem varies quite dramatically from neighborhood to neighborhood so there are definitely areas where the noise is very disrupting while other areas seem undisturbed by the new routes. But it’s clear both from surveys that were professionally done, and from my interaction with residents across town that airplane noise has become a serious quality of life issue for many.

2.    Should the City use its resources to address airplane noise in Palo Alto? If so, which resources would you consider to be appropriate?

All lobbying and educational resources should be used. All support should be offered to our county representatives who are fighting for us. I think however it’s premature to commit staff and financial resources until we get a coalition of all the regional parties to unify resources behind a single strong initiative. If the leaders in the county who are fighting this battle get to the point where they call on direct intervention from multiple regional players the Palo Alto city should step forward.

3.    What action plan would you suggest to address airplane noise in Palo Alto? Please consider current actions as well as contingency plans if the current process put in place by Representatives Eshoo, Farr, and Speier does not improve significantly the situation for Palo Alto residents.

If the current process yields poor results then at the very least we should prioritize the suggested changes that are BOTH easiest for the FAA to accomplish and provide best relief for our resident. For example: Sequencing planes over the ocean;  Using the highest possible angle of descent;  Requiring airlines to contribute to noise reduction by equipping  planes with appropriate technology.  Obviously an undesirable last resort is going to court.

 

John Fredrich    

Thank you for your inquiry and your efforts to have the increase in noise pollution abated.

The number of flights, lower altitudes, and altered landing patterns have reduced the possibilities for quiet contentment in some neighborhoods significantly. The 4:00 AM Surf Air sorties are equally annoying, but easier to resolve, I would think, as the San Carlos Airport has some power to regulate.

I would support an advisory vote by the Palo Alto City Council to the FAA as well as a memorial to US Congress requesting that flights wherever possible approach SFO from a line over the middle of San Francisco Bay as far from human habitat as can be calculated. The current methods of plotting that course do not seem to evaluate human comfort as a factor worth noting. If that cannot be done, every effort needs to be made to share the burden by seeing to it than no fixed approaches allow any neighborhoods to bear a disproportional amount of the traffic. I do not feel that our discomfort is a priority in calculating the landing patterns and that needs to change.

In the meantime, given the additional climate related problems associated with the increase in carbon dioxide going above 400 ppm, I try to fly as little as possible, just as I try to drive my car as infrequently as I’m able. That, however, as a retired person, is a luxury I can manage. I would like to go to Europe next summer but I’m willing to boycott air travel if that is necessary to get the airlines to take seriously the demands of those of us on the ground.

Also, I do see this as a health issue but am not knowledgeable enough to know how to marshal those facts and that argument. That too, moreover, is a case that needs to be made to the Federal authorities with facts and a unified voice.

I wish you well in your efforts and appreciate your interest in these elections.

 

Arthur Keller    

1.    To what extent do you consider there to be an airplane noise problem in Palo Alto?

Airplane noise is a problem in Palo Alto, although certain neighborhoods are more affected by it than others.  Those directly under the new flight path are particularly affected by it.

2.    Should the City use its resources to address airplane noise in Palo Alto? If so, which resources would you consider to be appropriate?

Yes.  It has started to take action.  I support this action, but I want to avoid paralysis by analysis.

3.    What action plan would you suggest to address airplane noise in Palo Alto? Please consider current actions as well as contingency plans if the current process put in place by Representatives Eshoo, Farr, and Speier does not improve significantly the situation for Palo Alto residents.

Minneapolis succeeded in getting the MSP airport from implementing RNAV for departures.  See http://mspfairskies.com/   We should explore their strategy.  http://www.minneapolismn.gov/ward11/issues/WCMS1P-096357  See also http://www.startribune.com/south-minneapolis-residents-increasingly-sounding-off-on-airport-noise/315619871/ It appears that we are behind the curve, since NextGen has already been implemented here.  If necessary, Palo Alto can collaborate with other affected cities and take appropriate legal action.

 

Lydia Kou    

1.    To what extent do you consider there to be an airplane noise problem in Palo Alto?

There is a problem when the frequency of the airplanes passes over our houses are almost every hour or sometimes it seems right after another. Residents have told me that they actually see the airplanes lined up above their house coming in to land. I also live under a flight path and have woken up to airplane noise when we have our windows open during hot nights.

I want the cities affected by the airplane noise to initiate a noise pollution medical white paper. I am not in the medical field, but I often wonder how do children separate or tune out the noise when at play and when resting and if this might have an impact on their health. Even adults have difficulty tuning out unwanted noise.

2.    Should the City use its resources to address airplane noise in Palo Alto? If so, which resources would you consider to be appropriate?   

The City should absolutely use their resources to address the airplane noise issue. City Hall has as one of their top 4 priorities for 2016 Healthy City, Healthy Community http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/cou/council_priorities/default.asp

City has legal, financial and lobbying resources and should be applying these resources to rectifying this issue.

3.  What action plan would you suggest to address airplane noise in Palo Alto? Please consider current actions as well as contingency plans if the current process put in place by Representatives Eshoo, Farr, and Speier does not improve significantly the situation for Palo Alto residents.

There is a plan in place with Supervisor Joe Simitian leading a Select Committee to understand and to communicate with the FAA. We hope a solution comes forth sooner than later. However, if the improvements are going to be too far out and stringing us along, then the cities affected should be uniting to consider a lawsuit, such as, this http://www.nextgennoise.org/

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

 

Liz Kniss    

1.    To what extent do you consider there to be an airplane noise problem in Palo Alto?

Yes I believe it, as I hear it day and night, directly over my house it seems.  And many neighbors want action regarding this issue, and I realize Sky Posse has done a terrific job of publicizing and drawing it to the attention of Anna Eshoo and Joe Simitian.

2.    Should the City use its resources to address airplane noise in Palo Alto? If so, which resources would you consider to be appropriate?

Yes, I believe the City should, as our residents are feeling such distress and many have been disturbed to the point of talking about selling their house and moving away.

3.    What action plan would you suggest to address airplane noise in Palo Alto? Please consider current actions as well as contingency plans if the current process put in place by Representatives Eshoo, Farr, and Speier does not improve significantly the situation for Palo Alto residents.

I think we need to give the Congresspersons some time to carry out the process that is ongoing.  Our job should be frequent contact and pushing for a resolution that will “share the pain” with other jurisdictions.

 

Danielle Martell  

Thank you for your interest in my opinion.  Aircraft noise is a topic for which I have strong feelings.

For years, both day and night, Palo Alto aircraft noise has been out-of-control.

Palo Alto is the richest small city in the nation, and our country is comprised of small cities.  If we don’t have obvious resources to combat aircraft noise, we can easily find the money through budget shuffling.  Perhaps the $60M to $90M cost of a needless new police station, which resident polls show we don’t want, could be used to address aircraft noises instead.

The City of Palo Alto has a team of savvy, combative attorneys who should be able to counsel us in addressing the horrible aircraft noise problem.

We must put the well-being of Palo Altans first!

When elected, I pledge to do everything in my authority to support your group’s agenda.  Also, I have attached my photo and a few campaign fliers to help you better understand who I am and my platform.

 

Don McDougall

Sky Posse and similar groups have mobilized strong airplane noise contol advocacy and should be commended.  As a result of their efforts City consultants have recently issued a DNL Day/Night noise Level) Assessment of four flight track alternative approaches to San Francisco Airport.  Of the four alternatives studied one, called HIGHR, seems to be best for Palo Alto. Palo Alto representatives on Supervisor Simitian’s committee need to advocate strongly for this route alternative.  They also need to advocate strongly against routes knows as SERFR TWO and BSR Three.  Continued support all Regional efforts and vocal support from Palo Alto for airplane/airway noise needs to be sustained.

 

Greer Stone

Airplane noise is absolutely a problem in Palo Alto. Too many times have my conversations been interrupted by an all-too-frequent passing flight. Noise pollution in Palo Alto has gotten steadily worse over the years. Whether it is planes, trains, or automobiles, the rise of noise pollution is unsustainable.

This rise in airplane noise pollution is mostly contributable to the direct result of policies set by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and SFO Airport that caused Palo Alto to be under the descending flight paths of 3 out of the 5 routes into SFO. This is primarily because BDEGA flights have shifted farther south, and more arrivals are approaching over the Peninsula, rather than over the Bay. Also, the SERFR approach has gotten lower and therefore noisier.

I believe it is prudent for Palo Alto to consider all available options to address this problem. I favor working with the FAA to conduct a joint study in order to find the best alternative routes for flights coming into SFO. Incoming flights should fly above 6,000 feet over Palo Alto and descend over the bay and not over people’s homes.

We should also continue to work with our regional partners, neighboring communities, and local elected officials, to advocate for a regional approach to solving the problem. I am hopeful that Congresswoman Anna Eshoo’s membership on the recently formed Congressional Quiet Skies Caucus will bring positive change to Palo Alto. I am also cautiously optimistic that the FAA’s select subcommittee will mitigate the noise.

The City of Palo Alto should do all we can in order to help representatives Eshoo, Farr, and Speier, in their goals of reducing noise pollution. However, if they are unable to enact the desired change, we should consider contingency options, including legal action if necessary. We must also remain aware of the risks posed by the Palo Alto Airport, and the threat of a small commercial service being operated out of that airport in the future.

 

Greg Tanaka    

1.    To what extent do you consider there to be an airplane noise problem in Palo Alto?

I am personally affected by consistent airplane noise overhead in our neighborhood.  I share the concerns of many residents that have been impacted and find this problem unlivable.  Although I am used to some air disruption, in the past it has been the occasional Stanford Hospital life flight, or military traffic that but today the landing traffic for SFO is objectionable every day.

2.    Should the City use its resources to address airplane noise in Palo Alto? If so, which resources would you consider to be appropriate?

I support the use of City resources to help form an advocacy position to change the experience.  I am proud that the City supported Skyposse and taken a strong leadership role by funding an airplane traffic report that identifies the current experience and impact to residents for the federal authorities.  This is a good use of tax payer dollars, and supports my goal of securing neighborhood quality of life.

3.    What action plan would you suggest to address airplane noise in Palo Alto? Please consider current actions as well as contingency plans if the current process put in place by Representatives Eshoo, Farr, and Speier does not improve significantly the situation for Palo Alto residents.

In my policy statement on my website I make it clear that working with state and federal representatives if key to securing Palo Alto interests.  As a council member you can count on me to continue to lobby for FAA change.  The legislative process will take time, and I support the Eshoo actions.  However, as an elected City official I will also support reaching out to other affected cities across the nation to form a coalition of cities to address change with FAA landing protocol.  Palo Alto is a small city, but has a large voice.  Since we own our own airport, we also have competent staff that is capable of following the regulatory process strategically.  I believe Palo Alto should lead this issue to a thoughtful resolution.