The Livermore Airport Commission has recommended a new airport policy that is at odds with residents, and with long sought requests of neighboring cities.
The May 16 2023 Pleasanton council meeting had many residents expressing discontent over noise and pollution. The Livermore Airport Commission followed on June 5th with a contentious meeting that left residents unsatisfied with the process and feeling left out.
The following day, the Pleasanton City Council reviewed the update. The general message from residents and elected officials was that although Pleasanton has to bear the effects of noise and pollution, it has no practical way to influence the activities. It will send a letter in advance of the June 26 2023 Livermore Council meeting to articulate their concerns.
The Livermore Airport Citizen’s Group has been very vocal on these issues. Among their grievances of the recommendation:
- Fails to implement the Livermore City Council Resolution of March 23, 2010 “The city will AGGRESSIVELY FOSTER the REDUCTION of aircraft NOISE”
- Public is in the dark, little transparency
- The City Initiative: (where the city can put out an RFI/RFP/RFQ) is worded whenever there is “land/improvement available” – this is in direct contradiction to the 2010 City resolution that explicitly indicates only when “existing demand” with “tangible evidence” – and the city does not make this determination – it is the Airport Advisory Commission that does. Likewise “Encourage imaginative and innovative development of land” (section 1.2) is hardly consistent with meet existing demand. And yet they claim in that same section “The above objectives reflect the Airport Development Priorities established by the Livermore City Council in 2010 through Resolution number 2010-058”; no, they do not.
LVK affects residents in all three Valley cities. Consequently, it would only be fair to include wider representation on policy making. Livermore should rework the makeup of the Commission to include representatives from Pleasanton and Dublin at minimum.
With Livermore’s propensity to casually codify recommendations that are before them, it would be better to have such recommendations developed with everyone’s input included and debated. Good neighbors deserve a good helping of courtesy.