County Vote Forecasts Airport Closure of San Jose, California’s Reid-Hillview airport (RHV)

Larry Dighera

2018-12-08 01:15:29 UTC

https://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/County-Vote-Forecasts-Airport-Closure-231953-1.html

County Vote Forecasts Airport Closure

By Kate O'Connor | December 5, 2018

Image: Ian Kluft - CC BY-SA 4.0

The path is now clear for the proposed closure of San Jose,
Californias Reid-Hillview airport (RHV) after a 3-2 vote by the Santa
Clara County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday against accepting further
FAA Airport Improvement Program (AIP) funds. In addition to being a
designated reliever airport for San Jose International Airport (SJC),
RHV is also home to San Jose State Universitys Aviation Department
flight operations and numerous aviation businesses. Owing to grant
obligations associated with previously accepted AIP funding, the
airport must be kept open until 2031.

One option being proposed involves the consolidation of RHV
operations to San Martin (E16), the other airport operated by the
county. AOPA weighed in on the proposal before Tuesdays vote in a
letter (PDF)
https://download.aopa.org/advocacy/2018/AOPA_Comments_SCC_BOS_Airport_Business_Plans.pdf
that strongly opposed the relocation of RHV operations and the closure
of the airport. The organization called RHV a viable and important
community asset, warning that the loss of RHV would move a
significant number of the 160,000 operations to SJC likely causing
additional congestion and delays in airline operations at SJC.

In a report relating to Santa Clara Countys Airport Business Plan
Update, the county notes lead emissions as a reason to consider
closing RHV, citing a 2008 study by the EPA that ranked the airport
25th out of 3,414 airport facilities across the country for the amount
of lead emitted annually. It has also been suggested that the airport
land could be used to address the countys need for affordable
housing. Other community concerns noted include aircraft noise and
plane crashes.

Read More on These Topics
Business & Military
Comments (12)
Well if AOPA's strongly worded letter couldn't save the airport then I
guess nothing could.

Posted by: jvo fnr | December 5, 2018 6:18 PM Report this comment

Lead emissions should not be considered a factor in air traffic
relocations. Assuming the same amount of fuel will be burned
somewhere, and that it is dispersed into the air, there will be no
ultimate change in airborne lead. In fact, decreasing the lead around
RHV will only increase the lead at the other airports.

Posted by: Unknown | December 5, 2018 7:39 PM Report this comment

Another ignorant progressive decision to attempt to stop carbon/lead
emissions.. Only to drive it somewhere else, and encure a net "0"
carbon/lead reduction while creating a negative economic impact..
California, where every dumb idea has a chance to thrive..

Posted by: Tom O'Toole | December 5, 2018 9:28 PM Report this
comment

RHV is an extremely active GA airport. That is why the measured lead
levels are high. It's busy because the only alternative in the "South
Bay" is San Jose International. San Martin is much smaller and quite
far away and is really not an alternative.

For many years the "lead" issue at RHV was pushed by a single
individual. Most took him for a crank! But he persisted and eventually
gained a following, then a sympathetic administrator at the county,
then real estate developer money....

Now that the tactic has proven itself, we can expect to see it used at
other localities whose runways will be bulldozed just as leaded avgas
disappears.

Posted by: kim hunter | December 5, 2018 10:50 PM Report this
comment

News Flash:

Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors voted on closing a 5 mile
stretch of Highway 101 that runs through the middle of the county just
west of Reid-Hillview airport. The board stated that the approximately
300,000 cars that use that highway every day are generating
substantial carbon emissions and thus closing the highway will result
in a cleaner environment. Further, Highway 101 is the scene of
numerous car crashes and injuries which will be eliminated by its
closure.

The board also indicated that the highway land area would be reclaimed
for low income housing. The exact economic theory by which such new
housing would be built and sold for less money than current market
conditions was not detailed, however. A possible explanation is that
the housing will be less expensive due to lacking viable
transportation infrastructure nearby. A further theory is that the
people losing their jobs related to Reid-Hillview airport will vacate
the area leaving more housing open to others.

Further highway closures are being researched to help clean up the
environment. Closing 85, 87, and I-680 is seen as a major step to
reducing the carbon emissions in the county. Several studies have
shown that areas lacking in transportation infrastructure have far
fewer carbon emissions which validates the county's overall strategy.
A total ban on highways and roadways is seen as a long term goal since
that would substantially reduce carbon emissions county wide as well
as greatly reducing housing prices.

Posted by: MIKE CIHOLAS | December 5, 2018 11:11 PM Report this
comment

News Flash:

Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors voted on closing a 5 mile
stretch of Highway 101 that runs through the middle of the county just
west of Reid-Hillview airport. The board stated that the approximately
300,000 cars that use that highway every day are generating
substantial carbon emissions and thus closing the highway will result
in a cleaner environment. Further, Highway 101 is the scene of
numerous car crashes and injuries which will be eliminated by its
closure.

The board also indicated that the highway land area would be reclaimed
for low income housing. The exact economic theory by which such new
housing would be built and sold for less money than current market
conditions was not detailed, however. A possible explanation is that
the housing will be less expensive due to lacking viable
transportation infrastructure nearby. A further theory is that the
people formerly employed at Reid-Hillview airport will vacate the area
leaving more housing open to others.

Further highway closures are being researched to further clean up the
environment. Closing 85, 87, and I-680 is seen as a major step to
reducing the carbon emissions in the county. Several studies have
shown that areas lacking in transportation infrastructure have far
fewer carbon emissions which validates the county's overall strategy.
A total ban on highways and roadways is seen as a long term goal since
that would substantially reduce carbon emissions county wide, as well
as greatly reduced housing prices.

Posted by: MIKE CIHOLAS | December 5, 2018 11:12 PM Report this
comment

Come on folks; it is California, this is what is to be expected and
what the voters in California seem to want election after election.
Nothing will change until the politics change. If you are sick of
being in the margins then do the wise thing and get out while you can.

Posted by: bruce postlethwait | December 6, 2018 2:12 PM Report
this comment

I totally agree with Mike Ciholas.

Posted by: Richard Katz | December 6, 2018 2:20 PM Report this
comment

No doubt closing a multi-million dollar airport facility, doing
extensive demolition, and then erecting 'affordable housing' makes
perfect economic sense....only if you are taking advantage of the
legalized marijuana available. This ranks right up there with 'I'll
sell you the Brooklyn Bridge'. It's difficult to argue against ideas
that are this ridiculous because the other side of the table isn't
thinking in a rational way.

Posted by: Steven Morton | December 6, 2018 2:44 PM Report this
comment

There were two supervisors who utilized common sense in the meeting.
One of which is whose district they want to move operations to (San
Martin). He said, if lead is an issue, why are you moving it
elsewhere... One of the supervisors in an interview said the site is a
"Gold Mine" and it would essentially be foolish to not mine there. As
we all know, it's about $$$. I think it's foolish to remove a
community asset like this. SJC won't take the aircraft, other airports
are full, and San Martin is in no way a realistic location for those
of us in the bay area. Watching the deliberations on the live stream
were quite interesting.

Posted by: Michael Luvara | December 6, 2018 2:59 PM Report this
comment

And the county has >$880 million right now for affordable housing
projects. But what developer in their right mind wants to take a the
project that doesn't make as much money.

Posted by: Michael Luvara | December 6, 2018 3:02 PM Report this
comment

(Kim Hunter)

I remember my buddy talking to a local politician, asking what he can
do to make his town better. The politician replied, "just show up. So
many times we'll have an item on the table, we all know it's a crock,
but somebody shows up and makes a stink about it, so we have to react.
And that one person keeps showing up, because no one else does to
oppose it."
-------------------------

https://download.aopa.org/advocacy/2018/AOPA_Comments_SCC_BOS_Airport_Business_Plans.pdf

AOPA

November 30, 2018
Santa Clara Board of Supervisors
70 West Hedding St
San Jose, CA 95110
Reference: Dec 4, 2018 Board meeting, Agenda item 19
Airport Business Plan
Dear Supervisors;
The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) is a membership
organization comprised of nearly 330,000
aircraft owners, pilots, and people who appreciate the value of
general aviation in their communities. On behalf
of more than 34,000 members in California, I am writing to urge the
Board to approve option 1 of the staff
report submitted by Jeffrey V. Smith, County Executive as described on
page 17 of document 93897 A. This
option, among other items, will set the County policy to once again
accept Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
Airport Improvement Program (AIP) funds for airport maintenance and
development at Reid Hillview Airport
(RHV).
In reviewing all the documents relating to the development of the
business plan updates for both Reid Hillview
and South Countys San Martin (E16) airports, we are troubled that the
topic of closure of Reid Hillview Airport
has again surfaced. Numerous small businesses and professionals use
aircraft based at RHV to support their
business needs. The proposal to close RHV and transfer operations to
San Martin, an hour or more commute
from San Jose, simply is not a viable or efficient option. With
limited capacity for basing aircraft at both Palo Alto
and SJC, there are no viable alternatives to RHV in the immediate
area. AOPA is strongly opposed to any move
by Santa Clara County to close RHV.
Reid Hillview Airport is a critical FAA designated reliever airport to
San Jose Mineta International Airport (SJC).
With its close proximity to Silicone Valley and downtown San Jose, RHV
provides an attractive alternate for
general aviation operations. Rather than arriving or departing from
SJC, those aircraft operations take place at
RHV. The loss of RHV would move a significant number of the 160,000
operations to SJC likely causing additional
congestion and delays in airline operations at SJC.
Attempting to close Reid Hillview Airport in the face of existing
Federal Grant Obligations in perpetuity linked
to FAA Grant funds used to acquire the majority of land for the
airport could result in expensive and uncertain
litigation for years. Grant obligations linked to capital improvements
accepted previously wont expire until
2031. Under current policy, the county is passing up millions or FAA
AIP grants that could be used to upgrade
and maintain the facilities at Reid Hillview, including repayment of
the $3 million loan issued in 2017 by the
county to repave the runways at both Reid Hillview and San Martin
Airports.
A I R C R A F T O W N E R S A N D P I L O T S A S S O C I A T I O N
San Jose State Universitys Aviation Department, forced to relocate
from SJC to RHV, is the only university in the
State university system that offers a complete aviation curriculum
including flight, technician and operations
training. The university depends on its location at RHV to provide
training opportunities for students. Students,
including local community members, benefit from this training which
provides access to high-paying careers in
the aviation industry. If RHV were to close, with no viable
alternatives in the valley in which to relocate this
university program, so too would this important educational component.
Suggestions to close RHV seem to have germinated in response to a need
for affordable housing in the Santa
Clara Valley. Unfortunately, closing RHV will have no impact on
affordable housing needs in 2018 since with
current FAA Grant Assurances, we believe the earliest available date
for closure would be after 2030. If the
county were serious about addressing the affordable housing crisis,
the county could begin immediate
development with bond funds on land currently owned by the county.
Progress could be made now, not 12
years from now when the affordable housing crisis will be much worse.
We urge the county Board of Supervisors to set a policy to accept
federal AIP and other FAA grants for Reid
Hillview Airport and to remove any process to study closing the
airport. RHV is a viable and important
community asset,
We appreciate your consideration of our comments on this most
important issue.
Sincerely,
Bill Dunn
AOPA Government Affairs
e-mail: ***@aopa.org
phone: 301-695-2044
Cc: Supervisor Mike Wasserman
Supervisor Cindy Chavez
Supervisor Dave Cortese
Supervisor Ken Yeager
Supervisor Joe Simitian

------------------------------

http://sccgov.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=SplitView&MeetingID=9967&MediaPosition=&ID=93897&CssClass=

The County of Santa Clara
California

Report
93897
Under advisement from the December 12, 2017 Board meeting (Item
No.21): Receive report from the Roads and Airports Department relating
to the Airports Business Plan Update.
Information
Department: Office of the County Executive Sponsors:
Category: Report
Attachments
Printout
RHV Public Meeting Summary 05/22/18
San Martin Public Meeting Summary 05/23/18
Written Public Comments
Grant Assurances (This file has not yet been converted to a viewable
format)
FAA Release Requests
Airports Business Plan Update
Comments from Airports Commission
Public Comment - CAAPSO
Written Public Comments Addendum
Airports Business Plan Presentation 9-17-18
Public Comment 9-17-18
Meeting Schedule
Airports Business Plan - redline view
Reid-Hillview Airport Masterplan
San Martin Airport Master Plan
Typical Elements of an Airport Master Plan (This file has not yet been
converted to a viewable format)
Public Comment relating to DART
Public Comment 12-3-18 (a)
Public Comment 12-3-18 (b)
Public Comment 12-3-18 (c)
Public Comment 12-3-18 (d)
Memo from Vice President Chavez
Airports Business Plan Update Presentation Final
Public Comment 12-4-18 (e)
Public Comment 12-4-18 (f)
Public Comment 12-4-18 (g)
Public Comment
Written Comment
Written Comment
Body
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION

The purpose of this report is to provide information to the Board of
Supervisors for consideration related to the County Airports Business
Plan Update. Administrative staff is expecting further direction from
the Board of Supervisors as they see fit.

At its December 12, 2017 meeting, the Board of Supervisors directed
staff to proceed with the update to the Business Plan for
Reid-Hillview Airport and San Martin Airport.

CRITICAL CONDITION PRECEDENT TO POSSIBLE CHANGED USAGE OF THE AIRPORT
PROPERTIES

As the Board considers this Business Plan Update and the possibility
of a change in usage of the airport properties, it is important to
understand that evaluation of the sites for other uses will require
some level of hazardous materials assessment.

PLAN UPDATE

Staff has prepared a draft Business Plan Update for HLUET and the
Boards consideration. As indicated in the attached Business Plan
Update, key components and goals of the Business Plan Updates
analysis include:

· Analyzing the Airport Enterprise Funds (AEF) and each
airports sources of revenue and types of expenses;

· Identifying trends in the piston-propeller segment of General
Aviation and their effect on the type of operations occurring at the
County airports as well as their effect on the AEFs longstanding
Business Model;

· Developing Long Range Facility Plans (LRFPs) that identify
the airports maintenance and capital improvement needs and their
associated costs;

· Developing a new Business Model for the County airports
necessitated by the changing nature of the airports operations;

· Outlining the actions needed to execute the new Business
Model and the estimated potential revenue to be realized; and

· Examining the historical role of grant funding from the
Federal Airport Improvement Program (AIP) with respect to development
of the airports and the appropriate role of AIP grants going forward.

The analysis described above produced the following key conclusions:

· The AEFs longstanding Business Model has relied on revenue
from aircraft storage spaces (hangars, tie-downs and shelters) for
over 75% of total revenue. This Business Model has enabled the AEF to
remain financially self-sustaining for many years. Operating revenue
has been sufficient to fund operating expenses, although the condition
of both airports could be characterized as run-down, as well as the
local match required for grant-funded capital projects, which have
been implemented on a pay-as-you-go basis.

· However, the piston-propeller segment of General Aviation is
in decline, which has negative repercussions on the financial health
related to the ongoing operational and maintenance expenses of the
airport system and its ability to remain financially self-sustaining
with revenue primarily from aircraft storage. Notwithstanding the
decline in based aircraft, the number of operations at the County
airports in the last several years has been growing due to the demand
for professional pilots (both domestic and foreign) and the associated
flight schools required to train them. These trends dictate that the
County change its longstanding business model to one with a more
diversified and higher-yielding revenue stream.

· The key to generating a more diversified and higher-yielding
ongoing revenue stream is to put the airports real property assets to
work by leasing certain parcels for non-aviation commercial
development and by restructuring the Fixed Based Operator leaseholds.

· The airports infrastructure requires approximately $20
million in investment over the next 10 years, approximately half of
which is on the airfield and therefore eligible for Federal funding.
The Board approved a $3 million loan from the General Fund this fiscal
year for airfield paving pending the outcome of this Plan Update and
the future direction of the airports system. If the County chooses to
apply for Federal grants in the future, a portion of the cost of the
paving project could be eligible for retroactive grant reimbursement.

· Over the long term, the AEF may be able to generate
sufficient revenue to fund anticipated operating and capital costs,
including the necessary infrastructure investment, if the County is
able to more effectively utilize the airports real property assets.
In other words, the AEF cannot remain financially self-sustaining
unless the airports real property assets are employed to generate
additional revenue. The process for leasing real property is lengthy.
It will be several years before the parcels identified in the Business
Plan could begin to produce revenue. However, this assumption must be
tested and verified through a solicitation process involving the real
property assets and execution of leases to confirm the cash flow
anticipated by the report.

If the County resumes accepting Airport Improvement Program (AIP)
grants, that funding can be used to reduce the backlog of deferred
airfield infrastructure improvements. It is important to note that AIP
funding cannot be used to fund ongoing facility maintenance and
operations, which is the challenge to the longer-term financial
viability of the airports system.

Should the County continue to forego AIP grants, it is likely that
additional loans to the AEF would be required to fund future needed
airfield projects until such time Reid-Hillviews real property assets
generate revenue to help pay for these capital projects. This assumes
the FAA would provide property releases. However, foregoing the
Federal grant funds for Reid-Hillview would allow the County greater
flexibility with respect to future use of the airport beginning in
2031 when the existing Federal grant obligations expire. It should
also be noted that the County could apply for AIP grants for the San
Martin Airport, but not for Reid-Hillview Airport.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

At the September 17, 2018 special meeting of the Housing, Land Use,
Environment, and Transportation (HLUET) Committee, the Roads and
Airports Department provided the Committee with a supplemental report
relating to the County Airports Business Plan Update of the
Reid-Hillview and San Martin Airports and sought input from the
Committee. At this meeting, staff presented two options regarding the
Airports Business Plan Update:

· Staffs recommendation: Maintain Reid-Hillview as an airport
while making improvements and paying down debt by accepting Federal
grants, applying for property releases from the FAA, and conducting an
RFP for leasing properties (Option 1).

· Alternative: Preserve the opportunity for reuse of the
Reid-Hillview property for purposes other than an airport in 2031 when
grant assurances expire by adopting a policy that the County would
accept Airport Improvement Program (AIP) grants, applying for property
releases from the FAA, and negotiating leaseholds to make acreage
available for non-aviation development (Option 2).

Following the presentation by staff and public comment, Supervisor
Cortese requested that the Administration complete additional analysis
related to an alternative described as Option 3 for the possible
future consolidation and expansion of general aviation operations at
the San Martin Airport and re-use of Reid-Hillview, and directed that
the following analysis be completed and returned to the Committee
before the Airports Business Plan Update was considered by the Board
of Supervisors:

· Business analysis of the capital improvements necessary to
consolidate County general aviation operations at San Martin (e.g.,
additional asset development of Reid-Hillview property for
non-aviation uses, investment requirements to improve and expand
airport operations at San Martin so that existing assets at
Reid-Hillview would be replaced with improved facilities at San Martin
so that existing users of Reid-Hillview would not be displaced with
such a consolidation and expansion of San Martin).

· Identification of possible legal constraints on the full
consolidation by the County of airport operations at San Martin
following 2031 when grant assurances at Reid-Hillview expire.

At the close of the October 18, 2018 HLUET meeting, Supervisor
Wasserman recommended that Supervisor Corteses request for additional
analysis regarding the Airports Business Plan Update be brought to the
full Board for consideration, and the Committee clarified that the
request for staff to develop an Option 3 would be placed on a future
Board meeting for consideration and to receive possible additional
direction.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS

The Business Plan update sets out a series of policy options with a
recommended course of action. The airport system operates through a
self-funded Enterprise Fund. Adoption of the Staff Recommendation does
not impact the General Fund. If the Board were to choose alternative
actions, there are cost implications, some of which are estimated in
this report pursuant to requests for information by HLUET.

The Business Plan Update describes a series of interrelated issues
involving revenues, expenditures, grant funding and the general
aviation market as they relate to the health of the Airport Enterprise
Fund. It also discusses the overarching issue of grant funding and
grant assurances as they relate to the Countys ability to exert local
control over the airports.

Discussion of the Issues around Acceptance of Grants

The Federal government provides grant funding for eligible airport
development projects through the Airport Improvement Program (AIP).
The AIP program was established by the Airport and Airway Improvement
Act of 1982 to provide funding for airport planning and development.
The Airport and Airway Trust Fund, which was established by the
Airport and Airway Revenue Act of 1970, provides the revenues used to
fund AIP eligible projects through taxes or user fees that are
collected from the various segments of the aviation community. No
general taxpayer funds go into the Airport and Airway Trust Fund.

A portion of current AIP grant funds are assigned to eligible airports
on an annual basis. For Reid-Hillview and San Martin, the FAA provides
up to $150,000 per airport per year in entitlement funding that can
be used for any eligible project. The FAA will allow sponsors to bank
their entitlement for up to three years so that in the fourth year, a
sponsor will have up to $600,000 for each individual airport that can
be used on an eligible project. After three years, the oldest unused
funds are released to the FAA for distribution to another airport
through the AIP program. The County has not received FAA AIP grants
since 2011.

During part of this period, the County was denied grants due to a
dispute involving skydiving at San Martin Airport, and, as a result,
$1.5 million in Federal entitlement funding has been redirected to
other airports. Each year that the County does not apply for AIP
funding for both airports, an additional $300,000 in entitlement
funding will be redirected to other airports. Or, if the County
chooses to receive AIP grants for San Martin, but not Reid-Hillview
(RHV), then $150,000 in entitlement funding would be re-directed. It
is possible that those RHV funds could be re-directed to San Martin
with FAA approval.

In addition to entitlement funding, AIP grant requests may also be
considered for discretionary funding, which are made available to
airports on a competitive basis subject to funding availability.
Regardless of funding source, (entitlement or discretionary) the AIP
program provides up to 90% of the eligible project value in Federal
grants funds with up to 4.5% of the project value available through
State grant funding. It is important to note again that AIP funding
cannot be used to fund facility ongoing maintenance and operations,
which is the central long-term challenge facing the system.

The Board of Supervisors recently approved a loan of $3 million to the
Airport Enterprise Fund from the General Fund to repave the runways
and taxiways at the airports. This recently completed project was
structured to be federally compliant and therefore grant eligible.
Should the County resume accepting grants, staff will submit a grant
application for this project.

Entitlement funds may be used to retroactively fund projects.
Therefore, the County could apply the $1.2 million in entitlement
money accumulated for each of the two airports towards the General
Fund loan, and then apply the annual $300,000 in FAA entitlement funds
over the next six years to complete payment on the remaining balance
of $1.8 million. After six years, the County could then accumulate
future AIP entitlement grants for other needed projects. During that
six-year period, however, the County could still apply for
discretionary funding for grant-eligible projects.

Airports require constant maintenance. The runway and taxiway
pavement, along with the parking ramp and lighting, signage, and
surface markings all have a finite life and must be periodically
renewed and replaced, regardless of the demand for aircraft parking.
AIP grants can pay up to 90% of those costs with another 4.5% provided
by the State. Without grant funding, the County must pay 100% of those
costs.

When receiving AIP funding for projects, the grant recipients must
agree to a series of thirty-nine grant assurances (assurances). These
are binding agreements between the Federal government and the local
agency regarding the operation of the airports. The assurances include
specific requirements for how the grant funding will be utilized, how
the project will be executed, and a variety of requirements on how the
airports will be operated. Grant assurance agreements generally last
20 years.

Grant assurances fall into two categories[1]; assurances specific to
project, of which there are nineteen, and assurances that dictate
specific requirements for long-term operations of an airport, of which
there are twenty. The attachment provides a brief overview of the
different grant assurances and groups them into project specific
assurances and airport operation assurances.

The intent of the group of twenty grant assurances relating to
operating the airport is to ensure the grant recipient maintains and
operates the airport safely and efficiently. Most of the assurances
align with the Countys desire for safe and efficient airports and
make good business sense.

However, several of the assurances may restrict the ability of the
County to regulate the airports in ways that may be desirable and to
reduce conflict with surrounding land uses without first obtaining FAA
approval. For instance, the assurances restrict the County from
imposing a time-of-day curfew, and from regulating the size and type
of aircraft using the airports, or the types of uses, such as pilot
training or skydiving. In addition to the assurances, the Airport
Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 also regulates the operation of
airports in the United States, including generally prohibiting the
enactment of curfews and use restrictions.

Since the County most recently accepted grants in 2011, the most
recent AIP grant agreement states that the County is currently
obligated to comply with the assurances until 2031.

Grant Acceptance Risks

Another issue regarding grant acceptance relates to risk the County
may be exposed to should it elect to accept FAA AIP grant funding
going forward. If the airports general aviation business diminishes to
the point that the AEF is no longer self-sustaining, the County would
be required to keep the airports operating for the duration of the
grant assurance period. The AEF budget for FY 2018-19 is approximately
$2.7 million dollars. This is the theoretical annual maximum exposure
to the General Fund in todays dollars should airport revenue go to
zero for the remainder of the grant assurance period. Of course, if
the airport business declines that severely, staff would employ cost
saving measures to reduce to the greatest extent possible the General
Fund exposure and operate the airports at the minimum viable safety
level.

Constraints Related to the Airport Noise and Capacity Act

The Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 (ANCA) regulates local
operators of public airports in important ways. Through ANCA, the FAA
retains authority over the creation and implementation of access
restrictions at all publicly owned airports, regardless of whether
jurisdictions accept AIP grants. This means that any restrictions the
County might wish to enact regarding the types of uses and time of use
restrictions once the existing AIP grant assurances have expired would
need to be reviewed and authorized by the FAA. Practically, this
means that the FAA could likely prevent the County from imposing
curfews, even after the grant assurances expire.

Because the Airport Noise and Capacity Act would still require the
County to operate the airports similarly to airports receiving AIP
grants, staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve
retroactive use of existing available Federal entitlement moneys to
begin paying down the principal of the loan. In addition, Staff
recommends that the Board of Supervisors direct the Administration to
apply for reimbursement for the remainder of the principal to the
maximum amount possible. Acceptance of these monies will require the
acceptance of new grant assurances for a new 20-year term.

Property Releases

A key premise of the Business Plan Update is the non-aviation use of
airport property. Since Reid-Hillview property was purchased in part
with FAA grant funding, the FAA must authorize use of the airport
property for non-aviation use, a process referred to as a property
release. The FAA frequently allows such development at other airports,
but to date, when the County has applied for a property release at the
Reid-Hillview parcel at the corner of Capitol and Tully shown in the
attachment, the FAA would not release the parcel.

The most recent land release request is attached. Land releases are a
critical approval necessary for the success of the business plan and
the clearest path to providing funding for ongoing maintenance and
operations. Board approval of this business plan is a crucial step in
the land release application process. Should the Board agree to move
forward with non-aviation development, a property release request
would be once again submitted for the airport parcels in question, and
the County believes that the FAA would likely be legally required to
approve it; however, it is unknown how the FAA will respond.

Strategy for Non-Aviation use of Property

Pending direction from the Board of Supervisors and concurrent with
the request for property releases, staff would draft the Request for
Proposals for the real property identified in the Business Plan
Update. The Board will be asked to approve the RFPs and subsequent
leases should the County come to terms with interested land
developers. The process including any City of San Jose land
development approvals would require a minimum of three years. At this
point, the revenue projections for the airport can be adjusted to
reflect the new leases and the County would have certainty around the
fiscal health of the airports.

Fixed Base Operators (FBO) Strategy

The purpose of the FBO strategy as recommended in the Business Plan
Update is to improve competitiveness for aircraft and pilot services,
use the airports land more efficiently, and improve quality of the
buildings and grounds through the development of Minimum Standards.
While this strategy is unlikely to result in significant revenue
changes for the AEF as FBO lease proceeds are a small fraction of
revenue, the consolidation of FBOs would free up land that could then
be available for non-aviation ground leases.

The original leases for the FBOs at Reid-Hillview were executed
between 1965 and 1973. It can be surmised that nine individual leases
provided the best mix of aviation service providers for the airports
needs at that time. The nine FBO leases at Reid-Hillview have all been
adjusted to expire concurrently in December 31, 2021. The concurrent
expiration is a strategy staff employed to ease implementing the new
full service FBO strategy as described in the Business Plan Update.

Of the nine existing FBO leaseholds at Reid-Hillview, only two provide
a full range of services. The remainder of the FBOs act more as what
the FAA defines as a Specialized Aviation Service Operator. These
operators usually provide a single service.

The Plan recognizes the change in the aviation business climate since
the mid-1970s and recommends reducing the number of leaseholds from
nine small operations to two larger operations. Under the two FBO
scenario each of the proposed FBOs will be required to provide a full
range of services. As part of the RFP, a minimum standards document
will be prepared to ensure that the two FBOs provide a full range of
aviation services including fueling, maintenance, parking, rentals,
ground support and terminal services. This will provide appropriate
market competitiveness for services and eliminate the case where only
one service provider sets pricing.

Although the Business Plan Update recommends two full service FBOs
for Reid-Hillview, it is possible that the best mix of size and
service that the market can support is more than two but fewer than
nine. As the staff implements the Boards direction, an RFP can be
developed with industry and stakeholder outreach in such a manner to
allow flexibility in the number of future FBOs while adhering to the
goals of a competitive market, full service and efficient use of land.
Any RFPs will be presented to the Board for approval once they are
developed and prior to advertising. Significant outreach with new
potential vendors as well as existing tenants will be provided during
the RFP development period.

In addition, by reducing the number of leases, the FBO layout can be
made more efficient by providing a more coherent land side and air
side interface. As a result, the lease area can be reduced from 18
acres to approximately 14 acres. The plan proposes the excess land be
made available for non-aviation use subject to FAA property release.

Below are two diagrams showing the existing lease layout and the
recommended lease layout. The recommended plan provides for an
orderly airside and landside interface between the leaseholds and
eliminates three cul-de-sacs necessary to provide landside and
airside frontages for the exiting nine parcels. In addition, the new
Plan may eliminate the need for John Montgomery Drive on the land side
and free up an additional land that may be used for future
non-aviation uses.

Existing Layout of Leases at Reid-Hillview

Proposed layout of leases at Reid-Hillview

The FBO lease at San Martin Airport expires on December 10, 2020. The
single FBO at San Martin provides services commensurate with the
demand for a smaller airport. The current leaseholder has sublet the
various services out to different organizations (SASO) to provide
aircraft maintenance and repair, fueling, and flight training. Staff
recommendation for San Martin airport is for the County to take over
management of the FBO property and lease out the appropriate space to
individual SASOs to provide the services necessary for an airport of
San Martins size and activity level. In addition, the County will
take over the self-fueling island. With the FBO hangar income, fuel
sales and SASO leases, the budget for San Martin airport will be
positively affected.

Nonprofit Use of Airport Property

The Business Plan Update identified two properties that occupy airport
property that are not paying the AEF market-based rent. This
arrangement is not appropriate for an enterprise fund. Both the
Eastridge Little League and the San Martin Lions Club provide valuable
service to the community. Recognizing the challenge these two
organizations would face in acquiring properties, the Plan recommends
the County identify funding to appropriately compensate the AEF the
value of the real estate asset. This plan does not recommend removing
either use.

Discussion of Airport Consolidation and Expansion (Option 3)

The HLUET Committee referred to staff direction to describe the
resources needed to evaluate consolidation of Reid-Hillview to San
Martin and its expansion as a regional training center, Option 3. In
order to evaluate such a scenario, staff would need to prepare a new
Master Plan (MP) for San Martin Airport assuming that Reid-Hillview is
closed and some portion of the Reid-Hillview operation is relocated to
San Martin. In order for the Board of Supervisors to approve a new
Master Plan, an environmental assessment of approval of the Master
Plan would need to be prepared, and, based upon that assessment, an
Environmental Impact Report/Statement (EIR/EIS) would also need to be
prepared.

An airport master plan is a technical document generally prepared in
accordance with FAA Advisory Circular 150/5070-6B Airport Master
Plans. It is a comprehensive study of the airport which typically
describes short, medium and long-term plans for airport
development.[2] The advisory circular provides guidelines on the
content of a Master Plan and the process by which it is developed,
including public outreach recommendations to adequately address
stakeholder input, needs and desires.

In most cases, a typical Master Plan would include the following
elements which are described in greater detail in the attachment:

· Pre-planning

· Public Involvement

· Environmental Consideration

· Existing Conditions

· Aviation Forecast

· Facility Requirements

· Alternative Development and Evaluation

· Airport Layout Plan

· Facilities Implementation Plan

· Financial Feasibility Analysis

The comprehensiveness for each of the elements varies based on the
specific circumstances of the airport being studied. Typically, the
level of detail necessary for the study are developed during the
pre-planning effort.

The FAA recognizes that a Master Plan represents the views, policies
and development plans of the airport sponsor, not necessarily those of
the FAA. As such, the FAA does not approve a Master Plan but will
formally accept it once it is completed. In order to meet Federal
requirements however, the FAA must approve the Forecast of Demand and
the Airport Layout Plan (ALP) portions of the Master Plan if the
airport sponsor desires the airport be eligible for future Federal
grant funding.

Master Plans can take some time to develop and have several cost
drivers. As an example, the process for the 2006 Master Plan was
begun in September 1999 when the Board of Supervisors initially
authorized staff to apply for FAA grant funding to complete new Master
Plans for Reid-Hillview, San Martin and Palo Alto Airports. The final
Master Plans were published in July 2006. At the time, staff was
preparing three airport master plans concurrently, so it can be
expected that developing a single airport Master Plan should not take
as much time. With that in mind, staff expects the best-case scenario
for completion of a new San Martin Airport master plan to be three to
four years.

The cost of developing a Master Plan varies based on the specific
aviation, community and stakeholder needs for the airport being
studied. However, for a reference point, in 2001 the San Martin
Master Plan budget was approximately $300,000. The estimate for the
EIR/EIS in 2006 was approximately $1 million. In order for the Board
of Supervisors to adopt a new Master Plan, it is likely that an
EIR/EIS will be necessary. The Federal EIS is required to conform to
NEPA and allow the airport to be eligible for AIP funding in the
future. Today, rough estimates for the cost of preparing a Master
Plan is $500,000 and the environmental work is $2 million. This
estimate is very preliminary and does not reflect a comprehensive and
updated analysis of the costs.

Master plans and NEPA-required studies are FAA AIP grant eligible.
However, they must be included in the five-year Airport Capital
Improvement Plan (ACIP) submitted annually to the FAA. Should the
Board elect to apply for grant funding for a San Martin Master Plan
study, the ACIP will first need to be updated. Practically, this
means that the first opportunity to obtain grant funding for these
activities would occur in 2020. Also applying grant funding to the
master plan-related activities could impact the ability of the AEF to
use entitlement grant funding to repay the $3 million General Fund
loan.

Previous Master Planning Effort and Outcome

In 1999 preparation of Master Plans for Reid-Hillview, San Martin, and
Palo Alto were authorized to proceed by the Board of Supervisors. The
effort was concluded in 2006 and the environmental process was
commenced. The cost of the three Master Plans was approximately
$722,000. In 2014, The Palo Alto Airport was relinquished to the City
of Palo Alto.

In order to lessen the costs to the AEF, the County applied for grants
to fund the environmental study for San Martin Airport. The
environmental work for RHV was self-funded and the work for Palo Alto
was not done. In 2008, the County was awarded a $400,000 AIP grant to
complete the Federal EIS to comply with the National Environmental
Policy Act for the San Martin Airport Master Plan. Unfortunately, the
CEQA EIR costs were not eligible for grant reimbursement and the
Airport Enterprise Fund did not have the resources to fund the
additional costs. As a result, the EIR/EIS was not prepared and the
grant funding was returned.

The 2006 Master Plans studied various growth options for County
airports. The Board of Supervisors directed that the maximum number of
based aircraft allowed at Reid Hillview be capped, and that the
majority of new aviation growth be accommodated at the San Martin
Airport. Consequently, the Master Plans for Reid-Hillview and San
Martin Airport were developed to accommodate up to 750 and 418 based
aircraft respectively. In 2006, Reid-Hillview had 687 based aircraft
and San Martin had 115. The number of based aircraft at Reid-Hillview
is currently 478 and San Martin has 150.

The 2006 Master Plans for Reid-Hillview and San Martin were developed
with the expectation that Reid-Hillview would continue as a general
aviation reliever airport. If the County were to consolidate
Reid-Hillview through development at San Martin Airport, a new San
Martin MP will be required. A basic overview of the types of
improvements that would be required at San Martin Airport are
described in the 2006 Master Plan. It is probable that the
improvements described in the 2006 Master Plan for San Martin would
represent a similar scale of development necessary to accommodate a
portion of the Reid-Hillview aircraft and operations.

The current MP for San Martin contemplates:

· A new air traffic control tower

· An extended runway

· One new taxiway

· A new terminal building

· A new maintenance building

· Multiple new corporate hangers

· A new tiedown parking ramp

· New water and sewage infrastructure

· One new FBO

· Property acquisitions to protect the airport from
incompatible development

Attached is the 2006 South County Airport Master plan, which contains
a diagram showing the described improvements.

This Airports Business Plan Update was prepared in response to
direction from the Board of Supervisors and represents staff analysis
of the options for an updated airports business plan. Contemplation
of airport consolidation has been discussed in the report in response
to a referral from the HLUET Committee. It is understood that the
land use, neighborhood compatibility, environmental footprint, and
environmental justice issues around Reid-Hillview Airport have been
longstanding community concerns.

During community hearings and at HLUET, nearby residents and
representatives of East San Jose institutions including People Acting
in Community Together (PACT) and Somos Mayfair consistently voiced
opposition to RHV as a general aviation airport. Some of the
representatives spoke to the serious health hazards posed by leaded
fuel used by general aviation airplanes, others spoke to the safety
concerns of having incompatible land uses (residential neighborhoods
adjacent to RHV), while others expressed the urgent need for
additional affordable housing that could be placed at RHV through a
re-use plan.

The urgent need for substantially more affordable housing in Santa
Clara County has been thoroughly analyzed and documented in County
Office of Supportive Housing reports as well as in presentations on
Nexus Studies for affordable housing impact fees in unincorporated
Santa Clara County. However, County staff have not to-date provided
analysis addressing consistent community concerns around lead
contamination and poisoning in the vicinity of Reid-Hillview Airport.

In light of the Countys core mission to promote the health and
well-being of the residents of Santa Clara County, and in order to
better inform the Board of Supervisors decision-making process,
information about lead contamination and poisoning, the use of leaded
fuel in small, piston-engine airplanes, and blood lead levels in Santa
Clara County children is provided.

Lead Contamination and Poisoning

Lead was introduced in the 1920s as a fuel additive for use in engines
to help boost fuel octane and prevent valve seat recession but is now
widely recognized as a significant public health concern. With newer
engine and fuel technology, leaded fuels were transitioned out of use
over several decades due to the health risk associated with lead
exposure. As discussed below, leaded aviation fuel (avgas)
continues to be used in the piston-engine aircraft that are typically
used for recreational aviation.

Lead contamination and poisoning presents serious public health risks.
Lead is a confirmed neurotoxin, and even low levels of lead in blood
can result in stunted physical and cognitive development in children,
leading to lower IQ scores, poor academic performance, poor attention
and impulse control, and numerous physical health complications.[3] In
adults, elevated blood lead levels are associated with kidney and
brain damage, increased blood pressure, miscarriages, stillbirths, and
infertility. Importantly, the most common way to address lead
exposure is to remove the sources of lead.

Environmental Standards for Airborne Lead

In 2008, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) considered
adjusting the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for
airborne lead, taking into account the air-related effects on
neurocognitive function loss associated with exposure to varying
levels of lead. The EPA concluded that there are causal associations
between air-related (lead) exposures and population IQ loss.[4] At
that time, the EPA revised the NAAQS for lead to 0.15 µg/m3 in total
suspended particles as a 3-month average and has retained that
standard following additional review in 2016. This standard has been
maintained despite scientific consensus that there is no safe level of
exposure to lead.

Blood Lead Levels

Currently, children with blood lead levels (BLL) equal to or greater
than 5 µg/dL of blood are identified as having a BLL of concern by the
Center for Disease Control (CDC).[5] However, the Environmental
Protection Agency, the CDC, and California Department of Public Health
have concluded that there is no safe blood lead exposure, and no BLL
over zero is free of all risk.[6] Even low levels of lead in blood in
children have been shown to result in cognitive decline and reduced
IQ[7] and, although the effects may be small, they are enduring and
usually permanent.[8] Studies find that adults exposed to lead as
children show significant neural differences to adults without
childhood lead exposure. Persons exposed to lead in early life
experience an unfolding series of adverse behavioral outcomes:
behavior problems as a child, pregnancy and aggression as a teen, and
criminal behavior as a young adult.[9] Because lead exposure often
occurs with no obvious symptoms, it frequently goes unrecognized.

Sources of Airborne Lead

Since the removal of lead from gasoline used in automobiles, point
sources for concentrated lead emissions, such as smelters, metal
foundries, power plants, and airports are now considered the main
routes of exposure to lead in outdoor air. However, without a current
source of lead emissions, legacy contamination from leaded gasoline
use in past decades, leached lead from water pipes, and old house
paint also contributes significantly to BLLs, as lead particles from
these sources are ingested, or inhaled when climatic conditions cause
lead particles to become re-suspended in air.[10]

Lead Emissions at Reid-Hillview Airport

Although leaded fuel was phased out of use in automobiles beginning in
the 1970s and has been banned in California since 1992 for road use,
leaded gasoline continues to be used in small, piston-engine planes.
These planes are typically used for flight instruction, personal
recreational or business use, and charter use, operating out of small
general aviation airports like Reid-Hillview. Lead is not added to
jet fuel that is used in commercial aircraft, military aircraft, or
other turbine-engine powered aircraft. Avgas is currently the largest
source of lead emissions in the United States,[11] estimated by the
EPA to account for half of the lead pollution in American skies.

Locally, Reid-Hillview (RHV) is a significant source of airborne lead
pollution in the Santa Clara Valley. A 2008 study by the EPA ranked
the airport 25th out of 3,414 airport facilities across the country
with an estimated 580 kilograms of lead emitted annually.[12] This
estimate is based upon data obtained from the Federal Aviation
Authority relating to airport activity including statistics relating
to the types of aircraft in use and the number of takeoffs and
landings. Since 2008, RHVs number of annual flight operations has
grown from 141,006 to 162,648 in 2017, which suggests that
neighborhood children and the surrounding communities are exposed to
more airborne lead pollution than at the time of the study.

RHV was one of 15 airports chosen by the EPA for required monitoring
due to expected lead emissions from piston-engine aircraft utilizing
the airport. Results through December 2016 indicate that lead
concentrations have exceeded 50% of the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards which are standards for harmful pollutants established by
the EPA under authority of the Clean Air Act for airborne lead (0.15
µg/m3), requiring continued monitoring. Three month rolling averages
from 2014 through 2016 at RHV ranged from 0.049 to 0.103 µg/m3.[13]

Blood Lead Levels of Children in Santa Clara County

In 2012, the California Department of Public Health published data on
children under 6 years old with blood lead levels (BLL) at or above
4.5 µg/dL of blood. Five out of a total of 58 zip codes in Santa
Clara County were in the top 200 out of 2,589 zip codes across the
state for elevated BLLs in young children, where there were at least
500 children tested. These included the two zip codes adjacent to
Reid-Hillview Airport (95122, 95127), and one zip code with a border
within one mile of the airport (95116). Each of these three zip codes
showed a higher than average percentage of children with elevated
BLLs.

Table 1. Children >6 Years with Elevated Blood Lead Levels (BLL) by
Top Zip Codes in Santa Clara County, 2012[14]

Zip Code

Region

Percentage of Children with =>4.5µg/dl BLL

95127

San Jose East (RHV)

3.02%

95122

San Jose East (RHV)

2.48%

95116

San Jose East

1.93%

95111

San Jose South

1.81%

95020

Gilroy

1.68%

Although this data does not demonstrate that the use of leaded fuel at
Reid-Hillview Airport (RHV) is the cause of elevated BLLs in adjacent
areas, it may be a significant contributing factor. A study at Santa
Monica Airport[15] found that the highest lead concentrations occur
close to airport runways and decrease exponentially with distance from
an airport, dropping down to background levels at about 1 km.[16]
Additionally, a 2011 study[17] concluded that there is a significant
association between potential exposure to lead emissions from avgas
and elevated BLLs in children. The results of the analysis in that
study suggest that children living within 500 meters of an airport at
which planes use avgas have higher blood lead levels than other
children, and that the apparent effect of avgas was evident also among
children living within one kilometer of those airports.

For the millions of people nationwide living within a kilometer of
airport facilities that service piston-engine aircraft, the continuing
flow of lead into the environment remains a potentially serious source
of exposure risk, with a recent study of BLLs in children living near
airports using avgas in Michigan providing evidence that elevated
BLLs in children proximate to airports is at least partly attributable
to avgas deposition from piston-engine aircraft.[18] This study
found that children residing within one kilometer of an airport are
25% and 45% more likely to exceed present and past thresholds of
concern than children living at least 4 kilometers away.

Areas with higher than average percentages of children with elevated
BLLs are more likely to be populated by people of color and those in
lower income groups, with one study finding extraordinarily high
rates of lead toxicity in black and Hispanic neighborhoods in
Chicago, concluding that lead toxicity is a source of ecological
inequity by race and a pathway through which racial inequality
literally gets into the body.[19] Census data indicate a
predominantly minority population in the five zip codes in question
(Table 2), with a poverty rate exceeding the county average of 9.3%
(Table 3).

Table 2: Percentage of Individuals with Hispanic/Latino or Asian
Origin in Zip Codes with Higher Rates of Elevated BLLs[20]

Zip Code

Hispanic or Latino

Asian

95127 (SJ East RHV)

58.9%

23.2%

95122 (SJ East RHV)

58.6%

23.4%

95116 (SJ East)

59.9%

34.7%

95111 (SJ South)

51.6%

34.4%

95020 (Gilroy)

58.2%

6.1%

Table 3: Percentage Individuals Below Poverty Level in Zip Codes with
Higher Rates of Elevated BLLs, with Median Income[21]

Zip Code

Individuals Below Federal Poverty Level

Median Annual Household Income

95127 (SJ East RHV)

11.8%

$78,362

95122 (SJ East RHV)

17.6%

$62,595

95116 (SJ East)

19.2%

$51,399

95111 (SJ South)

16.7%

$61,630

95020 (Gilroy)

12.6%

$86,261

Countywide

9.3%

$101,173

Recommendations

It is recommended that the Board of Supervisors adopt the following
recommendations:

1. Receive the Business Plan Update.

2. Consider options discussed, or others that are appropriate, and
provide direction to staff.

3. Direct the County Executive to report back to the Board with a
recommended plan to analyze and address any concerns regarding
airborne lead and associated concerns.

4. Direct the County Executive or designee to accept $1.2 million
in FAA entitlement funding to help pay down the $3 million loan the
AEF received from the General Fund in fiscal year 2017. Execute the
necessary Grant Agreements to receive the funding from the federal
government.

5. Direct the County Executive to apply for Federal and State
Grants for the Santa Clara County Airports to the maximum extent
possible for the improvement of the airports infrastructure.

6. Direct the County Executive to apply for property releases from
the FAA consistent with the Business Plan Update.

7. Direct the County Executive to prepare Requests for Proposals
consistent with the Business Plan Update for leasing properties and
consolidating the Fixed Base Operators (FBOs) at Reid Hillview
Airport.

Alternative

Alternatively, if the Board of Supervisors desires to preserve the
Countys options for possible use of the Reid-Hillview Airport for an
alternate purpose, the following option may also be considered.

1. Approve a policy statement that the County will not apply for
Airport Improvement Program grants for Reid-Hillview Airport.

2. Direct the County Executive or designee to accept $1 million in
FAA entitlement funding related to the airfield repaving project at
San Martin Airport to help pay down the outstanding General Fund loan.

3. Direct the County Executive to apply for property releases at
Reid-Hillview Airport from the FAA consistent with the Business Plan
Update.

4. Renegotiate existing leaseholds to the extent possible to
consolidate the FBOs at Reid-Hillview Airport to make available
acreage for non-aviation development. This effort may by hindered by
a decision to forego Federal grants since the future of Reid-Hillview
will be viewed as uncertain by potential leaseholders.

The Board may wish to clearly state its intent regarding Reid-Hillview
by:

5. Declaring its intent that the purpose in foregoing certain
Federal AIP funds is to ultimately close Reid-Hillview Airport.

6. Directing the County Executive to prepare a new Master Plan for
the San Martin Airport in consideration of the future closure of
Reid-Hillview Airport.

CHILD IMPACT

The recommended action will impact the health and welfare of children
and youth regarding lead contamination and/or ultimate usage of the
airport property.

SENIOR IMPACT

The recommended action may also have a health and welfare impact upon
seniors.

SUSTAINABILITY IMPLICATIONS

The recommended action will have no/neutral sustainability
implications.

BACKGROUND

At the May 9, 2017 Board meeting, staff presented a report that
recommended development of an updated business plan (BP) for county
airports. With the Boards concurrence, staff was directed to return
with an implementation plan that included a time-frame and the costs
necessary to produce a new BP. Since that initial meeting, staff has
held a series of 17 separate public meetings (attachment), including
six Airport Commission meetings, to answer questions and solicit input
from stakeholders.

On Dec. 12, 2017, an implementation plan was presented and accepted by
the Board with direction to bring the completed business plan update
back to the Board in spring 2018.

After completion of a series of stakeholder meetings, staff intended
to bring the Business Plan Update to HLUET Committee on May 17, 2018
and the full Board in June. Due to questions about the Business Plan
and the desire to obtain additional public input, the HLUET
presentation was postponed until June 21, 2018. Due to the length of
the June 21 agenda and the anticipated public input during this item,
the HLUET presentation was postponed to August 16, the first HLUET
meeting after summer recess. Subsequently a request was received from
constituents to hold the HLUET meeting in the evening to ensure the
greatest level of participation. The HLUET presentation was then
scheduled for an evening meeting on September 17, 2018.

At the September 17, 2018 HLUET meeting, the committee requested that
staff evaluate a third option to move the Reid-Hillview Airport
operations to San Martin and to establish a regional training center,
and to bring the updated report back to HLUET prior to submission to
the full Board.

At the end of the October 18, 2018 HLUET meeting, a discussion between
the Committee members resulted in a request for staff to present the
information requested by HLUET relative to Option 3 and the Business
Plan to the full Board of Supervisors prior to the end of the 2018
calendar year without a presentation to HLUET first.

Airports Commission Meeting

The Airports Commission will submit its comments on the Business Plan
separately directly to the Board of Supervisors. However, the
Commission did point out that the time periods for various fiscal
analysis in the Business Plan were inconsistent. The Airport
Commission also noted that in the Business Plan Updates discussion
around the issue of grant acceptance, the report did not fairly
balance the pros and cons of grant acceptance.

Reid-Hillview Meeting

Staff held a public meeting on May 22, 2018 between 6:30 P.M. and 8:30
P.M. in the Ocala Middle School cafeteria. Prior to the meeting,
notice was posted on the County website, Facebook page, Nextdoor
website and on the airports website and Facebook page. In addition,
an email notice was sent to all past registered meeting attendees and
all airport tenants. A flyer was distributed to all airport-based
businesses and a postcard notice was mailed to approximately 6,500
properties near Reid-Hillview Airport.

Approximately 100 people attended the meeting. About half of the
attendees were from the neighborhoods surrounding Reid-Hillview and
the other half were airport users and tenants. Spanish and Vietnamese
interpreters were made available to assist in communication.

A slide presentation was provided to the attendees with a question and
answer session following. Among the neighbors, the general consensus
was that the airport is an undesirable neighbor with numerous comments
to close the airport and redevelop it into affordable, multifamily
housing and/or community-serving uses such as schools or parks. San
Jose State University Aviation Department students attended and
expressed the value that the airport holds for them and their efforts
to obtain an aviation-based education and the opportunities that are
available to the local youth because of the SJSU presence at the
airport. Current airport tenants were concerned with the proposal to
realign the FBO leaseholds with a desire to understand the mechanics
of that change. There was also much discussion on the lack of clarity
in the preliminary draft report regarding the benefits Airport
Improvement Program (AIP) grant funding provides to the County and
what benefits in terms of freedom and flexibility that would be
obtained should the County elect not to accept future grant funding
and allow the existing grant assurances to expire.

A summary of the meeting with comments and responses is attached.

San Martin Meeting

On May 23, 2018 between 6:30 P.M. and 8:30 P.M., a public meeting was
held at the San Martin Airport to discuss the preliminary Business
Plan Update. The meeting notice was posted on the County website,
Facebook page, Nextdoor, and on the airports website and Facebook
page. In addition, an email notice was sent to all past registered
meeting attendees and all airport tenants. A postcard notice was
mailed to approximately 500 properties near San Martin Airport.

Approximately 50 people attended this meeting and fewer than five
attendees identified themselves as being from the surrounding
community. The remainder were airport users and tenants.

The same slide-show presentation from Reid-Hillview was presented at
the San Martin Airport. The discussion at San Martin was largely about
what will happen when the FBO leasehold expires in 2020. The FBO
leasehold includes hangars that will revert to County ownership upon
expiration of the FBO lease. Some occupants of the FBO hangars claim
ownership of the hangars. This is not consistent with the FBO lease.
Additional discussion was held on the value of accepting AIP grant
funds, and the existing Airport Master Plan that includes possible
additional development at the airport, including a lengthened runway.

A summary of the meeting with comments and responses is attached.

Meeting with the Federal Aviation Administration

Staff met with the FAA, Airport District Office (ADO) on July 27, 2018
to present the preliminary draft Business Plan Update and discuss its
intent and purpose.

County staff presented the Plan to the FAA staff in attendance. Staff
explained the intent of monetizing excess land and realignment of the
FBOs at Reid Hillview in the context of improving the fiscal outlook
for the Santa Clara County Airports.

The FAA staff expressed continued concerns about the Countys failure
to apply for AIP grant funding. The FAA staff indicated that failure
to apply for grants is usually a precursor to an attempt to close an
airport. In addition, property release requests are also frequently
seen as an effort by an airport operator to justify future closure of
an airport. The FAA indicated that past property releases submitted by
the County were viewed in that context.

After an in-depth discussion of the Plans strategy, including the
property releases, the FAA staff indicated that there is likely to be
an opportunity to negotiate the property releases once the Business
Plan Update is approved.

The FAA was receptive and appreciative of the efforts the County has
made and expressed a desire to actively partner on improving the
airports. To that end, staff and the ADO office will meet again in the
fall of 2018 to review the outcome of the HLUET and Board of
Supervisors actions.

CONSEQUENCES OF NEGATIVE ACTION

The County would continue to operate the airports with the existing
leasehold mix; revenue and expenditures would largely remain the same
with expenses rising relative to economic conditions and increases to
rents indexed to the Consumer Price Index (CPI).

The FY 2019 budget for the Airports division calls for a $268,000
transfer from Retained Earnings to the operating budget. Without
additional revenue sources, this is a trend that is expected to
continue indefinitely. The deficit does not include any capital
investment. All capital needs will necessitate additional funding.
Under this scenario, a long-term subsidy of approximately $20 million
dollars over ten years is required.

STEPS FOLLOWING APPROVAL

Send notification of completed processing to:

1. Pam Rebillot, Roads and Airports Department, Administration

2. Eric Peterson, Roads and Airports Department, Airports Division

[1] There are three grant assurances that are specific to commercial
air-carrier airports and consequently do not apply to the County
airports. 10. Metropolitan Planning Organization, 12. Terminal
Development Prerequisites, and 39. Competitive Access

[2] FAA AC 150/5070-6B Airport Master Plan, pg. 5

[3] US Dept. of Health and Human Services, National Toxicology
Program, NTP Monograph, Health Effects of Low-level Lead Evaluation
(June 2012)

[4] Murphy, D., and Pekar, Z., United States Environmental Protection
Agency, Air-related IQ Loss Evidence-based Framework and Estimates
from Quantitative Risk Assessment (April 2008)

[5] Centers for Disease Control Fact Sheet, Blood Lead Levels in
Children

[6] Vorvolakos, T., Arseniou, S., & Samakouri, M. (2016). There is no
safe threshold for lead exposure: ? literature review.
Psychiatriki,27(3), 204-214. doi:10.22365/jpsych.2016.273.204

[7] Lanphear, B. P. (2000). Cognitive Deficits Associated with Blood
Lead Concentrations. Public Health Reports,115(6), 521-529.
doi:10.1093/phr/115.6.521

[8] Canfield, R. L., Jusko, T. A., & Kordas, K. (2005). Environmental
lead exposure and children's cognitive function. Rivista italiana di
pediatria = The Italian Journal of Pediatrics, 31(6), 293-300.

[9] Reyes, J. (2015) Lead exposure and behavior: Effects on antisocial
and risky behavior among children and adolescents. Economic Inquiry
53(3): 1580-1605.

[10] Schmidt, C. (2010) Lead in Air, Adjusting to a New Standard.
Environmental Health Perspectives 118(2): A76-A79;
doi:10.1289/ehp.118-a76

[11] Health Impact Project, Pew Charitable Trusts, 10 Policies to
Prevent and Respond to Childhood Lead Exposure (August 2017)

[12] United States Environmental Protection Agency, Lead Emissions
from the Use of Leaded Aviation Gasoline in the United States,
Technical Support Document, EPA420-R08-020 (October 2008)

[13] Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2016 Air Monitoring
Network Plan (July 2017)

[14] Top 200 California Zip Codes for Percentage of Children Age <6
years with Blood Lead Levels of =>4.5 mcg/dl (California, 2012);
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/DEODC/CLPPB/Pages/data.aspx

[15] United States Environmental Protection Agency, Development and
Evaluation of an Air Quality Modeling Approach for Lead Emissions from
Piston-Engine Aircraft Operating on Leaded Aviation Gasoline,
Technical Report, EPA-420-R-10-007 (February, 2010)

[16] See also Piazza, B. (1999). Los Angeles Unified School District,
Health and Safety Branch Santa Monica Municipal Airport: A Report on
the Generation and Downwind Extent of Emissions Generated from
Aircraft and Ground Support Operations

[17] Miranda, M. L., Anthopolos, R., & Hastings, D. (2011). A
Geospatial Analysis of the Effects of Aviation Gasoline on Childhood
Blood Lead Levels. Environmental Health Perspectives, 119(10),
1513-1516. doi:10.1289/ehp.1003231

[18] Zahran, S., Iverson, T., Mcelmurry, S. P., & Weiler, S. (2017).
The Effect of Leaded Aviation Gasoline on Blood Lead in Children.
Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists,
4(2), 575-610. doi:10.1086/691686

[19] Sampson, R. J., & Winter, A. S. (2016). The Racial Ecology of
Lead Poisoning. Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race,
13(02), 261-283. doi:10.1017/s1742058x16000151

[20] United States Census Bureau, 2012-2016 American Community Survey
5-Year Estimates

[21] United States Census Bureau, 2012-2016 American Community Survey
5-Year Estimate
-------------------------------

https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/12/04/reid-hillview-airports-days-may-be-numbered-after-santa-clara-supervisors-action/

Reid-Hillview Airports days may be numbered after supervisors action
Santa Clara County boards vote opens up the possibility of developing
the property as housing or other uses
Previous

An airplane takes off at Reid-Hillview Airport in San Jose, Calif., on
Tuesday, Dec. 4, 2018. (Randy Vazquez/Bay Area News Group)

By THY VO
PUBLISHED: December 4, 2018 at 7:07 pm | UPDATED: December 5, 2018 at
11:08 pm

SAN JOSE Santa Clara County supervisors took a major step Tuesday
that could lead to eventual closure of Reid-Hillview Airport, a move
many residents who live near the airport have long wished for.

By declining to accept new federal grants to help operate
Reid-Hillview, the board opened the door to letting the airport
property be used for other purposes.

The 3-2 vote, with Supervisors Joseph Simitian and Mike Wasserman
dissenting, calls for the county to explore moving aviation
operations. . .

https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/12/07/letter-air-safety-is-at-risk-if-county-closes-airport/

Letter: Air safety is at risk if county closes airport
Supervisor Cindy Chavezs motion to begin the process of closing
Reid-Hillview airport is shortsighted at best, and greedy at worst.

Santa Clara County Supervisor Cindy Chavez
By LETTERS TO THE EDITOR |
December 7, 2018 at 9:21 am
Air safety is at risk if
county closes airport
Re: Reid-Hillview Airports days may be numbered (Page B1, Dec. 5):

Supervisor Cindy Chavezs motion Tuesday to begin the process of
closing Reid-Hillview airport is shortsighted at best, and greedy at
worst.

Passing on a 3-2 vote, the call for the county to explore moving
aviation operations from Reid-Hillview to the San Martin Airport and
asking the Federal Aviation Administration to lift its restrictions on
use of the airport property when. . .