A deputy to Los Angeles City Councilwoman Cindy Miscikowski has called comments by Congresswomen Jane Harman and Maxine Waters regarding action by the Board of Airport Commissioners on Alternative D “patently incorrect.”

The two congresswomen criticized Mayor James Hahn, saying the proposed RAND Corporation study is not as in-depth as the mayor promised, and that short shrift was being given to safety and security.

The two congresswomen wrote Los Angeles Mayor James Hahn, reminding the mayor that in May he had agreed that the RAND Corporation would be included in safety and security studies regarding the mayor’s proposed Alternative D.

The congresswomen charged that the airport commission was moving forward with the plan before the RAND Corporation could adequately participate in studying the security and safety issues.

But David Kissinger, Miscikowski airport deputy, disputed the claim by the congresswomen.

“There will be no action by the Los Angeles City Council regarding the LAX master plan Alternative D until after the RAND Corporation study is completed,” said Kissinger.

Miscikowski was not consulted by either Harman or Waters, nor did Miscikowski receive a copy of the letter the two congresswomen sent the mayor regarding the RAND Corporation study, according to Kissinger.

Kissinger said that until earlier this year Miscikowski agreed with the concepts Harman and Waters expressed in their letter to the mayor.

Miscikowski wanted to remove certain aspects of the LAX master plan Alternative D from the master plan environmental impact report (EIR), but the councilwoman learned that the entire master plan EIR would be tossed out if certain aspects of the EIR were removed, said Kissinger.

Harman had consulted attorney Jan Chatten-Brown regarding the ability to eliminate elements of the LAX master plan, and Chatten-Brown responded with a letter to Harman.

Referring to Chatten-Brown’s letter to Harman, Kissinger said “Chatten-Brown actually disagreed with Harman and Waters in her response letter to Harman.”

Miscikowski is proposing what is being called a “consensus” plan that would have the noncontroversial aspects of LAX master plan Alternative D move forward and controversial aspects of the plan delayed until a later “phase of development.”

Under Miscikowski’s plan, there would be security studies for every project and a security plan implemented for each project as the master plan Alternative D moves forward, said Kissinger.

Miscikowski’s specific plan is more of an evolutional thought process, with new studies and mitigations developing in concert with each project, Kissinger said.

Mandated under Miscikowski’s consensus plan would be meetings with stakeholders in the community to achieve a consensus of the community, said Kissinger.

According to Kissinger, Chatten-Brown’s letter stated: “While the California Environmental Quality Act has elaborate provisions covering requirements to recirculate an EIR when significant new information is added, there is nothing that specifically requires recirculation of an EIR when information is deleted from a final EIR.

“For example, if the use of remote check-in at Manchester Square was necessary, at least in part, to mitigate significant traffic and air pollution impacts of the expansion project, then that element of the master plan could not be eliminated without a detailed environmental analysis of alternative mitigation measures.

“Such an analysis may or may not already be a part of the existing EIR. Even if alternative mitigation measures are part of the existing EIR, the environmental impacts of such mitigation measures must themselves be analyzed if they may have significant impacts of their own,” Chatten-Brown concluded in her letter, according to Kissinger.

“We are anxious to share information with elected officials, especially since the failure of previous leadership endangered the LAX master plan Alternative D, and we want to engender dialogue.” said Kissinger.

Share