Burbank Airport Story Was Not Balanced

* There is hardly a fact wrong in your Sept. 6 story “Size at Heart of Airport Debate” on Burbank Airport. Yet the story lacks balance--and worse yet fairness.

For example, you noted opponents’ criticism of former Airport Authority President Bob Garcin as “aloof” and R. C. (Chappy) Czapiewski’s perception of a “damn the people” attitude. Yet there is no response from Garcin in the article, nor is there any mention that there was any attempt to reach him for comment.

Another glaring omission is your failure to identify groups or individuals favoring a new and larger terminal. Our group has identified itself as a strong supporter at most public gatherings, and we have been in fairly frequent communication with Times reporters assigned to airport news.

Another critical point not mentioned: the sharp reduction in land area affected by high levels of noise from 1970 to 1990. Land receiving 70 decibels and more of noise was cut from more than 400 acres to less than 25.

One minor factual point: You mentioned the acquisition of the airport in 1978 “with taxpayers money.” More accurately, the purchase was with revenue bonds issued by the airport authority and FAA funds specifically collected from airline passengers and used nationwide for airport improvements. I would have expected you to mention that until 1978, the airport paid local property taxes and received not one dime from the fund, even though its passengers had been paying into that fund for 20 years.

Finally, the airport debate is not truly over such a simple matter as a new and larger terminal, as some of your sources appear to have told you. The real debate is over how and whether to accommodate the economic growth (translation: jobs) for the airport’s service area which will benefit everyone over the decades to come.

JAMES E. FOY

North Hollywood

Foy is secretary of Friends of the Burbank Airport.