April 16--SAN JOSE -- What appears to be a technical error by San Jose airport officials in the city's bid requirements for an elite corporate jet center slated for use by Google executives, among others, has snowballed into a controversy that could affect other operators at the airport -- and possibly force the city to rebid the project altogether.
The omission involves the airport's overnight curfew for flights and whether the city can make it effective forever even if it drops the provision in the future for new operators.
The mistake -- pointed out by Aviation Director Bill Sherry last week in a last-minute memo -- has provided fuel to a neighborhood watchdog group that already objects to an $82 million project the City Council seems prepared to sign off on. It also has attracted complaints from competitors who accuse San Jose of changing the rules of the game to benefit two aircraft operators, including one that is used by the Google executives.
At the evening portion of its Tuesday meeting, the City Council is scheduled to decide whether to award a 50-year lease to Signature Flight Services to develop Mineta San Jose International Airport's west side with seven hangars for corporate jets.
That company's primary tenant, Blue City Holdings, would manage aircraft in five of those hangars for Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin and Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt, whose airplanes now are parked at Moffett Field where their lease is
up next year.
The Signature facility is projected to provide at least $3 million annually in rent and other fees to the cash-strapped airport, which has been working to attract more planes -- commercial and private -- and revenue to repay the costs of a recent $1.3 billion renovation.
Over the next two decades, the airport's 1,100 annual corporate jet flights -- many occurring during the airport's curfew hours of 11:30 p.m. to 6:30 a.m. -- is expected to grow by 5,000 flights.
While the city says most of those flights will be 89 decibels or less, which is allowed under the curfew's noise limit, nearby residents say it will still be loud and add even more intrusiveness, said Bob Harmssen, co-chair of Citizens Against Airport Pollution, which objects to what he calls the city's end-run around a provision just to snag the Signature deal.
"It's a David vs. Goliath battle, with the little people getting hosed year after year, their homes worth less than they were even before. How would you like to live with that airplane noise waking you up in the morning or the night?" said Harmssen. "They're pursuing the rich and famous over the little people."
But Sherry strongly denied those allegations. He said Signature and Blue City Holdings, which are investing tens of millions into the facility, agree to follow the city's curfew ordinance, which carries a $2,500 fine per violation. And they agree to language that says if either breaks any law, they could be evicted. Sherry also says that Signature and Blue City Holdings understand they could be evicted for multiple curfew violations, though he is not aware of any evictions for curfew problems.
But he said they won't agree to the provision that even if the city drops the curfew, operators and their tenants could be evicted for not continuing to follow the 11:30 p.m. to 6:30 a.m. blackout for flying.
Sherry now is asking the council to drop the extended provision, which has been in effect since 2004 for all of the fixed-base operators -- ACM Aviation, AvBase and Atlantic Aviation.
"We will be able to enforce the curfew both by the fine as well as possible eviction if there is a violation," said Sherry. "I feel very, very good and very confident that the city is protected."
Still he acknowledges that the omission hasn't helped their efforts. San Jose City Councilman Sam Liccardo last year had specifically asked staff to include both the basic curfew that all must adhere to as well as the curfew specifics for fixed-base operators.
On Monday, Maria Sastre, Signature president and chief operating officer, called the extended curfew clause "onerous," adding that "no responsible business would sign up for something like that."
Meanwhile, officials at Atlantic Aviation, whose proposal was rejected by the city for being incomplete and whose appeal the council denied last week, have sent a letter to the mayor and council asking the airport and city "to either stand by the terms and conditions" of the initial bid and not renegotiate, or issue revisions.
Landmark Aviation, which did not bid on the project, said it might have had it known the secondary provision would be dropped. Landmark officials have written to Sherry seeking a similar redress.
Sherry said he sees no reason the city would have to rebid the project.
"The Signature project is in the best interests of the airport, and the city, and it will operate according to all laws, including the curfew," he said.
But Harmssen isn't buying it. He said a lawsuit his group filed against the city in July 2010 over development on the west side, and which it lost in county court last year, is being appealed.
Contact Tracy Seipel at 408 275-0140.
BY THE NUMBERS
Number of corporate flights in 2012 that flew between 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. at Mineta San Jose International Airport: 1,100
Projected number of additional corporate flights that will fly between those hours in 2027: 5,000
Number of times in 2012 all aircraft flew during curfew hours of 11:30 p.m. to 6:30 a.m. : 533
Number of times in 2012 curfew was violated and resulted in a fine: 28
Breakdown of offenders: 24 commercial airlines; 3 charter airlines; 1 corporate jet
Source: Mineta San Jose International Airport
Copyright 2013 - San Jose Mercury News
