Los Angeles County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath has introduced a motion calling for additional safety review at Whiteman Airport, bringing renewed attention to ongoing closure discussions surrounding the county-owned airport in Pacoima.
April Accident Prompts New Motion
The motion will be considered during today’s Board of Supervisors meeting, and follows an April 20 accident involving a Cessna 172 near the airport. The aircraft struck power lines and overturned in a commercial parking lot, injuring the pilot, who was the only person on board. No ground injuries were reported.
Horvath’s motion directs the county Department of Public Works to identify near-term safety measures at Whiteman and report back within seven days with timelines, costs and possible funding sources. It also asks the department to outline responsibilities among the FAA, NTSB, Los Angeles County, the city of Los Angeles and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power.
The county has previously moved to study possible closure and redevelopment of Whiteman. In comments submitted to the board, AOPA cited a January FAA letter saying Airport Improvement Program grants used to buy land at Whiteman carry obligations requiring the property to remain in airport use unless the FAA releases the county from those obligations.
Aviation Groups Question Framing
AOPA said the issue is not whether safety should be reviewed, but whether the motion places too much responsibility on the airport and county before investigators have determined the cause of the accident.
The group also objected to the motion’s direction to build on recommendations from a prior Community Advisory Committee, whose work included closure-related proposals, and said pilot, aircraft and airspace rules are largely federal matters.
“Safety is always our primary concern, and while we appreciate the County’s willingness to work with federal partners, including the FAA, to enhance safety, this motion appears to deliberately exclude informed non-government industry-specific stakeholders from providing input, and is built on a series of flawed premises that ignore the legal and operational realities of Whiteman Airport,” AOPA Regional Manager Niki Britton wrote in comments submitted to the board.
Horvath’s office said the supervisor has sent letters to the FAA and NTSB to request an expedited review of the accident in April, along with coordination on possible corrective actions.
“Residents deserve clear answers and confidence that every available safety measure is being considered,” Horvath said. “Los Angeles County owns and maintains Whiteman Airport, but critical aspects of aviation safety—air traffic control, pilot protocols, and airspace—are under federal authority. The Federal Aviation Administration plays a central role in those operations, and we need a full review, clear answers, and action to prevent this from happening again.”
Community Comments Split
A letter supporting the motion also urged the county to consider longer-term changes to the airport, including closure and redevelopment.
“We, too, are concerned about the continued threats to public safety posed by aircraft crashing into the neighborhoods surrounding Whiteman Airport,” a letter signed by several San Fernando Valley community groups, political organizations and residents said. “Attempts to improve aircraft and airport safety protocols are mitigation measures that will improve our community in the short term. While those efforts are important, we are striving for long-term solutions that result in the closure of Whiteman Airport and equitable redevelopment of the area.”
The closure of both SMO and WHP will devastate the utility of light GA for reaching the west side of LA. VNY is practically consumed by bizjets and BUR is for commercial flights. The next nearest airports will be HHR and EMT, which are a considerable distance from the LA-Santa Monica commercial corridor. They’re not far as the crow flies, but the traffic from those places to the west side makes it a 1-2 hour drive from either of them. Frankly, even WHP isn’t great when there’s any amount of traffic: SMO will be irreplaceable.
Yep. Don’t bury the power lines. Close the airport. That will fix everything.
The bottom line is how to reconcile a historical airport with urban encroachment. Though I’m not sure, I ll guess those power lines weren’t there when the airport was opened or the years after. I’ll also go out on a limb that someone waived something to approve those power lines on the approach path to an airport.
What this supervisor should be questioning is why those power lines were ever approved in the first place and how quickly can they be buried. In reality, as in the case of SMO, BDUand BKL, the politicians and the populace see airports as playthings of the ‘rich.’ They don’t look at the economic engine an airport can be. They forget they tomorrow’s airline pilots and future military aviators are still the kids at the fence. Keep taking away the opportunity to learn and sooner or later the pipeline will run dry.
But, hey, let’s just level all the airports, and turn them into affordable housing and parks. (Not)
They hate airplanes because of the noise and supposedly lead poisoning, but can’t get enough of drone deliveries from Amazon and others. Go figure.
The ‘safety’ initiative is just another ploy to close the airport. Watch it, any of you that are tenants, remember the fate of Meigs. Beware of corrupt government officials seeking land.