At this week’s Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors (BOS) meeting, Supervisor Lindsey Horvath introduced a motion asking county officials for a report within seven days on ways to improve safety at Whiteman Airport in Pacoima, including timelines, costs and funding strategies.
The motion comes on the heels of a small plane crash blocks from the airport on April 20, when a single-engine Cessna 172 clipped high-voltage power lines and crashed upside down in the parking lot of an O’Reilly Auto Parts store on Van Nuys Boulevard. The pilot, who was the sole passenger, was reportedly trying to land at Whiteman. He was critically injured in the accident.
“Public safety in Pacoima is not negotiable, and I will not allow this moment to pass without action,” said Horvath. “This motion is about getting answers, but, more importantly, it’s about ensuring accountability at every level for what went wrong and what must change.”
The supervisor said she has also: requested that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) move forward with an investigation of the crash; asked for an expedited review into the cause of the crash; and sent a letter to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), which is leading the investigation, demanding timely guidance on immediate and long-term safety recommendations.
Jason Morgan, chief of the Aviation Division for the LA County Department of Public Works, said the final NTSB report and safety recommendations may take six months to complete.
Last month’s crash was the latest of several accidents in recent years, renewing long-held safety and environmental concerns about the airport among many area residents, local politicians and others who have been urging the county, which owns Whiteman, to close the airport for years.
By contrast, “multiple neighborhood councils, including Pacoima, recently voted to support keeping Whiteman open,” according to the Whiteman Airport Coalition, which includes pilots, business owners, local residents and other stakeholders who want Whiteman to remain open.
“These are formally elected bodies representing hundreds of thousands of residents, and their voices should be central in any process that claims to be community-driven,” said the coalition in a statement to the San Fernando Valley Sun/el Sol.
Coalition members have voiced criticism of Horvath for ordering the county’s public works department “not to take FAA funding” – funds the coalition said could be used for annual infrastructure improvements that would support overall long-term safety at the local airport, such as upgrading the tower, improving the runway and undergrounding power lines.
During the BOS meeting, Horvath acknowledged that she paused acceptance of FAA grants to avoid locking the county into long-term federal obligations while a study is being conducted “to look at various scenarios to inform the decision about the future of Whiteman Airport.”
In 2024, the BOS approved a $1.9 million land-use and economic study looking at the possible impacts of closing Whiteman, but the coalition claims it can only be shut down by the FAA.
According to Morgan, the blocking of FAA funds has not resulted in any safety issues at the airport, noting that no problems have been identified by annual Caltrans inspections or by FAA runway safety action team meetings, held yearly at all towered airports, including Whiteman.
“Public pressure is clearly forcing movement and we welcome any serious focus on safety at Whiteman Airport, but that process needs to reflect current conditions and current community input,” noted the coalition’s statement. “It is concerning that Supervisor Horvath continues to rely on recommendations from a 2020 Community Advisory Committee (CAC) that is no longer active. … That committee does not reflect the San Fernando Valley today.”
Residents Voice Concern About Airport
But many local residents shared their worries about Whiteman during a community meeting at Vaughn Next Century Learning Center’s G3 Campus in Pacoima last week. About 200 people attended the meeting, and most spoke out against the airport operating in their community.
“This is our community. People who don’t live here treat [Pacoima] like [it’s] their playground,” said Ernesto Ayala of Pacoima, referring to small aircraft owners who use the airport, who he believes pose possible safety hazards for the entire community. “These are the streets [where] we grew up, these are the streets [where] we work … have our businesses [and] raise our families.”
The April 30 meeting about Whiteman – which was scheduled before last month’s accident – was co-hosted by Pacoima Beautiful and ICON CDC (Initiating Change in Our Neighborhoods Community Development Corporation) to address current and planned airport mitigations.
Morgan, who was the county representative at the meeting, said they have implemented a voluntary nightly curfew at Whiteman, asking all pilots to avoid flying between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. to reduce noise for surrounding neighborhoods. He said most pilots routinely comply with the curfew, but noted that fire, law enforcement, media and other public services are exempt.
In addition, due to environmental concerns about the continued use of leaded fuel in many small aircraft, Morgan said they introduced unleaded fuel at the airport as an alternative gasoline. In 2023, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that exposure to lead emissions from aircraft that use leaded fuel “can cause irreversible and life-long health effects in children.”
To date, about 30% of the aircraft that fly in and out of Whiteman can’t use existing unleaded alternatives, said Morgan, but noted that in 2024 Congress “directed the FAA and the aviation industry overall … [to] replace leaded aviation fuel with an unleaded alternative by 2030.”
Pacoima resident Helen Tran believes the mitigations aren’t enough. She applauded Horvath’s refusal to accept further federal funds for Whiteman.
“I think one of the most important things that our county has [done] so far is stop accepting FAA grant money, and that’s really to the credit of Supervisor Horvath, because without [that] money, we’re no longer handcuffed to what the federal government can tell us to do with this land,” said Tran, who lives about a mile away from the airport with her family.
“As a mom [of a two-year-old], it’s really concerning that we live so close to an institution that can just spew pollutants all over our neighborhoods with no accountability at this point,” she said. “In what other community – in what affluent community – is [that] acceptable? It’s an endangerment to our children – [that’s] been recognized by the federal government.
“I really want to encourage all of our decision makers today and our community to continue to support the closure of Whitman Airport,” continued Tran, “[and] give ourselves the benefit of imagining greater things here in Pacoima.”
What Could Replace Whiteman?
Roberto Barragan, executive director of ICON CDC, said the airport’s nearly 200 acres “have much more economic potential, for something other than a private parking lot” for small aircraft hobbyists. He said ICON CDC conducted a Whiteman Airport Reuse Study in 2023 to identify industries that could be recruited to repurpose the land currently utilized by the airport.
A Pacoima-based non-profit organization that supports local job creation and neighborhood development, ICON CDC is funded by various government sources, including local politicians, such as LA City Councilmember Moncia Rodriguez, who supports closing Whiteman.
Looking at Whiteman’s 184 acres, the study indicates that a mixed-use plan would reportedly generate greater revenues, employment and services, and suggests that 20 acres be developed for the film industry; 30 acres for light industry; 20 acres for medical device/biotech; 20 acres for computers/software; 20 acres for retail; and 13 acres for workforce and affordable housing.
Barragan said they shared the study with Horvath and the consultant contracted for the county’s own ongoing land-use study. He emphasized that ICON CDC supports maintaining the existing Barton Heliport at Whiteman, which is used by local fire and emergency departments.
Residents Are Divided and Skeptical
Those who live and work near the airport are skeptical about the information being spread about the airport and question if local politicians really know what it feels like to literally “be on the ground.” Opinions are varied based on vantage points.
There have been many rumors that low-income housing would be built to replace the airport, increasing density and parking issues. While local politicians and Pacoima Beautiful have led the charge against the airport, they have yet to publicly tell residents what the discussions have been to say what would replace Whiteman.
Pacoima resident Nicci Amberg said she is interested in seeing additional studies about the purported health and environmental concerns that are often directly attributed to Whiteman.
“I would like to know the studies that are done with factual information of the environmental impact,” said Amberg, noting that she worries more about the potential health impacts of power lines that are positioned near her home and about the number of deadly local traffic accidents.
“Do you know that Pacoima … has one of the highest death rates [from] automobile accidents?” she claimed, adding, “I feel like the airport is probably the least of our concerns.”
Amberg said she also disagrees with the multitude of noise complaints often lodged against Whiteman.
“I work from home and, honestly, I hear more noise from the dogs in the neighborhood than the airplanes and the helicopters,” said Amberg.
But for Jose Mendez, the April 20 accident left him with grave concerns about the airport.
“The plane [crashed] about a few meters away from my wife,” recounted Mendez. “Thank God, nothing happened to her, but emotionally she was [deeply] affected. When I tried to speak with her about what happened that day, she couldn’t answer at first; I think she was in shock.
“I’m upset because people from the airport never even came to check … how the families who were there are doing,” he continued. “I think they care more about themselves [than] about people in the community.”