U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

76–150 PDF 2013

ECONOMIC IMPACT AND FUTURE MANAGEMENT 

OF L.A./ONTARIO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 

(112–108) 

FIELD HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

AVIATION 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON 

TRANSPORTATION AND 

INFRASTRUCTURE 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

SEPTEMBER 27, 2012 (Ontario, California) 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

( 

Available online at: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/ 

committee.action?chamber=house&committee=transportation 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE 

JOHN L. MICA, Florida, Chairman 

DON YOUNG, Alaska 

THOMAS E. PETRI, Wisconsin 

HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina 

JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR., Tennessee 

FRANK A. LOBIONDO, New Jersey 

GARY G. MILLER, California 

TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois 

SAM GRAVES, Missouri 

BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania 

SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia 

JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio 

CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan 

DUNCAN HUNTER, California 

ANDY HARRIS, Maryland 

ERIC A. ‘‘RICK’’ CRAWFORD, Arkansas 

JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER, Washington 

RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois 

LOU BARLETTA, Pennsylvania 

CHIP CRAVAACK, Minnesota 

BLAKE FARENTHOLD, Texas 

LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana 

BILLY LONG, Missouri 

BOB GIBBS, Ohio 

PATRICK MEEHAN, Pennsylvania 

RICHARD L. HANNA, New York 

JEFFREY M. LANDRY, Louisiana 

STEVE SOUTHERLAND II, Florida 

JEFF DENHAM, California 

JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma 

REID J. RIBBLE, Wisconsin 

CHARLES J. ‘‘CHUCK’’ FLEISCHMANN, 

Tennessee 

VACANCY 

NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia 

PETER A. DEFAZIO, Oregon 

JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois 

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of 

Columbia 

JERROLD NADLER, New York 

CORRINE BROWN, Florida 

BOB FILNER, California 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland 

LEONARD L. BOSWELL, Iowa 

TIM HOLDEN, Pennsylvania 

RICK LARSEN, Washington 

MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts 

TIMOTHY H. BISHOP, New York 

MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine 

RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri 

GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California 

DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois 

MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii 

JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania 

TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota 

HEATH SHULER, North Carolina 

STEVE COHEN, Tennessee 

LAURA RICHARDSON, California 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION

THOMAS E. PETRI, Wisconsin, Chairman 

HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina 

JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR., Tennessee 

FRANK A. LOBIONDO, New Jersey 

SAM GRAVES, Missouri 

JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio 

RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois 

CHIP CRAVAACK, Minnesota, Vice Chair 

BLAKE FARENTHOLD, Texas 

BILLY LONG, Missouri 

PATRICK MEEHAN, Pennsylvania 

STEVE SOUTHERLAND II, Florida 

JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma 

JOHN L. MICA, Florida (Ex Officio) 

REID J. RIBBLE, Wisconsin 

CHARLES J. ‘‘CHUCK’’ FLEISCHMANN, 

Tennessee 

VACANCY 

JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois 

RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri 

DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois 

PETER A. DEFAZIO, Oregon 

BOB FILNER, California 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 

LEONARD L. BOSWELL, Iowa 

TIM HOLDEN, Pennsylvania 

MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts 

MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii 

STEVE COHEN, Tennessee 

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of 

Columbia 

NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia 

(Ex Officio) 

(III) 

CONTENTS Page 

Summary of Subject Matter .................................................................................... iv 

TESTIMONY 

PANEL 1 

Hon. Alan D. Wapner, Member, Ontario City Council, and Board Member 

of Ontario International Airport Authority (OIAA) .......................................... 7 

Hon. Gary Ovitt, Fourth District Supervisor, San Bernardino County, and 

Board Member of OIAA ....................................................................................... 7 

Miguel Santana, City Administrative Officer, City of Los Angeles ..................... 7 

PANEL 2 

Hon. Ronald O. Loveridge, Mayor, City of Riverside, and Board Member 

of OIAA ................................................................................................................. 22 

Lucy Dunn, President and Chief Executive Officer, Orange County Business 

Council, and Board Member of OIAA, accompanied by Larry Brose, Vice 

President, Investor Relations and Business Development, Orange County 

Business Council .................................................................................................. 22 

Brian Perry, Chief Legislative Deputy for Councilman Dennis P. Zine, Third 

District, Los Angeles City Council ...................................................................... 22 

John Husing, Ph.D., Vice President, Economics & Politics, Inc. ......................... 22 

PREPARED STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY MEMBER OF CONGRESS 

Hon. Ken Calvert, of California .............................................................................. 39 

PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED BY WITNESSES 

Hon. Alan D. Wapner .............................................................................................. 41 

Hon. Gary Ovitt ....................................................................................................... 44 

Miguel Santana ........................................................................................................ 47 

Hon. Ronald O. Loveridge ....................................................................................... 52 

Lucy Dunn ................................................................................................................ 56 

Councilman Dennis P. Zine (submitted by witness Brian Perry) ........................ 61 

John Husing, Ph.D. ................................................................................................. 69 

SUBMISSION FOR THE RECORD 

Hon. Gary G. Miller, a Representative in Congress from the State of California, request to submit written statement of Steve PonTell, President, 

Ontario Airport Alliance ...................................................................................... 3 

iv 


Insert offset folio 1 here 76150.001

Jt.~. j}Jnu.Gt nf mtprt,Stufatiu£,S 

qtommittce on \!transportation mib 3Jnfrn5tructure 

10bn it ftJiw 

Q;:f)airmoll 

Jnmes W. Coon II, Chief of Staff 

'Qm1U.i\Jinlltoll, tn(1: 20515 

September 21, 2012 

TO: Members, Aviation Subcommittee 

FROM: Honorable Thomas E. Petri 

~i(h jT. i\nbHH, 3Hj 

i\nnlting ~clltbtl' 

James U. 7.oill, DI.'JHocmt Chief of Slaff 

SUBJECT: Field Hearing on the "Economic Impact and Future Management of 

Ontario International Airport" 

Thursday, September 27, 2012 at 1 :30 P.M. in the City of Ontario, City 

Hall. 

PURPOSE 

To discuss the economic impact of and future plans for the LA/Ontario 

International Airport. 

mSTORY OF LA/ONTARIO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 

LA/Ontario International Airport (Ontario Airport) dates back to 1923, when a 

landing field was established on land leased from the Union Pacific Railroad. In the 

1940's, in order to accommodate the war cff011, the airpo11 was updated from a dirt field 

to a modern airfield with concrete runways, an air traffic control tower, and an instrument 

landing system. In the 1950's, the airport grew in the postwar boom. Three major 

aircraft plants including Lockheed, Douglas and Northrop had facilities at the airport. 

In 1967, the Los Angeles City Department of Airports co-signed a joint powers 

agreement with the City of Ontario and the airpOJ1 became part of Los Angeles' regional 

airport system. In 1985, ownership of Ontario Airport was transferred to the Los Angeles 

Department of Airports (now called Los Angeles World Airpo11s or "LA WA"). At that 

time, the City of Los Angeles paid $58,329.58 to Ontario to settle various obligations 

remaining from the 1967 Joint Powers Agreement (JPA). LAW A is the current owner 

and operator of Ontario Airport. 
v 


Insert offset folio 2 here 76150.002

CURRENT OPERATION OF LA/ONTARIO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 

Ontario Ail'pOlt (ONT) is a medium-hub, full-service airport with commercial jet 

service to numerous U.S. cities. The airport is located in the Inland Empire, 

approximately 35 miles east of downtown Los Angcles. Ontario AirpOlt's scrvice arca 

includcs a population of six million pcople living in San Bemardino and Riverside 

Counties and portions of north Orange County and cast los Angeles County.' In 2011, 

4.5 million passengers used thc ail'pOit and 419,523 tons of air freight were shippcd 

through the airport. 2 The airport currently has 61 daily depattures to 14 nonstop 

destinations in the U.S. and Mcxico. Passenger airlines servicing ONT are AeroMexico, 

Alaska, American, Delta, Southwest, United/United Express, and US Airways,3 

Ontario Airport is the center of a developing freight movement system that 

includes the airport, two railroads, foUl' major freeways, and an expanding netwOl'k of 

freight fOl'warders.4 The airport is also less than 50 miles from Los Angeles and Long 

Beach Harbors. 5 Ontario AirpOlt is served by several U. S. air freight carriers, including 

FedEx and UPS.6 

According to a 1992 study, Ontario AirpOlt has an annual eeonomic impaet of 

$5.4 billion? Ofthis, $413 million is generated by aviation aetivity on or near the airport, 

$1.5 billion is generated off-airport by expenditures related to the use of aviation 

services, and $3.5 billion is generated by money that is fe-spent and circulated through 

the local economy. According to LAW A, the airport authority that currently operates 

Ontario Airport, more than 7,690 jobs at'e directly attributable to and located on the 

airport. An additional 55,000 jobs, spread throughout the region, are indirectly 

attributable to the airpOlt, 

A review of FAA data for Ontario AirpOlt indicates that over the last decade 

passenger enplanements and cargo landed weights have declined. As is reflected in the 

tables on the next page, the largest drop in passenger enplanements was between 2007 

and 2011-a 34 percent drop. Between 2008 and 2011 enplanements dropped 24 percent 

and between 2006 and 2011 passenger enplatlements decreased 33 percent. The Federal 

Aviation Administration forecasts Ontat'io Airport will reach 6 million total passengers 

(enplanements and deplanements) by 2030. 

11.05 Angeles World Airport Website, bnn;llwww.lawa.orgfwelcome ollt.asvx?id~88 

21d, 

3id. 

• i~s Angeles World Airport Website, h!1n;!.ill'iYl'l,JJ!;Y~cQxgliYel~.ome ont.aspx?id=8g 

SId. 

6id. 

7 The Economic Impact of Ontario International Airport: Final Report, Wilbur Smith and Associates, 

published by City of Los Angeles Department of Airports, 1992. 

2 
vi 


Insert offset folio 3 here 76150.003

Ontario International Airport Passenger Enplanements:8 

-- Calendar Year: Passenger Enplanements: 

2000 3,197,795 

2001 3,168,975 

2002 3,092,677 

2003 3,089,025 

2004 3,291,726 

2005 3,158,935 

2006 3,404,361 

2007 3,473,272 

2008 2,998,110 

2009 2,416,872 

2010 2,380,881 

2011 2,271,458 

Ontario International Airport Cargo Landed Weight (lbs);9 

Calendar Year: Cargo Landed Weight 

(Ibs): 

2000 2,439,691,772 

2001 2,582,804,587 

2002 2,887,626,050 

2003 2,675,116,110 

2004 2,651,706,962 

2005 2,687,742,160 

2006 2,801,537,034 

2007 2,788,665,658 ---.~---. 

2008 2,699,776,864 

2009 2,336,057,158 

2010 2,241,182,912 

20ll 2,313,849,963 

FUTURE OPERATION OF LA/ONTARIO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 

Currently, there is an eff0l1 underway to transfer ownership of Ontario Airport 

from the City of Los Angeles to a new airport authority made up of representatives of the 

City of Ontario, the County of San Bemardino, and other stakeholders. According to 

proponents of this effort, Los Angeles obtained Ontario Airport through a transfer of 

8 FAA's Passenger Boarding (Enplallemellt) and AII·Cargo Data for U.S. Airports, 07/03/2012, 

http;lIwww.faa.gov/airports/planning capacity/passenger allcargo sfatslpassenger/index.cfm?yem=all. 

91g. 

3 
vii 


Insert offset folio 4 here 76150.004

governance that provided for allocation of particular costs, but did not involve any 

payment tied to the actual value ofthe airport itself. to 

On August 28, 2012, the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors 

unanimously approved the creation of a new airport authority. This followed Ontario 

City Council approval of a new airport authority on August 22, 2012. The OJAA 

currently is comprised of the following members: 

• City of Ontario Council Member Alan D. Wapner 

• City of Ontario Council Member Jim W. Bowman 

• County of San Bernardino Fourth District Supervisor Gary Ovitt 

• City of Riverside Mayor Ronald O. Loveridge 

• Orange County Business Council President and CEO Lucy Dunn 

CUl1'ently, the new joint powers authority has no control over Ontario Airport, but 

the city has submitted a proposal to Los Angeles for local control of the airpOli. 

Specifically, in April 2011, the City of Ontario presented Los Angeles with a financial 

offer of$250 million to transfer control of the airport. The April 2011 offer includes an 

upfront payment of $50 million for complete dissolution of the 1967 Joint Powers 

Agreement; the opportunity to thnd eligible Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) 

projects with up to $125 million of future passenger facility charge (PFC) collections at 

Ontario Airport; the assumption of $75 million in Ontario Airport debt and grant 

obligations; the indemnification of any and all liabilities; and job protection for current 

Ontario AirpOlt employees. Los Angeles is considering the offer and negotiations 

between Ontario and Los Angeles are ongoing. 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION REVIEW OF AIRPORT 

TRANSFERS 

Transfers of airpOlt authority and ownership are local decisions to be decided at 

the local level. The role of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is to make a 

determination on the eligibility of the new airpOlt sponsor. The FAA will conduct a 

review to determine whether the new ail'POlt sponsor is legally, financially, and otherwise 

able to assume and carry out the ce11ifications, representations, warranties, assurances, 

covenants and other obligations required of sponsors, which are contained in the Airport 

Improvement Program (AlP) project application and grant agreements forms. The new 

sponsor must also demonstrate to the FAA that they have the authority to act as a 

sponsor, and must submit an opinion by its attorney addressing the sponsor's legal 

authority to act as a sponsor and cany out its responsibilities under the grant agreement. II 

10 Sel Ontario Free, http://setonlariofi·ee.com/faq 

11 FAA Order 5100.38A 

4 
viii 


Insert offset folio 5 here 76150.005

Grant Assurances to be reviewed by FAAfor compliance by the new airport owner:l2 

• The airport owner will give assurance satisfactory to the Secretary that good title 

to the property will be acquired (Assurance 4. Good Title). 

• The review is intended to ensure that the new airport owner does not surrender by 

contract its capability to sufficiently control the airport in order to carry out its 

commitments to the Federal government. FAA is looking to identify any terms 

and conditions of the arrangement, which could prevent the realization of the full 

benefits for which the airpOli was constructed, or which could develop into a 

restriction on the sponsor's ability to meet its Federal obligations (Assurance 5. 

Preserving Rights and Powers). 

• Any lease or agreement granting the right to serve the public on the premise of an 

airport so obligated should be subordinate to the authority of the owner to 

establish sufficient control over the operation to guarantee that patrons will be 

treated fairly (Assurance 5. Preserving Rights and Powers). 

• The owner is obligated to the Federal Government to ensure that the facilities of 

the airport are made available to the public on fail' and reasonable terms without 

unjust discrimination. (Assurance 22. Economic Non-Discrimination). 

• The previous airport owner has not granted an exclusive right for the use of the 

airpOli (Assurance 23. Exclusive Rights). 

• The review looks to ensure that the airport owner maintains a fee and rental 

stmcture for facilities and services that will make the airport as self-sustaining as 

possible, in accordance with 49 U.S.C. Section 47107 (Assurance 24. Fee and 

Rental Structure). 

• Disposition of airpoli revenue conforms to Federal policy (Assurance 25. AirpOli 

Revenue}. 13 

Documents new airport owner is required to submit to FAA for review and approval: 14 

• A copy of the public agency's enabling legislation or act that gives it the authority 

to operate and own the airport. 

• If operation and management of airport is to be conducted by another party, a 

copy of the executed or draft Operation and Management Agreement. 

• Proof of Good Title, including a copy of executed deed and tract information. 

• If a new sponsor has purchased the airport from a previous FAA Sponsor, an 

executed copy of the Assumption agreement, including a list of transferred grants. 

• A copy ofthe applicant's attorney's legal certification that the applicant meets the 

legal requirements to carry out the certifications, representations, warranties, 

assurances, covenants and other obligations required of sponsors which are 

contained in the AlP project applicant and grant agreement forms. 

• The applicant's audited financial statements for the most recent fiscal year. 

12 FAA White Paper to Aviation Subcommittee, September 2012. 

13 Use of AirpOit Revenue Policy 64 F.R. 7696, February 16, 1999. 

14M. 

5 
ix 


Insert offset folio 6 here 76150.006

• Copies ofthe Exhibit A map, the Airpo11 Layout Plan, and a Land Inventory map 

identifYing grant acquired land. 

• Proof of the approval of other government agencies if applicable. As a general 

rule, the name of the approving agency and date of approval is sufficient 

• Copy of the Part 139 Application for Certificate, amendments to AirpOlt 

Certification Manual/Airport Certification Specifications if applicable. 

• A copy of the compatible land use plan, including zoning laws and the airport's 

powers to restrict the use ofland adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity of the 

airport to activities and purposes compatible with normal ail'pOlt operations, 

including landing and takeoff of aircraft. 

• A copy of the new sponsor's Airport Management and Organization Plan. 

• As necessary, any documentation required pursuant to the Nafional 

Environmental Policy Act of 1970 (NEP A) and applicable NEP A regulations. 

WITNESSES 

HonorableAlanD. Wapner 

Member, Ontario City Council and Member of OIAA Board 

Honorable Gary Ovitt 

County Supervisor, San Bernardino County and Member of OIAA Board 

Mr. Miguel Santana 

City Administrative Officer, City of Los Angeles 

Honorable Ronald O. Loveridge 

Mayor, City of Riverside and Member ofOIAA Board 

Honorable Dennis Zine 

Member, Los Angeles City Council 

Ms. Lucy Dunn 

President and Chief Executive Officer 

Orange County Business Council and Member of OIAA Board 

Mr. Jo1m Husing 

Vice President, Economics & Politics, Inc. 

6 
(1) 

ECONOMIC IMPACT AND FUTURE 

MANAGEMENT OF 

L.A./ONTARIO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 2012 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION, 

COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE, 

Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 1:32 p.m., in city of 

Ontario City Hall, 303 East B Street, Ontario, California, Hon. 

Thomas Petri (Chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Present: Representatives Petri and Miller. 

Also Present: Representatives Baca and Calvert. 

Mr. PETRI. I’d like to begin this Aviation Subcommittee field 

hearing by thanking the city of Ontario Mayor Leon, Representatives Gary Miller and Joe Baca, and we will soon be joined by Ken 

Calvert, the airport board members, city and county officials, concerned citizens in attendance for your hospitality and for your appreciation today. We would also like to recognize the hard work of 

Jacob Green and his team in helping to make the arrangements for 

this hearing today. It is very much appreciated. 

Today the Subcommittee on Aviation will hear testimony on the 

economic impact of and future plans for the L.A./Ontario International Airport. The goal of this oversight hearing is to learn 

about the economic impact of the airport, including its role as a job 

creator and its place in the national aviation system. 

We will also hear testimony about future plans for this mediumhub commercial airport. 

I want to emphasize that the presence of the House Aviation 

Subcommittee here today should not be interpreted as a sign that 

Congress plans to inject itself into future discussions related to the 

management of the airport. This is a matter that must be decided 

by local and regional policymakers, many of whom are, in fact, in 

attendance here this afternoon. 

I look forward to hearing from the witnesses, and thank you for 

your participation. 

Before I recognize Mr. Miller for his opening statement, I would 

ask unanimous consent that Members not on the committee be permitted to sit with the committee at today’s hearing, offer testimony 

and ask questions. 

Without objection, so ordered. 

I would also ask unanimous consent that the record of today’s 

hearing remain open until such time as our witnesses have proVerDate Aug 31 2005 14:38 Jan 08, 2013 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\HEARINGS\112\AV\9-27-1~1\76150.TXT JEAN
2 

vided answers to any questions that may be submitted to them in 

writing, and I ask unanimous consent that the record remain open 

for 15 days for additional comments and information submitted by 

Members or witnesses to be included in the record of today’s hearing. 

Without objection, so ordered. 

Now I would really like to recognize a hard-working Member of 

Congress and a colleague who invited us to come and to learn more 

about the situation, Representative Gary Miller. 

Mr. MILLER. It is coming on. All right. There are no lights. I am 

assuming you can hear me. 

Mr. PETRI. The acoustics are so good, you can’t even tell it is not 

on. 

Mr. MILLER. It is really good to be here today. I first represented 

Ontario Airport from 1998 to 2002, and you had Mayor Gary Ovitt 

as a supervisor here. It is good to see you again. 

I want to thank the city for their hospitality, for inviting us here 

today. 

I would like to mention my colleagues from California, Joe Baca, 

who represents the area. We worked hard for years on issues that 

benefit the region. And a good friend of mine, Ken Calvert, who is 

on his way from his office right now, and he should be here shortly. 

But we need to discuss the issues of the airport. There is also 

a request from the Ontario Airport Alliance. I would like to admit 

their statement into the record. 

Mr. PETRI. No objection. 

[The information follows:] 

3 


Insert offset folio 7 here 76150.007

COMMENT - ONTARIO AIRPORT ALLIANCE 

The Ontario Airport Alliance represents businesses and cities throughout the Inland Empire and San 

Gabriel Valley in support oflocal control ofONT. We have been severely impacted by the sustained 

declines in passenger traffic and the number of airlines flying in and out of Ontario. In simplest terms, a 

vibrant ONT is the single most important economic driver in our region. Without it, the Inland Empire, in 

particular, has no chance of a full recovery. 

The impact of that is staggering - not just here, but throughout Southern California, throughout the state, 

indeed throughout the country. The Inland Empire is home to 4.3 people, bigger than half the states in the 

U.S. Add in another 1.5 million people in the San Gabriel Valley, and ONT's prime market is larger than 

the entire states of Missouri, Maryland, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Colorado. And yet, even as we 

continue to grow - an additional 1.8 million people in the Inland Empire alone in the next 25 years -

we're still reeling from a recession that cost San Bernardino and Riverside counties close to 150,000 jobs 

and decimated our housing market. 

A weakened Ontario International Airport hampers our ability to attract and retain business, to export our 

products and services, and to create jobs suitable and sustainable for a population of our size. That hurts 

everyone - and again, not just here. When the Inland Empire struggles, Los Angeles Connty loses out, 

Orange County loses out, the California economy loses out. 

It's for these reasons that businesses and government are here today, united in our support of local 

control. We understand what's at stake. We live it and breathe it every day. We also understand that we 

need to back up our words with action, and to that end pledge our assistance to the Ontario International 

Airport Authority. We are prepared, as an alliance, to help attract airlines back to ONT, to assist in the 

marketing of the airport, and to ensure that this most treasured oflocal assets achieves its full potential. 

The Ontario Airport Alliance appreciates this subcommittee's willingness to listen to our community. 

ONT is a big part of who were are, and we urge you to support us in returning contrul of our airport to the 

people best equipped to operate it. 

Steve PonTell 

A£--l ,/ 

71 . I 

I1refdent, Ontal Airpo Alliance 

V 
4 

Mr. MILLER. I would like to thank the subcommittee chairman, 

Mr. Petri. He flew across the United States to get here today. He 

has been a good friend and colleague for 14 years on the committee, and he believes in transportation. Last time we had a hearing here was Chairman Jimmy Duncan, who is still a subcommittee chairman, who hosted the last one. 

We need to discuss the need for local control. We have looked at 

what has happened to Ontario in recent years. There are no fingers 

being pointed at LAWA in any fashion, but the benefit of this airport is tremendous. 

It is situated in one of the most fastest growing regions in the 

U.S., serving over 6 million people from San Bernardino, Riverside 

County, and portions of Orange County and L.A. County. The explosive population growth demands that planning and investment 

in our aviation and surface transportation infrastructure be coordinated on all levels in order to ensure that movement of goods and 

people can continue in the future. 

With most southern California airports close and at full capacity, 

Ontario is the most promising solution to southern California’s future aviation needs because it has the ability to accommodate a 

large increase in air services, where the other airports have very 

limited capacity today. 

I had the honor, like I said, of representing this when it was the 

41st Congressional District. It is changing to a new one today. I 

went to the 42nd, and now I am in the 31st. But at that point, 

Mayor Ovitt, we worked on major issues. We talked about the need 

for UPS having the benefit of having the China route, which they 

did. We got that implemented. We had many infrastructure needs 

around the airport that we worked together, the mayor and the city 

council and myself, to accommodate those things. We did a good 

job. 

We need to look to the future. August 2000, as I said, we had 

the other subcommittee hearing here, and it was very good. The 

hearing today is the only other time members of the Southern California Transportation Committee have been in this area to discuss 

a need for this airport. 

For the 1980s and 1990s, airline deregulation produced greater 

competition and lower fares, which led to a steady increase in passenger traffic. However, by the end of 2011, Ontario was down 32 

percent fewer passengers, and 2000 was a dismal record in comparison to the Los Angeles Airport. 

In 2000 to 2001, the number of Ontario passengers was close to 

that of John Wayne. Today, passenger traffic at Ontario is slightly 

more than half of John Wayne. Furthermore, Burbank Airport, 

which handles far fewer passengers than Ontario in 2000, is now 

about the same size as Ontario. These comparisons showing 

Ontario’s decline while other southern California airports remain 

healthy is a clear sign that something must be done differently in 

the future. 

I applaud the efforts of our local elected officials in the community and business leaders to help bring Ontario to local control and 

make Ontario one of the most competitive passenger, cargo and 

business airports in the United States. 

5 

As negotiations continue between the new authority and LAWA, 

there has been a sense of urgency as a precipitous decline in the 

service in Ontario from 2007 has meant the loss of nearly $500 million to the Inland Empire regional economy, and the loss of more 

than 9,250 jobs. The transfer of the airport sponsorship to the new 

authority is required if we are to achieve true airline regionalization. Ontario is an economic engine to the region. 

Earlier this week I met with Gina Marie Lindsey, who is executive director of LAWA. We had a very positive meeting, and I believe the conclusion of that meeting was that we needed to do 

something for the benefit of the region and for the benefit of this 

airport. We share a mutual goal that Ontario needs to be capable 

to provide great economic benefits, and that provision needs to happen as soon as possible. 

I again would like to thank Chairman Petri. He came a long way. 

He understands the importance of this airport. We discussed it. 

Congressman Baca and I have had numerous discussions on this 

issue. I believe this is an area that we can dissuade many that believe bipartisanship is not truly available and does not truly happen, because it does. We both realize that there is a tremendous 

need, and if we cooperate and work together, we can accomplish 

many good things. 

And it is good to see my good friend, Kenny Calvert, here, and 

I yield back the balance of my time. 

Mr. PETRI. Thank you. 

Representative Baca. 

Mr. BACA. Well, thank you very much. Good afternoon to all of 

you for coming. Mayor and city council, thank you for allowing us 

to use your facility this afternoon on a very important topic as we 

begin to discuss the Ontario International Airport and its importance to the southern California region. And I state the southern 

California region, so it is not just about the Inland Empire, but it 

is about the southern California region. 

And I want to thank the subcommittee chairman, Tom Petri, for 

traveling to Ontario to hold this critical hearing. In fact, I happened to talk to him this morning and he indicated that he flew 

from Wisconsin to Phoenix, and then Phoenix on to Ontario. So 

that tells us that Ontario is important for this region and to maintain the airport out here. So thank you very much for flying Southwest, although I am not advertising Southwest. But that is how he 

flew into this area. 

I also want to thank the Chair for giving me an opportunity to 

participate in this Transportation panel. 

I also want to thank members of the Transportation Infrastructure Committee for being a strong advocate. One of the strongest 

advocates in the area has been Gary Miller, Representative Gary 

Miller, who not only represented this city, along with me and others, has worked diligently to improve the quality of life in the Inland Empire, and he knows the importance of what this airport 

means to this region. I think together in a bipartisan effort, along 

with many other Members, we can collaborate and work and hopefully we can solve the issue that is pending before us in a very 

positive way. 

6 

One of my other colleagues who is here, I would like to recognize 

him as well, and that is Ken Calvert who is with us, who is also 

very much concerned with Ontario International and what it 

means to our region, and what it means to Riverside and the surrounding area. So thank you very much, Ken Calvert, for being 

here this morning. 

The history of Ontario Airport dates all the way back to 1923, 

when a landing field was established on the lands leased from 

Union Pacific Railroad. Since then, Ontario Airport has been a benefit to the communities and residents of California and the Inland 

Empire. 

It also provides good paying jobs for the area residents, increases 

economic development, and improves the overall quality in our 

area. In fact, the airport has been called ‘‘the jewel of the Inland 

Empire.’’ 

Unfortunately, the last 7 years have been difficult for Ontario 

Airport. Since 2007, only one other airport in the Nation, Cincinnati, has suffered a greater percentage of decline in the number 

of passengers. This decline in air traffic has cost our region in 

terms of lost jobs, tax revenue, and economic development. 

What I firmly believe is that this problem is one that can be 

fixed. I say that can be fixed with the work and looking forward 

and thinking and bold actions that we all need to take. As we convene this hearing today, officials from Ontario and Los Angeles are 

in the process of ironing out an agreement to return Ontario Airport to local control. This is a positive step in what has been a long 

and often difficult process. 

While I have introduced legislation in the House of Representatives to have the Federal Government mandate the transfer of the 

airport, it is encouraging that the issues can hopefully be resolved 

at the local level. 

I want to commend all of the parties involved for this progress 

that has been made so far. Alan Wapner, thank you for your leadership. Jim Bowman, thank you as well in what you have done in 

bringing this to our attention, and hopefully we will work forward. 

But there is still much that needs to be done and discussed to 

determine the path ahead of Ontario Airport. It is imperative that 

we work together to ensure the brightest future possible for the 

airport so that we can help put more Inland residents back to 

work. 

So today we will listen, we will learn from excellent panels of 

witnesses. I hope this hearing will build our collaborative effort in 

strengthening Ontario Airport and create new jobs, tax revenue, 

economic development for the Inland Empire, and improving the 

quality of life for all of us living around this region. Ultimately, we 

must all work together to maintain a positive environment, and 

that is what Gary Miller and others are trying to do in trying to 

make sure that Ontario is back at the local control. 

Once again, I thank the participant Members and the witnesses 

for their time. I yield back the balance of my time. 

Mr. PETRI. Thank you. 

Representative Calvert. 

7 

Mr. CALVERT. Well, thank you, Chairman Petri, for coming out 

here to California and doing this hearing. I will have a full statement that I would like to introduce for the record. 

But I just have a few short comments. 

I want to thank my friend, Gary Miller, who invited me here 

today, and Joe and all of us from the Inland Empire, because we 

know this is not just an airport for San Bernardino County or for 

East Los Angeles but for this entire region, including Riverside 

County. This is an airport that we utilize on many occasions. I just 

flew out here the other day to go to San Francisco, and this is our 

regional airport. 

So it has been somewhat disheartening to all of us to see what 

has happened to this wonderful facility, and we would love to work 

forward with the city of Los Angeles to move this airport along. 

I know that Jerry Lewis couldn’t be here today. He is still in 

Washington, DC. He feels very strongly about this, as we all do. 

We want to make sure that this airport does well, and I think the 

city of Ontario certainly has the interest and will do a great job of 

making this a premiere facility for this entire region. 

So not only does it help Ontario, but those of us who fly out of 

LAX a lot, it will help LAX because you can only jam so much into 

that box, and we are in that box, the three of us, every single week. 

The parking is tough. The traffic is tough. We need to kind of share 

the wealth a little bit and get some flights out of here, Ontario, and 

I think it will work great for the region. 

So thanks for having this hearing, and I appreciate being here 

with you. 

Mr. PETRI. Thank you. 

Our first panel of witnesses consists of the Honorable Alan D. 

Wapner, who is a member of the Ontario City Council; and the 

Honorable Gary Ovitt, Fourth District Supervisor, San Bernardino 

County; and Mr. Miguel Santana, City Administrative Officer, city 

of Los Angeles. Gentlemen, thank you for being here today. Thank 

you for the effort that went into your prepared statements, which 

will be made part of the record of this hearing. I would invite you 

to summarize those statements in about 5 minutes, beginning with 

Alan Wapner. 

TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE ALAN D. WAPNER, MEMBER, 

ONTARIO CITY COUNCIL, AND BOARD MEMBER OF ONTARIO 

INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY (OIAA); THE HONORABLE GARY OVITT, FOURTH DISTRICT SUPERVISOR, SAN 

BERNARDINO COUNTY, AND BOARD MEMBER OF OIAA; AND 

MIGUEL SANTANA, CITY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, CITY OF 

LOS ANGELES 

Mr. WAPNER. Thank you, Mr. Chair, Congressman Miller, Congressman Baca, and Congressman Calvert. On behalf of the city of 

Ontario and the newly formed Ontario International Airport Authority, welcome to Ontario. My name is Alan D. Wapner. I am a 

city council member for the city of Ontario and a board member for 

the new Ontario International Airport Authority. Thank you for 

holding this field hearing on this matter of critical importance to 

the Inland Empire and all of southern California. 

8 

As a result of the declining conditions at Ontario International 

Airport and the region’s concerns about the airport’s ability to sustain commercial air traffic in the future, the Ontario City Council 

took action last month and formed the Ontario International Airport Authority. This new Authority was formed through a Joint 

Powers Agreement between the city of Ontario and the county of 

San Bernardino. 

Over the past 2 years, a compelling case has been made for why 

the city of Los Angeles should relinquish control of Ontario International Airport. As I wrote in an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times, 

there are many reasons for Ontario to be placed under local control 

and governed by a multi-jurisdictional airport authority. 

One, it allows Los Angeles World Airport, LAWA, to focus its energy and time on LAX for the benefit of the region’s economy as 

a whole. 

Two, it promotes regionalization by returning Ontario International Airport to local control, which is conducive to the development of robust regional airports. 

And three, it ensures all of southern California, including Los 

Angeles, will have sufficient and affordable airport capacity. Without adequate capacity, airlines will be forced to land elsewhere. 

This transfer will also protect the significant financial investment made into the Ontario Airport by the Federal Government 

and the city of Ontario. Hundreds of millions of dollars to enhance 

Ontario Airport ground access and associated infrastructure have 

been accomplished through our fiduciary partnership. These multimillion-dollar projects include grade separations, street widenings, 

interchange upgrades, radio system enhancements, landscaping, 

land use planning studies, water treatment systems, and noise 

mitigation programs. 

The inability of the Ontario Airport to support commercial air 

traffic will not only undermine the region’s air traffic strategy but 

will inevitably undermine Federal, State, and local-funded infrastructure investments designed to support Ontario Airport into the 

foreseeable future. 

To prevent this disaster, just last week Los Angeles City Administrative Officer Miguel Santana released his report on options for 

future management and control of ONT. We embrace his recommendation that the CAO facilitate negotiations between LAWA, 

the city of Ontario, the county of San Bernardino, the Ontario 

International Airport Authority and other primary stakeholders to 

determine the most effective and appropriate ownership and management alternative for the airport. 

All of southern California, including Los Angeles, will be better 

served by the transfer of Ontario Airport to the Ontario International Airport Authority. It is our intent that negotiations with 

the city of Los Angeles result in a transfer that is a win for all parties and is structured in accordance with FAA policies. By transferring sponsorship of Ontario International Airport from LAWA to 

the Ontario International Airport Authority, the airport will have 

a sponsor that has a vested interest in its success and is accountable for providing long-term airport capacity for the benefit of the 

entire region, including the city of Los Angeles. 

9 

I would like to take this opportunity to express my appreciation 

to the Los Angeles City Council members Dennis Zine, Bill 

Rosendahl and Paul Koretz for their motion of March 20th, 2012. 

Their motion resulted in the Los Angeles City Administrative Officer’s report which has given all parties the direction and clarity to 

move ahead with the airport’s transfer. 

I know I speak for the entire board of the Ontario International 

Airport Authority when I say we are fully committed to restoring 

Ontario International Airport as the region’s most important economic engine capable of meeting the long-term demand for air travel in southern California. Thank you. 

Mr. PETRI. Thank you. 

Supervisor Ovitt. 

Mr. OVITT. Good afternoon and thank you, Chairman Petri and 

Representatives Miller, Calvert and Baca, for this very important 

day in Ontario. Welcome to Ontario, San Bernardino County and 

the Inland Empire. My name is Gary Ovitt. I am the Fourth District Supervisor for the county of San Bernardino, board member 

of the Ontario International Airport Authority, and a former mayor 

of this great city of Ontario. 

The Ontario International Airport Authority was created in August of 2012 by a Joint Powers Agreement between the city of Ontario and the county of San Bernardino. Its purpose is to oversee 

the orderly transfer of the airport from the city of Los Angeles and 

provide the governance for the ongoing operations of the airport. 

Under terms of the Joint Powers Agreement, I joined Ontario 

City Council members Alan D. Wapner, to my left, and Jim W. 

Bowman of the Ontario International Airport Authority on board 

as my district includes the cities of Ontario, Chino, Chino Hills, 

Montclair, and the southern portion of Upland. 

We are very fortunate that the city of Riverside’s mayor, Ronald 

O. Loveridge, and president and CEO of Orange County Business 

Council, Lucy Dunn, have agreed to join the Authority as board 

members representing the entire region. 

Under the 2005 stipulated settlement agreement signed by 

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, a champion of airport regionalization, 

growth of passenger and air cargo activity is a requirement. The 

historic settlement agreement cleared the way for billions of dollars 

in construction projects now underway at LAX. The city of Los Angeles can show its commitment to airport regionalization and encourage the growth of Ontario International Airport by transferring 

Ontario International Airport to those who have a vested interest 

in its success. 

Local control has proven to be more conducive to developing robust regional airports than trying to manage them from a city 

many miles away in a different county. 

Ontario International Airport is of great importance to all of 

southern California. It deserves to be managed by a multi-jurisdictional agency responsive and accountable to the entire region. I believe the Ontario International Airport Authority will help the airport rebound from the neglect of recent years while positioning 

itself for long-term growth consistent with the regional transportation plan of the Southern California Association of Governments, 

10 

otherwise known as SCAG, the largest metropolitan planning organization in the country. 

Ontario International Airport does not serve the Inland Empire 

alone. Its catchment area encompasses some 6 million people living 

in a 25-mile radius of the airport. Thousands of air travelers bypass Ontario International Airport each day to get the flight schedules and fares they seek from surrounding regional airports, increasing the traffic congestion and automotive emissions. 

From my previous roles as president of the Southern California 

Association of Governments and a former county representative on 

the South Coast Air Quality Management District, I can attest to 

the need of a successful regional airport to benefit the overall 

transportation needs of the region. 

One of the earliest proponents of a change in control of Ontario 

International Airport came from the SCAG regional council comprised of 84 elected officials representing 189 cities, six counties, 

and six county transportation commissions. SCAG concluded that 

transferring Ontario International Airport to local control is in the 

best interest of the city of Los Angeles and the southern California 

region. 

In a resolution unanimously adopted on September the 2nd, 

2010, SCAG said the change of airport sponsorship will enable the 

city of Los Angeles to focus its attention on modernizing LAX and 

restoring passenger traffic to pre-September 11 levels, essential 

steps to enable LAX to achieve its full potential as the city of Los 

Angeles primary economic engine. By transferring control of Ontario International Airport to the Ontario International Airport Authority, SCAG noted that Ontario International Airport will operate using the same proven structure as all other secondary airports 

in the region. Each of these airports operates as low-cost secondary 

sites under the control of an agency that takes responsibility and 

is accountable for its performance. 

The San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors most certainly 

agree with SCAG’s findings. That is why we passed a resolution 

that Ontario International Airport needs to be managed by a regional airport authority. As a critical piece of our economy, the entire region has come together in support of the transfer of Ontario 

International Airport to the Ontario International Airport Authority. We greatly appreciate the interest, concern, and support of this 

committee. Thank you very much. 

Mr. PETRI. Thank you. 

Mr. Santana. 

Mr. SANTANA. Good afternoon. On behalf of the mayor and the 

City Council of Los Angeles, I would like to thank you for this opportunity to address your committee. As a 23-year resident of the 

Inland Empire, I would like to personally thank you for the focus 

on revitalizing L.A./Ontario Airport in this important region. 

The CAO’s role in this process is to analyze and provide recommendations to the city council and the mayor. As a CAO, I have 

16 bosses. I report to the mayor and each one of the 15 city council 

members. But I do not run the airports. The CAO does not manage, 

nor does LAWA. That is run independently by a separate board of 

the commissioners appointed by the airport. Any proposed transiVerDate Aug 31 2005 14:38 Jan 08, 2013 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\HEARINGS\112\AV\9-27-1~1\76150.TXT JEAN
11 

tion would need to be approved by the Board of Airport Commissioners and affirmed by the city council. 

My office was instructed by the L.A. City Council to evaluate the 

city of Ontario’s proposal and to help identify and analyze the other 

potential options for future ownership, operation and management 

of the airport. To assist in the review, my office contracted with 

Acacia Financial Group, along with other consultants, to help analyze potential options. It is our goal to facilitate and continue the 

dialogue with Ontario and its partners in discussing a long-term 

strategy for the airport. 

Indeed, our report was released on September 21st and outlined 

a number of options. Over the last few years, LAWA has taken numerous steps to create operational efficiencies at the airport and 

reduce operating costs in an effort to increase passenger traffic and 

promote new air service. However, despite these efforts, even 

though LAWA has made progress in improving operations and curtailing costs, an acquisition and transfer of the airport back to the 

city of Ontario or the Ontario International Airport Authority has 

considerable merit. 

To that end, the city of Ontario proposed in their December 14th, 

2011, letter to LAWA that the operations and fee title to the airport be transferred from the city of Los Angeles to the city of Ontario. The primary terms of that transfer include the following: 

paying to the city of Los Angeles general fund a $50 million transaction payment unrelated to the airport’s valuation to defray the 

city’s cost of transferring the airport back to Ontario; assuming or 

retiring approximately $71 million in existing bond debt and any 

other Ontario-related financial obligations, including indemnification of any and all liability pertaining to those obligations; paying 

LAWA in years when the cost per enplaned passenger to airlines 

operating in Ontario is $5 or less, up to one-third of annual Ontario 

PFC collections up to the cumulative amount equal to the amount 

of LAX PFC collections contributed to capital projects at Ontario, 

estimated at about $125 million; entering into an employee protection and transition services agreement to protect existing LAWA 

employees; refraining from imposing any operating restrictions, 

caps, curfews, aircraft type bans, and any other barriers to future 

growth of the airport; and maintaining all current operating covenants for the airport, as well as terminating or revising the original 1967 JPA. 

The $50 million transaction payment to the city of Los Angeles 

general fund is meant by Ontario to be a reimbursement of the cost 

for transferring the airport. However, based on my conversations 

with the FAA, such a payment appears to be viewed by the FAA 

as a potential revenue diversion under Federal aviation law. Our 

city attorney has also looked at this matter and has concluded the 

same. 

However, as a result, this particular option is not an option that 

we are recommending, but we do recommend that the city engage 

in very aggressive discussions with the city of Ontario, the county 

of San Bernardino, and the Authority on an option that allows us 

to proceed forward on an effective transfer, and I will describe 

what that potential partnership could look like. 

12 

In our report, we enumerate a number of different alternatives. 

The alternative that we are recommending is the acquisition of Ontario International Airport by the city of Ontario or the Ontario 

International Airport Authority, or by a separate party. Acquisition 

of a commercial airport by any other municipal agency is allowable 

under FAA regulations providing that the FAA approval is obtained and proceeds go to LAWA, not the city general fund, as airport revenues used to benefit the city’s airport system. 

This alternative would provide for the new owner to, one, obtain 

an FAA operating certificate; two, compensate LAWA financially 

for the value of the airport, as well as the cost of the transition to 

the new owner; three, to freeze all outstanding airport debt and assume existing financial obligations; four, execute an employee protection agreement for a minimum period; five, agree to refrain from 

imposing operating restrictions, caps, curfews, bans on aircraft 

types; six, dispose of any fund balances held by the airport; seven, 

assume responsibility for outstanding grant assurances; and eight, 

assume responsibility for the airline use and lease agreement. 

Based on this proposal, we are recommending a path forward. As 

I stated on September 21st, my office did release a report that outlined a process to begin these negotiations. We are recommending 

that the city of Los Angeles and LAWA explore potential acquisition by the city of Ontario and the Ontario International Airport 

Authority, subject to FAA approvals. We also recommend that the 

city direct my office to facilitate a discussion and negotiations with 

all of the various parties, as well as other stakeholders, to discuss 

common goals in an effort to increase economic activity across the 

region. 

All participants could potentially achieve these goals and objectives by establishing a transaction with the city of Ontario or the 

Authority and providing certain financial and operational benefits 

to LAWA to enhance a much needed capital infrastructure at LAX. 

This, in fact, could be a win-win both for the city of Los Angeles, 

LAWA and, of course, the Inland Empire. 

Earlier this week, the city council’s Trade, Commercial and Tourism Committee endorsed my recommendation, and it will be moving forward for the full city council within the next several days. 

Upon approval of that final recommendation by the full city council, we are recommending that the LAWA commission immediately 

meet and establish a set of guidelines to allow the negotiations to 

move forward. Those guidelines could include the following: to the 

greatest extent possible, avoid or mitigate any disruption of service 

at the airport; the airport must continue to be operated as a commercial airport; the airport shall be operated in the most efficient 

manner possible; the city and LAWA should receive reasonable 

compensation in respect of the investment that LAWA has made to 

the airport; all existing employees shall be treated fairly and in accordance with existing labor contracts; and the city’s existing and 

future general fund base must always be protected. 

It is in the interests of both the mayor and the city council to 

move as quickly as possible on these negotiations. My office has 

been directed to report back in 90 days on the status of this potential partnership. 

13 

I am also joined by Jess Romo, who is the Ontario Airport manager, who many of you may know, and as well by Ray Serrano from 

my office. Thank you very much. 

Mr. PETRI. Thank you. Thank you all. 

I do have a few questions, and I suspect other members of the 

panel may as well. 

The first one I would direct to Mr. Wapner, and that is why is 

it that you believe transferring control of the airport to a new authority would be a win for all involved? 

Mr. WAPNER. Well, certainly we have an aviation system in 

southern California that depends on various airports reaching capacity to serve the aviation needs of southern California. Without 

Ontario Airport growing to its proposed capacity of 31 million annual passengers a year, the entire region will be shorthanded in 

trying to meet the aviation needs of the economic climate of southern California. 

In essence, what would then happen, according to the airline industry, is if they can’t meet the aviation needs here, they will move 

the entire economic segment of aviation to another region, potentially Nevada or Arizona. So it’s very important. As we know, the 

FAA system is built upon the principle that we need primary airports such as LAX, but we also need reliever airports to help relieve the primary airport of general aviation, as well as some of the 

more short-haul flights. 

So really, to create a system in southern California, you need all 

the airports really operating at their full capacity. 

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Ovitt, what do you hope to achieve for Ontario 

Airport as a member of the new Airport Authority should ownership be transferred to the new airport board? 

Mr. OVITT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I believe that this will put 

in charge of the airport those who have a vested interest in it, and 

it will be a multi-jurisdictional airport authority made up of representatives from really pretty much the entire catchment basin 

that would be utilizing the airport. 

With all of that stated, then best practices would really kind of 

demand that we have representation from all of them, and we 

would respond and be accountable to the airport vetters. 

So Ontario is a tremendous economic generator for this region, 

and we would look forward to that helping to straighten out our 

economy, which has been lagging far behind these last few years. 

Mr. PETRI. I have a couple of questions also for you, Mr. 

Santana. You recently were quoted as saying that a change in airport ownership could potentially benefit all interested parties. 

Could you expand on that or explain what you meant by that, or 

how that would be possible? 

Mr. SANTANA. The reason why we recommended moving forward 

with these negotiations is that LAWA certainly has a number of 

pressing needs at LAX, and this potential partnership could result 

in revenue to help LAWA meet those needs. 

For the Inland Empire, obviously this has been a priority for 

many, many years, and the idea is, as articulated by the other panelists, is that through local control the airport could play a larger 

role in the revitalization of the regional economy. And like everyVerDate Aug 31 2005 14:38 Jan 08, 2013 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\HEARINGS\112\AV\9-27-1~1\76150.TXT JEAN
14 

thing else, when there is that much importance placed on an asset, 

then the opportunities of maximizing that asset also occur. 

So from our perspective, this provides us an opportunity to both 

allow the city of Los Angeles to receive revenue to enhance and improve the overall capital needs of an airport that is an essential 

part of the regional economy while at the same time strengthening 

Ontario Airport by allowing those individuals who play a leadership role within this region to manage it. 

Mr. PETRI. Thank you. 

Representative Miller. 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Councilman Wapner, what do you think the top priority would be 

for the airport once Ontario International Airport is transferred 

and you assume control? 

Mr. WAPNER. Thank you, Congressman Miller. Obviously, the top 

priority is to lower the cost of business for the airlines so that we 

can incentivize airlines to come back here and launch more flights. 

What has pushed the airlines away is the high cost of doing business at Ontario. In fact, we are the highest cost airport in the 

United States for an airport our size. And airlines having limited 

resources, certainly they are going to use those resources in markets that they can do business at a much cheaper rate than they 

can at Ontario. 

Secondly, what we want to do is stop the exodus of flights that 

are now leaving Ontario and incentivize other airlines to come back 

to Ontario and increase their flights. 

We also want to stress more development on the airport side 

itself. Since Los Angeles has had control of the airport, we have 

seen little, if any, development on-site, and obviously the advantage of doing development on the airport site is the more ancillary 

revenue that you develop, the lower the costs are going to be for 

the airlines doing business there. So if we can bring more nonaviation revenue such as increased ground leases, parking revenue, 

concessions, then that will again lower the cost of doing business 

for the airlines, and it incentivizes them to have more business and 

more flights here. 

And then finally we have to target a new marketing campaign 

to recapture the flights and the people that have left Ontario already. A lot of folks have already created new riding habits by driving into Los Angeles to catch a flight, or into Burbank or Orange 

County. So the next thing that is going to be necessary is to have 

a marketing plan, and we envision all of southern California coming together to help fund this, but a new marketing plan that 

would bring passengers back to Ontario, tell them that we now 

have more flights, we now have cheaper flights, we have more airlines, give us another chance, come back to Ontario and we will 

make you happy. 

Mr. MILLER. It looks like the marketing budget was originally $2 

million. It is down to about $200,000 now, and Mr. Santana mentioned the cost. Looking at your cost per enplaned passenger, you 

are about $13.50 per passenger. Burbank is $2.09. Palm Springs is 

$4.07. So you have a huge disadvantage. When the cost goes down, 

you share some of the profits back. And the other discussion was 

about the employee compensation must be continued at current levVerDate Aug 31 2005 14:38 Jan 08, 2013 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\HEARINGS\112\AV\9-27-1~1\76150.TXT JEAN
15 

els, and an average employee makes $115,000, which is 15 percent 

above anybody else. How would you deal with that? 

Mr. WAPNER. Well, you know, obviously those are going to be 

some obstacles that we are going to have to talk about. When we 

examined the reason for the high cost of doing business at Ontario, 

it really came down to three primary factors. 

One, LAWA was assessing and is assessing a 15-percent administrative overhead charge on the operating budget at Ontario International Airport. So that is 15 percent we can knock off immediately because, obviously, the city of Ontario is not going to charge 

the same types of charges to Ontario Airport. 

Secondly, there are just too many employees at Ontario International Airport. At one point, they had over 400 employees. If you 

are an airport, it might necessitate 75 to 100 employees. 

And then finally, as you mentioned, Congressman Miller, because 

of an L.A. City charter provision, all employees, contractors, vendors at an L.A.-owned facility must pay prevailing wages. Now, obviously, we all support prevailing wages, but we support prevailing 

wages of the Inland Empire cost of living. These prevailing wages 

are based on the city of Los Angeles cost of living, and all of our 

congressional delegation understands that businesses locate to the 

Inland Empire because it is much cheaper for their employees to 

buy houses out here, and the cost of living is much lower. So it 

doesn’t make sense to be paying employees up to 20 or 25 percent 

more than what the market will bear just because of an L.A. City 

charter provision. Obviously, that provision won’t apply to the city 

of Ontario. 

Having said that, one of the provisions that Mr. Santana has put 

forth is that the existing contracts be supported in the transfer. We 

are not looking to lay off any employees, especially 300 employees. 

So certainly part of the negotiations is going to have to find some 

way that these employees can either be absorbed into the LAWA 

or city of L.A. system, or they will stay here and they will just be 

replaced through attrition. 

Mr. MILLER. Supervisor Ovitt, you mentioned that your vision for 

the growth and development of Ontario Airport is consistent with 

SCAG’s regional transportation plan. Can you educate us further, 

the audience and the committee, on the regional transportation 

plan, how the transfer of the airport complies with that? 

Mr. OVITT. Certainly, Congressman Miller. I would be happy to 

do that. The SCAG—the metropolitan planning organizations are 

required to actually do a plan for regional transportation every 4 

years, and we do one that takes in the entire six-county region, 

which is Los Angeles County, Ventura County, San Bernardino 

County, Riverside County, Orange County, and as well Imperial 

County, which seems interesting as well. 

Anyway, we do a regional transportation plan so that we make 

sure that we are working together to try to develop mobility within 

the entire region, and it is an investment for a 20-year period, and 

it is based on growth forecasts and economic trends that project out 

over that 20-year period. As well, it is interested in the role of 

transportation in the broader context of economic, environmental, 

and quality-of-life goals for the future. So when you look at that, 

16 

we do the same thing, of course, with not only our ground transportation as well, we do that with our aviation as well. 

And so as a result of that, we have forecast that between the 

years 2012 to 2035, our aviation growth would show that Ontario’s 

baseline medium growth, low growth and high growth scenarios 

are such that if it were the baseline medium growth for Ontario 

International Airport, we would have 19.2 million air passengers a 

year by 2035. But if we went by the scenario for the high growth, 

it could be, as Councilman Wapner had mentioned, 31.6 million air 

passengers a year. 

So that is the difference between it, and the RTP is obviously 

very important. In fact, our Federal funding demands that we do 

an excellent job and make sure that we have the dollars to pay for 

those projects as well. 

Mr. MILLER. My last question is for Mr. Santana. My comments 

were not meant as an attack on the costs. They were just kind of 

glaring when I looked at them, and I hope that is discussed during 

the negotiations. 

But if the parties have successful negotiations in the process, 

how do you see the city of Los Angeles processing and completing 

the transaction? 

Mr. SANTANA. I’m sorry? 

Mr. MILLER. If the negotiations are successful, how do you see 

the process being completed with the city of Los Angeles? 

Mr. SANTANA. Well, I think the first step is establishing a common understanding of what we are trying to achieve, and that is 

why we laid out a series of guiding principles that the city would 

engage in and immediately seek support from the representatives 

of the Inland Empire. Once those principles are solidified, then we 

can begin the work of dealing with each one of those issues. 

You talked about the issues of the costs. Obviously, that is going 

to be a significant amount of discussion. Establishing what the appropriate value is is another. How do we manage the issue of the 

employees, and I think there are a number of options that could 

be pursued to allow the transition to still occur while at the same 

time honoring the contracts that we currently have. And then finally, establishing what that transition could look like. The Authority currently doesn’t run an airport, and so there would have 

to be a transition period for that, and there are a number of different options that could still involve LAWA through a contractual 

relationship, perhaps, to allow that transition to occur. 

This is obviously—the most important thing at this juncture is 

the fact that I think all sides are interested in getting to a common 

goal. I know, as someone who has been for many years an observer, 

and then an active participant in this process, it is refreshing to 

see that we are finally all on the same page. But the real work 

really begins now in developing an understanding and a consensus 

around some very difficult issues. But it starts off with the common 

interest of getting there. 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you. I yield back. 

Mr. PETRI. Representative Baca? 

Mr. BACA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I have a question for all of the panelists. Whoever would like to 

tackle the question first, please dive in. 

17 

What is the most important message that we, as Members of 

Congress serving in Washington, DC, can send to the Federal Aviation Administration regarding the ongoing negotiation to return 

Ontario Airport to local control? 

Mr. WAPNER. I will take that, Congressman Baca. Obviously, as 

Members of the United States Congress, you have a responsibility 

to safeguard the investment of Federal dollars. And as I stated in 

my testimony, there have been hundreds of millions of dollars 

spent from the Federal Government for the expansion and the operation of Ontario International Airport. So it is obviously in the 

best interest of Congress, as well as the United States Government, 

to make sure that Ontario remains a successful airport and operates as such. 

Secondly, as I stated earlier, the FAA, if you look at their system 

of aviation throughout the country, depends on all levels of airports, and I think it is consistent with the FAA policies that an airport like Ontario be maintained and also be as successful as possible. 

Now, we have talked for a while, and I publicly talk about the 

fact that if we don’t act soon, Ontario Airport closes, and a lot of 

people say that can’t be. But we have to look at this realistically. 

The existing airport that we have out there can accommodate 12 

million annual passengers. We have two terminals which can each 

accommodate 6 million. We are doing just a little over 4 million 

passengers. 

All of you have flown out of our old airport, right? The levels that 

we are seeing now for ridership are the same as they were in 1983 

out of the old terminal. So essentially, we have seen hundreds of 

millions of dollars from the Federal and local government gone to 

waste, sitting over there, because they are not being utilized by 

folks needing to use the airport. 

So it is imperative that FAA understand that funding they have 

made available through previous programs needs to be safeguarded. We need to show that when folks receive money, that they 

are going to use that money in the proper manner that it was intended, not to build an airport that nobody uses. 

So I think that hopefully the message to the FAA is, once we 

come to an agreement here at the local level, to expedite the processing and streamline the processing as much as possible to get the 

licensing done so that we can take transfer. 

Mr. BACA. Thank you very much. Stop wasting taxpayer money, 

yes. 

Mr. OVITT. Thank you, Congressman Baca. And I would just add 

to that that it is a real mobility issue as well. We are talking about 

goods moving here, which is so vital to the entire country, and we 

are talking about the ability to get to the different airports as well. 

Obviously, when we talk about so many people here having to find 

flights in Los Angeles or go elsewhere, as opposed to being able to 

utilize this valuable asset that we have based on the lack of flights 

available here, we are talking about even more of a strangulation 

of our mobility, our ability to get goods where they need to go, et 

cetera. So I think it plays a very important role in that. 

Once again, FAA obviously is Federal, and we are talking and 

looking for your help in that regard because you have some control 

18 

over it. We would love your help as far as the railroads are concerned as well on goods movement, but that is a whole different 

issue and we won’t bring that up, but you heard me anyway. 

Mr. BACA. Thank you. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. OVITT. And certainly we would look to your help. You as our 

representatives have done a lot of good in helping us to bring dollars here for the ground access to our airport, and we would look 

forward to that in the future. 

We will not be able to grow to that 31 million, assuming that it 

becomes a real viability in the future, unless we have some additional help to find some other means of transportation besides just 

automobiles dropping people off. We will need high-speed rail or 

some other means as well. So we would probably look to you in the 

future. We know you have a few issues of your own economically 

speaking, but we would love to work with you in that regard as a 

partnership. 

Mr. BACA. Miguel? 

Mr. SANTANA. Thank you. I had an opportunity to meet with the 

assistant administrator of the FAA a few months ago to specifically 

discuss this issue and to get some clarity around potential diversion issues, which I was able to receive. And in that meeting they 

made it very clear that they are relatively agnostic on who ultimately runs the airport. However, they are not neutral on issues 

pertaining to safety, transition, and also accountability. 

So I think as we proceed forward in this process and hopefully 

reach a consensus, an agreement, that the FAA would be clear on 

what their expectations are as we move forward through that transition. So as the team that is working on this, both from the Inland 

Empire as well as the city of Los Angeles, has those clear expectations outlined, we can navigate through them efficiently and create 

a solution that we all want to seek out. 

Mr. BACA. OK. Thank you. 

I know that we all have several questions, but if I may ask one 

final question, and then hopefully we will have a second round so 

that we can complete asking some of the questions. 

Mr. Ovitt, Supervisor Ovitt, I understand that the responsibility 

of managing and eventually making Ontario Airport profitable is 

going to be a daunting task. However, I know that you and OIAA 

board are all up to the task. I want to reiterate that myself and 

other Members of Congress, Congressman Gary Miller representing 

the Inland Empire, and Ken Calvert and Lewis and others are willing to help in any possible way. 

With that in mind, please explain to us what are some of the 

first actions of OIAA board and planning to do within the first year 

of operation of the Ontario Airport if the transfer of control from 

LAWA is successful? 

Mr. OVITT. Thank you, Congressman. Certainly I think first of 

all we will need to look at the entire facility itself, and obviously 

working with LAWA folks who have been running the facility. So 

we are going to have to look at that, take a revisit to how it is 

being run. But certainly marketing will play such an important 

role, to market it to the local patrons. Obviously, as Councilman 

Wapner mentioned earlier, to lower the rates for the flights and obVerDate Aug 31 2005 14:38 Jan 08, 2013 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\HEARINGS\112\AV\9-27-1~1\76150.TXT JEAN
19 

viously try to make more flights available as well, so that we can 

reach other destinations. 

So all of those together will be important for us to look at, and 

certainly we will reach out into our communities, and the communities are quite large. The catchment area, of course, is Orange 

County and Riverside County, as well as San Bernardino County. 

So we will look to all of them. But we are going to certainly need 

some marketing. We are going to certainly need to reorganize the 

way we do business and try to become more efficient in that regard, and try to renegotiate, if you will, with our employees as well. 

So we look forward to all of those things. 

Mr. BACA. Thank you very much, Mr. Ovitt. 

I understand that we won’t have an opportunity to ask a second 

round of questions, so the Chair has permitted me to ask one additional question. So I will ask this of Mr. Santana. 

Thank you for your efforts in preparing the feasibility study looking at the issues of local control of Ontario Airport. In your studies 

on this issue, did you find that Ontario Airport will be able to reduce its overall cost structure if it is returned to local control? Why 

or why not? 

Mr. SANTANA. We did look at cost structure as one of the issues 

and tried to identify how we could reduce the cost. Some of the 

issues have already been articulated in terms of the self-imposed 

regulations that as a city we have on our employees and our contractors at LAX and at Ontario. So one opportunity for a reduction 

in cost is obviously an evaluation of that, right-sizing the airport, 

the management of the airport, as well as engaging in contracts in 

a different way than we currently have. 

The other opportunities obviously really depend on how effective 

the airport is and how effective the region is in improving the local 

economy. There is a direct correlation with the decline of the economy and the decline of the airport. So as the regional economy improves, then it is anticipated that the potential of the airport also 

improves. 

So part of the analysis identified various scenarios in which that, 

in fact, could occur. 

Mr. BACA. Thank you very much. I don’t have any other questions, but I would just like to state that—thank you, Alan Wapner, 

for your leadership on this endeavor in trying to bring us back to 

local control. 

Mr. PETRI. Representative Calvert. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I think it is very appropriate that the gentleman from Wisconsin 

is here today to help referee this situation, because I think he 

knows injustice when he sees it. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. CALVERT. And certainly he had that opportunity the other 

night. 

But I don’t think it is important that we re-litigate what happened here at Ontario for the last number of years and why Los 

Angeles was given the opportunity to manage this facility some 

years ago. What is important is I think that we all recognize that 

the people here in the Inland Empire have every capability of managing this as a safe, clean, and convenient airport facility, and I 

20 

don’t think anybody intends anything different than that. It is important because I think obviously it is in the best interest of this 

region that that occurs. 

One of the questions that both Mr. Lewis had sent to me and I 

was interested also, not in just what—maybe this is also going to 

be important to Mr. Husing when he comes up for his testimony, 

but the impact Ontario Airport has not just on the city of Ontario 

but on the entire Inland region. Obviously, I am from Corona, but 

I am only a half-hour away from Ontario Airport, and it has just 

a tremendous impact on my home town. Also, I see the mayor of 

Riverside here. 

In your opinion, Mr. Wapner and Mr. Ovitt, what kind of vibrant 

impact does Ontario Airport have not just on the economy but what 

it does to the entire region and the reputation and so forth for our 

local community? 

I will just start with you, Mr. Wapner. 

Mr. WAPNER. Well, you know, we have talked about this already. 

The airport has an enormous impact on all of southern California. 

Economically, we know that it is in the billions of annual economic 

impact, responsible for tens of thousands of jobs. In fact, the downfall of the airport most recently has caused over a half-billion-dollar 

negative economic impact for the entire region and the loss of almost 10,000 jobs in the region as a result. 

So when we hear discussions about the downturn in the economy 

and how when the economy improves, so will the airport, folks 

have to recognize that part of the downfall in the economy is due 

to the downfall of the airport, that it is a self-creating episode. So 

until the airport improves, the economy doesn’t improve. It is a 

Catch-22 there. 

Secondly, as Supervisor Ovitt pointed out, we have issues like 

mobility, and more important than that, environmental impacts, 

where we are seeing over an additional 1.5 million car trips a year, 

that folks from the Inland Empire are having to go to Los Angeles 

to catch an airplane. That is inexcusable. Can any of you come up 

with a better, cheaper way of eliminating 1.5 million cars in a year 

than just transferring an airport? I mean, let’s be realistic. We are 

looking at all different kinds of transit and everything else. This 

is an easy solve. 

So it impacts the economy. It impacts the environment. It impacts mobility. It also impacts folks’ quality of life. Why should 

anyone in southern California have to endure a long-term ride to 

Los Angeles International Airport when they could go to one that 

is much closer to their home? 

I applaud Mayor Villaraigosa. He has been a long-time champion 

of regionalization of aviation. He has always recognized that it is 

always better for folks to use an airport closer to their home than 

the other way. 

And the real injustice here—and that is why folks around the 

Los Angeles International basin support local control of Ontario— 

is that they are being victimized. They are being victimized because their airport is the only airport not of choice but of necessity 

in southern California. Unfortunately, we are having to export tens 

of thousands, if not millions, of folks to that area that could very 

well be using airports closer to their homes. 

21 

So it is really not fair to the folks living around LAX at this point 

to have to endure all the impacts of aviation when it could be more 

evenly distributed among other airports. 

Mr. OVITT. Congressman, in answer to your question, there is no 

doubt that one of the issues that we have all been facing, of course, 

is this economic downturn, this recession that we have been going 

through, and that has an impact, obviously, on the number of those 

that are actually flying, especially in our area. We have been probably the hardest hit in the country, or at least very close to that. 

So that certainly makes a difference. 

In fact, as the airlines look at our region, part of the reason they 

are not willing to expand here is they look at the median household 

income, and we are not quite where they want us to be, and so that 

is part of the reason. And yet I would argue that Orange County 

would love to come here, would rather come here than John 

Wayne. Certainly Riverside County, very few go to Palm Springs. 

They would much prefer to come here, or here as opposed to Los 

Angeles. 

And when we have talked about the L.A. Airport, number one, 

the mobility is really difficult to get there in the first place, especially from here. But secondly, it is clear over on the West Side of 

Los Angeles. So you have to go all the way through the city as well. 

It wouldn’t be so bad if it were on the eastern end of it. So that 

is certainly an important issue. 

I think one of the things that hurts us here in Ontario is our 

name, Ontario. I mean, you know, it takes a province in Canada 

to be as great as the city of Ontario, but that in itself, people don’t 

always know where we are located. How close are we to Los Angeles? And the fact that we are in the market area of L.A. and there 

is great accessibility to L.A. from where we are as well. 

Once again, we are probably the most populated region in the 

country that doesn’t have a pro football team or a basketball team 

or something of that nature. We are very large. The Los Angeles 

Basin is huge, so all of our media comes from Los Angeles. So we 

really don’t have an identity of our own, and we need that, and 

that is something that the airport helps to bring as well. Obviously, 

we would love to have a media here as well, and that is one thing 

that we need to work on in that regard. 

So I think all of those play a very important part to our region 

and the fact that if we had that airport, I think it would all contribute towards—I think the figures have been over $6 billion economic impact to this region, not only in Ontario but in the surrounding area as well. And so I think if we are able to once again 

generate additional flights and build the air transportation figures, 

we will do much better. 

And the one last thing I would say is that SCAG, as I mentioned 

before, 84 members, most of which come from Los Angeles County—in fact, the entire City Council for L.A. is on it—overwhelmingly have supported regionalization of airports and aviation and 

air traffic. So they are on our side. They just need to remember 

that they voted that way. Thank you. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, and I do agree, we do need a professional football team, but we are not going to get in the middle of 

22 

downtown L.A. and Ed Roski’s deal, and neither are we going to 

bring in the Green Bay Packers to play Los Angeles. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. PETRI. Thank you. 

Gentlemen, thank you all for the effort that went into your testimony and for your taking questions and handling them so ably. 

This will conclude the first panel. Now it is my pleasure to—well, 

you leave, and—— 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. PETRI [continuing]. The second panel joins us. Let me introduce it, and do please come forward. 

The second panel consists of the Honorable Ronald O. Loveridge, 

who is mayor of the city of Riverside and a member of the Ontario 

International Airport Authority. I understand Ms. Lucy Dunn has 

had difficulty getting here. She will be represented by Larry Brose, 

who is the vice president of Investor Relations and Business Development of the Orange County Business Council. They will be joined 

by Mr. Brian Perry, chief legislative deputy of Councilman Dennis 

Zine, who is testifying on behalf of Dennis Zine; and Mr. John 

Husing, vice president, Economics and Politics, Inc. 

Again, thank you very much for the effort that went into your 

prepared statements. They will be made a part of the record of this 

hearing in their entirety, and I would invite you to summarize 

those prepared remarks in about 5 minutes, beginning with Mr. 

Loveridge. 

TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE RONALD O. LOVERIDGE, 

MAYOR, CITY OF RIVERSIDE, AND BOARD MEMBER OF OIAA; 

LUCY DUNN, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, 

ORANGE COUNTY BUSINESS COUNCIL, AND BOARD MEMBER 

OF OIAA, ACCOMPANIED BY LARRY BROSE, VICE PRESIDENT, INVESTOR RELATIONS AND BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT, ORANGE COUNTY BUSINESS COUNCIL; BRIAN PERRY, 

CHIEF LEGISLATIVE DEPUTY FOR COUNCILMAN DENNIS P. 

ZINE, THIRD DISTRICT, LOS ANGELES CITY COUNCIL; AND 

JOHN HUSING, PH.D., VICE PRESIDENT, ECONOMICS & POLITICS, INC. 

Mr. LOVERIDGE. Thank you and good afternoon to Members of 

the House of Representatives. Let me first just thank you for bringing public attention to the future of the Ontario Airport. 

Two very quick stories. Yesterday I was talking to Kurt 

Markwall from San Francisco, who described arriving in Terminal 

2 at 6:00 p.m. and finding all the businesses closed and their gates 

shuttered. He said it was like walking through a ghost town. 

Another quick story. I know you talked a great deal about SCAG. 

They had a wonderful kind of gathering where we approved an absolutely first-rate regional transportation plan. But they had something like 30 or 40 different venues where people were showing 

their wares. One of those was from LAX. They had some great exhibits for what was taking place at the Los Angeles Airport. We 

asked, how about Ontario? There wasn’t a pamphlet, there wasn’t 

a mention. I value what is taking place at LAX, but I was haunted 

23 

by the fact that this was a regional gathering and there was not 

a single piece of literature on the Ontario Airport. 

I submitted written testimony. Let me make seven points and try 

to do that quickly. 

The first point this is not a tug of war between two cities, Ontario and Los Angeles. It has been emphasized, Ontario is a regional airport. If I could speak specifically for Western Riverside 

County, Ontario is our airport, and I represent tens of thousands 

of air travelers, past and prospective. 

Second, and this is interesting to me, that in Western Riverside 

County, the support for local control, I would use the language, is 

just extraordinary. What is the scorecard? Every city in Western 

Riverside County, except for one, the Riverside County Board of 

Supervisors, the Greater Riverside Chamber of Commerce, the Inland Empire Economic Partnership, the Monday Morning Group— 

you name a group, and it has said yes to local control of the Ontario Airport. I’ve been now mayor of Riverside, as Ken knows, for 

some 18 years, and I can’t identify any other issue that has greater 

widespread support than local control for the Ontario Airport. 

I should note that some 46 other cities across the counties of 

L.A., Orange and San Bernardino also joined the call for local control of Ontario Airport. 

I also think this is interesting. Those of us in elected life read 

newspapers and read what the editorials say. It is important to 

note that the editorial boards of newspapers across southern California strongly endorse support for the transport to local control. 

In Press Enterprise, a recent editorial pointed out that local control will eliminate the conflict of interest inherent with the city of 

L.A. controlling a competing airport in another jurisdiction at a 

time when LAX is rebuilding its own passenger traffic, renewing its 

infrastructure. 

The fourth point, and I think this was made earlier today, is that 

support for local control is centered on a reality that the Ontario 

Airport under control of LAWA is not working. And it is stunning, 

the point that Alan Wapner made, we are now at 1980 levels, despite, as you will hear from John Husing, big-time growth in population and in jobs in the Inland Empire. One major reason for the 

decline of passengers, as we have identified, is the high cost of flying out of the Ontario Airport. It costs more. 

I like this. This was in Tuesday’s paper. The headline story in 

it was: ‘‘Southwest Flying Less From Ontario.’’ In 2007, they had 

53 daily flights. Now they have 33. There was a description of why 

that is, and I like the language of the representative from Southwest. ‘‘ ‘Apart from fuel,’ Hawkins said, ‘the airlines’ cost of doing 

business at any airport also plays a role.’ He said, ‘It’s the most important external consideration,’ calling it ‘one of the spices in the 

secret recipe.’ ’’ The point is that Ontario is higher; everybody else 

is much lower. 

We talked about the economic loss to this region. John Husing 

will make that point much more effectively than I can. But everything you read about this whole global marketplace that we compete in, you need an international airport within a reasonable distance, and that is what Ontario Airport provides. 

24 

Point number seven. There was an excellent statement, I 

thought, by Mayor Villaraigosa. He is quoted as saying, ‘‘This comprehensive report underscores the irrefutable importance of commercial aviation activity at LAX and indeed throughout the southern California region on our economic well-being. From passenger 

spending to the enhanced national and international trade, LAX 

and our region’s other airports are uniquely where the action is.’’ 

My point is that it is time for the action to also include the Ontario 

Airport. Every other airport in southern California is experiencing 

an increase in traffic. 

My final point, and I would thank very much the Ontario City 

Council, but after some 18 years as mayor of Riverside, I am stepping down but not exiting public service. One of the things that I 

look forward to is serving as a board member of the Ontario International Airport Authority. I will dedicate my best efforts to ensuring that Ontario International Airport makes its expected important contribution to the regional economy and to providing millions 

of southern Californians with a convenient regional airport to meet 

their travel needs. 

Thank you for your attention, and thank you for placing this 

item, as you can tell by the coverage today, at the attention of all 

of us in this region and across southern California. 

Mr. PETRI. Thank you. 

Mr. Brose. 

Mr. BROSE. Good afternoon, Chairman Petri and Congressmen. I 

am Larry Brose, vice president of business development and investor relations for the Orange County Business Council. Lucy Dunn 

is jetting her way here right now. She is coming in from northern 

California and unfortunately couldn’t get to Ontario, had to come 

to another airport. So if I may read her testimony, I would appreciate that. 

‘‘Good afternoon, members of the subcommittee. My name is 

Lucy Dunn.’’ 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. BROSE. ‘‘I am president and chief executive officer of the Orange County Business Council and a board member of the Ontario 

International Airport Authority. 

‘‘The Orange County Business Council is a leading advocate for 

business on important issues locally, regionally, and nationally. We 

work to grow Orange County’s economy, to preserve a high quality 

of life by promoting economic development countywide, and serve 

as a unified voice for business in America’s sixth largest county. 

‘‘To understand why the Orange County——’’ 

Mr. PETRI. Guess what? You have been replaced. She has arrived. You have been relieved. 

[Applause.] 

Mr. BROSE. I have been upstaged. 

Mr. PETRI. Welcome, Ms. Dunn. Glad you could make it. 

Mr. BROSE. I will read, you answer questions. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. PETRI. Join us at the table. Come on up. 

Mr. BROSE. ‘‘To understand why the Orange County business 

community is vitally interested in the future of success of Ontario 

International Airport, one would only need to drive from anywhere 

25 

in Orange County to Los Angeles International Airport. Those of us 

in Orange County recognize that our hometown airport, John 

Wayne Airport, is constrained. Until 2015, the number of passengers legally capped at 10.8 million per year. Even if the cap 

were to be relaxed or lifted, there is an absolute limit to how much 

of the growth and demand for air service it can accommodate. 

‘‘In addition, due to its physical footprint, John Wayne Airport is 

limited by its single runway for commercial jets. 

‘‘For a time, it seemed that El Toro Marine Naval Air Station in 

Irvine might be converted to an international airport. However, airport proposals were defeated by two ballot initiatives, and eventually the airport opponents prevailed. Ontario International Airport 

quickly emerged as the best long-term solution for unconstrained 

airport capacity in southern California to serve the large and growing southern California market. 

‘‘If you had the good fortune to fly in and out of Ontario International Airport, you know it is a convenient airport with great 

ground access, great parking, and modern terminals and facilities. 

Forbes named it southern California’s best alternative airport. 

‘‘Ontario International Airport offers parallel runways that can 

accommodate the largest airliners in the world, including the Airbus A–380. Ontario International Airport can easily accommodate 

12 million annual passengers. For residents in northern Orange 

County, Ontario International Airport is a wonderful choice because it offers the air service and nonstop destinations business 

travelers demand and is close to home. 

‘‘Ontario International Airport is ideally and uniquely situated to 

serve the needs of business and leisure travelers in the four-county 

region. Additionally and very important to the business community, Ontario handles a significant amount of the region’s cargo volume. I am convinced, under the governance of the Ontario International Airport Authority, it will realize its full potential not only 

as a major international airport but also as a vital economic engine 

for the region. 

‘‘I am pleased and honored to serve as a board member of the 

Ontario International Airport Authority, and I look forward to 

working with my fellow board members to help Ontario International Airport achieve success as an integral part of the southern 

California network of airports. Thank you.’’ 

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Perry. 

Mr. PERRY. Chairman Petri, honorable Representatives Calvert, 

Miller, Baca, my name is Brian Perry, and I am the chief legislative deputy for Councilman Dennis P. Zine. He represents the 

Third District in the San Fernando Valley portion of Los Angeles. 

Regrettably, Councilman Zine was unable to attend in person due 

to a conflict at this very moment with a previous obligation in his 

district that he was unfortunately unable to avoid or reschedule. 

Your invitation, he would have been here personally if it had been 

possible. 

Councilman Zine has been honored to serve as a Los Angeles 

City Councilman, representing the Third District, the San Fernando Valley, for the past 11-plus years. Prior to his service on the 

Los Angeles City Council, he worked for 33 years as a proud member of the Los Angeles Police Department. He is a lifelong Angelino 

26 

and has seen enormous changes not only in Los Angeles but 

throughout the region over the past several decades. 

In addition to his service on the Los Angeles City Council, he has 

served on the Board of Directors for the Southern California Association of Governments, the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments, the Independent Cities Association, and the National 

League of Cities, and other local, State and Federal decision and 

advisory bodies. 

As an elected official in the city of Los Angeles, he quickly realized that the decisions made throughout the entire region have a 

direct impact on the quality of life for residents in the city of Los 

Angeles. His message to you today is to offer his insight as a member of the city council, and his firsthand experiences and observations of the current situation at Ontario Airport. 

The Greater Los Angeles Area is reliant upon a system of commercial airports for travel to and from the region. These airports 

include Los Angeles International, Burbank, Long Beach, John 

Wayne Orange County and, of course, Ontario International Airport. In order to provide the best service possible to all the residents of our region and to the traveling public, it is essential that 

all five of these airports provide quality service, competitive prices, 

and ample availability of flights to and from the region. 

Unfortunately, this has not been the case. Since 2007, the total 

number of annual passengers at Ontario Airport has declined by 37 

percent. This is why he introduced a Council motion in Los Angeles 

to review the status of Ontario Airport and its relationship to Los 

Angeles World Airways. 

This decline has driven more and more passengers to other airports, most notably Los Angeles International, and led to increased 

congestion on our roads and an absolute lack of productivity for 

travelers who sometimes have to drive for hours on southern California freeways just to take a simple flight to northern California. 

This should not be the case. 

Last year, Councilman Zine made an unannounced personal visit 

to Ontario Airport so he could see things firsthand. What he saw 

was disappointing. He saw a beautiful, modern airport with a complete terminal closed due to lack of flights. He saw approximately 

half of all the concession stands closed or out of business. This was 

shortly after noon on a Tuesday. 

During his visit, he also made an unannounced stop at the Los 

Angeles World Airports executive office at Ontario International 

Airport to speak with the onsite manager. He was shocked to learn 

that the onsite manager was not, in fact, onsite, and that there was 

actually a system of shared management where two individuals 

served as general managers for both Ontario and Van Nuys Airport 

on a rotating basis. 

Councilman Zine is a strong believer in local control and the consumer benefits of regional competition. Local officials and stakeholders have a greater incentive to promote and operate Ontario 

Airport with maximum efficiency. As Ontario grows, the local economy grows and traffic is relieved on southern California roads and 

highways. It is completely counterintuitive that as the population 

in the Inland Empire region has continued to grow, the service and 

availability of flights at Ontario Airport has continued to decline. 

27 

While private airlines set the rates for their flights and local airports only have a certain amount of influence over these rates and 

flight schedules, the Councilman looked on the Internet to review 

the costs of flights from L.A. and Ontario to Sacramento. He found 

that a traveler from the Inland Empire can travel roundtrip from 

LAX to Sacramento for $136 cheaper than he can fly from Ontario 

on the same day, on the same airline. This naturally creates a tremendous incentive for these passengers to needlessly add to the 

congestion on our freeways for a 1-hour flight they should be able 

to take from their own backyard. 

Any deal involving the transfer of Ontario Airport back to local 

control must ensure that the city of Los Angeles and Los Angeles 

World Airways not be held liable for bond indebtedness related to 

the airport. If we can come to an agreement that does not harm 

the city or LAWA and includes fair compensation for the actual 

value and assets of the airport, then his message to you is simple 

and straightforward. He joins the Los Angeles Times, the Southern 

California Association of Governments, community groups throughout the city of Los Angeles, and many others in saying loud and 

clear that it is time to set Ontario free. 

In conclusion, he wants to thank you, Mr. Chairman and the 

other members. A vibrant Ontario Airport is critical not just for 

residents of Ontario and the Inland Empire but for the entire region, including the city of Los Angeles. Local control of Ontario Airport made under the right circumstances that do not harm the city 

of Los Angeles or LAWA is an important first step in reestablishing 

this airport as an economic engine in the Inland Empire and provides positive benefits to the entire region. Thank you. 

Mr. PETRI. Thank you. 

Mr. Husing. 

Mr. HUSING. Thank you, Members of Congress. It is a pleasure 

to be here today. My name is Dr. John Husing. I am a private economist. I have been studying the Inland Empire now, this year, for 

48 years. I am also the chief economist of the Inland Empire Economic Partnership, an organization dedicated to increasing the 

prosperity of this region. 

I have been taking a look at two things that are in my official 

statement. One is why the decline in passenger traffic at Ontario; 

and second of all, what has been the economic impact of it. 

First of all, allow me to characterize the two-county Inland Empire area. Currently, it has 4.29 million people. That is 400,000 

larger than the State of Oregon. Out of the total of 50 States, 24 

of them are smaller in population than these two counties. The 

area had 1.3 million jobs before we got into the recession. It still 

has 1.16 million today. It needs a strong airport just for the sheer 

bulk and size of this region. The economy here is recovering. Year 

over year, we are up 24,400 jobs this year over last year. 

At its current pace this year, Ontario is going to be down 41.2 

percent between the peak in 2007 and the 2012 figure. The market 

as a whole, of which we are a part in southern California, at the 

same time is down 6.8 percent. So this steep reduction has meant 

a massive decline in Ontario’s share of the market, from 8 percent 

now down to only 5.4 percent. It had been 8 percent all the way 

28 

through from the late 1990s through the middle of the 2000s. Now 

suddenly, it has slipped to those levels. 

It takes us back to the 1985 level of passenger traffic. So in 1985, 

what is the difference in this area between now and then? The answer is we have added 2.3 million people in the Inland Empire 

since 1985. That is an increase in population of 120 percent. That 

is larger than several U.S. States, what we have simply added. We 

have added 585,000 jobs since then, which is doubling, and that is 

despite the decline because of the recession. We have added twothirds more businesses in that time. So you are looking at an airport with double the population, more than double, double the 

number of jobs, and two-thirds more businesses, yet we are now 

back to a level of passenger traffic from two or three decades ago. 

There is no way that it is our economy’s slowdown that caused 

these kinds of declines. That makes absolutely no logical sense, not 

with those kinds of numbers in terms of what has happened in this 

region. 

Looking, then, at what it is doing to this area to have that occur, 

like any other area, we are in a competitive economy where we 

have to compete for the reasons for companies to come here. What 

has occurred is a consequence of a loss of traffic or loss of passenger service at Ontario is 1.1 million air passengers from the Inland Empire now are traversing L.A. County to get over to LAX. 

This creates a costly burden on the families and the businesses in 

this area, and as has been repeatedly said, adding millions of vehicle miles on L.A.-area freeways. Using a very conservative assumption on what are the ground costs, the parking costs, the time lost 

to commuting, all together that is a $48.5 million gift on the competitiveness of the Inland Empire just simply for that fact. 

Secondly, Ontario is, as was just stated, now a very expensive 

airport for airlines to use. Airports don’t decide who goes there; airlines do, and they take a very careful look at their costs. As Mayor 

Loveridge indicated, one of the things that Southwest talks about 

repeatedly is the fact that it is too expensive to operate from here 

at the levels they wanted to. 

One of the things I took a look at is there is strong data from 

the Federal Government on every flight destination from an airport. If you take the 38 destinations from Ontario that represent 

a little over three-quarters of all the passenger trips, what we find 

is there is an average 18.1 percent higher cost of tickets from Ontario to that entire group of airports. That is costing people who 

live in this area $128 million a year for those folks that are still 

using Ontario, much less those who have to make the trip into L.A. 

For businesses, these may not even be the biggest costs. 

Ontario’s major harm to business is the loss of direct flights. You 

want to get someplace, you want to get there as a businessperson, 

you want to do it efficiently. The direct flights have practically vanished to all but a very few locations. I took again a look at those 

same 38 major destinations, looking at direct flights that you can 

get from LAX versus the few that you can get from here. I did a 

huge reduction in the number to be conservative. Total time loss 

was roughly 420,000 hours as a consequence of sitting in airports, 

changing planes in order to be able to make those flights, another 

hit of $17.5 million. 

29 

If we add the three things I just talked about together, that is a cost of $198 million to the Inland Empire economy. However, 

what didn’t I measure? One, you can’t get conventions to come here 

anymore because conventioneers can’t fly here. So there has been 

a huge hit on the convention business, on the hotels. We have lost 

tourists. I didn’t even include those in my calculations. 

Then there is just to businesses, when there is a reduced flight 

schedule to get places, you end up going someplace and sitting 

around for hours to go to a meeting, and then sitting around for 

hours to get a flight back here. Particularly, I might add, for those 

of us who go up to Sacramento all the time, the flight leaves, if I 

recall correctly, at about 10 after 6:00. You end up with a meeting 

at 10:30. You have several hours in the capital. You can’t get a 

flight back until 1:30. That is time, and time costs money to business folks. 

In addition to that, when you have those kinds of costs, as an 

economist, one of the things you always look at is what is the multiplier effect of that. If you simply say for every dollar lost there 

is another dollar that is lost elsewhere in the economy, so a very 

small multiplier of 2, you get to a half-a-billion-dollar hit on the Inland Empire economy for what appears to be no good reason other 

than the fact that this institution is not playing the role it used to. 

There is no reason why a change should have occurred, and it really would help this area enormously now that we are effectively— 

by the way, I am running for Senate because we are going to be 

the 26th largest State. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. HUSING. As a nonpartisan, I might add. 

But the fact of the matter is that this market needs an airport 

to serve it that serves our needs and under our control here. Thank 

you very much. 

[Applause.] 

Mr. PETRI. Thank you. 

I do have a couple of questions. 

First, welcome, Ms. Dunn. I know you had a little struggle getting here, and we appreciate the effort. 

Ms. DUNN. It is a personal story that relates perfectly today, Mr. 

Chairman, because my flight to Ontario was cancelled. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. MILLER. And there is no backup flight available. 

Ms. DUNN. And there was no backup flight. The only way, sir, 

to get here was to travel to John Wayne Airport and travel an hour 

or so. A 1-hour trip took 3 hours, and I apologize for my delay, but 

a good example. 

Mr. PETRI. My question was maybe I’ll give you a chance to expand on that a little bit for other people. Why is it that residents 

and businesses in Orange County care about Ontario Airport? 

Ms. DUNN. When you have the southern California economy as 

a whole, Mr. Chairman, it is driving the California economy. Orange County is a major jobs-creating force, one of the lowest unemployment rates in the State; in fact, even lower, I think, than the 

national average. It is incredibly important for our businesses and 

travelers, our shippers, to have a transportation system that is effective and efficient from so many different vantage points. 

30 

As you know, business is not constrained by a county or by a city 

but crosses boundaries all the time. In fact, southern California, 

both Orange County and the Inland Empire, have strong connections to an international market as well. 

In the case of Ontario Airport, you compare it to, for example, 

our own airport in John Wayne, which everyone in this room 

knows is my favorite airport in the world. But the reality is even 

if its right now current cap were expanded, its market could still 

not handle all of the growth perhaps that this region is slated to 

occur because it has only one runway, and we need a system that 

balances off of each other. 

When a company like Disneyland just recently invested $1 billion 

in their theme park in Anaheim to become literally the largest employer in the Southland, you can’t build any more parking structures. You have got to have a transportation system—air, rail, 

transit—that allows all of those visitors to utilize everything. 

And then the last and most important thing I want to share with 

you, why Ontario is important, no one better than Orange County 

understands the importance of local control. That airport is locally 

controlled by five supervisors locally elected. They understand the 

market. They understand the sensitive balance between travelers 

and cargo shippers, and they are able to adjust in a remarkable 

way that has made an airport rather efficient and effective in a 

tough, tough economy. 

But it isn’t all things to all people. It has to be a great airport 

system, and that is why both business and visitors and residents 

need Ontario to succeed as well. 

Mr. PETRI. Thank you. 

Mayor Loveridge, I wonder if you could expand on a statement 

in your prepared remarks that if you were to have local control, it 

would eliminate any conflict of interest in the management of the 

airport. 

Mr. LOVERIDGE. I think I tried to illustrate that with the story 

as I began. It is a matter of where you give attention, where you 

give your focus, what you see yourself responsible for. Ontario Airport is here, but if you look at the five people who run LAWA, the 

executive director, their focus is on what it should be, on making 

LAX work. 

I did realize I am part of a quorum of the Santa Ana Water Planning Shed, so I need to leave very soon because otherwise the 

quorum will not be in place. My apologies. 

Mr. PETRI. Thank you. 

Mr. Miller. 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I have really enjoyed this panel. I am not impugning the previous panel in any fashion, but we have heard information I don’t 

think many of us have heard generated before. 

Mr. Perry, you are a breath of fresh air, Councilman Zine’s comments that you were reading, because the three Members of Congress that live in this area know exactly what you are talking 

about. I remember 3 years ago I took flights out of Ontario that 

in August I tried to book that weren’t available. You go over there 

and it is like Death Valley. Every time I go to the airport to pick 

up a relative, who try to come into Ontario if possible, you look in 

31 

the distance to even find a plane, and they just don’t exist, which 

is just sad because I remember in my assembly days in the 1990s, 

Joe Baca and I both went out of Ontario every week and there was 

never a problem. 

The problem that Councilman Calvert and Baca and myself have 

is we take the first flight out we can to get to Washington to vote, 

and then we take the first flight home after votes because we don’t 

live in Washington. We live here. And if we go to Los Angeles, we 

can book four or five different flights. If we miss the one flight to 

Ontario, which is usually a connection, we can’t get back here until 

the next day. And if we do take the flight out of Ontario in the 

morning, we can’t get there in time to vote because of the connection. If we take it the wrong time of the year, the connection might 

not have a flight going out of there at all because of weather. 

So it has been a process that has occurred over the years that 

has had a huge negative impact on our region here. If you look at 

the Federal dollars that have been invested in Ontario Airport, I 

know when I started representing this city and the county in 1998, 

the amount of money I brought to the city council when Gary Ovitt 

was mayor at that point in time, and the existing city council, for 

infrastructure, for other services that benefit that airport directly, 

you look back and think we wasted a lot of money based on current 

dollars. 

There might have been earmarks back then, Mr. Calvert. You 

had to out me, didn’t you? 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. MILLER. But they were good earmarks. Nothing was named 

after me. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. MILLER. It was after Ontario Airport and the city council did 

the ribbon cutting. I just helped them get the money. But, yes, 

thank you for outing me. 

But, Mr. Perry, why do you believe that the carriers have reduced air service to Ontario, and what would the benefit be to the 

city of Los Angeles and LAX for successful transfer of Ontario back 

to the local control? 

Mr. PERRY. Well, just from my own experience this morning as 

I drove from downtown Los Angeles here to Ontario, open freeway, 

clear lanes, drove pretty efficiently. The same time, the traffic from 

Ontario to downtown Los Angeles was bumper to bumper, was 

stopped, and I am hoping it is—— 

Mr. MILLER. I well understand that. 

Mr. PERRY. So the Councilman is a firm believer, in principle, of 

local control. The benefit to Los Angeles will, of course, be everything that people have talked about—air quality, congestion. But 

it also will allow the Los Angeles World Airport to focus on making 

Los Angeles International Airport one of the most competitive and 

best airports in the world, which should be their focus. Unfortunately, it may be that including focusing on Ontario is detracting 

from their ability to do that, or at the very least not allowing the 

focus that needs to be put in to make Ontario the best it can be 

is lacking as well. 

32 

All in all, everyone needs to work together, and local ownership 

and operation of Ontario would be a benefit to everyone in the 

southern California region. 

Mr. MILLER. Well, Ms. Dunn, you recall back in the 2000s the 

battle over El Toro? 

Ms. DUNN. Yes. 

Mr. MILLER. The significant need for an airport in North Orange 

County. At that point in time, about 2005, we were talking about 

the privately funded concept of MAGLEV from the convention center in Anaheim to Vegas. But the number-one priority stop for that 

would have been Ontario Airport, where you could have actually 

gotten a boarding pass at the convention center at Anaheim. You 

could have gotten on that train. Eleven minutes later they dropped 

you off at the gate and you got on a plane. 

That concept doesn’t seem to even be in the distant horizon any 

longer because of the underutilization of Ontario at this point in 

time. 

What is your opinion in Ontario’s consideration in the long-term 

solution? If you look at them to the air commuter traffic in our 

southern California region, what do you see the benefit being 

placed back in Ontario for the expansion of local control? 

Ms. DUNN. Well, Mr. Miller, if I may share, first, there is a glimmer of hope on that first vision that you just presented, where I 

just participated last week in the groundbreaking of ARTIC, the 

Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center. 

Mr. MILLER. I’m very well familiar with that. 

Ms. DUNN. As you very well know. And that is, as a hub, could 

be like a new downtown for all of Orange County, where all forms 

of transportation would go, and it is still the dream that that station transportation would connect with Ontario; again, another reason why Orange County—north, south, east and west—we all need 

Ontario to succeed. 

So the aspect of local control, as you mentioned, critically important. When you are closest to your people, you are best able to 

serve their needs. With all due respect, 60 miles away is not close 

to the market of Ontario International Airport, and that is why we 

really do need to do the right thing here. 

Mr. MILLER. They are elected officials from L.A. County that just 

attended the hearing and just had to leave, and they are feeling 

the same need as you do. 

Mr. Husing, it has been nice reading you in the paper all these 

years. I never listened to you give speeches. You have done a great 

job. 

A couple of questions. Why do you believe air carriers have reduced their service to Ontario in recent years? And be honest. And 

do you feel a positive future for Ontario Airport if we do gain local 

control? 

Mr. HUSING. I think that the key issue is cost, cost per passenger, what does it cost them to take a passenger out of here 

versus anyplace else they can use their planes. They are going to 

maximize the efficiency of their operations and minimize their cost 

per passenger. With local control, we strongly believe the cost per 

passenger here would be much more reflective of what you generally find in regional airports. Right now, it is completely out of 

33 

line, and that has chased away business that would otherwise be 

flying in here and flying out of here and taking passengers. 

Mr. MILLER. And just for the record, the cost per passenger in Ontario is $13.50. If you go to a comparable airport in Long Beach, 

it is $6.64. If you go to Burbank, it is $2.09. 

Mr. HUSING. Precisely the issue. 

Mr. MILLER. Continue. I didn’t mean to interrupt you. 

Mr. HUSING. No, thank you. Tell you what. I will ask the questions. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. MILLER. Do you feel positive about the future of Ontario? 

Mr. HUSING. There is no reason for what happened to have occurred. This was a very, very efficiently run, working airport handling 8 percent of passenger traffic in southern California year 

after year after year until a change in management occurred at 

LAWA, period, beginning and end of problem. 

Mr. MILLER. And, Mr. Perry, for the record, I had a very long 

meeting and a nice meeting with the director of LAWA on Monday. 

We talked to the mayor’s office last week. We were trying to be 

very clear that this is not a hearing that is intended to beat up on 

Los Angeles or LAWA at all. That was never our intent. I hope we 

don’t have to have another hearing later that might be different, 

but that was not the intent of this one. 

Our concern as elected officials, and the Federal dollars and the 

investment we have made, and the need we see for regional capacity for air traffic, because if you look at our freeways, they are impacted. The only thing nice about the recession, and it is not nice, 

is that when I get up at 4 in the morning to drive to LAX, I only 

think I have two bottlenecks instead of 14 going to the airport, 

which is a sad, sad thing to say for our economy, because when the 

recession started you could see the impact on our freeways every 

month decrease, and that is sad. 

But when you have seen the same thing occur at an airport that 

should be a good international airport decrease in a more rapid 

fashion, that is heartbreaking. 

I yield back and thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. PETRI. Representative Baca? 

Mr. BACA. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

I know that all of us are very much concerned from a region perspective, and there are some of the mayors here and city council 

persons that are here. But one of the other mayors that was out 

here earlier—I don’t know if he had to leave or just stepped out for 

a while—but that is Paul Eaton as well, the mayor from Montclair, 

that is very much concerned with this region, along with us and 

the panelists and other speakers. 

But let me start with Mr. Husing. One of the important things 

that you talked about, I am very interested in the population as we 

look at the population, what it was and how it has grown to 4.9 

million people. What is anticipated in terms of the additional 

growth in the area, and what impact, then, will that have on Ontario Airport? Because this area is affordable. More and more people are moving into the Inland Empire, both San Bernardino and 

Riverside County and surrounding areas. Yet, with the growth in 

the population, what impact would it have? And then what kind of 

34 

traffic congestion would it provide or give to the L.A. area if, in 

fact, the growth in the population continues to grow, as we anticipate? 

Mr. HUSING. The Southern California Association of Governments does a lot of socio-economic work to back up the regional 

transportation program. In their forecasts, we add between now 

and 2035 in this region 1.8 million more people than we currently 

have. So right at the moment, we are at roughly 4.3 million. Add 

1.8 million. You do the math, a huge area. We pass many more 

States in terms of our size. 

To put that in context, the number of people we will add is more 

than the number anticipated in Orange, San Diego, Imperial and 

Ventura combined. The reason for that is very simple. We have 

land, and you need land to build houses. Ergo, this is where the 

population goes. 

A similar forecast is made for jobs, that the job growth out here 

will be also larger than those four counties combined, and it will 

be by itself larger in both cases than either the population growth 

or the job growth of Los Angeles County. That is the future that 

we are staring at right now. 

We need this facility very, very badly, and we need it to really 

be prepared to handle that kind of a load going forward. 

Mr. BACA. And that will have an impact as we look at—if we 

don’t go to local control and expand Ontario Airport, then the traffic congestion will increase, because right now most of us I know— 

Ken Calvert and I traveled from Corona and me from the San 

Bernardino area, and then Gary Miller now from Ranch 

Cucamonga into the other area. We are stuck in traffic going to try 

to get our flights. With the increase of the population, which means 

it is going to take us a lot longer to get to LAX to try to get 

through a flight, not only getting through LAX, but then we have 

to go through security. By the time we go through security, and 

then if we find out that our flights have been canceled, we have 

to run over to another airline, which we have done at some times 

and have been over at American Airlines, and that is another terminal, and we have the nice terminals that you can go from one 

to another and still get that flight if, in fact, we had them here. 

So that presents a problem. 

Could you just elaborate a little bit more in terms of the traffic 

congestion that it would have and the impact? Or, Perry, you could 

talk about that on the L.A. as well, because traffic congestion impacts the lives of individuals and that quality of life, which means 

that they are spending a lot more time on the road, which means 

it impacts them and their families and others where they can come 

here. And then also when you talked about earlier the population 

growth, the mayor here, Paul Leon, would like to see the possibility 

of increasing businesses and attracting businesses. We can’t do 

that if we don’t have the kind of an airport that would allow business. 

I will give you an example. When I worked for Verizon and GTE, 

we were looking at the possibility of moving the headquarters right 

here to Ontario because of the airport, but it ended up going somewhere else, and other businesses are thinking about this. Could 

you elaborate a little bit more on that? 

35 

Mr. HUSING. I think the thing that really disturbs me the most 

about this entire issue as a southern Californian is the fact that 

we have been working for years to try and get vehicle miles traveled under control, whether it is SB–375 and trying to get transport-oriented housing, sustainable community sorts of thinking, 

whether it is getting people to rely more on things like Metrolink, 

this has been the effort. This is the only case I can think of, of an 

agency that has not been working to reduce vehicle miles traveled 

but as a consequence of their actions they are increasing vehicle 

miles traveled. It is weird. 

Mr. BACA. What does that cause? Accidents? Death? I mean, you 

know, there is a lot that can go on, and we care about the quality 

of life and the life of an individual that may be put on the road 

where they wouldn’t have to go if it was out here. I mean, we don’t 

think that aspect in terms of a life that may be lost because we 

didn’t do the right thing, and we have an opportunity to do the 

right thing and save someone’s life by not putting them on that 

freeway in that congestion. 

Mr. HUSING. Well, another aspect of this that goes to a point that 

you are making is this. For us to accommodate the increases in 

population that we are talking about without massively increasing 

commuting to the coast, you do want companies to migrate to 

where the workers have moved. They are moving there because 

they can afford the housing. You would like the companies to come 

with them. 

When you take an airport, which is a key asset for this region’s 

competitiveness, and you eliminate its ability to allow companies to 

be competitive, then you reduce the ability for us to draw those 

firms, nothing to do with air traffic, it just increases the amount 

of commuting stacking up on those roads because you don’t get a 

balance between jobs and housing, which is something we are all 

trying to accomplish. 

Mr. BACA. Thank you. 

Ms. Dunn, along the same lines, could you explain the type of 

businesses that usually will flourish with the addition of a strong 

secondary airport in large commercial markets? 

Ms. DUNN. Well, clearly tourism, but in addition, especially here, 

goods movement is hugely important, just starting with UPS. I 

think Ontario is their second largest market here from Atlanta, 

and goods movement is huge, of course, for the ports of L.A.-Long 

Beach. 

It is interesting because, as Dr. Husing has said, the dots all connect in so many areas of both land planning and living. Even just 

we are struggling always in southern California meeting our air 

quality requirements set by the Feds. But when you have a requirement that we add a million trips a year to go to LAX when 

we could be just going 2 miles down the street, it is crazy-making 

how we don’t connect these dots in good land planning and good 

environmental protection. Whether or not you believe in all of the 

stuff that they talk about on greenhouse gases, the fact is it is just 

good efficiency and effectiveness, and that is what business is attracted to. 

So bringing jobs to the Inland Empire, which has long been a 

huge mantra for their success, their economic success, they have 

36 

been the housing community for Orange County for many years, 

but this is a great opportunity for growth, and an international airport will attract those jobs and those businesses that marry beautifully with the residential communities. 

Mr. BACA. You are absolutely right. I think we have become commuters that are driving either to L.A. or to Orange County or San 

Diego or somewhere else because we haven’t created those kinds of 

jobs, and this would give us an opportunity to attract and create 

jobs locally right here, where we can get many of our students who 

are going through our colleges, our community colleges, that will 

be able to obtain a job locally and keep them here. I would love to 

keep my family here instead of having them move somewhere else 

because they can’t get a job here. 

But again, thank you very much. I yield back the balance of my 

time. 

Mr. PETRI. Representative Calvert? 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I am going to bring up a name that nobody will recognize. My 

grandfather’s name is Pete Hamlin. And the reason I bring him up 

is my grandfather operated a barbershop on Century Boulevard 

just a couple of miles from LAX, opened up in the 1920s and operated it for 50 years. 

So I have been going around—I am not here to bash L.A. I love 

L.A. But since I was a little infant, I have seen L.A. grow, and my 

grandfather would tell me stories. I guess that is where the old 

chicken farms used to be, down there where the airport was located. They started off with a single runway, and they built that 

airport up and, of course, there were no freeways. There was no 

405, there was no 105, there was no 605, there was no 91, all of 

which we get to travel on all the time, and we have built those systems up. God knows, my friend Howard Berman asks for more and 

more money for the 405, and every mile of freeway we develop 

today isn’t running $10 million a mile, as you know, Mr. Petri. 

What is the 405 running right now? About $100 million a mile, or 

more? 

Mr. PETRI. Probably more. 

Mr. CALVERT. Probably more. So the L.A. area is severely impacted. I don’t think there is anybody that would debate that subject. How far can you develop LAX? How much more air traffic can 

you bring in? How many more airplanes can you take into L.A. and 

have it as a reasonable alternative to other locations? 

I think that is part of the thing. It is not just what we want to 

do here for Ontario. It is what we need to do for L.A. I get to serve 

on the Appropriations Committee on defense appropriations, work 

with the L.A. airbase, and I can’t tell you, I hear from people who 

work there, the horror stories they tell me about traffic and the 

cost of housing and so forth and so on. 

For a region, we need to develop Ontario Airport to meet its obligation to southern California, because I think we are losing business around Los Angeles because of the impacts of development 

around the airport. There isn’t any land left, and the only way you 

can go is vertical and around the airport. That is not such a great 

idea. 

37 

So I bring that up in the sense not to go after Los Angeles. I 

guess we can debate what happened to the management a few 

years ago at Los Angeles, and as was pointed out, we are not here 

to bash Los Angeles. I think they recognize they want to move in 

a different direction now, and I hope that is the case because it is 

not just good for Ontario, it is good for L.A. I think that point has 

been made. 

This economy in this region has probably been more impacted for 

a number of reasons, probably the construction industry—I am 

sure John could get into that—but more than probably any region 

in the United States as far as raw number of jobs. But that wasn’t 

the reason why the traffic flows went down. I think everybody kind 

of knows that, and like I said earlier, we are not going to re-litigate 

it. But I hope we can move to an agreement, and I congratulate the 

mayor of L.A. and the members of the City Council of Los Angeles 

for recognizing that truth, that we need to get this back to Ontario 

to compete on a level playing ground and to get this region growing 

again. 

With that, Mr. Chairman, unless Lucy or anybody wants to say 

anything—I know you all very well. 

Mr. PERRY. I would like to just interject that the co-author—— 

Mr. CALVERT. You didn’t know my granddad. 

Mr. PERRY. Pardon? 

Mr. CALVERT. You didn’t know my granddad. 

Mr. PERRY. I did not. The co-author of the motion introduced by 

Mr. Zine is Mr. Bill Rosendahl, who represents the area surrounding LAX, particularly Westchester, Playa del Ray, and all of 

the areas along the coast that border LAX. So his interest is, as 

everyone has been discussing here, benefitting Los Angeles. This 

whole process can be and, I believe, will be mutually beneficial for 

everyone involved. 

Mr. PETRI. Great. John, do you want to say anything else about 

the housing industry? Are we coming back, by the way? 

Mr. HUSING. We finally are starting to see very tiny increases in 

price. 

Mr. PETRI. In other words, we bottomed out. We bottomed out. 

Mr. HUSING. We bottomed out. 

Mr. PETRI. We are on the way back. Lucy pointed out, Orange 

County is always on top. 

Ms. DUNN. But we need everyone around us to succeed as well. 

We can’t be an island. 

I just wanted to thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and committee members, for coming here, highlighting this issue. It is so 

important, and I am really very, very thrilled that you are here 

today. 

Mr. PETRI. Thank you. 

Mr. HUSING. If I might just add a personal comment also is you 

might have detected a little hostility in my thinking on this. I can’t 

tell you how pleased I am to see L.A. coming to the table with Ontario to try to put this to bed. This is incredibly important, and I 

am glad that is beginning to happen now. 

Mr. MILLER. Would the gentleman yield for a second? 

Mr. PETRI. Yes. 

38 

Mr. MILLER. I would like to again state that I want to thank the 

director of LAWA. We had a very positive meeting, and the sentiment was very positive moving forward. With the concurrence of 

the mayor’s office last week, we had the same type of conversation, 

and they are anxious to do it the proper way. But I thank you for 

your statement because I think you are trying to do the right thing. 

Thank you very much. 

Mr. BACA. If you can yield to me before the chairman closes? 

Mr. MILLER. I would be happy to yield. 

Mr. BACA. Thank you very much. I just basically want to thank 

the chairman for coming and having this hearing, and I want to 

thank Congressman Gary Miller for taking the lead and bringing 

us all together, and Ken Calvert and myself for being here and 

hearing the witnesses and the testimony. I think it enlightened us. 

It opened our ears and our eyes in terms of how we can all collaborate and work together and make a positive thing that would help 

our region and our area. 

So again, thank you very much, Mr. Chair, for taking the time, 

for being here. Hopefully you have a pleasant flight flying back either tonight or tomorrow, and you make every kind of connection, 

because it is important for you to be back with your family as well. 

And again, thank you very much, Congressman Miller, for having 

this hearing here today. 

Mr. PETRI. I am flying out of Ontario, and I am hoping it is not 

canceled. I am sure it won’t be. 

[Laughter.] 

Ms. DUNN. I will be happy to drive you to John Wayne. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. PETRI. I would like to join in thanking the panel for your testimony, thanking my colleagues for participating, particularly Representative Miller for inviting our committee to come to Ontario 

and to learn more about this very important problem. 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. PETRI. And hopefully being a catalyst in getting it favorably 

resolved, and the city of Ontario for their hospitality and helping 

with all of these arrangements. 

With that, this hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:34 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

39 


Insert offset folio 8 here 76150.008

I want to · start by thanking Chainnan Petri (pEE-try) for calling today's 

hearing and my House colleagues and today's witnesses for taking time out their 

schedules to come together to discuss a very important issue to this region. 

Ontario Airport has been an important piece of southern California's air 

transportation infrastructure since nearly the dawn of the aviation industry. As the 

Inland Empire has grown, the importance of Ontario Airport to this region's 

economy has only increased. Today the airport supports over 7,600 direct jobs and 

is an economic engine supporting over 55,000 indirect jobs throughout the Inland 

Empire 

However, in recent years, Ontario Airport's status as a medium sized fullservice regional airport has begun to slip and many have begun to fear that under 

current conditions Ontario Airport is failing to meet its full potential. Estimates 

show that from 2007 to the end of2012 Ontario Airport is on pace to record a 

41.2% reduction in passenger travel over the period. This reduction in 

enplanements has correlated strongly with higher than average fares at Ontario 

Airport and a reduction in air service at the airport. As a result of these factors 

fewer travelers are landing in Ontario and spending their tourism dollars around 

the Inland Empire and more residents of our region are forced to take to our 

already congested roads and travel great distances to access affordable air service. 

F or a region that would be our nation's 26th largest state, this simply should not be. 
40 


Insert offset folio 9 here 76150.009

I, like many in this room, believe that Ontario Airport should be returned to 

local control. Local control will provide airport management and oversight that is 

ideally suited to address our region's specific challenges, capitalize on our 

strengths and return Ontario Airport to its status one of the nation's premier 

regional airports. 

I am heartened by the progress the region has made in forming the Ontario 

International Airport Authority and I support the ongoing talks between the City of 

Ontario and the City of Los Angeles as they work to find a path toward transferring 

title and governance of Ontario Airport to the new authority and back to local 

control. I look forward to today's testimony and to working with Chairman Petri, 

my colleagues in Southern California's Congressional delegation and regional 

stakeholders to rejuvenate Ontario Airport. 
41 


Insert offset folio 10 here 76150.010

Testimony before tbe 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION 

OF THE U.S. HOUSE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION 

AND INFRASTRUCTURE 

Regarding 

"Economic Impact and Future Management of Ontario International Airport" 

September 27, 2012 

Alan D. Wapner 

Council Member 

City of Ontario, California 

and 

Board Member 

Ontario International Airport Authol'ity 

City of Ontario 

City Hall 

303 East liB" Street 

Ontario, CA 91764 

(909) 395-2011 

awapner@ci.ontario.ca.us 
42 


Insert offset folio 11 here 76150.011

Testimony of Alan D. Wapner 

Page 2 

Testimony of Alan D. Wapner, City Council Member, City of Ontario 

and Board Member, Ontario Intemational Airpolt Authority 

Before the Subcommittee on Aviation 

Of the U.S. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

Regarding 

"Economic Impact and Future Management of Ontario Intemational Airport" 

at Ontario, California 

September 27, 2012 

Members of the Subcommittee, on behalf of the City of Ontario and the newly formed Ontario 

International Airport Authority, welcome to Ontario. My name is Alan D. Wapner. I am a City 

Council Membel' for the City of Ontario and a Board Member of the new Ontario International 

Airp0l1 Authority. Thank you for holding this field hearing on this matter of critical impOltance 

to the Inland Empire and all of Southern California. 

As a result of the declining conditions at Ontario International AirpOli and thc rcgion's concerns 

about thc airport's ability to sustain commercial ail' traffic in the future, the Ontario City Council 

took action last month and formed the Ontario Intel'llational AirpOlt Authority. This new 

authority was fonned through a Joint Powers Agreement between the City of Ontario and the 

County of San Bernardino. 

Over the past two years, a compelling case has been made for why the City of Los Angeles 

should relinquish control of Ontario International Airport. 

As I wrote in an Op-Ed in the Los Angeles Times, there are many reasons for Ontario to be 

placed undcr local control as governed by a multi-jurisdictional airport authority; 

1. It allows Los Angeles World Airports, LA WA, to fOC\lS its energy and time on 

LAX for the benefit of the region's economy as a whole. 

2. It promotes regionalization by returning Ontal'io International Airport to local 

control, which is conducivc to the development of robust rcgional airp0l1s. 

3. It ensures all of Southern California, including Los Angeles, will have sufficient 

and affordable airport capacity. Without adequate capacity, airlines will be forced 

to land elsewhere. 

This transfer will also protect the significant financial investment made into the Ontario Airport 

by the Federal govel'llment and the City of Ontario. Hundreds of millions of dollars to enhance 

Ontario AirpOlt ground access and associated infrastructure have been accomplished through our 

fidueiary partnership. These multi-million dollar projects include grade separations, street 

widenings, interchange upgrades, radio system enhancements, landscaping, land use planning 

studies, water treatment systems, and noise mitigation programs. Inability of the Ontario 

Airport to support commercial ail' traffic will not only undennine the region's air traffie strategy, 
43 


Insert offset folio 12 here 76150.012

Testimony of Alan D. Wapner 

Page 3 

but will inevitably undennine federal, state and locally funded infrastructure investments 

designed to support Ontario Airport into the foreseeable future. 

To prevent this disaster, just last week, Los Angeles City Administrative Officer Miguel Santana 

released his report on options for future management and control of ONT. We embrace his 

recommendation that the CAO facilitate negotiations between LAW A, the City of Ontario, the 

County of San Bemardino, the Ontario International Airport Authority, and other primary 

stakeholders to determine the most effective and appropriate ownership and management 

alternative for the airport. All of Southern California, including Los Angeles, will be better 

served by the transfer of Ontario Airport to the Ontario Intemational Airport Authority. 

It is our intent that negotiations with the City of Los Angeles result in a transfer that is a win for 

all parties and is structured in accordance with FAA policies. By transferring sponsorship of 

Ontario International Airport from LA WA to the Ontario International Airport Authority, the 

airport will have a sponsor that has a vested interest in its success and is accountable for 

providing long-term airpolt capacity for the benefit ofthe entire region, including the City of Los 

Angeles. 

I would like to take this oPPOltunity to express my appreciation to Los Angeles City Council 

Members Dennis Zine, Bill Rosendahl and Paul Kmetz for theil' Motion of March 20, 2012. 

Their motion resulted in the Los Angeles City Administrative Officer's report which has given 

all patties the direction and clarity to move ahead with the airport's transfer. I know I speak for 

the entire Board of the Ontario Intcl11ational Airport Authority when I say we are fully 

committed to restoring Ontario International AirpOlt as the region's most important economic 

engine capable of meeting the long-term demand for air travel in Southel11 Califol11ia. 

Thank you. 

### 
44 


Insert offset folio 13 here 76150.013

Testimony before the 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION 

OF THE U.S. HOUSE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION 

AND INFRASTRUCTURE 

Regarding 

"Economic Impact and Future Management of Ontario International Airport" 

September 27, 2012 

Gary Ovitt 

Fourth District S\lpervisor 

County of San Bernardino 

and 

Board Member 

Ontario International Airport Authority 

San Bernardino County Government Center 

385 N. Arrowhead Ave, Fifth Floor 

San Bel'llardino, CA 92415 

(909) 387-4866 

govitt@sbcounty.gov 
45 


Insert offset folio 14 here 76150.014

Testimony of Gary Ovitt 

Page 2 

Testimony of Gary Ovitt, Fourth District Supervisor, County of San Bernardino 

and Board Member, Ontario International Airport Authority 

Before the Subcommittee on Aviation 

Of the U.S. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

Regarding 

"Economic Impact and Future Management of Ontario International Airport" 

at Ontario, California 

September 27, 2012 

Good afternoon, Members of the Subcommittee, and welcome to Ontario, San Bernardino 

County and the Inland Empire. My name is Gary Ovitt. I am the Fourth District Supervisor for 

the County of San Bemardino, Board Member of the Ontario International Airport Authority and 

a former Mayor of the City of Ontario. 

The Ontario International Airport Authority was created in August of 2012 by a Joint Powers 

Agreement between the City of Ontario and the County of San Bernardino. Its purpose is to 

oversee the orderly transfer of the airport from the City of Los Angeles, and provide the 

governance fonhe on-going operations of the airport. 

Under terms of the Joint Powers Agreement, I joined Ontario City Council Members Alan D. 

Wapner and Jim W. Bowman on the Ontario International Airport Auth0l1ty Board as my district 

includes the cities of Ontario, Chino, Chino Hills, Montclair and a portion of Upland. We are 

very fOltunate that City of Riverside Mayor Ronald O. Loveridge and President and CEO of the 

Orange County Business Council Lucy Dunn, have agreed to join the Authority as Board 

Members representing the region. 

Under the 2005 StipUlated Settlement Agreement signed by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, a 

champion of airport regionalization, growth of passenger and air cargo activity is a requirement. 

That historic Settlement Agreement cleared the way for the billions of dollars in construction 

projects now underway at LAX. 

The City of Los Angeles can show its commitment to airport regionalization and cncourage the 

growth of Ontario International AirpOlt by transferring Ontario International Airport to those 

who have a vested interest in its success. Local control has proven to be more conducive to 

developing robust regional airports than trying to manage them fi'om a city many miles away in a 

diffel'ent county. 
46 


Insert offset folio 15 here 76150.015

Testimony of Gary Ovitt 

Page 3 

Ontario International AirpOlt is of great importance to all of Southern California. It deserves to 

be managed by a multi-jurisdictional agency responsive and accountable to the entire region. I 

believe the Ontario International Airport Authority will help the airport rebound from the neglect 

of recent years while positioning itself for long-term growth consistent with the Regional 

Transportation Plan of the Southern California Association of Govemments, otherwise known as 

SCAG. 

Ontario International Airport does not serve the Inland Empire alone; its catchment area 

encompasses some six (6) million people living in a 25-mile radius of the airport. Thousands of 

air travelers bypass Ontario International AirpOit each day to get the flight schedules and fares 

they seek from surrounding regional airports, increasing the traffic congestion and automotive 

emissions. From my previous roles as President of the Southern California Association of 

Governments, and a fonner County representative on the South Coast Ail' Quality Management 

District, I can attest to the need of a successful regional airport to benefit the overall 

transpOltation needs of the region. 

One of the earliest proponents of a change in control of Ontario Intemational Airport came from 

the SCAG Regional Council. Comprised of 84 elected officials representing 189 cities, six 

counties and six County Transportation Commissions, SCAG concluded that transferring Ontario 

International Airport to local control is in the best interest of the City of Los Angeles and the 

Southern California region. 

In a resolution unanimously adopted on September 2, 2010, SCAG said the change of airport 

sponsorship will enable the City of Los Angeles to focus its attention on modernizing LAX and 

restoring passenger traffic to pre- September eleven levels - essential steps to enable LAX 

achieve its full potential as the City of Los Angeles' primary economic engine. By transferring 

control of Ontario International Airport to the Ontario International Airport Authority, SCAG 

noted that Ontario International Airport will operate using the same proven structure as all other 

secondary airports in the region. Each of these airports operates as low-cost secondary sites 

under the control of an agency that takes responsibility and is accountable for its performance. 

The San Bernardino Co~mty Board of Supervisors most certainly agrees with SCAG's findings. 

That is why we passed a resolution that Ontario International Airport needs to be managed by a 

regional airport authority. As a critical pieee of our economy, the entire region has come together 

in support of the transfer of Ontario International Airport to the Ontario International Airp011 

Authority, 

We greatly appreciate the interest, concel'll and support of this committee. 

Thank you, 
47 


Insert offset folio 16 here 76150.016

United States House of Representatives 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

Subcommittee of Aviation 

Written Testimony of Los Angeles City Administrative Officer Miguel Santana 

September 27,2012 

Good afternoon and thank you members of the Subcommittee for the opportunity to 

address your committee. The focus on revitalizing LNOntario International Airport 

(Airport) is an important issue in the region. 

The CAO's role in this process is to analyze and provide recommendations to the City 

Council and the Mayor. The CAO does not manage nor does Los Angeles World 

Airports (LAWA) report to the CAO. LAWA reports to a separate Board of 

Commissioners that are appointed by the Mayor. Any proposed transaction would need 

approval by the Board of Airport Commissioners and affirmed by the Los Angeles City 

Council. 

My office was instructed by the Los Angeles City Council to evaluate the City of 

Ontario's proposal and help identify and analyze the other potential options for future 

ownership, operation, and management of the Airport. To assist in the review, my office 

contracted with Acacia Financial Group, along with other consultants to help analyze the 

potential options. It is our goal to facilitate and continue the dialogue with Ontario and its 

partners in discussing a long term strategy for the Airport. 

City of Ontario Proposal for Transitioning Airport to Local Control 

Over the last few years, LAWA has taken numerous steps to create operational 

efficiencies at the Airport and reduce operating costs in an effort to increase passenger 

traffic and promote new air service. These steps include reducing staffing levels by 41 

percent from 2007 to 2012, consolidating shuttle bus and parking operations, retaining a 

new marketing manager and reducing operating costs. 

However, even though LAWA has made progress in improving operations and curtailing 

costs, an acquisition and transfer of the Airport back to the City of Ontario and/or the 

Ontario International Airport Authority has considerable merit. 

To that end, the City of Ontario proposed in their December 14, 2011 letter to the 

LAWA. that the operations and fee title to the Airport be transferred from the City of Los 

Angeles to the City of Ontario. The primary terms of the transfer include: 

• Paying to the City of Los Angeles' General Fund a $50 million Transaction 

Payment, unrelated to the Airport's valuation to defray the City's costs of 

transferring the Airport back to Ontario 
48 


Insert offset folio 17 here 76150.017

Subcommittee on Aviation 

Testimony of Miguel Santana 

• Assuming, or retiring, approximately $71 million in existing bond debt and any 

other LAfONT-related financial obligations, including indemnification of any and 

all liability pertaining to those obligations 

• Paying LAWA in years when the Cost-Per-Enplaned-Passenger (CPE) to 

airlines operating at LAfONT is $5.00 or less, up to one-third of annual LA/ONT 

PFC collections up to a cumulative amount equal to the amount of LAX PFC 

collections contributed to capital proJects at LAfONT (estimated by Ontario to be 

$125 million) 

• Entering into an Employee Protection and Transition Services Agreement to 

protect existing LAWA employees, Including their pension and retirement 

benefits and obligations, for a minimum period 

• Refraining from imposing any operating restrictions, caps, curfews, aircraft type 

bans on, and any other barriers to, future growth at the Airport 

• Maintaining all current operating covenants for the Airport, as well as terminating 

or revising the original 1967 JPA 

City of Ontario's Proposed "Transaction Payment" 

The $50 million Transaction Payment to the City of Los Angeles' General Fund is meant 

by Ontario to be a reimbursement of the City's costs for transferring the Airport; 

however, based on my conversation with the FAA, such a payment appears to be 

viewed by the FAA as a potential revenue diversion under federal aviation law. 

The FAA regulations define airport revenue as any revenue that the sponsor (owner) 

derives from the use or sale of airport property. As a consequence of the FAA's 

definition of airport revenue, and upon a review of the proposed Transaction Payment, 

our City Attorney is of the opinion that payment to the City's General Fund would likely 

violate the FAA revenue use diversion rules and conflict with the City Charter. Thus, 

given the likelihood that the proposed Transaction Payment would be viewed by the 

FAA as an unlawful diversion of airport revenue-unless paid directly to LAWA, we do 

not recommend that the City of Ontario's proposed Transaction Payment to the City of 

Los Angeles' General Fund be considered. 

LA/ONTARIO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT OWNERSHIP/MANAGEMENT OPTIONS 

While we do not recommend accepting the offer made by Ontario, we did explore and 

analyze other alternatives for improved management and operation of the Airport. We 

considered four such alternatives. 

2 
49 


Insert offset folio 18 here 76150.018

Subcommittee on Aviation 

Testimony of Miguel Santana 

Alternative 1: No Transfer or Acquisition by Another Entity 

The status quo continues with LAWA retaining ownership and management of the 

Airport. While this option would continue LAWA's ownership, management, and 

operation of the Airport, improvements to the current operations could be made 

including: (a) continuing the cost cutting measures for maintenance and operations; (b) 

making optimal use of the terminals by shifting certain airlines' exclusive use premises 

to reduce space utilization; (c) automating the parking operations; (d) examining both 

parking lot shuttle bus operations and the in-line baggage handling and screening 

maintenance for efficiencies; (e) emphasizing direct marketing to both the airline 

industry and potential passengers; and (f) and other cost saving or revenue proposals. 

Alternative 2: Transfer of LA/Ontario International Airport to the City of Ontario 

This option is similar to the City of Ontario's December 2011 proposal to the City, 

except that the transfer would be to Ontario and the recently established Ontario 

International Airport Authority (OIAA). Here again, provisions would have to be made for 

defeasing LAWA's bond indebtedness, repaying LAWA for approximately $128 million 

in LAX PFCs, protecting the current LAWA employees servicing the Airport and the City 

of Ontario and/or the OIAA obtaining an Airport Operating Certificate from the FAA. 

Alternative 3: Alternative Management Model or Privatization 

The sale or lease of the Airport, or part of its operations, to a private firm using the 

FAA's Privatization Pilot Program is possible. A Regional Airport Authority could also be 

used or developed that could partner with the private sector using a third-party 

management contract to manage Airport operations. Any airport privatization option 

would include: (1) executing a long-term lease with a private operator/lessee with the 

possibility of up-front payments to LAWA; (2) ongoing lease payments to LAWA; (3) the 

need to defease all outstanding Airport-related debt and existing financial obligations; 

and (4) the need to revise the Airport Use and Lease Agreement with the resident 

airlines. 

Alternative 4: Acquisition of LA/Ontario International Airport by the City of 

Ontario, the Ontario International Airport Authority, or a Separate Party. 

Acquisition of a commercial airport by another municipal agency is allowable under FAA 

regulations providing that FAA approval is obtained and the proceeds go to LAWA as 

airport revenue used to benefit the City's airport system. 

This alternative would provide for the new owner to (1) obtain an FAA Airport Operating 

Certificate; (2) compensate LAWA financially for the value of the airport, as well as the 

costs for transition to a new owner; (3) defease all outstanding Airport debt and assume 

existing financial obligations; (4) execute an employee protection agreement for a 

3 
50 


Insert offset folio 19 here 76150.019

Subcommittee on Aviation 

Testimony of Miguel Santana 

minimum period; (5) agree to refrain from imposing operating restrictions, caps, 

curfews, bans on aircraft types, or any barriers to growth; (6) dispose of any fund 

balances held by the Airport; (7) assume responsibility for outstanding grant 

assurances; and (8) assume responsibility for the airline Use and Lease Agreement 

(which would also require the consent of the airlines). 

Over the years, LAWA has invested over $560 million in Airport improvements paid from 

FAA grants, PFCs collected from passengers at LAX, issuance of Airport Revenue 

Bonds, PFCs collected from passengers at the Airport and other Airport revenue. Many 

of the above considerations were acknowledged and agreed to by the City of Ontario in 

its December 2011 conceptual proposal. 

As part of any acquisition of the Airport, consideration must be given to the $70.6 million 

bond defeasance, $128 million repayment of the LAX PFCs and the costs of any City 

employee protection and compensation program arising from a transaction. In addition, 

consideration should be given to the Airport's land value and the potential for future 

growth. LAWA's own consultant provided an valuation that included a range with the 

upper end of the range at over several hundred million dollars. The final value will be 

determined through negotiations between the parties but should not be less than the fair 

and reasonable recovery of LAWA's investment. 

THE PATH FORWARD 

My office recommends that the City of Los Angeles and LAWA explore a potential 

acquisition (Alternative 4) by the City of Ontario and/or the Ontario International Airport 

Authority of the Airport, subject to the required FAA approvals. My office recommends 

that the City shOUld bring together the City of Ontario, County of San Bernardino, 

Ontario International Airport Authority (OIM), and other primary stakeholders to discuss 

common goals in an effort to increase economic activity across the region. All 

participants could potentially achieve their goals and objectives by consummating a 

transaction with the City of Ontario and/or the OIM, and by providing certain financial 

and operational benefits to LAWA to enhance needed capital infrastructure at LAX. 

The City Council's Trade, Commence and Tourism Committee heard our Ontario Airport 

report on Tuesday, September 25, 2012. At the time of drafting this testimony, we 

expected the Committee to approve our recommendations and send the report to the 

full Council for adoption. As part of this process, my office proposed that the Board of 

Airport Commissioners adopt several prinCiples to assist with analyzing and pursuing 

alternative Airport management and governance structures including: 

• To the greatest extent possible, avoid or mitigate any disruption of service at the 

Airport 

• The Airport must continue to be operated as a commercial airport 

• The Airport shall be operated in the most efficient manner possible 

4 
51 


Insert offset folio 20 here 76150.020

Subcommittee on Aviation 

Testimony of Miguel Santana 

• The City and LAWA should receive reasonable compensation in respect to its 

Investment in LAfONT 

• All existing employees shall be treated fairly in accordance with the existing labor 

contracts 

• The City's existing and future General Fund base must be fully protected 

It is the City of Los Angeles' goal to maximize the inherent value and facilitate the 

success of the Airport to benefit the region by considering a different model for the 

management and operation of the Airport. Depending upon the decision to implement 

an alternative management structure, any new ownership, governance, or management 

structure will need to develop a transition plan, timetable, and the concurrence of all 

interested parties. 

Thank you for the opportunity to address your Subcommittee on Aviation. 

5 
52 


Insert offset folio 21 here 76150.021

Testimony before the 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION 

OF THE U.S. HOUSE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION 

AND INFRASTRUCTURE 

Regarding 

"Economic Impact and Future Management of Ontario International Airport" 

September 27, 2012 

Ronald O. Loveridge 

Mayor, City of Rivel'side, California 

and 

Board Member 

Ontario International AirPOlt Authority 

City ofRivel'side 

City Hall 

3900 Main Street 

Riverside, CA 92522 

(951) 826-5551 

rloveridge@rivcl'sideca.gov 
53 


Insert offset folio 22 here 76150.022

Testimony of Ronald O. Loveridge 

Page 2 

Testimony of Ronald O. Loveridge, Mayor of the City of Riverside, California, and Board 

Member, Ontario International Airport Authority 

Before the Subcommittee on Aviation 

Of the U.S. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

Regarding 

"Economic Impact and Future Management of Ontario International Airport" 

at Ontario, Califol'1lia 

September 27, 2012 

Good afternoon members of the Aviation Subcommittee. My name is Ronald O. Loveridge. I 

am the MayoI' of the City of Riverside and a Board Member of the Ontario Intel'1lational AirpOli 

Authority. Thank you for the opportunity to speak in support of transferring Ontario 

International Airport from the Los Angeles World Airports to the new Ontario International 

Airpoli Authority. 

Ontario International Ail'POli is a regional asset serving a large population covering four 

counties. It only makes sense that it be governed by an airport authority with region-wide 

representation and participation. I represent the interests of the tens of thousands of air travelers 

and the 2.2 million residents in Riverside County who have a vested interest in the success of 

Ontario International and the contribution it makes to our regional economy. 

I am excited and honored to join the other Ontario International Airport Authority Board 

Members to work through the transfer of airport sponsorship from the City of Los Angeles. We 

are united in our commitment to the return of Ontario International Airport as a successful and 

integral part of the Southe1'll California airport system. 

In my 33 years of public service as a City of Riverside Council Member beginning in 1979 and 

Mayor since 1994, I have never seen western Riverside County come together to support a cause 

as it has on this transfer issue. 

Overall, more than 125 local govermnents, public agencies, business and civic organizations, and 

elected officials have joined together (0 urge the transfer of Ontario International AirpOlt from 

the City of Los Angeles to a new multi-jurisdictional agency dedicated to the airport's success. 

Every city except one in western Riverside County (total of 13) have joined the City of Riverside 

in supporting the Set ONTario Free campaign. Likewise, the Riverside County Board of 

Supervisors, Inland Empire Economic Partnership, Monday Morning and lnland Action, and 

Greater Riverside Chamber of Commerce have adopted and/or approved the same call. In 

addition, 46 cities in Los Angeles County, San Bernardino County and Orange County have 

taken formal action to join the coalition. 
54 


Insert offset folio 23 here 76150.023

Testimony of Ronald O. Loveridge 

Page 3 

The overwhelming consensus is that Ontario International Airport will be managed, more 

efficiently and more effectively, through the governance structure created by the Ontario 

International Airport Authol'ity. The dramatic, and continuing, loss of passengers explains and 

undcrscores why the City of Los Angeles should not control Ontario International AirpOlt. 

The editorial boards of most m!\ior newspapers in Los Angeles County, San Bernardino County 

and Riverside County considered the issue and have strongly supported transfer of Ontario 

International Airport to local control. SCAG, Southern California Association of Governments, 

has also taken this position. 

After the Riverside City Council unanimously approved a resolution in support of the transfer of 

Ontario International Airport, I wrote a letter to the City of Los Angeles Mayor Antonio 

Villaraigosa. I noted that our region had shared the pain of the recession with other cities across 

California and the nation, including the City of Los Angeles. I added that the economic 

difficulties in the inland region were compounded by the dramatic decrease in air service and 

passenger traffic at Ontario International Airport. TIlese levels have not been seen since the 

1980s1 

I look to Mayor Villaraigosa to do the right thing for all of Southern California, by transfelTing 

Ontario Intel'l1ational Ail'POlt to the Ontario International AirpOlt Authority. This way, all of 

Southern California, including the City of Los Angeles, will have sufficient, sensibly priced, 

airport capacity well into the future. 

In a LA Times alticle (August 20, 2012), Mayor Villaraigosa is quoted as saying, "This 

comprehensive report underscores the irrefutable importance of commercial aviation activity at 

LAX, and indeed throughout the Southern California region, on ow' economic well-being. From 

passenger spending to the enhancement of national and intel'l1ationaJ trade, LAX and our region's 

other airports are uniquely where the action is." It is time for the action to also include the 

Ontario Intel'l1ational Ail·port. 

The City of Riverside and virtually all of Riverside County feel strongly that Ontario 

International Airport needs the full focus and the attention of an airport authority with a vested 

interest in the airport. The economic loss to our region during this period of drastic air service 

reductions is estimated at $500 million al1l1ually and a loss of more than 9,200 jobs. 

It only makes sense that returning Ontario International Airpolt to local control will put the 

airpOlt in the hands of people who are ready to take rcsponsibility, be accountable and assume 

the risk for our region's most vital economic engine. 

With the Ontario International Airpolt Authority as the sponsor, Ontario International Airport 

will be on equal footing with othcr airports in Southern California, making it a competitive 

partner in the airport l'egionalization effort. 
55 


Insert offset folio 24 here 76150.024

Testimony of Ronald O. Loveridge 

Page 4 

As the Riverside Press Enterprise indicated in a recent editorial, local control will eliminate the 

conflict of interest inherent with the City of Los Angeles controlling a competing airport, in 

another jurisdiction, at a time when LAX is rebuilding its own passenger traffic and renewing its 

infrastructure. 

In December, I will be stepping down as Mayol' of the City ofRlverside. That does not mean I 

intend to retire from public service. Indeed, one of the things I am most looking forward to is 

serving as a Board Member of the Ontario International Airport Authority. I will dedicate my 

best efforts to ensuring that Ontario Intemational Airport makes its expected, and important, 

contribution to the regional economy and to providing millions of Southern Californians with a 

convenient airpOlt to meet their travel needs. 

Thank you. 

### 
56 


Insert offset folio 25 here 76150.025

Testimony before the 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION 

OF THE U.S. HOUSE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION 

AND INFRASTRUCTURE 

Regarding 

"Economic Impact and Future Management of Ontario International Airport" 

September 27,2012 

Lucy Dunn 

President and Chief Executive Officer 

Orange County Business Council 

and 

Board Member 

Ontario International Airport Authority 

2 Park Plaza, Suite 100 

Irvine, CA 92614 

(949) 794·7208 

ldunn@ocbc.org 
57 


Insert offset folio 26 here 76150.026

Testimony of Lucy Dunn 

Page 2 

Testimony of Lucy Dunn, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Orange County Business 

Council and Board Member, Ontario International Airport Authority 

Before the Subcommittee on Aviation 

Ofthe U.S. House Committee on TranspOliation and Infi'astructure 

Regarding 

"Economic Impact and Future Management of Ontario International Airpoli" 

at Ontario, California 

September 27, 20 I 2 

Good afternoon Members of the Subcommittee. My name is Lucy Dunn. I am President and 

Chief Executive Officer of Orange County Business Council, and a Board Member of the 

Ontario International Airport Authority. 

Orange County Business Council is a leading advocate for business on important issues locally, 

regionally and nationally. We work to grow Orange County's economy, to preserve a high 

quality of life by promoting economic development countywide, and serve as a unified voice for 

business in America's sixth largest county. 

To understand why the Orange County business community is vitally interested in the future 

success of Ontario International AirpOli, one would only need to drive from anywhere in Orange 

County to LAX. 

Those of us in Orange County recognize that our hometown airport, John Wayne Airport, is 

constrained. Until 2015, the number of passengers is legally capped at 10.8 million per year. 

Even if the cap was to be relaxed or lifted, there is an absolute limit to how much of the growth 

and demand for air service it can accommodate. In addition, due to its physical footprint, John 

Wayne Airport is limited by its single runway for commercial jets. 

For a time, it seemed EI Toro Marine Naval Air Station, in Irvine, might be converted to an 

international airport. However, airpOlt proposals were defeated in two ballot initiatives, and 

eventually the airport opponents prevailed. Ontario International Airport quickly emerged as the 

best long-term solution for unconstrained airport capacity in Southern California to serve the 

large and growiug Southern Califol'llia market. 

If you've had the good fortune to fly in 01' out of Ontario International Airport, you know it is a 

convenient airpOlt with great ground access, great parking, and modern terminals and facilities. 

Forbes named it "Southern California's Best Alternate Airport." Ontario International Airport 
58 


Insert offset folio 27 here 76150.027

Testimony of Lucy Dunn 

Page 3 

offers parallel runways that can accommodate the largest airliners in the world, including the 

Airbus A-380. Ontario International Airport can easily accommodate 12 million annual 

passengers. For residents in northern Orange County, Ontario International Airp0l1 is a 

wonderful choice because it offers the air service and nonstop destinations business travelers 

demand, and is close to home. 

Ontario International Airport is ideally and uniquely situated to serve the needs of business and 

leisure travelers in the four-county region. Additionally, and very imp0l1ant to the business 

community, Ontario handles a significant amount of the region's cargo volume. I am convinced 

under the governance of the Ontario International Airport Authority it will realize its full 

potential, not only as a major international airport, but also as a vital economic engine for the 

region. 

I am pleased and honored to serve as a Board Member of the Ontario International Airport 

Authority. I look forward to working with my fellow Board Members to help Ontario 

International Airport achieve success as an integral part of the Southern California network of 

airports. 

Thank you. 

### 
59 


Insert offset folio 28 here 76150.028

Lucy Dunn 

Orange County Business Council 

PI'esi{ient {tIuf CEO 

Lucy Dunn is President and CEO of Orange County Business Council, where she leads a 

dynamic organization of business members, working with academia and govemment, to ensure 

the county's economic prosperity and high quality of life. 

Before joining the Business Council, Lucy was appointed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger 

and confirmed by the Califomia State Senate in 2004 to serve as Director of the Califomia 

Depaltment of Housing and Community Development. In June 200S, Governor Sehwarzenegger 

appointed her to the California Transportation Commission and in 2012, Governor Jerry Brown 

appointed her to serve a second four year term. She also served as a member ofthe Green 

Building Code Advisory Committee of the California Building and Standards Commission 

developing the nation's first green building standards. She is a member of Orange County's 

working group to develop the county's 10 Year Plan to End Homelessness, and serves as a 

member to a small business advisory committee for AQMD. 

Lucy twice received the California State Legislature "Woman of the Year" in 1997 and in 2009 

for her civic involvement and influence. In 2001, she served as the first woman president in the 

SO"year history of the Building Industry Association of Southem California. She serves on the 

boards of numerous organizations including Southem Califomia Association of Governments' 

GLUE Council, Mobility 21, Association of California Cities-OC, Orange County Taxpayers 

Association and Pacific Symphony. She a co"founder of the state-wide Real Economic 

Association Leadership Coalition, an association of CEO's ofthe state's 19 largest business 

advocacy groups. 

She is the recipient ofnumel'Ous honors and awards. In 2005, she received California Building 

Industry Association's D. Gregg Brown Award for "passionate and effective advocacy on behalf 

of housing." The Orange County Business Joumal honored her with its 2006 "Women in 

Busincss" award, and in 2007, she received the prestigious "Vision and Visionaries" Award from 

her alma mater, Califomia State University, Fullerton. In 200S, she received the Women in 

Transportation Seminar"OC Chapter "Woman of the Year" award for advancing women in 

transportation and for leadership in renewal of Orange County's MeaslU'e M for transportation. 

She has been twice named as one ofOC Metro's "20 Women to Watch." In2011, she received 

SCAG's Private Sector Partner of the year, and as "Person of the Year" by the California 

Transportation Foundation in 2012. 

Lucy is an attorney admitted to practice before the Califomia State Bar, the federal bar and the 

U.S. Supreme Court. She is a director ofa number ofnon"profit 0l'gani7.ations including the 

Lennar Charitable Housing Foundation dedicated to ending homelessness, and founder of the 

Bolsa Chica Conservancy dedicated to advocating for and restoring 1000 acres of wetlands in 

Huntington Beach. She also performs with two professional chamber choral ensembles: 

Meritage and Meistersingers. 

She is the mother oftwo adult sons who reside in San Francisco, one of whom is a San Francisco 

Deputy Sheriff and the other an account manager fol' a major online marketing finn. 
60 


Insert offset folio 29 here 76150.029

COMMlITEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE 

Truth in Testimony Disclosure 

Pursuant to clause 2(g)(5) of House Rule XI, In the case of a witness appearing in a nongovernmental 

capacity, a written statement of proposed testimony shall Include: (1) a currIculum vitae; and (2) a 

dIsclosure of the amount and source (by agency and program) of each Federal grant (or subgrant thereof) 

or contract (or subcontract thereof) received during the current fiscal year or either of the two previous 

fiscal years by the witness or by an entity represented by the witness. Such statements, with appropriate 

redaction to protect the privacy of the witness, shall be made publicly available in electronic form not 

later than one day after the witness appears. 

I (1) Name: 

Lucetta (Lucy) Dmll 

(2) Other than YOUl'self, name of entity you are representing: 

Orange County Business Council and Ontario Joint Powers Authority 

(3) Are you testifying on behalf of an entity othel' than a Government (federal, state, 

local) entity? 

YES xx 

NO 

lfyes, please provide the information requested below and 

attach your curriculum vitae. 

(4) Please list the amount and source (by agency and program) of each Federal 

grant (or subgrant thereot) or contract (or subcontraet thereot) received during the 

current fiscal year or either of the two previous fiscal years by you or by the entity 

you are representing: 

None. 

9·24·12 

Signature Date 
61 


Insert offset folio 30 here 76150.030

September 27,2012 

Honorable Thomas Petri 

Chairman 

U.S. House Subcommittee on Aviation 

2165 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Petri: 

My name is Dennis P. Zine and I have been honored to have served as a Los 

Angeles City Councilman representing the 3rd Council District (San Fernando 

Valley) for the past 11 + years. 

Prior to my service on the Los Angeles City Council, I worked for 33 years as a 

proud member of the Los Angeles Police Department I am a lifelong Angeleno 

and consider myself to be intimately familiar with the people and communities 

and I have seen the enormous changes, not only in the City, but throughout the 

region over the past several decades. 

In addition to my service on the Los Angeles City Council, I have served on the 

Board of Directors for the Southern California Association of Governments 

(SCAG). the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments (SFV-COG). the 

Independent Cities Association (ICA), the Nationa! League of Cities, and other 

local, state, and federal decision-making bodies. 

As an elected official in the City of Los Angeles, you quickly realize that the 

decisions made throughout the entire region have a direct impact on the quality 

of life for residents in the City of Los Angeles. 

Mr. Chairman, you and the honorable members of the House Subcommittee on 

Aviation already know the history of Ontario International Airport in addition to the 
62 


Insert offset folio 31 here 76150.031

current governance structure, so I won't take your time to rehash that 

information. 

My message to you today is to offer you my insight as a member of the Los 

Angeles City Council and my firsthand experiences and observations of the 

current situation at Ontario Airport. 

The Greater Los Angeles area is reliant upon a system of commercial airports for 

travel to and from the region. These airports include Los Angeles International 

Airport, Burbank Airport, Long Beach Airport, John Wayne/Orange County 

Airport, and of course Ontario International Airport. 

In order to provide the best service possible to all of the residents of our region 

and to the traveling public, it is essential that all five of these Airports provide 

quality service, competitive prices, and ample availability of flights to and from 

the region. 

Unfortunately. this has not been the case. 

Since 2007, the total number of annual passengers at Ontario Airport has 

declined by 37%. 

This decline has driven more and more passengers to other airports, most 

notably Los Angeles International, and led to increased congestion on our roads 

and an absolute lack of productivity for travelers who sometimes have to drive for 

hours on Southern California freeways just to take a simple flight to Northern 

California. This should not be the case. 

Last year, I made an unannounced personal visit to Ontario Airport so that I could 

see things firsthand. What I saw was disapPointing. 

I saw a beautiful, modern airport with a complete terminal closed due to lack of 

flights. I saw approximately half of all of the concession stands closed down and 

out of business - including a popular name brand coffee shop - shortly after 

noon on a Tuesday. 

During my visit, I also made an unannounced stop at the Los Angeles World 

Airports (LAWA) executive offices at Ontario Airport to speak with the onsite 

manager. I was shocked to learn that the onsite manager was not in fact onsite 

and that there, at the time at least, was actually a system of shared management 

where two individuals served as general managers for both Ontario Airport and 

Van Nuys Airport on a rotating basis. 

I am a strong believer in local control and the consumer benefits of regional 

competition. Local officials and stakeholders have a 'greater incentive to promote 

and operate Ontario Airport with maximum efficiency. As Ontario Airport grows, 
63 


Insert offset folio 32 here 76150.032

the local economy grows and traffic is relieved on Southern California roads and 

highways. It is astonishing to me and completely counterintuitive that as the 

population in the Inland Empire region has continued to grow. the service and 

availability of flights at Ontario Airport has continued to decline. 

I prepared my written remarks on Friday, September 21. As I prepared my 

remarks I decided to go online to Southwest Airlines to search for flights to 

Sacramento on Monday, September 24 from both Los Angeles International and 

Ontario Airports. I chose the destination (Sacramento) and dates completely at 

random. 

Southwest Airlines offered "Wanna Get Away" rates of $141 for 8 different 

departing flights from LAX to Sacramento on Monday, September 24 and 8 

different return flights also with rates of $141 from Sacramento to LAX the 

following day, September 25. 

However, Southwest Airlines offered no flights at the 'Wanna Get Away" rates to 

or from Ontario to Sacramento for these same dates. 

At the next two fare levels, the "Anytime" and "Business Select" rates, Southwest 

Airlines rates are $9.00 higher from Ontario at the "Anytime" level and the 

"Business Select" level across the board when compared to LAX. 

The bottom line is that a traveler from the Inland Empire can travel roundtrip from 

LAX to Sacramento for $136 cheaper than they can from Ontario on the same 

days, from the same airline. This naturally creates a tremendous incentive for 

these passengers to needlessly add to the congestion on our freeways for a one 

hour flight that they should be able to take right in their own backyard. 

I realize that private airlines set the rates for their flights and local airports only 

have a certain amount of influence over these rates and flight schedules. My 

point, however, remains valid that the current situation is simply not working. 

I have attached a copy of both of the online pricing charts that I obtained from 

southwest.com for these flight comparisons. 

Any deal involving the transferring of Ontario Airport back to local control must 

ensure that the City of Los Angeles and Los Angeles World Airports not be held 

liable for any and all bond indebtedness related to the Airport. If we can come to 

an agreement that does not harm our City or LAWA and includes fair 

compensation for the actual value of the Airport, then my message to you is 

simple and straightforward. I join the Los Angeles Times, the Southern California 

Association of Governments, community groups throughout the City of Los 

Angeles, and many others in saying loud and clear that it is time to Set Ontario 

Free. 
64 


Insert offset folio 33 here 76150.033

In conclusion, I want to thank you Mr. Chairman and the members of the 

committee for taking the time to carefully consider this matter. A vibrant Ontario 

Airport is critical not just for residents of Ontario and the Inland Empire - but for 

the entire region including the City of Los Angeles. I believe that local control of 

Ontario Airport, made under the right circumstances that does not harm the City 

of Los Angeles or the Los Angeles World Airports, is an important first step in reestablishing this Airport as an economic engine in the Inland Empire and provide 

positive benefits to our entire region. 

Thank you once again for your time. 

Sincerely, 

DENNIS P. ZINE 

Los Angeles City Councilman, Third District 
65 


Insert offset folio 34 here 76150.034

,---JJI.-. 

SOIITIIW1iST.(:oM· 

Select Departing Flight: 

Ontario/lA, CA to Sacramento, CA 

ModifyS\l!lrch Additional search Optioo-,; 

Md 31lQtMr t1!ght 

FIrst 2 Bags Fiv Free0. WeIght, sllc & excess lImIts apply. I Guv't taxes &: fee~ MW Included 

...E'!:... J~'-"~!'~~_~~_~2E4P ,,!,I;£. __ ~'-~~_.~~ ~ Try Our LOW Fare Galendar .. 20 21 22 23 25 26 27 28 29 WeldylOO""_"..,, \'om mil !'AI; SAT W# 10'0« 'Uf~rm.r MI SAT 

, 

Anrllrnll~fOundedtJplotheneilrestdcnllt. 

Arrt'lc Roullng Travel 

11R1~ 

(j'-lI:!Hhl 

---,-------.-------

600AM 720AM '" NIHUtop 1:2:0 

71YJAM 9;10AM 8" r--- NOI1!lop 1:20 

! 10.ooAM! 11;15 AM ,,, /to-nstop 

r-

: 1200FM . '''''''' 4<' IIMstajl 1:15 

rI 4:15ft,\ 500FM 15" NaflStap 1:15 

... '" '''''''' .SO nllnslop 1:15 

8l4OflA ... "" ." Nonstop 

Select Returning Flight: 

Sacramento. CA to Ontario/lA, CA 

Alllam$ilrtlfOundeoupt'othenlt3I'Ostdoll:lt. 

Bmdn:~~:e'lI~ 

(')'225 

@>'225 

!D1225 

®IZ25 

DlIp,IIt AnNe f H9httl Routing ~~:I BU$ln:~~:eh:~ i:iow'~''''l ,t,'I:[f,m, 

Bl4SAM ; SWAM aoo 1:15 

8SOAM 10~AM '"' t:15 

; 1tl45AM 1J)OFM 2511 1:13 

2:25PM , .. '" 1473 t:15 0'225 

6~R.t 1Mf'" 850 l!lS 

7SO"" ",,'" 1919 

An."Ul'lle 

$2.09 

€)$209 

®1209 

®'209 

@1209 

Anytime 

$20$; 

0'209 

@'209 

0'209 

w.WI.southwest.com/lJ.lht/S<!~t·lJ.lht.htmUdil<:=O%3A34%3AI3482492B3.772000%3A5545%40CI •.• 

Wannl'l Get Away 

WannllGetAway 

1/1. 
66 


Insert offset folio 35 here 76150.035

1 9!lOfM 10;4$fM 1:15 ~)l209 

Important fare &. Schedule Information 

AU faras and (aNl ranges are subject to' (!lange until putthllsed. 

Flight ontlme perlormaflce statlsttcs: (M be vlewtd by tUckIng OJl the fndMdu~1 flight numbers. 

All fares and fare ranges lISted lire per J,'IersOI'I (or-ejlch way O'f travel. 

Price se'ecled flight{s) 

~Vnav~lIabje~ lndkai:es the rorreslXllldlnu folfe Is unavaJlail!e tor the selected travel datetsl.lfle search did not meet certaIn f3m 

" 

.. ~ BUSINESS SElECf'GPrlority Ooardlflg group. Al·15 I 2,$68 Rapid Rewards@Polnts I fly By® Priority ;~ Lane 1 Premlum Drink (day of travel) i Sllm~H)ay Changes I Fully Refundabre 

TJI"~1> ,u" .. , .. " .. ;> Ute., "" .. V"," " .... " "'jJUVII~" Y"" ~t: .. I\ ....... 11 ..... 'U,ot!;:'" .. !;: .. ~,. '" .,,""" 'I ...... " ..... , .... "" .. v, ... nllY ""I'" "".,.,ou. 

"Tr.wel nme:" represents thl! rotal elapsed lime (or your trip (rom your dl!parture (fiy to yilur final destination Intruding stops, layovers, and time lOfl(j:Cnanges. 

For infaflt, chUd t;Hl), gr~up (10+), and miUtary fares please ca!ll"600"J"flY~SWA (1-8Q:O·415·9792). These far •• are a discount off tha "AnyUme" fare.. Olb$r (ares may be 1o""l'It. 

··Save .$250 with RIght + Hotel~ claim 1$ based on 2011 ilvallable data fOr ave-r3ge Silvlo;s on Jackpot bookings pun:hased 11'1 a buooleQ padcage 'IS potchaslng component'S separately (I.e. a Ia carte). Savings on any given package wlJ[ vary based on the scleded origIn, (ieslltlatton, travel dates, hotel property, length of stay, car rental, and actlvlty tkkets. SavIngs may Mt be 

s\I/tU/lbleOllil!!patkages. 

WWlv.southwost.comllight/Se..,t·lIght.hlmYdi;c=O%3A34%3AI348249183.772000%3A5545%4OCI ••• 2/2 
67 


Insert offset folio 36 here 76150.036

---JIISQIITHWEST.(lQM' 

Select Departing Flight: 

Los Angeles, CA to Sacramento, CA 

ModlfySoarch ®RGundTrJp €>one~Way AddItional Seardt Options 

From: To: 

1::~~::.~'Ang=,,,,,,,,,,,CA:,:,,,:'l.AX=-____ -,J,e(S$=,;,,,,,,--,,,,,,,·· """''''",--";;;,,,,cJ<c..-_ -_ -_ -_.==:=J Md another fl!ght 

First 2 Ba.gs Fly Free®. Weight, Size 80. exooss IIm!ts apply.j Gov't taxes &: fees !lOW In:;luded 

DIJPlO!'t Arrl\l., F(!gMit Ittlutitog Anytime Wanna Ge~ Away 

P.«1i~1 "CO $141 

,,,. No-ns!op €l'200 0'141 

'IS fflHl$top /1)'200 (,')'141 

1---

21,., t!ol'lstop 0'200 0"4' 

... '" ,,."" .... IWl'IStllj) 1:15 0'216 0'200 1&"41 

500fM &.16fM "'" f.;(JMtop 1:15 ; 0'216 I 0>200 /1)'141 

. :T' -,_._--- .--~,- . 

7:1$R>t ... ,,' .., NI>nstoJ) 1:15 ®'216 0'200 ®'141 

800Ft.! 9ASft,t ".. NoMtop 1:15 (;)1200 0'141 

""'R' 1055fM "" N\'Instop 1:15 €l'200 0'141 

L_ .. 

Select Returning Flight: 

Sacramento, CA to Los Angeles, CA 

First 2 Bags Fly Free@-. Welyht, sIze &. excess limits apply.l Gov't laxes a fees now InclUded 

2!:~~-~ .. ~,,-1.£!.'~2E5P ~~r.._~~~..!.~~_ ~nvourl.o'tJFareC9fendar " 21 22 23 24 26 27 28 29 30 ".." ....... , ••• ,,, ... J>IV f1I.l MY $I.Hf NOft 1lJIi v.ro THU nil' :lOS 5tI« 

O"l'lut Anlve Fl/ihtll ltoutln1) Travl,Il 811'$lne,~SeI1!cl: Anytime WannJlGetAw..y (';'tw.e) lime $216 $100 $14:1 

:t.-\:~·'ll~ 

""AM 8t1OAM "" tklnstQP 1:25 €)'216 0'200 0'141 

--"'"""\". 

1M AM 800AIA "" I1o(l510p t:lS 4')'216 "'200 e)l141 

:'---- U'AM '0:25AM we ftollstoP 1:20 €l'216 ®'200 .;y·141 

,-

, 11$5 AM f25511A 10" HQnstQ? t:10 0'216 0'200 @'141 

""''''' ".m , .... Nl>oMoj) 1:20 0'216 0'200 0'141 

www.southwest.com/ijjht/sel!<:t·tlght.htm~di;c=O%3A34%3A1348249283.771000%lA5545%40C1... 1/2 
68 


Insert offset folio 37 here 76150.037

s..10~ 5:JOPM ." Nonstop 1;20 {)'216 0'201} 0'141 

7!)Of'" 8~fM t1onstop l;~O (')S216 @'200 0'141 

i 95SS¥A j 11:!SfM "" Nonstop 1:20 {)'216 (,>1200 0'141 

Price .elected fllght(s) 

Important FIne &. Schedule Inrorl11l'1tIrm 

All fares and fil!rQ rang;es ate subJett to thange untU purclt&seu. 

FHght untlme perfomllmcC statistics caR be viewed by clickIng on the Irn!lvldual mght numbers. 

At! fares and fare ranges Itst".d are per person for each way Of travel. 

Conlinuo 

"Una"lIU!!b~·lndka\(ls the corre~jl()ndlog f;Jf(! Is unavailable fQr the selected travel daw{s), the search did not meet certain farc 

.equlrernenls, or the mght has .. !ready departed. 

~Soltl Out" Indk'.<ltes that Right Is sold O\It for tho- cofretpomllng fare type. 

~]nvand w I Pepart or Return Dates"lnd!cates that ovr system Ci!J'll'\Ot relurn a vaUd itinerary opt/ones} with the search crlterla submitted. ThIs can oc<:ur .... hen fllghts: are sold out 1ft one dirEttion of a roundtrIp search or wIth a same-day roundtrip seafcl1. These IUnnr~r!es may becom$ v(llfd optlons!f you search wIth it d!fferent depart or return date ao%r tor i!I om'! way I1lght If'\.Sread. 

"Tt,)ve:1 TIme" represenG tho total elapsed tJme for your trip fron'! your departure dty to your final destination lndudl(t9: stops, 

layovers, and time zone cnanges. 

for Infant, chUd (2-U), gr<tup (IO+). and military f4res pleaSe call I-BlXH-Fl¥-SWA (1-8()O-43S-9:792), These fitres JUG a 

dlscountofftha "Anytlm~" farer. Othar fares may be loWer. 

"~Save $250 wlUl Rlght + Hotel- ctalm ls based 01'1 2011 avaHable data for average savings- on Jilckpot bookIngs purthas-ed In a 

bundled packa!}e vs purchaSing tomponents separately (I.e. a la carte}, 5avl1\95 M My \liven package wUl vary based nn the 

selected o,lgln, destfMtlon, u"vel dates, holel property, length of stay, tar (enWl. ilnd activity tickets, Savings mal' not be 

;w"Uable Oil <Ill p3(k3ges. 

v.ww.southwest.com/iIJhtj"'I>:NiJht.htm~dtc=O%3A34%3A134B2492B3.772000%3A5545%40Cl .•• 2f2 
69 


Insert offset folio 38 here 76150.038

Economics & Politics, Inc. 961 Creek View Lane 

Redlands, CA 92373 

(909) 307·9444 Phone 

(909) 748·0620 FAX 

john@johnhuslng.com 

www.johnhuslng.com 

Testimony Of Dr. John Husing 

My name is Dr. John Husing. I am a private economist who has studied the economy of San 

Bernardino and Riverside counties, which we call the Inland Empire, since September 1964, a 

total of 48 years. I am also the Chief Economist of the Inland Empire Economic Council, an 

organization dedicated to increasing the prospel'ity of this region. 

At the request of the City of Ontario, I have taken a hard look at contentions about the causes of 

the declinc in passenger traffic and Ontario Intel'llational Airport (ONI). In addition, I have 

estimated the economic impact of that decline on the Inland Empire. First, let me characterize 

the area. In January 2012, the region had 4.29 million people, a number 400,000 larger than 

Oregon and above 24 of the 50 states. The region had 1.3 million jobs going into the recession 

and 1.16 million today. A market of this size needs a strong airp011. The economy is now in 

recovery mode having added an average of 24,400 jobs compared to 2011, all oflhem in the 

private sector. 

At its current pace, ONT will see a -41.2% decline in air passenger traffic from 2007-2012. In 

that time, the Southern Califol'l1ia air service market is down just 6.8%. The steep reduction at 

ONT has cut its market share from 8.0% in 2007 to 5.4% in 201l. 

The -41.2% decline means that 2012 will see 4.24 million air passengers at ONT or essentially 

the same level as in 1985 when Los Angeles acquired the airpolt.. Yet since that time, thc Inland 

Empire has added 2.3 million people to reach 4.29, a gain of 120%. Also since 1986, the inland 

counties have added 585,017 local jobs to reach 1.16 million, a gain of 102% despite the 

recession. From 1986-2010, the number ofInland Empire firms has gone from 38,779 to 65,024, 

a gain of26,245 or 67.7% despite the downturn. 

These facts do not SUPPOlt the notion that the performance of the Inland Empire economy is the 

primary cause of the woeful air passenger traffic levels at ONT. Other factors within the control 

of the airport operator have played a greater role. 

Beyond the low passenger levels, the fact the Inland Empire's ail' passengers must often have to 

travel to LAX for decent air service is putting the region's economy at a severe competitive 

disadvantage. An estimated 1.1 million air passengers are now baving to traverse Southern 

Califol'llia to LAX. That creates a costly burden on families and businesses, not to mention the 

impact of adding millions of vehicle miles traveled on to LA area freeways. Using very 

conservative assumption, I have estimated the combination of ground transportation costs, 

parking costs and time lost in commuting to and from LAX impose an arumal extra cost burden 

of$48,300,311 a year on the Inland Empire's economy. 
70 


Insert offset folio 39 here 76150.039

ONT is one of most expensive airport for airlines to use. This has imposed another cost burden 

on the Inland Empire's economy as airlines increased their prices to compensate. To estimate 

how much, data on flight costs from ONT and LAX were collected using the 38 destinations that 

constituted 75.7% of ONT's market (1,347,861 round trips of 1, 780,655). The base for this 

analysis was the Airline Origin and Destination Survey compiled by Office of Airline 

Information of the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics. Ticket prices for one adult, flying 

coach, round trip, on an any time ticket in 2012 showed that flights cost average 18.1% higher at 

ONT to these destinations compared with LAX. That imposes another $128 million drain on 

the ~n1and Empire's air passengers and its economy. 

For businesses, perhaps the most deleterious impact of ONT's mismanagement has been the loss 

of non-stop flights to major U.S. markets and the extra time it now takes to traveL To estimate 

the lost time, the flight time to ONT's 38 major destinations was estimated and compared to the 

time from LAX. The longer time from ONT was due to the lack of availability of non-stop 

flights that exist at LAX. In comparing the time loss, it was only assumed that more expensive 

direct flights would have been used, if they were available at ONT, if they involved a significant 

time savings for travelers. The range of direct flight usage was put at 7.5% to 16% of potential 

passengers. Using this technique, the hours lost time to inland travelers who would have opted 

for non-stop flights, were they available, was estimated at 419,187 hours. As it would primarily 

be business travelers opting for these more expensive flights, an hourly rate based upon al1l1ual 

salary of $70,000 was assumed even though the area's average income for better paid workers is 

$86,806. The result was a cost of lost time of $17.5 million for inland air passengers and the 

local economy. 

In sum, the cost to Inland Empire air passengers and the costs to its economy is $198.3 million a 

year. This is a very conservative estimate as it does not include the cost to local hotels of the 

loss of conventions and tourism customers. For business leaders, it also does not include the 

time loss of being forced to use a limited flight schedule and then sitting around for hours before 

and after meetings. Importantly, it does not include the multiplier impact of pulling dollars out 

of the region's economy. When those considerations are included, the actual cost to the region 

would be in the $500 million range. 

For what would be America's 261argest state, it only makes sense to have it controlled by a local 

multi-jurisdictional airport authority such as been created in the Ontario International Airport 

Authority. 

Thank you. 
71 


Insert offset folio 40 here 76150.040

Economics & Politics, Inc. 

961 Creek View Lan. 

Redlands, CA 92373 

(909) 307-9444 Phone 

(909) 748-0620 Fax 

john@iohnhllsing.colll 

wWIV.johnhusing.com 

JOHN HUSING, Ph.D. 

Dr John Husing is a research economist who has specialized in 

the study of Southem California's growing economy since 

1964. His M.A. and Ph.D. are from Claremont Graduate University. For decades, he has produced city and county specific 

economic development strategies for Southern California's local governments. He is also a leading authority on the impact 

of the goods movement industry on the region, and in particular 

its role as a provider of upward economic mobility to blue collar workers. He served as the economist reviewing and recommending strategies for the Clean Truck Program at the ports of 

Los Angeles and Long Beach. With his significant understanding of San Bernardino and Riverside counties, he assists the Inland Empire Economic 

Pal1nership as its Chief Economist. In 2006, the Los Angeles Times Magazine listed Dr. 

Husing as one of the 100 most powerful people shaping life in Southern California. 

Dr. Husing's extensive study of the region has led to economic strategies that combine a 

database of statistics with extensive interviews with executives and entrepreneurs to understand the forces shaping Southern California. His firm, Economics & Politics, Inc., 

based in Redlands, has p!'Oduced project specific economic impact studies for transportation and water agencies, housing developers and environmental entities. Today, his prolific knowledge of the region and his lifetime of experiences has him briefing business 

leaders and policy makers throughout California on the economic trends and issues relating to budgets, state initiatives and public policy, His eclectic career has remarkably included managing a Nevada casino, running for Congress in his twenties, teaching college 

and running the world's largest whitewater rafting company. 

Dr. Husing enjoys a less studious life as an adventurer, taking treks into uncharted ten'itories as well as traveling to 56 different countries. He has twice entered the unexplored 

jungles of New Guinea to make first contact with previously undiscovered stone-aged 

tribes. Dr. Husing has traveled throughout most of Africa and his last adventure trip took 

him over the Himalayas f!'Om Nepal into Tibet. A fourth generation Californian, he is an 

amateur genealogist having traced his American heritage back 12 generations to Edward 

Fuller on the Mayflower. 
72 

Æ 


Insert offset folio 41 here 76150.041

COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE 

Truth in Testimony Disclosure 

Pursuant to clause 2(g)(5) of House Rule XI, in the £ase of a wItness appearing In a nongovernmental 

capacity, a written statement of proposed testimony shall Include: (1) a curriculum vitae; and (2) a 

disclosure of the amount and source (by agency and program) of each Federal grant (or subgrsnt thereof) 

or contract (or subcontract thereof) received during the current fiscal year or either of the two previous 

fiscal years by the wItness or by an entlty represented by the witness. Such statements, with appropriate 

redaction to protect the privacy of the wltness, shall be made publicly available In electronic form not 

later than one day after the witness appears. 

I (1) Name: 

John E. Husmg, Ph.D. 

(2) Other than yourself, name of entity you are representing: 

Inland Empire Economic Partnership, City of Ontario 

(3) Are you testifying on behalf of !In entity other thall a Government (federal, state, 

local) entity? YES 

YES If yes, please provide the information requested below and 

attach your curriculum vitae. 

NO 

(4) Please list the amount and SOUl'ce (by agency and program) of each Federal 

grant (or subgrant thereot) or contract (or subcontract thereot) receivcd during the 

currcnt fiscal year or either of the two previous fiscal years by you or by the entity 

you lu-e representing: 

NONE 

Signature 

September 22, 2012 

Date