Here are a couple of updates on the on-going claims against the City of SF and SFO regarding runway noise. When the city lost the decision for some of the plaintiffs to recover damages because they have owned their homes since before 1980 (see the original decision here), it appealed that ruling. The appeal wound its way through court and the appeals judge, Judge Novak, sided with the plaintiffs, so seven people are entitled to damages. Finally. Readers who have owned their homes since 1980 should think about joining Round 3.
We wrapped up the second round of complaints in court on January 21st with the original judge, Judge Mazzei, again hearing the cases. Just as that day in court arrived, the city made an appeal to dismiss Round 2 complaints as being the same as Round 1. The plaintiffs presented information indicating that plaintiffs who are continually sustaining damages can continually file complaints in Small Claims court. The judge allowed another two weeks for plaintiffs to present more information. I have done that myself using the fact that I have new data from my personal monitoring station report for Round 2. You can read about that report here. We also presented more information disputing the applicability of the case law that limits damages to pre-1980 owners. We do not have a date for the decision on dismissal nor the base Round 2 decision.
Lastly, under my questioning, the aircraft noise expert witness that the City has been using from the beginning, Steve Alverson from Environmental Sciences Associates, confirmed my suspicion that trees and vegetation don't have any impact in blocking noise. This is interesting because the SFO Community Roundtable is spending time and money to investigate "vegetative attenuation" as I noted here when I went to the last Runway Noise subcommitte meeting. I understand that in sprawling organizations (really two organizations here– the airport and its owner, the City)– things can get lost, but when one expert says something is irrelevant one would hope the other experts would take note and not waste effort investigating it. The time would be much better spent figuring out what else has changed and what they can do about it.
Leave a Reply