Residents urge Carlsbad to press county and continue legal action over Palomar Airport jet service

Dozens of Carlsbad residents told the City Council on March 25 that the county’s expansion of commercial jet service at Palomar Airport is disrupting sleep, threatening public health and creating safety risks, and they urged the city to press for enforceable limits or pursue further legal action.

“Palomar is still a general aviation airport, and yet the county is rapidly transforming it into something else,” Cynthia Trevino told the council. “I’m being awakened at 3 a.m. and 4 a.m. by intrusive, sleep-disrupting jets… I’m asking you to continue to stand firm, continue the lawsuit, enforce your land use authority, speak more forcefully on behalf of residents, push for limits and meaningful quiet hour protections.”

Speakers including Linda Parisi, Matt Lahana and others described persistent early-morning departures and measured noise events they said have reached 75–85 decibels at homes near flight paths. “When planes pass overhead, you cannot have your windows open in your house and have a conversation,” Parisi said, adding that the change would be permanent if commercial service continues.

Speakers cited two broad concerns: community health and safety. Anita Arnold and Vicky Syed referenced FAA documents and a local “hot spot” designation, with Syed noting she had circulated FAA hotspot maps and warning that ramp and taxiway changes to accommodate larger jets had reduced visibility and increased runway-incursion risk. “Hot spot 1 is an accident waiting to happen,” Syed said.

Community members asked the council to strengthen enforcement of the voluntary noise-abatement procedures (VNAP)—including pushing the FAA to require departures that go out over the ocean rather than directly over neighborhoods—and to seek injunctive relief if county actions continue while litigation is pending. Miles Erickson, a recent arrival and former airline pilot, described wake-turbulence and runway-margin concerns tied to EMB-175 operations on a short runway.

Council members did not take new formal action on Palomar during the meeting. Several residents asked the council to join or expand lawsuits against carriers and the county; one speaker noted the city previously joined an American Airlines lawsuit via a 3–2 vote and urged councilors to consider joining a separate suit or seeking injunctive relief.

The public comment period framed the issue as an ongoing dispute among residents, county decision-makers and federal regulators, with speakers urging the city to use its land-use authority, continue litigation efforts and press the FAA and county for enforceable quiet hours and more stringent noise-abatement compliance.