PETITION DRIVE COMES UP SHORT CAMPAIGN FOR CURFEW AT BURBANK AIRPORT SET BACK.

Byline: Sylvia L. Oliande Staff Writer

BURBANK - Burbank Airport foes have failed to collect the 5,100 signatures needed to put an initiative on next year's ballot in an effort to secure an overnight curfew and cap on flights, officials said Thursday.

Members of Restore our Airport Rights said they will continue circulating petitions in order to meet a February deadline to place the initiative on a Burbank ballot in 2003. They said their other political campaigning - walking precincts for congressional candidates and stumping for city-sponsored Measure B - kept them preoccupied and hindered the signature drive.

``We'll have to start over to build that momentum two years from now, but I'm sure it's still going to be a hot issue in front of everybody,'' ROAR Chairman Howard Rothenbach said.

ROAR had hoped to get the flight curfew and cap on the April 10 ballot, thinking it might get the support of voters who overwhelming approved the city's Measure B on Nov. 7.

Measure B - approved by 80 percent of Burbank voters - gives residents the right to veto any deal put forth by the city and the Burbank Airport Authority for a relocated terminal. The language does not deal with flight operations.

Airport Commissioner Charles Lombardo, who represents Burbank, said the measure alone should be what guides the future of the terminal plan.

``The residents of Burbank told the council, you come up with a terminal plan and we'll review it, and they left the people that are best equipped to do the job in charge,'' Lombardo said. ``You can't run an airport by an initiative.''

Rothenbach said ROAR will continue to collect signatures because the petition they are currently circulating does not expire until February, six months after it was certified. If they meet that deadline, they will be able to qualify for the next regular election.

This will be ROAR's second attempt at putting an initiative on a ballot. Earlier this year, the group submitted more than the required number of signatures, only to have the city attorney and city clerk reject the petition because of legal problems with the way it was written.

The group submitted a revised petition in August and have been collecting signatures since early September.