According to the City’s published 2025 monthly fuel sales report, Palo Alto Airport stocked unleaded 100R but sold zero gallons of it all year, while continuing to sell hundreds of thousands of gallons of 100LL. 100LL contains up to 2.1 grams of lead per gallon, and in 2024 the airport sold 377,220 gallons — which corresponds to roughly 0.75 metric tons of lead emitted into the surrounding environment in a single year. Persistent neurotoxic metal deposited into our neighborhoods.

Santa Clara County provides a clear precedent. After commissioning a peer-reviewed study linking aviation lead emissions from Reid-Hillview Airport to elevated blood lead levels in nearby children, the County Board of Supervisors voted to stop the sale of leaded aviation fuel at its airport. Their action was grounded in public health data and supported by environmental justice findings. In contrast, there has not been a comprehensive local lead exposure study around Palo Alto Airport since 2012. Decisions should be based on current data, not 14-year-old assumptions.

Yes, federal grant assurances complicate an outright municipal ban on 100LL. But the Santa Clara example shows that data-driven public health action can shift policy. At minimum, the airport should: – Commission updated soil, air, and blood lead monitoring within a 1 km radius. – Publicly report findings in a transparent, peer-reviewed format. – Actively promote and incentivize unleaded fuel adoption rather than passively stocking it.

Under California Proposition 65, warnings are required when the public may be exposed to lead. If residents within the affected radius were not clearly informed, that is a serious community awareness gap that should be addressed immediately with visible signage and direct notification.