NAV CANADA’s Discretionary Runway Choices — The January 2026 Evidence

The Discretionary Paradox: A Forensic Audit of Runway Selection

The Great Misdirection

For decades, institutional rhetoric has relied on a single, unassailable absolute: “The wind dictates the runway.” This serves as a psychological shield, suggesting that aircraft noise is an unchangeable meteorological fact.

The “Smoking Gun”: NAV CANADA kept arrivals on Runway 05 with dangerous 21-knot crosswinds, instead of switching to Runway 33 where the same wind would have produced a safer 21-knot headwind. In other words, they chose to land with crosswind to maximize throughput on the 05/23 system, rather than use the wind to provide safety and respite. This configuration is not wind-limited; it is throughput-limited.

TSB Watchlist 2025: Ottawa’s Own Safety Investigators Say People Are at Risk

In October 2025, the Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) released its latest national Watchlist of unresolved safety hazards. The Board warns that a set of long-standing issues across Canada’s transportation system “continue to put people, property, and the environment at risk.” Toronto Pearson’s runway operations sit directly inside that risk picture.

Source: Transportation Safety Board of Canada, Watchlist news release, 15 October 2025 .

Forensic Log 01: Jan 13 — The Efficiency Bias

AeroView forensic captures from January 13 confirm light, stable winds (7–11 kts). While the North–South field (15L/R) offered optimal headwinds, 100% of arrivals were concentrated on the Westbound corridor to maintain Simultaneous Parallel Approaches.

AeroView capture Jan 13 08:19:57 showing light winds and runway configuration.

Exhibit 1.1: AeroView forensic capture (08:19:57Z).

Cross-verification capture Jan 13 08:19:31 confirming wind conditions.

Exhibit 1.2: Field cross-verification (08:19:31Z).

Exhibit 1.3: WebTrak evidence of sustained Westbound saturation.

Forensic Log 02: Jan 14 — Choosing Risk Over Respite

AeroView capture Jan 14 18:38:22 showing strong crosswinds on runway 05.

Exhibit 2.1: Operational capture (18:38:22Z).

AeroView capture Jan 14 18:38:44 confirming gusts up to 23 knots.

Exhibit 2.2: Cross-verification of 23kt gusts.

Exhibit 2.3: WebTrak record of Runway 05 arrivals despite optimal Runway 33 headwind.

Forensic Log 03: Jan 15 — Localized Atmospheric Bias

Technical monitoring documents a 4-knot wind discrepancy between fields. The North field offered a respite-capable environment (11 kts) that was officially bypassed in ATIS Message Uniform to maintain throughput.

AeroView capture Jan 15 showing North Field winds at 11 knots.

Exhibit 3.1: North Field wind capture (11 kts).

AeroView capture Jan 15 showing South Field winds at 15 knots.

Exhibit 3.2: South Field wind capture (15 kts).

Exhibit 3.3: WebTrak recording of Westbound concentration during localized shifts.

Forensic Log 04: Jan 16 — The Split-Field Contradiction

On January 16, NAV CANADA’s own AeroView tool reported simultaneous, conflicting surface winds: the South Field showed 190° at 7 kts, while the North Field showed 190° at 13 kts at the same time stamp. The system explicitly distinguishes between the two fields, yet operations continued to treat “the wind” as a single, monolithic constraint, accepting crosswind components in order to maximize Westbound arrival throughput over residential corridors. Again, the limitation here is not the wind; it is throughput.

This split-field snapshot demonstrates that localized wind variation is measurable and operationally visible, but selectively ignored when it would justify runway configurations that provide respite to communities.

AeroView South Field tab showing 190 degrees at 7 knots.

Exhibit 4.1: South Field — 190° @ 7 kts (AeroView, 01:15:06Z).

AeroView North Field tab showing 190 degrees at 13 knots.

Exhibit 4.2: North Field — 190° @ 13 kts (AeroView, 01:15:24Z).

Exhibit 4.3: Screen recording toggling between South and North Field, confirming simultaneous split-field winds.

Forensic Log 05: Jan 17 — Split-Field Throughput, Reconfirmed

On January 17, AeroView once again displayed divergent surface winds between the South and North fields at Toronto Pearson. The South Field reported approximately 240° at 13 kts with gusts to 19 kts, while the North Field simultaneously reported approximately 260° at 12 kts with gusts to 18 kts. Despite this clearly differentiated, field-specific wind information, operations continued to treat “the wind” as a single constraint while maintaining Westbound arrival configurations over built-up residential corridors.

This repetition, coming immediately after the January 16 split-field event, confirms that the technology is not the limitation. Controllers and managers can see localized wind variation in real time and still elect configurations that prioritize runway system throughput over community respite and conservative crosswind management.

AeroView South Field screen showing 240 degrees at 13 knots, gusting 19.

Exhibit 5.1: South Field — ~240° @ 13 kts G19 (AeroView, Jan 17).

AeroView North Field screen showing 260 degrees at 12 knots, gusting 18.

Exhibit 5.2: North Field — ~260° @ 12 kts G18 (AeroView, Jan 17).

Exhibit 5.3: Screen recording confirming repeated split-field winds and persistent Westbound configuration on January 17.

What NAV CANADA Could Have Done on January 17 (Safe, Legal Options)

With split-field winds of approximately 240° @ 13 kts G19 (South Field) and 260° @ 12 kts G18 (North Field) and Pearson’s runway headings, at least three safe and legally acceptable configurations were available:

Option 1 – Westbound into-wind on 24L/24R/23. Runways 24L/24R and 23 align closely with 240–260 degrees, providing strong headwind components and only minor crosswind. This is a conservative, fully into-wind choice that does not require tailwinds.
Option 2 – Respite configuration on 33L/33R. With a 260°/12 kt wind, runway 33 benefits from a modest headwind and a moderate crosswind of roughly 11 kts—well inside the typical crosswind limits for transport-category aircraft. This would have shifted traffic to a north–south axis and provided meaningful relief for communities under the Westbound arrival corridor.
Option 3 – Mixed configuration (24s + 33s). Arrivals and departures could have been split between the 24s and 33s, balancing throughput with crosswind management and community respite, while still remaining within safe wind limits.

Notably, in these conditions runways 05/06 would have carried substantial tailwind components and are the least suitable choices. The evidence therefore shows that the limiting factor on January 17 was not the wind or runway availability, but NAV CANADA’s decision to prioritize Westbound system throughput over more conservative and community-protective runway options.

Forensic Log 06: Jan 17–18 — Overnight Abuse of Discretion

Westbound arrivals that began around 06:30 on January 17 continued without interruption into the early hours of January 18. By 07:15Z on January 18 (approximately 02:15 a.m. local time), aircraft were still being routed over the same built-up residential corridors, despite AeroView showing winds that fully supported safer, quieter alternatives.

At that time, NAV CANADA’s South Field display showed winds of approximately 240° at 15 kts, gusting 21 kts. These conditions are ideal for 24L/24R/23 and remain compatible with 33L/33R within typical crosswind limits. The system therefore had multiple safe, legal and meteorologically supported options that could have shifted or reduced noise over sleeping communities. Instead, the same high-throughput Westbound configuration was maintained for more than twenty consecutive hours. This is not a weather constraint; it is a discretionary decision to preserve capacity at the direct expense of public health.

AeroView South Field display at 07:15Z on January 18 showing 240 degrees at 15 knots, gusting 21.

Exhibit 6.1: South Field wind vector — 240° @ 15 kts G21 (AeroView, 07:15Z Jan 18).

AeroView South Field summary table at 07:15Z on January 18 confirming crosswind and headwind components.

Exhibit 6.2: Runway component table — headwind-favourable conditions with minor crosswind (AeroView, 07:15Z Jan 18).

Taken together, these captures show that even after 2:00 a.m., NAV CANADA had multiple safe, legal alternatives but chose to continue saturating the Westbound arrival corridor. The system is not wind-limited; it is throughput-limited.

Forensic Log 07: Jan 18 (Evening) — Continued Discretion After Overnight Abuse

Wind Conditions: AeroView evening captures show stable, operationally manageable winds consistent with multiple runway headings.
Optimal Into-Wind Options: Both the 24s and 33s remained compatible with the observed wind, offering safe, legal alternatives for arrivals.
NAV CANADA Chosen Configuration: Westbound flows continued over the same built-up residential corridors that had already endured more than twenty hours of sustained traffic.
Risk / Operational Impact: Communities experienced compounded exposure: first throughout the night, then again into the evening period when respite should have been restored.
Why This Proves Discretion, Not Wind: After prolonged overnight operations, any wind-compatible runway configuration that shifted traffic away from the Westbound corridor would have reduced harm. The evidence shows that such options were available but ignored in favour of throughput.

AeroView evening capture Jan 18, confirming continued Westbound configuration.

Exhibit 7.1: Evening AeroView snapshot — continued Westbound arrivals on Jan 18.

AeroView evening capture Jan 18, confirming wind conditions compatible with alternative runways.

Exhibit 7.2: Evening wind display — conditions compatible with alternative runway choices.

Even after prolonged overnight operations, NAV CANADA preserved the same Westbound configuration instead of shifting to other safe, legal, wind-supported options. The limitation remained discretionary, not meteorological.

Forensic Log 08: Jan 20 — Repetition Under New Conditions

Wind Conditions: AeroView recorded winds well within normal operating limits, compatible with multiple runway directions.
Optimal Into-Wind Options: The 24s and 33s again presented viable, safe choices; nothing in the observed wind mandated the use of a single Westbound arrival pattern.
NAV CANADA Chosen Configuration: Arrivals were kept on the Westbound system, prolonging exposure along the same residential corridor.
Risk / Operational Impact: Communities under the Westbound path absorbed recurring peak noise despite clear opportunities to distribute or reduce the burden.
Why This Proves Discretion, Not Wind: With multiple runway headings available within safe operational envelopes, the decision to maintain Westbound arrivals reflects a throughput preference, not a wind constraint.

AeroView capture Jan 20 showing wind conditions under which Westbound arrivals were maintained.

Exhibit 8.1: Jan 20 AeroView display — winds compatible with multiple runway options.

The Jan 20 capture shows that the Westbound arrival configuration persisted even when wind conditions supported safer, more community-protective alternatives. Again, the system is not wind-limited; it is throughput-limited.

Forensic Log 09: Jan 21 (Morning) — Split-Field Choice, Not Constraint

Wind Conditions: Morning AeroView screenshots show manageable winds on both North and South fields, with no indication of an extreme or limiting event.
Optimal Into-Wind Options: Runways aligned with the prevailing flow (including 23 and the 24s) were fully compatible with headwind- or low-crosswind operation.
NAV CANADA Chosen Configuration: Arrivals continued to be directed predominantly along the Westbound residential corridor.
Risk / Operational Impact: Morning traffic reinforced a continuous-use pattern over the same communities, rather than using the available flexibility in surface winds to rotate or redistribute impacts.
Why This Proves Discretion, Not Wind: The evidence shows that NAV CANADA had safe, legal options that respected both the wind and community respite, yet selected a configuration that maximized throughput over the already burdened corridor.

AeroView morning capture Jan 21 showing surface winds on one field.

Exhibit 9.1: Jan 21 morning — field wind display compatible with multiple runway configurations.

AeroView morning capture Jan 21 confirming similar wind on the paired field.

Exhibit 9.2: Jan 21 morning — paired field display confirming non-limiting winds.

Together, these captures show that morning winds were fully compatible with several safe, legal runway options. The decision to maintain Westbound arrivals was discretionary, not imposed by the wind.

Forensic Log 10: Jan 21 (Evening) — Pattern Consolidated

Wind Conditions: Evening AeroView displays show routine, non-extreme winds that did not force the use of a single runway system.
Optimal Into-Wind Options: Multiple runway headings—including the 24s and 33s—remained compatible with the observed vector, offering safe alternatives.
NAV CANADA Chosen Configuration: The Westbound arrival configuration persisted into the evening, extending the daily burden on the same communities.
Risk / Operational Impact: By layering evening operations on top of morning and prior-day flows, NAV CANADA created a sustained, avoidable noise and health impact that cannot be attributed to weather.
Why This Proves Discretion, Not Wind: When normal wind conditions are treated as justification for a single, high-throughput pattern—despite multiple safe, legal options—the constraint is institutional choice. The wind is merely cited after the fact.

AeroView evening capture Jan 21 showing continued Westbound configuration.

Exhibit 10.1: Jan 21 evening — AeroView snapshot confirming continued Westbound arrivals.

AeroView evening capture Jan 21 confirming wind still compatible with alternative runways.

Exhibit 10.2: Jan 21 evening — wind display demonstrating that alternatives remained available.

By Jan 21 evening, the chronological record from Jan 13–21 shows a clear pattern: whenever the system could have rotated to other safe, legal, wind-compatible runways, NAV CANADA instead preserved a high-throughput Westbound configuration. The system is not wind-limited; it is discretion-limited.

Forensic Log 11: Jan 25–26 — Operational Efficiency, Not Wind

The late-January AeroView panels add a different kind of proof. Instead of a single snapshot, they show the system cycling through both South Field and North Field tabs with ordinary winds (roughly 9–14 kts, headings between 040° and 260°) and modest crosswinds on every runway. In each view, the runway component table shows that multiple configurations are comfortably within normal limits, yet the on-screen guidance still steers operators toward the same high-throughput systems.

These screens are not recording a storm, a crosswind emergency, or a marginal day. They are documenting a routine, fully-manageable wind regime where the limiting factor is how the system has decided to package “preferred wind” and “operational” status — not what the air is actually doing.

AeroView South Field display with 040 degrees at 13 knots and low crosswind components.

Exhibit 11.1: South Field — 040° @ 13 kts. Crosswind components remain low across the runway set.

AeroView South Field display with 050 degrees at 14 knots.

Exhibit 11.2: South Field — 050° @ 14 kts. Normal, fully manageable winds with multiple safe configurations.

AeroView North Field display with 250 degrees at 9 knots.

Exhibit 11.3: North Field — about 250° @ 9 kts. Again, nothing in the table forces a single configuration.

AeroView South Field display with 260 degrees at 10 knots.

Exhibit 11.4: South Field — roughly 260° @ 10 kts. Multiple runways show safe headwind or minor crosswind; the limiting factor is operational efficiency, not the wind.

Looked at together, these four panels show a wind environment with generous margins and multiple safe options. The constraints are operational efficiencies and internal preferences, not the wind itself.

Use this tool to copy or email a technical brief based on the January 13–26 runway evidence and the later AeroView panels.

Institutional Brief Generator

Generate a technical demand letter for government representatives based on these findings.

To: [Representative Name]
Subject: TECHNICAL BRIEF: Forensic Evidence of Discretionary Runway Choices (Jan 13–26)

Dear Representative,

This technical brief provides updated forensic evidence — including AeroView operational panels from January 13 through January 26 — demonstrating that runway configurations at Toronto Pearson are not dictated by weather, but by internal throughput preferences that maximize capacity over safety and community respite.

Across this entire 14-day period, NAV CANADA repeatedly selected runway systems that increased crosswind exposure and prolonged noise impacts, even when safer, quieter, and fully legal into-wind options were available.

Key Forensic Findings (Jan 13–26):

1. Throughout the period, AeroView recorded routine surface winds between 7 and 14 knots — fully manageable conditions that supported multiple safe and legal runway options (including 24L/24R, 23, and 33L/33R).

2. Despite this, arrivals were consistently concentrated on the high-throughput 05/23 and 24L/24R systems, even when these choices resulted in substantial crosswind components. Headwind-favourable runways were repeatedly ignored.

3. Multiple days documented split-field winds where the North and South Fields exhibited different vectors and speeds at the same timestamp — yet operations continued to treat “the wind” as a single constraint. This proves that localized wind data is visible but not operationally utilized when it would justify respite-providing configurations.

4. On January 14, NAV CANADA maintained 21-knot crosswinds on Runway 05 even though Runway 33 offered a safe 21-knot headwind. This was a deliberate choice to preserve simultaneous parallel arrivals rather than optimize safety or reduce community burden.

5. Overnight from January 17–18, Westbound arrivals continued past 02:00 a.m. despite AeroView showing strong headwind support for the 24s and acceptable crosswind margins for the 33s. This demonstrated a willingness to maintain capacity-driven configurations for more than twenty consecutive hours, even during nighttime quiet hours.

6. On January 18, 20, 21, and again on January 25–26, AeroView screenshots and component tables showed clear headwind-compatible options for the 24s and 33s — yet the preferred runway guidance still favoured the high-throughput systems that saturate built-up residential corridors.

7. The newly captured AeroView panels from January 25–26 further reinforce the pattern: winds from 040° to 260° at 9–14 knots fully supported multiple safe configurations. Yet the system continued to prioritize runway choices that maximize operational efficiency, not ones that align with into-wind safety norms or provide respite to communities.

Taken together, these findings show:

• The system is not wind-limited.  
• Localized field-specific winds are visible but not operationally respected.  
• Safer, quieter configurations were repeatedly available but ignored.  
• Capacity (throughput) consistently outweighs safety margins and public health.

In plain terms: **the constraint is not the wind — it is operational discretion used to preserve throughput.**

Requested Actions:

1. A formal review of NAV CANADA’s decision-making process for runway configuration, including how split-field winds are incorporated into real-time operations.

2. An examination of whether internal guidance permits crosswind-heavy configurations for the purpose of maintaining arrival banks or simultaneous parallel operations.

3. The establishment of enforceable safeguards ensuring that when wind conditions allow it, runway configurations must rotate impacts and provide predictable respite to communities.

I can supply the complete AeroView screenshots, video captures, and detailed timeline upon request.

Sincerely,  
[Your Name]  
[Your Address]  
[City, Province, Postal Code]  
[Email] | [Phone]

<div class="paa-actions-unequal">
          <button type="button" class="paa-btn-copy-unequal" onclick="paaCopyDiscretion()">
            📋 Copy Brief
          </button>
          <button type="button" class="paa-btn-copy-unequal paa-btn-email-unequal" onclick="paaEmailDiscretion()">
            ✉️ Email This Brief
          </button>
          <span id="paa-copy-msg-discretion">Brief copied to clipboard.</span>
        </div>
      </div>
    </div>
  </div>

<div class="paa-gov-box">
      <span class="paa-gov-heading">WHERE TO DIRECT THIS EVIDENCE</span>
      
      <span class="paa-region-title">Federal & Provincial (Policy)</span>
      <div class="paa-link-grid">
        <a class="paa-directory-link" href="https://www.ourcommons.ca/members/en" target="_blank">
          🇨🇦 Find your Federal MP
        </a>
        <a class="paa-directory-link" href="https://www.ola.org/en/members" target="_blank">
          🏛️ Find your Ontario MPP
        </a>
      </div>
      
      <span class="paa-region-title">Toronto</span>
      <div class="paa-link-grid">
        <a class="paa-directory-link" href="https://www.toronto.ca/city-government/council/members-of-council/" target="_blank">
          📍 Toronto City Council
        </a>
      </div>

<span class="paa-region-title">Peel Region</span>
      <div class="paa-link-grid">
        <a class="paa-directory-link" href="https://www.mississauga.ca/council/city-council-members/" target="_blank">
          📍 Mississauga Council
        </a>
        <a class="paa-directory-link" href="https://www.brampton.ca/EN/City-Hall/Council-Office" target="_blank">
          📍 Brampton Council
        </a>
        <a class="paa-directory-link" href="https://www.caledon.ca/en/government/mayor-and-council.aspx" target="_blank">
          📍 Caledon Council
        </a>
      </div>

<span class="paa-region-title">Halton Region</span>
      <div class="paa-link-grid">
        <a class="paa-directory-link" href="https://www.oakville.ca/town-hall/mayor-council-administration/mayor-council/" target="_blank">
          📍 Oakville Council
        </a>
        <a class="paa-directory-link" href="https://www.burlington.ca/en/council-and-city-administration/council-members-and-wards.aspx" target="_blank">
          📍 Burlington Council
        </a>
        <a class="paa-directory-link" href="https://www.milton.ca/en/town-hall/mayor-and-council.aspx" target="_blank">
          📍 Milton Council
        </a>
        <a class="paa-directory-link" href="https://www.haltonhills.ca/en/your-government/elected-officials.aspx" target="_blank">
          📍 Halton Hills Council
        </a>
      </div>

<span class="paa-region-title">York Region</span>
      <div class="paa-link-grid">
        <a class="paa-directory-link" href="https://www.vaughan.ca/council/mayor-and-members-council" target="_blank">
          📍 Vaughan Council
        </a>
        <a class="paa-directory-link" href="https://www.richmondhill.ca/en/mayor-and-council.aspx" target="_blank">
          📍 Richmond Hill Council
        </a>
        <a class="paa-directory-link" href="https://www.markham.ca/about-the-city-of-markham/city-hall/regional-ward-councillors" target="_blank">
          📍 Markham / Thornhill Council
        </a>
        <a class="paa-directory-link" href="https://www.king.ca/your-local-government/council/councillors" target="_blank">
          📍 King Township Council
        </a>
      </div>

<span class="paa-region-title">Durham Region</span>
      <div class="paa-link-grid">
        <a class="paa-directory-link" href="https://www.durham.ca/en/regional-government/council-members.aspx" target="_blank">
          📍 Durham Region Council
        </a>
        <a class="paa-directory-link" href="https://www.pickering.ca/council-city-administration/mayor-and-council/" target="_blank">
          📍 Pickering Council
        </a>
        <a class="paa-directory-link" href="https://www.ajax.ca/en/inside-townhall/mayor-and-council.aspx" target="_blank">
          📍 Ajax Council
        </a>
        <a class="paa-directory-link" href="https://www.whitby.ca/town-hall/mayor-and-council/" target="_blank">
          📍 Whitby Council
        </a>
        <a class="paa-directory-link" href="https://www.oshawa.ca/city-hall/city-council/" target="_blank">
          📍 Oshawa Council
        </a>
        <a class="paa-directory-link" href="https://www.clarington.net/en/town-hall/Mayor-and-Council.aspx" target="_blank">
          📍 Clarington Council
        </a>
        <a class="paa-directory-link" href="https://www.uxbridge.ca/en/your-local-government/council.aspx" target="_blank">
          📍 Uxbridge Council
        </a>
        <a class="paa-directory-link" href="https://www.scugog.ca/council-and-administration/mayor-and-council/" target="_blank">
          📍 Scugog Council
        </a>
        <a class="paa-directory-link" href="https://www.townshipofbrock.ca/municipal-office/mayor-and-council/" target="_blank">
          📍 Brock Council
        </a>
      </div>
    </div>
    
      <div class="paa-gov-box">
      <span class="paa-gov-heading">HEALTH BOARDS & PUBLIC HEALTH UNITS</span>

<span class="paa-region-title">Toronto</span>
      <div class="paa-link-grid">
        
        <a href="https://secure.toronto.ca/pa/decisionBody/44.do" target="_blank">📑 Toronto Board of Health</a>
        <a href="https://www.toronto.ca/community-people/health-wellness-care/health-programs-advice/" target="_blank">🏥 Toronto Public Health – Programs</a>
      </div>

<span class="paa-region-title">Peel Region</span>
      <div class="paa-link-grid">
        <a href="https://peelregion.ca/health/peel-public-health" target="_blank">🏥 Peel Public Health</a>
        <a href="https://www.peelregion.ca/health" target="_blank">📊 Peel Public Health – Health & Family</a>
      </div>

<span class="paa-region-title">York Region</span>
      <div class="paa-link-grid">
        <a href="https://www.york.ca/health" target="_blank">🏥 York Region Public Health</a>
        <a href="https://www.york.ca/york-region/statistics-and-data/york-region-public-health-annual-report" target="_blank">📊 York Public Health – Reports</a>
      </div>

<span class="paa-region-title">Halton Region</span>
      <div class="paa-link-grid">
        <a href="https://www.halton.ca/for-residents/public-health" target="_blank">🏥 Halton Region Public Health</a>
        <a href="https://www.halton.ca/for-residents/immunizations-preventable-disease" target="_blank">📊 Halton Public Health – Programs</a>
      </div>

<span class="paa-region-title">Durham Region</span>
      <div class="paa-link-grid">
        <a href="https://www.durham.ca/en/regional-government/public-health.aspx" target="_blank">🏥 Durham Region Health Department</a>
        <a href="https://www.durham.ca/en/health-and-wellness/health-and-wellness.aspx" target="_blank">📊 Durham Public Health – Health & Wellness</a>
      </div>
    </div>

function paaEmailDiscretion() {
      const ta = document.getElementById('paa-letter-text-discretion');
      if (!ta) return;
      const subject = 'TECHNICAL BRIEF: Forensic Evidence of Discretionary Runway Choices (Jan 13–21 and Subsequent AeroView Panels)';
      const body = ta.value;
      const href = 'mailto:?subject=' + encodeURIComponent(subject) +
                   '&body=' + encodeURIComponent(body);
      window.location.href = href;
    }
  </script>

</div>

<p></p>

<div class="paa-signoff">
  <h3 class="wp-block-heading paa-signoff-title">Pearson Accountability Alliance</h3>
  <p class="paa-signoff-subtext">
    Independent Environmental & Public Health Research for Toronto Pearson Communities.
  </p>
</div>

<footer class="wp-block-template-part"><style>
  /* --- SOPHISTICATED INSTITUTIONAL FOOTER (COMPACT) --- */
  .paa-footer {
    background-color: #151b3d !important; /* PAA Deep Navy */
    border-top: 3px solid #e1d28d; /* Institutional Gold */
    padding: 40px 80px; 
    font-family: Georgia, serif;
    color: #f2f2f2 !important; /* Sophisticated Off-White */
  }

.paa-footer-container {
    max-width: 1400px;
    margin: 0 auto;
    display: flex;
    align-items: center; /* V-Centering balances the logo with the link stack */
    gap: 100px;
  }

/* Fixed Logo Column */
  .paa-footer-logo-col {
    flex: 0 0 450px; /* Locked at 450px */
  }

.paa-footer-logo-img {
    width: 450px !important;
    height: auto;
    display: block;
  }

/* Right Side: Sophisticated Vertical Stack */
  .paa-footer-content-right {
    flex: 1;
    display: flex;
    flex-direction: column;
    justify-content: center;
  }

/* Tightened Navigation Stack */
  .paa-footer-nav-stack {
    display: flex;
    flex-direction: column;
    gap: 18px; /* Further tightened category gap */
    margin-bottom: 15px; /* DRASTICALLY reduced space above separator */
  }

.paa-footer-heading {
    color: #e1d28d !important; /* Institutional Gold */
    font-family: -apple-system, sans-serif;
    font-weight: 700;
    text-transform: uppercase;
    letter-spacing: 0.18em;
    font-size: 0.7rem;
    margin-bottom: 6px; /* Tighter header-to-link space */
    opacity: 0.95;
    border-bottom: 1px solid rgba(225, 210, 141, 0.15);
    padding-bottom: 4px;
    width: fit-content;
  }

.paa-footer-links ul {
    list-style: none;
    padding: 0;
    margin: 0;
    display: flex;
    flex-direction: column;
    gap: 4px; /* Tighter link-to-link space */
  }

.paa-footer-links a {
    color: #f2f2f2 !important; /* Off-White Links */
    text-decoration: none;
    font-size: 0.9rem; 
    font-family: -apple-system, sans-serif;
    transition: all 0.3s ease;
    opacity: 0.85;
  }

.paa-footer-links a:hover {
    color: #e1d28d !important;
    opacity: 1;
    padding-left: 8px;
  }

/* Lower Mission Block - Positioned higher */
  .paa-footer-bottom-block {
    width: 100%;
    margin-top: 0px; 
  }

.paa-footer-separator {
    border: 0;
    border-top: 1px solid rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.2); /* Visible separator line */
    margin-bottom: 15px;
  }

.paa-footer-mission-statement {
    color: #f2f2f2 !important; /* Off-White Text */
    font-size: 0.9rem;
    line-height: 1.6;
    font-style: italic;
    opacity: 0.7;
    max-width: 700px;
  }

/* Mobile Stacking Logic */
  @media (max-width: 1100px) {
    .paa-footer-container {
      flex-direction: column;
      text-align: center;
      gap: 40px;
      padding: 40px 20px;
    }
    .paa-footer-logo-col {
      width: 100%;
      max-width: 450px;
    }
    .paa-footer-heading {
      margin: 0 auto 6px auto;
    }
    .paa-footer-links li {
      justify-content: center;
    }
  }
</style>

<div class="paa-footer-content-right">
      
      <div class="paa-footer-nav-stack">
        
        <div class="paa-footer-links">
          <div class="paa-footer-heading">Research</div>
          <ul>
            <li><a href="https://pearsonaccountabilityalliance.org/site/evidence-hub/">Evidence Hub</a></li>
            <li><a href="https://pearsonaccountabilityalliance.org/site/about/">Public Benefit</a></li>
          </ul>
        </div>

<div class="paa-footer-links">
          <div class="paa-footer-heading">Support</div>
          <ul>
            <li><a href="https://pearsonaccountabilityalliance.org/site/become-a-supporting-member/">Become a Member</a></li>
            <li><a href="https://square.link/u/oZ3JUwww">Direct Donation</a></li>
          </ul>
        </div>

<div class="paa-footer-links">
          <div class="paa-footer-heading">Engagement</div>
          <ul>
            <li><a href="https://pearsonaccountabilityalliance.org/site/contact/">Get in Touch</a></li>
            <li><a href="mailto:membership@pearsonaccountabilityalliance.org">Email the Alliance</a></li>
          </ul>
        </div>

</div>

<div class="paa-footer-bottom-block">
        <hr class="paa-footer-separator">
        <div class="paa-footer-mission-statement">
          Empowering communities through evidence-based research and public education for a quieter, healthier, and more transparent aviation environment.
        </div>
      </div>

</div>
  </div>
</footer>
</footer>

<script src="https://maps.googleapis.com/maps/api/js?key=AIzaSyDZ0B3swYT_lsCnpiGI0QILsP0XHnSawgA&libraries=places"></script>

// Build the final address string when a place is chosen
  function attachPAAAutocomplete() {
    // Make sure Google is ready
    if (typeof google === "undefined" || !google.maps || !google.maps.places) {
      return;
    }

// Find your Street Address field (adjust 'text-1' if your field name changes)
    var input = document.querySelector('input[name="text-1"]');
    if (!input) {
      return;
    }

// Clear any autocomplete listeners another plugin attached
    if (google.maps.event && google.maps.event.clearInstanceListeners) {
      google.maps.event.clearInstanceListeners(input);
    }

// Turn off browser autofill for cleaner behaviour
    input.setAttribute("autocomplete", "off");

// Attach OUR Google Places Autocomplete, CANADA-ONLY
    var autocomplete = new google.maps.places.Autocomplete(input, {
      componentRestrictions: { country: "ca" },  // 🇨🇦 Canada only
      types: ["address"],
      fields: ["address_components"]             // we build the string ourselves
    });

// --- Prevent Enter from submitting the form when typing in fields ---
    var form = input.closest("form");
    // --- STOP FORMINATOR FROM SUBMITTING ON ENTER ---
if (form) {
  form.addEventListener("keydown", function (e) {
    // Prevent Enter from submitting unless user is on the submit button
    const isSubmit =
      e.target.type === "submit" ||
      e.target.tagName.toLowerCase() === "button";

if (e.key === "Enter" && !isSubmit) {
      e.preventDefault();
      return false;
    }
  });
}

// When a place is chosen, build the final address string
    autocomplete.addListener("place_changed", function () {
      var place = autocomplete.getPlace();
      if (!place || !place.address_components) return;

var streetNumber = "";
      var route        = "";
      var city         = "";
      var province     = "";
      var postal       = "";

place.address_components.forEach(function (c) {
        if (c.types.indexOf("street_number") !== -1)            streetNumber = c.long_name;
        if (c.types.indexOf("route") !== -1)                    route        = c.long_name;
        if (c.types.indexOf("locality") !== -1)                 city         = c.long_name;
        if (c.types.indexOf("administrative_area_level_1") !== -1) province  = c.short_name; // ON, QC, etc.
        if (c.types.indexOf("postal_code") !== -1)              postal       = c.long_name;
      });

// Normalize postal to "A1A 1A1"
      if (postal) {
        var cleaned = postal.toUpperCase().replace(/[^A-Z0-9]/g, "");
        if (cleaned.length === 6) {
          postal = cleaned.slice(0, 3) + " " + cleaned.slice(3);
        } else {
          postal = cleaned;
        }
      }

// Build "Street, City, ON M9M 2J4, Canada"
      var streetPart = (streetNumber + " " + route).trim();
      var cityPart   = city;
      var provPost   = ((province || "") + (postal ? " " + postal : "")).trim();

var parts = [];
      if (streetPart) parts.push(streetPart);
      if (cityPart)   parts.push(cityPart);
      if (provPost)   parts.push(provPost);

var finalValue = parts.join(", ") + ", Canada";

// Clean up any double spaces
      finalValue = finalValue.replace(/\s\s+/g, " ");

input.value = finalValue;
    });
  }

// Run our override a few times so we fire AFTER other plugins
  function scheduleOverrides() {
    setTimeout(attachPAAAutocomplete, 500);
    setTimeout(attachPAAAutocomplete, 1500);
    setTimeout(attachPAAAutocomplete, 3000);
  }

// Wait for Google JS, THEN schedule our overrides
  function waitForGoogle() {
    if (typeof google === "undefined" || !google.maps || !google.maps.places) {
      setTimeout(waitForGoogle, 200);
      return;
    }
    scheduleOverrides();
  }

// Start once the DOM is ready
  document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", waitForGoogle);

})();
</script>
</footer></div>
<script type="speculationrules">
{"prefetch":[{"source":"document","where":{"and":[{"href_matches":"/*"},{"not":{"href_matches":["/site/wp-*.php","/site/wp-admin/*","/site/wp-content/uploads/*","/site/wp-content/*","/site/wp-content/plugins/*","/site/wp-content/themes/twentytwentyfive/*","/*\\?(.+)"]}},{"not":{"selector_matches":"a[rel~=\"nofollow\"]"}},{"not":{"selector_matches":".no-prefetch, .no-prefetch a"}}]},"eagerness":"conservative"}]}
</script>
<link rel='stylesheet' id='autocomplete-google-address-css' href='https://pearsonaccountabilityalliance.org/site/wp-content/plugins/autocomplete-google-address/public/css/frontend.css?ver=1.0.0' media='all' />
<script id="wp-block-template-skip-link-js-after">
	( function() {
		var skipLinkTarget = document.querySelector( 'main' ),
			sibling,
			skipLinkTargetID,
			skipLink;

// Early exit if a skip-link target can't be located.
		if ( ! skipLinkTarget ) {
			return;
		}

/*
		 * Get the site wrapper.
		 * The skip-link will be injected in the beginning of it.
		 */
		sibling = document.querySelector( '.wp-site-blocks' );

// Early exit if the root element was not found.
		if ( ! sibling ) {
			return;
		}

// Get the skip-link target's ID, and generate one if it doesn't exist.
		skipLinkTargetID = skipLinkTarget.id;
		if ( ! skipLinkTargetID ) {
			skipLinkTargetID = 'wp--skip-link--target';
			skipLinkTarget.id = skipLinkTargetID;
		}

// Create the skip link.
		skipLink = document.createElement( 'a' );
		skipLink.classList.add( 'skip-link', 'screen-reader-text' );
		skipLink.id = 'wp-skip-link';
		skipLink.href = '#' + skipLinkTargetID;
		skipLink.innerText = 'Skip to content';

// Inject the skip link.
		sibling.parentElement.insertBefore( skipLink, sibling );
	}() );
	
//# sourceURL=wp-block-template-skip-link-js-after
</script>
<script async src="https://maps.googleapis.com/maps/api/js?key=AIzaSyDZ0B3swYT_lsCnpiGI0QILsP0XHnSawgA&libraries=places&language=en_US" id="aga-google-maps-js"></script>
<script src="https://pearsonaccountabilityalliance.org/site/wp-includes/js/jquery/jquery.min.js?ver=3.7.1" id="jquery-core-js"></script>
<script src="https://pearsonaccountabilityalliance.org/site/wp-includes/js/jquery/jquery-migrate.min.js?ver=3.4.1" id="jquery-migrate-js"></script>
<script id="autocomplete-google-address-js-extra">
var aga_form_configs = [{"form_id":1522,"mode":"single_line","main_selector":"input[name=\"text-1\"]","language":"","selectors":[],"component_restrictions":[]}];
//# sourceURL=autocomplete-google-address-js-extra
</script>
<script src="https://pearsonaccountabilityalliance.org/site/wp-content/plugins/autocomplete-google-address/public/js/frontend.js?ver=1.0.0" id="autocomplete-google-address-js"></script>
<script id="wp-emoji-settings" type="application/json">
{"baseUrl":"https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/17.0.2/72x72/","ext":".png","svgUrl":"https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/17.0.2/svg/","svgExt":".svg","source":{"concatemoji":"https://pearsonaccountabilityalliance.org/site/wp-includes/js/wp-emoji-release.min.js?ver=6.9"}}
</script>
<script type="module">
/*! This file is auto-generated */
const a=JSON.parse(document.getElementById("wp-emoji-settings").textContent),o=(window._wpemojiSettings=a,"wpEmojiSettingsSupports"),s=["flag","emoji"];function i(e){try{var t={supportTests:e,timestamp:(new Date).valueOf()};sessionStorage.setItem(o,JSON.stringify(t))}catch(e){}}function c(e,t,n){e.clearRect(0,0,e.canvas.width,e.canvas.height),e.fillText(t,0,0);t=new Uint32Array(e.getImageData(0,0,e.canvas.width,e.canvas.height).data);e.clearRect(0,0,e.canvas.width,e.canvas.height),e.fillText(n,0,0);const a=new Uint32Array(e.getImageData(0,0,e.canvas.width,e.canvas.height).data);return t.every((e,t)=>e===a[t])}function p(e,t){e.clearRect(0,0,e.canvas.width,e.canvas.height),e.fillText(t,0,0);var n=e.getImageData(16,16,1,1);for(let e=0;e<n.data.length;e++)if(0!==n.data[e])return!1;return!0}function u(e,t,n,a){switch(t){case"flag":return n(e,"\ud83c\udff3\ufe0f\u200d\u26a7\ufe0f","\ud83c\udff3\ufe0f\u200b\u26a7\ufe0f")?!1:!n(e,"\ud83c\udde8\ud83c\uddf6","\ud83c\udde8\u200b\ud83c\uddf6")&&!n(e,"\ud83c\udff4\udb40\udc67\udb40\udc62\udb40\udc65\udb40\udc6e\udb40\udc67\udb40\udc7f","\ud83c\udff4\u200b\udb40\udc67\u200b\udb40\udc62\u200b\udb40\udc65\u200b\udb40\udc6e\u200b\udb40\udc67\u200b\udb40\udc7f");case"emoji":return!a(e,"\ud83e\u1fac8")}return!1}function f(e,t,n,a){let r;const o=(r="undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope?new OffscreenCanvas(300,150):document.createElement("canvas")).getContext("2d",{willReadFrequently:!0}),s=(o.textBaseline="top",o.font="600 32px Arial",{});return e.forEach(e=>{s[e]=t(o,e,n,a)}),s}function r(e){var t=document.createElement("script");t.src=e,t.defer=!0,document.head.appendChild(t)}a.supports={everything:!0,everythingExceptFlag:!0},new Promise(t=>{let n=function(){try{var e=JSON.parse(sessionStorage.getItem(o));if("object"==typeof e&&"number"==typeof e.timestamp&&(new Date).valueOf()<e.timestamp+604800&&"object"==typeof e.supportTests)return e.supportTests}catch(e){}return null}();if(!n){if("undefined"!=typeof Worker&&"undefined"!=typeof OffscreenCanvas&&"undefined"!=typeof URL&&URL.createObjectURL&&"undefined"!=typeof Blob)try{var e="postMessage("+f.toString()+"("+[JSON.stringify(s),u.toString(),c.toString(),p.toString()].join(",")+"));",a=new Blob([e],{type:"text/javascript"});const r=new Worker(URL.createObjectURL(a),{name:"wpTestEmojiSupports"});return void(r.onmessage=e=>{i(n=e.data),r.terminate(),t(n)})}catch(e){}i(n=f(s,u,c,p))}t(n)}).then(e=>{for(const n in e)a.supports[n]=e[n],a.supports.everything=a.supports.everything&&a.supports[n],"flag"!==n&&(a.supports.everythingExceptFlag=a.supports.everythingExceptFlag&&a.supports[n]);var t;a.supports.everythingExceptFlag=a.supports.everythingExceptFlag&&!a.supports.flag,a.supports.everything||((t=a.source||{}).concatemoji?r(t.concatemoji):t.wpemoji&&t.twemoji&&(r(t.twemoji),r(t.wpemoji)))});
//# sourceURL=https://pearsonaccountabilityalliance.org/site/wp-includes/js/wp-emoji-loader.min.js
</script>
</body>
</html>