In an unexpected move, the City Council on Tuesday killed a controversial proposal to build a federal inspections facility at Long Beach Airport, which would have allowed airlines to fly internationally.

Long Beach began exploring the idea two years ago at the request of JetBlue, the airport’s largest carrier.

City and airport staff had recommended the council move forward with the project Tuesday, but a motion by Councilwoman Stacy Mungo led to an 8-1 vote against it.

Mungo, whose district contains the airport, said the decision “weighed heavily on her heart.”

“After significant deliberation and study, I just don’t think it’s the right time to proceed with an FIS facility,” she said. “The financial investment the city would make in this endeavor does not outweigh the benefits at this time.”

Some 500 community members, who stood on both sides of the issue, attended Tuesday’s meeting to hear and participate in discussion of the proposal, which lasted about four hours. When it became clear the city was going to turn down the proposal, the tone in the room shifted considerably.

Emotions were high, but the night ended on a positive note for the residents in airport-impacted areas who have been critical of the proposal.

Councilwoman Suzie Price, who supported Mungo’s motion, said that although her constituents are not impacted by the jet traffic, concerns from other residents in the city about jeopardizing Long Beach’s noise ordinance were too real to ignore.

The ordinance — handed down after years of litigation brought on by airlines challenging rules that limited commercial flights — exempted Long Beach from a federal aviation law that prevents airports from having to comply with city curfews or noise limits.

In Long Beach, the law sets a sound threshold, imposes a curfew for takeoffs and landings, and limits the number of commercial flight slots to about 50 per day.

“I would hate to be the council that sets something into motion that causes litigation in regards to our noise ordinance,” Price said. “For me, when it comes to the law in this regard, status quo is a good thing, and it’s not a risk that I want to undertake.”

Councilman Al Austin, who represents homeowners who live under the flight path, said he believed passing on the project was a “smart decision” for the community.

“I’m really happy,” resident Carmen Lopez said, through tears. “My house is my life.”

The vote Tuesday hinged on a $347,000 feasibility study conducted last year that found Long Beach could accommodate a federal Customs and Border Protection facility. The report forecasted millions of dollars in economic benefits to the region, but showed a minimal impact to Long Beach.

In a statement released after the meeting, Councilman Roberto Uranga, who also represents a district in the flight path, said the proposal “just did not add up, economically.”

Before asking her colleagues to terminate talks about the project, Mungo asked Airport Director Jess Romo a few financial questions, including one that revealed the airport currently has $110 million in outstanding debt.

The proposed 15,000-square-foot facility had an estimated price tag of $10 million, most of which would have been paid for by JetBlue, Romo explained. The city was willing to commit up to $3 million in passenger fees from the airport toward the project, but the facility itself would not have been a revenue generator. Rather, it would have collected enough to sustain its operations, Romo said.

Mungo said the fee revenues would have been diverted from other “priority” projects, such as upgrading the baggage claim area, improving ground transportation and preserving the historic terminal.

A number of JetBlue employees turned out to speak in support of the project, as did leaders in the local business community and the Chamber of Commerce.

Chamber CEO Randy Gordon expressed disappointment with the council’s decision.

“Last night, the City Council supported emotions and misinformation over facts and economics,” he said in a statement. “We commend the airport and city staff for a well-run process. It was simply ignored this time.”

In a statement after the vote, Rob Land, senior vice president of government affairs for JetBlue, said the firm is “profoundly disappointed that after years of delay and a city-mandated study validating the safety, security and economic positive nature of the project, that the City Council would reject the development of a Federal Inspection Station at Long Beach Airport,” he said. “JetBlue will evaluate its future plans for Long Beach, the greater Los Angeles area and California.”

There has been speculation that JetBlue might sue the city over its decision, an allegation that company spokesman Morgan Johnston declined to comment on.

“We have nothing to share beyond the statement,” he said via email.

Councilman Dee Andrews, the lone dissenting vote, encouraged the airline to stick around.

“One day this will come to fruition, for you and for all of us,” he said.

Third District resident Laurie Smith suggested creating a Long Beach Airport community roundtable – similar to the LAX model – where future decisions about the airport could be vetted and discussed by residents and business owners throughout the city.