Press Releases 2003

 

December 13, 2002
Regional Commission on Airport Affairs

NEWS RELEASE for immediate release

            Today’s decision by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to issue a permit to the Port of Seattle for construction of the proposed third Sea-Tac runway, with serious conditions for environmental protection, is a set-back for the Port of Seattle’s third-runway plans, said Larry Corvari, president of the citizen group, Regional Commission on Airport Affairs.

            “Our reading of the Record of Decision and the permit is that the Engineers are requiring the Port to meet several of the conditions that have already been imposed by the State Department of Ecology and the state’s Pollution Control Hearings Board.  The Port has appealed the State’s conditions to the courts, because, as they say, they cannot build the third runway if they have to do what is required of them to protect the environment.  And, as the Engineers said at their news conference this morning, the Port must comply with all the Board’s conditions as well as those adopted by the Engineers.

            “What this means is that the third runway project is allowed to go forward, but only if the Port meets impossible conditions.  The conditions in the permit from the Engineers and the conditions previously set by the State Pollution Control Hearings Board set out in detail just what the Port must do to meet the legal requirements for protecting our waters.  The Port should not appeal the decision of the Corps of Engineers, should not seek to do an end-run around it.  The Port should now admit it cannot afford to build the runway and comply with environmental laws.  It’s time for the Port to move on to other issues.”

Need for Project Challenged

            RCAA disagreed with two parts of the Engineers’ decision.  “With all respect, we disagree with the Corps’ finding that the runway project meets the public good.  The Port’s runway plan makes no sense.  Supposedly, they need a new runway with all sorts of costs and harm, to deal with delay in arrivals during bad weather.  Yet FAA analysis shows that only one flight in a hundred into Sea-Tac is significantly delayed.  Air travel is on the decline, and has been since Spring 2001.  Things will only get worse, as airlines cut back their flights, in trying to make a profit.  There just isn’t any need for this damaging and wasteful project, now or in the foreseeable future.”

            “We think also it would have been much better for the Corps of Engineers to include all the State’s conditions as part of the Engineers’ permit.  In fact, we understand that to be a legal requirement.  But the State Pollution Control Board’s ruling is intact, and the Port is not in a position to push forward. 

Funding Questioned

“So, while the Port could go ahead with this project, if the Port can find ways to meet all the environmental conditions, the Port should get the message.  This project is much too expensive and much too damaging.  Who will step forward to fund the rest of this huge project?  Can the Port name one single airline that uses Sea-Tac Airport, who wants the runway, and who is capable of paying its fair share of the cost?  It’s time to stop, and stop completely. 

“If the Port Commission isn’t sure whether it should stop, it should at the least take a long hard look.  The Port staff and the Commission owe the public an honest accounting.  How much has been spent to date, and for what exactly?  Where did the money come from to pay for the various items of work done to date?  How much more will it cost for each of the components still missing, especially for environmental work?  Where, exactly, will that money come from?  Most of it will be borrowed, no doubt.  So how much will the Port pay to borrow that money?  How will the borrowings be repaid?

“Unfortunately, the Port Commission has not asked the staff these questions in the past.  The Commission doesn’t know, the public doesn’t know, potential lenders don’t know, and probably the staff doesn’t know, either.  But these questions need to be answered fully, fairly, and honestly, in a way that permits the public to be involved, before the Port moves forward.”

Money Better Spent Elsewhere

            “The Port has more urgent uses for its money than the runway.  The Port’s finances are so desperate that they’ve just increased their real-estate taxes on King County property by 42 percent.  And their Marine Division would be bankrupt, if it were a private firm.  The Port Commission should be looking at better uses for the public’s money than this unnecessary project.

“There is not a lot of money available to our region for airport construction.  For practical purposes, we’re a one-airport town.  That one airport can be knocked out of commission by really bad weather, by earthquake, by accidents, by terror attacks, and so on.  The leadership of our region should be moving fast to get us a second airport, to back-up Sea-Tac.  The remaining FAA money for our region should be going that way, not into the wetlands at SeaTac.”

x x x

Press Releases 2001