Powerful discussion from BAC on Port Packages and SAMP
The Burien City Council heard from two members of their airport committee in support of their letter to the Port of Seattle Commission concerning Port Packages. Burien City Council Regular Meeting – 06 Oct 2025 – Agenda – Pdf
Jeff Harbaugh, primary author of the letter, spoke bluntly.
Vice Chair Brian Davis mentioned their support for an update to the 1997 HOK Community Impacts study and mentioned future recommendations for their legislative agenda.
Grading on a curve
Given the improvements since last year, this performance, and unanimous support from their council rates a solid A, with a few notes and quibbles.
- Councilmember Garcia asked for a number of bad Port Packages and Mr. Harbaugh demurred by suggesting that the answer was ‘all of them’. We agree. However, it’s a reasonable question. As we say in the Port Package Explainer, when we began doing site visits (357 at last count) our intent was to not only quantify, but grade systems: not only ‘windows’ but doors, blown-in insulation, acoustic panels, installation, structure, water damange, HVAC and more. To our mind, that was the only equitable way to evaluate ‘who goes first’. However, the moment the Port unveiled the SIRRPP and decided that multiple factors having nothing to do with hardware, including the current DNL65, acoustic testing (not required for the original installs) and its own equity index to determine eligibility, any such discussion of ‘bad’ became impossible. Their council needs to be educated on this. If the Port’s grading system is so far from what reasonable homeowners expect, the only correct answer now is indeed, ‘all of them.’
- Both presenters got a few details wrong about that 1997 study and the challenges as to NEPA vs SEPA.
- Their committee continues to give strong support for SB5652 and we’re not sure why, other than to support Senator Orwall. But that is not enough. The legislation we read was a mash-up with no clear value for us.
These will seem like nitpicks. However, at the end of the day, execution matters. At every airport-related event, electeds and staff routinely flub even the most basic details of airport subject matter. We sympathize. The acronyms alone are crazymaking. But those details matter.
We cannot afford more mistakes. Because every year fuels more cynicism and even more of a sense that resistance is futile. That sense of fatalism, more than even poor laws and regulations, is what keeps us from doing better.
Jimmy Matta joked about the first version of the BAC and its attempt to sue the FAA — something he opposed. But it was no laughing matter. Yes, it was expensive. However the real problem with the law suit was poor execution. The ruling was in favor of Burien. They won. It mattered. But without the council’s support for an appeal and with no support from other, more pro-Port city councils, there was no chance for success.
Similarly, the 1997 HOK study Burien seems ready to endorse was very good, though far from perfect. But again there was absolutely no follow-through from cities. And when Senator Orwall backed a refreshed study in 2020 the work product was so poor many activists quit.
What we keep saying to cities is this: have specific goals in mind and a commitment to follow through. What airport advocates have done for decades is exactly the opposite: chase the bus, with no plan for when they catch it.
Time after time, people do win round one. The Port does create ‘something’ to address local concerns. But after so many ‘wins’ where the results don’t go beyond the photo-op, it’s time for all of us to take some responsibility in getting to Rev 2.