Port of Seattle Commission Special Meeting – SEPA SAMP NTP Draft EIS Public Comment

# Port of Seattle Commission — Special Meeting on SAMP Near-Term Projects Draft EIS
**July 9, 2026 — SEA Conference Center / Microsoft Teams**

—

**[4:04 p.m.] Commission President Ryan Calkins:** This is Commission President Ryan Calkins convening the special meeting of July 9th, 2026. The time is 4:04 p.m. We’re meeting in person at the SEA Conference Center and virtually on Microsoft Teams. All commissioners are present today or will be present today. Commissioners are present at this open public meeting to hear comments for the record on the Sustainable Airport Master Plan near-term projects SEPA draft environmental impact statement.

While this is an active meeting as of this time, the commission will recess from 4:00 to 4:20 p.m. to allow time for those in attendance to visit the sole conference room next door to review Sustainable Airport Master Plan near-term project SEPA draft environmental impact statement information materials and a related video, and as well to provide time for anyone wishing to sign up to provide comments for the record. The sign-in table is outside in the hall.

Commissioners will reconvene in this room no later than 4:20 p.m. and will then hear comments regarding the SAMP draft environmental impact statement on the record until 6:00 p.m. We are now in recess. Thank you. So please join us next door to take a look at the documents and the video, and we’ll be back at 4:20.

**[4:22 p.m.] Commission President Calkins:** Good afternoon. It is now 4:22 p.m. and commissioners are back in order. A few housekeeping items before we begin. For everyone in the meeting room, please turn your cell phones to silent. For anyone participating virtually on Microsoft Teams, please mute your speakers when not actively speaking or presenting. Please keep your cameras off unless you are actively addressing the commission. You may turn on your camera once your name has been called to provide comment, and will turn it back off again at the conclusion of your remarks.

All of the items noted here will ensure a smoother meeting. This is the port’s fifth public hearing for the Sustainable Airport Master Plan near-term projects draft environmental impact statement. Our purpose today is to hear public comment for the record about that topic only. If you have a comment about other port business, we ask you to attend a regular commission meeting. The next regularly scheduled business meeting will be held on July 14th at noon at the port headquarters building, commission chambers at Pier 69 on the waterfront.

Comments today will be heard just as they are at other commission meetings. We will alternate between virtual and in-person attendees. Clerk Hart will call names in advance so speakers are aware when their turn is approaching. I want to recognize in particular each of the commissioners — Commissioner Muhammad is on her way, as well as Commissioner Felleman, Commissioner Cho, and Commissioner Hagawa. We are here to listen to you. It is not a question-and-answer period, and so commissioners will not be responding to the comments that are made. This is your opportunity to share and speak.

If you’re here with us in the room or joining virtually and need language assistance to provide comment, there are interpreters available in multiple languages. Please let port staff know and they can assist you in coordinating those services. Each person will have two minutes for their comment, and there is a court reporter in the room to capture those comments. Time may be lengthened for any translation services required. If you have additional information you would like to provide for the record, please make your way to the sole room where the port is providing an additional court reporter to transcribe your comment. Staff can direct you there. We also have written comment forms available there, a laptop where you can submit your comment virtually, and information on how else you can provide comment during the process.

Please note, before including your name, address, telephone number, email, or other personally identifying information in your comment, be advised that your entire comment — including your personal identifying information — may be made publicly available at any time. Thank you for taking the opportunity to provide a verbal comment on the SAMP draft EIS today.

The public comment period will now begin. Speakers will have two minutes per person to provide their comments, and the clerk will call the names of those who are signed up to speak. Each speaker will repeat their name for the record, and then the clerk will start the timer. Clerk Hart, please call our first speaker.

**Clerk Michelle Hart:** Thank you, Mr. Commission President. Give me just a moment to get the timer up, and then I do have a few instructions myself.

[pause]

Thank you. So for everybody attending to present comment today, I am going to call three from our virtual list and then three from the room. This will help me keep it organized and moving along. So when I run out of signups for the virtual, then of course it will be all from the room. When I’m calling people up from the room, I’ll call three at a time again, and if those three speakers can come up and sit at the same time and then just speak individually until they get through their two minutes. Once a person is through speaking for two minutes, they may return to their seat and then I will continue to call speakers in that manner.

For our court reporter in the room — for speakers, please speak clearly and slowly into the microphone so the court reporter can capture your comments. And I’ll go ahead and begin virtually. We’ll start with Mayor Sarah Moore. Mayor Moore, please go ahead and repeat your name for the record, and then I will start the timer. And if you are calling in by telephone, Mayor Moore, please go ahead and hit star six to unmute. Unfortunately, I cannot do that for you on this end.

And then I’ll move to former state senator Karen Kaiser. Can you hear me? Is this former state senator Karen Kaiser?

**Karen Kaiser (former state senator, 33rd Legislative District):** Yes, this is Karen Kaiser. I am former state senator for the 33rd legislative district. I want to thank the commissioners for having this public hearing and to hear from the community about their concerns on the draft environmental statement for the SAMP.

The concerns that I know you will hear from our community include disproportionate impacts on the people who live under the flight paths of Sea-Tac airport. Those impacts are economic, they are health, and they are quality-of-life impacts. The health impacts particularly concern me. I am worried that sleep interruptions really are significant impacts on individuals’ health and on children especially, who have to get up, go to school and learn, and are interrupted in their sleep from noisy airplanes. And when the SAMP is fully implemented, it will mean there will be so many airplanes — there will be many more in the evening hours and the early morning hours. It already is something that I noticed because I lived in the district. Around 2:30 or 4:00, I seem to have to wake up because there is an airplane, and I have a hard time getting back to sleep at that point. So I know this happens to many, many hundreds of residents who live surrounding the airport and in the flight path. Those health impacts also include air pollution and need to be mitigated. So noise and health need to be addressed and are not fully addressed, as far as I could see, in the draft environmental statement. The environmental statement is not only the environment as we think of it — wildlife and plants — it should include people and the impact. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Ms. Kaiser. The next speaker — I’m going to go back to Mayor Sarah Moore, followed by Debbie Wagner. Mayor Moore?

**Mayor Sarah Moore (Burien):** Hi. Am I unmuted?

**Clerk Hart:** You are unmuted. We can hear you.

**Mayor Moore:** Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is Sarah Moore and, as you said, I am the mayor of Burien. This hearing is important for many reasons, not the least of which is that it guarantees that you as commissioners will be hearing from the airport-adjacent communities such as mine about the impact increased flights will have on us. It’s my understanding that none of you attended the open house recently staged by the port staff, but at the end of the process, it’s you, the commissioners, who will vote on this massive airport expansion package. And I want to make that direct contact with you to talk about impact.

A 30% increase in flight operations at Sea-Tac International Airport will have significant negative impacts on the citizens of Burien and on the city itself. It will put more pressure on our infrastructure. It will further accelerate a cycle of economic blight that Burien has experienced since the Third Runway opened in 2008. This expansion will exacerbate public health dangers that correspond with high-intensity aircraft traffic. These include demonstrable increases in respiratory and cardiac illness, as well as negative impacts on mental health.

Current federal regulations governing noise and air pollution allow unsafe levels, and the port has an opportunity to step up and lead in acknowledging this by taking proactive steps to consider newer studies to determine safe levels. The situation demands assertive corrective measures that the Port of Seattle has been reluctant to take, but which this commission has the power to direct. We understand your primary mission is to ensure and continue economic vitality in this region. But as a reminder in closing, your obligations also include protecting the people on whose backs, and in the air above whose homes, you are building this wonderful success. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Mayor Moore. Our next speaker is virtual, calling for Debbie Wagner, followed by Senator Tina Orwall from the room, as well as Yoshiko Grace Matsui, Des Moines’s mayor, also from the room. Debbie Wagner?

**Debbie Wagner (former leader, Quiet Skies Coalition, Burien):** Hello. I’m Debbie Wagner, and I was the leader of Quiet Skies Coalition in Burien that sued the FAA for creating a new flight path through Burien, [which] required a cumulative impact analysis from the Ninth Circuit Court that has never been done. The one in the EIS is not anything — it’s incomplete and it’s completely invalid.

Your air emission analysis is also vastly understated. EPA also uses the same model that was used for the EIS and calculated more than double the amount of emissions for Sea-Tac airport than they did. You’re the fastest-growing emitter of greenhouse gas in King County — you went up by 2 million tons per year, from four to six, in just a few years with the addition of the Delta fleet. Again, you’re going to undo all of the progress that King County has been doing, because you will go up by several more million tons with an added 30% increase — adding gates, adding hourly operations, which adds polluters.

Historically, the communities around the airport have had poor health — cancers, early deaths, more deaths from disease, well above King County averages. The airport is the biggest facility air polluter in the state. So it stands to reason these illness rates are no surprise. I’m involved because I’ve been waiting for an honest analysis of emissions since 1996, when — with half the emission rates that you are calculating now — the EPA stopped the Third Runway because of a Clean Air Act violation. You can’t double emissions and have no violations of the Clean Air Act. So your consultants have done just fancy footwork and lied. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Ms. Wagner. So I’d also like to call up Katherine Caffrey, city manager for Des Moines. And we’ll begin with, from the room, Senator Orwall.

**State Senator Tina Orwall (33rd District):** Thank you. Good afternoon, Tina Orwall, state senator from the 33rd. Thank you for holding this hearing today. I just want to focus on a couple of points. One is the cumulative effect that this community is really experiencing. Years ago, when I raised my kids here, it was about noise, and then we started working with one of the top research schools in the country — in the world — University of Washington, who really has been leading the country around looking at these ultrafine particles. We also looked at Department of Health and looked at asthma. We have the highest rates of children in King County going to the emergency department, and it mirrors the landing path. We’ve looked at the levels in schools, in homes, and looked at how much of those ultrafine particles come indoors.

So again, to me, as we’re looking at this — this isn’t about having a thriving airport or a healthy community, it’s about doing both, and how we partner to really start doing those things around failed port packages, around more HEPA filters in our schools or senior centers, and for those at risk. Again, I think sometimes it’s a tail wagging the dog, because we are doing more work around the ultrafine particles that aren’t recognized by EPA and the FAA, but we have enough information to know that this community is heavily burdened. And my worry with the cargo and with the international flights is, again, those are older planes, they’re louder planes, and they’re going to really disrupt our nights as well — and I know Senator Kaiser brought that up. So again, we want to partner on how we move these things forward to have a healthy community. This is also your workforce — they live in this community, and we want them to be healthy too. So again, thank you for listening and taking this hearing.

**Clerk Hart:** And then we’ll move to Mayor Matsui.

**Mayor Yoshiko Grace Matsui (Des Moines):** Hello, my name is Yoshiko Grace Matsui, and I happen to be the mayor of Des Moines — and yes, that is my real name. Fortunately, Commissioner, our last names are different enough that I don’t get your email, but sometimes people do ask me how things are going at the port.

I’m here because our residents of Des Moines are port constituents, and for many of them there’s a long history of feeling ignored and overlooked as an airport community. The negative impacts of airport growth have fallen disproportionately on communities like ours, and the port hasn’t sufficiently addressed this imbalance. What we get is decades of noise, air quality impacts, and a tax base that is permanently constrained by our proximity to the airport. We carry real costs without the corresponding economic benefits.

Part of the problem is how these impacts are reviewed. Each individual project is evaluated as if it’s happening in isolation and on its own. Each one might look manageable, but looked at together, decades of incremental growth have had a real compounding effect on our community. That’s the lens the port’s review should be using, and exactly why project-by-project mitigation has never been enough. Mitigation to date has been piecemeal and one-time — a grant here, a promise there to keep talking — but it hasn’t matched the scale or the permanence of the impact. We’ve heard commitments to coordinate and to learn more before, and what we haven’t seen is a process with a real deliverable or deadline.

My ask today is direct. I’m urging the commission to commit to a direct, substantive process with Des Moines, Burien, and SeaTac on recurring mitigation — not another one-time check, not another open-ended promise to coordinate later. We’ve done our part. We’ve shown up. We’ve documented the impact. We’ve been patient. And what we’re asking for now is a commitment from the commission for meaningful mitigation conversations. Thank you very much.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Mayor Matsui. And then moving to City Manager Katherine Caffrey.

**Katherine Caffrey (City Manager, Des Moines; member, Port’s StART Committee):** Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is Katherine Caffrey. I’m the city manager for the city of Des Moines and also a member of the port’s StART committee. Let me start by acknowledging that I understand the need for this airport growth and I understand the impact it’s going to have on this region. But like the two speakers you just heard, the negative impacts disproportionately affect South King County cities — Des Moines, Burien, and SeaTac in particular — and it’s long overdue for that to be addressed in a meaningful way.

We as cities have asked for mitigation for many years, and as the mayor said, there’ll be a grant for this or a one-off project, and those are appreciated, but they are wholly insufficient. Less than 1% of the cost that these capital projects cost goes to mitigation. That is insufficient and does not reflect that the port really has in mind the best interest of all of your constituents, which do include South King County. So I echo Mayor Grace Matsui — we’re here to ask for the commission to engage in meaningful discussions about recurring mitigation with the cities. To date, the port has not agreed to our request to mediate on these issues. And so we are asking the commission to take this up and make a real commitment to have a conversation on how the port can grow and our cities can also continue to thrive. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Ms. Caffrey. And then we’ll move back to our virtual speakers. I have Rebecca Deming first, followed by Adama Hayoth, and then Laura Gibbons. Rebecca Deming — and Rebecca, if you’re calling by telephone, it’s star six to unmute.

[No response. Calling last time for Rebecca Deming — will come back to her.]

Moving to Adama Hayoth.

[No response.]

Moving to Laura Gibbons.

**Laura Gibbons (Seattle):** Hi, I’m Laura Gibbons from Seattle. I was upset to see that the — can you hear me?

**Clerk Hart:** We can, Laura. Yes, please proceed.

**Laura Gibbons:** Okay. I was upset to see that the NEPA comments on the SAMP were basically ignored. We’d expected a better analysis and hence some mitigation under the SEPA, but I guess since the port was reviewing itself, that was too much to hope for. This EIS does a good job summarizing the areas of controversy from the NEPA, but evades any mitigation or real solutions to these so-called controversies. The GSA boundary is an insult to people who live near the airport and are affected by the noise and aviation pollution. The SEPA should evaluate impacts for everyone under the flight paths and everyone affected by aircraft noise.

This EIS describes the state environmental health disparities [map] and the port’s own environmental justice criteria, but despite wading through the thousands of pages, I could not figure out how they were actually incorporated. Surely the map showing that most airport neighbors already bear the highest environmental health burdens would mean that no additional harm should be allowed, and the current harm should be mitigated whether or not any outdated — or, in the case of ultrafine particles, non-existent — thresholds were exceeded.

The claim that the SAMP is “not expected to prevent actions by the port or other entities in King County to mitigate climate change” is tragically wrong. King County is making progress in reducing greenhouse gases except for those from aviation. So far, despite promises, the port has done absolutely nothing to stem the rapidly rising Scope 3 emissions, which you yourself have documented. This plan for the expansion of Sea-Tac is anything but sustainable, and two minutes is not nearly enough time to cite all the evidence for this, so I will also submit a longer comment. The airport is not addressing the harms it’s causing at its current size, and there is no way to protect the health of airport neighbors or meet its climate goals if aviation emissions and noise continue to increase.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Ms. Gibbons. And then, before I call my next virtual speaker — from the room, if we could have city council member Sam Mendes, Deputy Mayor Gene Achziger — I’m so sorry, I know I just totally mispronounced that — and city council member Rocko DeVito come to the table, just so you can be prepared for your time.

Moving to Rebecca Deming, virtually.

**Rebecca Deming:** Oh, okay, thank you.

[No further comment recorded at this call — see below, Deming spoke later from the room list.]

**Clerk Hart:** And then Adama Hayoth, virtually.

[No response.]

Okay, so we’ll move to the room, to our speakers, beginning with city council member Sam Mendes, please.

[Audio check: “Green is on… Red is on.”]

**Council Member Sam Mendes (Burien City Council):** Okay. Good afternoon, council — commissioners. It’s good to see you again, and I appreciate you having this forum. I’m Sam Mendes, I’m a member of Burien City Council. We have no doubt that the airport expansion under consideration here will be of great economic benefit to the greater Puget Sound region, and indeed to the entire Pacific Northwest. We strongly object, however, to the Port of Seattle’s inflated claims of benefits to the airport-impacted communities and to Burien in particular, as it improperly minimizes the negative externalities.

I refer you to the economic impact analysis contained in Appendix K of your draft environmental impact statement. Exhibit 64 considers the economic and fiscal impacts of the airport on six adjacent cities in 2023. Of some 34,000 jobs, 710 went to Burien — that’s 2%. Of $8.7 million in business output, just $115,000 to Burien — that’s just 1.3%. Of $17.8 million in local tax revenue, Burien’s cut was $230,000. At the same time, our position under the approach path to runway 16-right, which is used for landings two days out of every three, saddles Burien and its residents with the greatest amount of economic and environmental damage from airport operations. There can be no other conclusion: Sea-Tac airport is a net negative for Burien. It is your responsibility to address that in a meaningful way.

I also just wanted to second Mayor Matsui of Des Moines and the comments about requesting a serious and recurring mitigation to these local communities, because of course these impacts are recurring — so piecemeal, one-time mitigation, or even piecemeal packages, are insufficient. So I want to just emphasize that request for ongoing compensation to these communities. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Council Member Mendes. And moving to Deputy Mayor Gene Achziger.

**Deputy Mayor Gene Achziger (Des Moines):** Yes. My name is Gene Achziger and I serve as deputy mayor of Des Moines, and I appreciate the opportunity to speak this afternoon.

Commissioners, I know you often highlight your environmental credentials, so I assume that you are familiar with the “pack it in, pack it out, leave no trace” guidelines used in wilderness areas. Regarding the SAMP, the port plans to add many more flights over longer hours, yet you claim it will not have a greater impact on my community than regular airport growth without these projects. You might have a point if you were making a real effort to pack out — or reduce the effects — Sea-Tac already has on your neighbors, but you are not.

For example, you have tried to address the noise and air quality issues at our schools, especially in the Highline School District. Most schools in Des Moines are located along the flight paths of the second and Third Runways, and you have funded HEPA filters and soundproofing at our new schools. We do appreciate these efforts, but our kids spend only 30 hours a week in school over nine months, which adds up to 1,080 hours. However, there are 168 hours in a week, so 138 hours each week, our kids do not have the protection of those filters and soundproofing. Over a year, there are 8,760 hours, so your mitigation covers only just over 12% of the time. For the other 88%, our kids are fully exposed to the impacts that you have created.

Your mitigation efforts do not match the size or lasting nature of the impact. So far, mitigation has been scattered and happens once. There are some grants, but they usually require our residents to use their own tax dollars to match the small amounts you provide. You create the problem and expect us to help clean it up. It is time to take the total impact seriously, and, as port commissioners, to fulfill your duty to represent all your constituents. Please commit now to real mitigation talks and a clear timeline instead of just stringing us along. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Deputy Mayor. And moving to city council member Rocko DeVito.

**Council Member Rocko DeVito (Burien City Council):** Hi, good afternoon. My name is Rocko DeVito and I’m a Burien city council member. Thank you for hearing from me today.

The port’s assessment of noise and air quality issues simply does not track with the experience of our residents living beneath the flight path. There is growing evidence that ultrafine particles shed by aircraft are more hazardous to public health than those produced by vehicles. The port and FAA declined to address ultrafine particles because, quote, “of limited and conflicting data and insufficient context.” In addition, there is growing consensus that current noise standards used by the port are not sufficient, but can’t or won’t be changed without changes at the FAA. This is unacceptable. These are real issues that affect adults and children in our community. I doubt you all would accept this report if you were living underneath the flight path.

These additional flights bring more asthma, less sleep, and noisier communities. If the port wants to present itself as a good steward to our communities, and does indeed believe that both of these issues deserve FAA changes, as your staff has indicated, then I implore you to stand up with us, work with our communities to lobby our federal officials, fund studies on ultrafine particles, and publicly commit to advancing new FAA policy and funding noise and health mitigation when those policies are implemented. Thank you, and have a good day.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, council member. Moving back to our virtual list — I’m going to call Mayor Mark Mullet. We’ll go back to Adama Hayoth, and then Scott Kennedy. Just so you know, in what order I’ll be calling those from the room — if we can have Jeff Harbaugh, Claire Parfitt, and Rebecca Deming come to the table, please. So we will move to Mayor Mark Mullet. Mayor Mullet, please go ahead.

**Mayor Mark Mullet (Issaquah):** Yeah, hi there. This is Issaquah Mayor Mark Mullet. I appreciate you taking the time to hear testimony today. I will say, I was born and raised in Tukwila, so I grew up a block off of Highway 99 — I understand the perspective that you’ve heard from the previous speakers today. I would like to share another perspective, and that’s as the mayor of Issaquah, our largest employer is Costco. They employ 6,000 people in the Issaquah community, and Costco is a unique company — if you are a vendor somewhere in the world and you want to sell a product within a Costco warehouse, you have to physically come to Issaquah and show them that product. And if you were to drive around Issaquah’s hotels, you would see people with tents set up demonstrating a variety of different things that you could buy at a Costco, because Costco’s buyers actually make these people show up in person and show these products. And I think it just kind of highlights that the economic growth of the Puget Sound is 100% reliant on an airport that can handle the volumes that we need to be able to handle.

And I would say, in my experience — when I was in the state senate, I worked with Karen Kaiser, Senator Kaiser, who was very passionate about supporting this community down here. I did find that the port was actually a partner on making sure we did do mitigation projects. So I know from my Senate experience that, as these expansions happen, the port has been open-minded about understanding some of the investments that have to be made alongside it. And I would say, during my 12 years in the Senate, we had so many studies on finding a greenfield project for an additional airport in Western Washington — every single one of those came up with a dead end. I don’t think anybody can say they’re being intellectually honest that that’s ever going to happen in our lifetimes.

And I do think the combination of this additional terminal at Sea-Tac, and in my conversations with Executive Somers and Snohomish County — there has been a sea change, and Paine Field, I think for the first time in recent history, is actually open to additional flights going out of Paine Field. And I do think there’s a vision between this expansion, the Sea-Tac terminal, and taking better advantage of Paine Field in the future, that we can actually support the economic growth that makes the Puget Sound community thrive. And that’s why, as Mayor of Issaquah, I’m actually supporting this expansion project. Thank you very much.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Mayor Mullet. Our next virtual speaker — calling again for Adama Hayoth. Adama, if you’re joining us via telephone, it’s star six to unmute.

[No response.]

Moving to Scott Kennedy.

**Scott Kennedy (Senior Manager, State and Local Government Affairs, Alaska Airlines):** Good afternoon, commissioners. I’m Scott Kennedy, senior manager of state and local government affairs for Alaska Airlines, here to reaffirm Alaska’s support for advancing the port’s Sustainable Airport Master Plan. As a locally based airline with nearly 10,000 employees based here and living in this region, we’re deeply invested in the airport’s long-term success and support bold, timely infrastructure investments to meet the growing regional demand.

Alaska’s growth is expanding opportunities for travelers throughout our hometown hub, including new direct international destinations on newer, fuel-efficient aircraft. And as demand grows and air service levels increase, SEA must remain efficient, sustainable, and capable of serving the travelers, communities, and regional economy that depend on it, and SAMP is essential to achieving that future. Alaska and the port have a strong track record of partnership on major capital projects, including the recently completed SEA Gateway project, which opened earlier this year. The proposed second terminal, with a secure connection to the N Concourse — a key element of SAMP — is a critical investment, and it will expand capacity to accommodate the anticipated growth, reduce aircraft congestion, and improve the passenger experience. We support this vision and appreciate the port’s partnership.

In closing, Alaska strongly supports advancing the SAMP to ensure SEA keeps pace with growth and remains a world-class, sustainable global hub for our guests and our operation. And we appreciate the opportunity to comment. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Mr. Kennedy. And just a reminder to our speakers to speak clearly into the microphone and slowly for the court reporter. Moving to the room, we have Jeff Harbaugh.

**Jeff Harbaugh (Burien; member, Burien Airport Committee and StART):** Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is Jeff Harbaugh. I live in Burien and have worked for relief from airport impacts for nine years as a member of the Burien Airport Committee and the StART committee.

In Burien, we expect the airport to grow. We expect SAMP projects to be constructed, and we recognize the value of the airport to the state. But the NEPA and SEPA processes are structured to be approved while circumventing community impacts — what I call the stunning absurdity that you’re able to conclude there will be no significant impacts and no mitigation required. Everybody in this room knows that isn’t true, and I think you commissioners also know that. We know the health impacts from noise and particle emissions are real and getting worse — how could they not, given the airport’s own projected growth? That growth and its impact may be underestimated as a result of the exclusion of certain relevant and required data in NEPA and SEPA.

Not once, to the best of my knowledge, has the port reached out to the cities and asked how they could help — at least acknowledging that this was a real problem. It certainly doesn’t happen in the StART committee, I can tell you that. And we sent you — the cities of Burien and Des Moines — a letter some months ago asking for some help with the failed port packages, and didn’t get much of a response to that. Go ahead and build your airport — we know it’s going to happen — but please offer your most impacted and generally least advantaged citizens some help. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Mr. Harbaugh. And moving to Claire Parfitt.

**Claire Parfitt (21-year Des Moines resident; Defenders of Highline Forest):** My name is Claire Parfitt. I’m a 21-year resident of Des Moines. I’m speaking on behalf of myself and also the organization Defenders of Highline Forest, which I’ve been heavily involved with for the last two years.

First of all, I’ve seen significant impacts just from increasing flights as a result of the Third Runway. I’m often woken up in the middle of the night by roaring planes. I live right next to Beach Park in Des Moines, and I love to keep my window open to hear the owls and sometimes seals, and I often just can’t even keep my window open, even in stifling weather, because of the roaring noise of the airplanes. There was residue determined on the east side of my condo that was aircraft emissions — highly cancerous material.

I also was involved in the fight to preserve land on 216th Street from development of a warehouse, and there’s been no mitigation for any destruction of land, the natural environment — which also adds to the impact of air pollution, from loss of trees for heat and filtering out harmful pollutants like carbon monoxide. Imagine the devastation of somebody I know who just bought a house right next to the greenbelt that was torn down — he had no idea this warehouse was going to be built, and he had a greenbelt in his backyard; now he has a warehouse and no communication from the port that that was happening in advance.

Also, somebody in my organization has brain cancer. She lives right under the flight path, and she mentioned that a member of every household on her entire street has cancer. To me, that is much stronger evidence than a merely anecdotal rate of cancer. So I see the impact in my community — you can’t even have a conversation in a restaurant in Des Moines. People live under the flight path — you can’t have a conversation, you have to go inside. So that’s my personal experience. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Ms. Parfitt. And moving to Rebecca Deming.

**Rebecca Deming (Community Development Director and SEPA Responsible Official, City of Des Moines):** Hi, I’m Rebecca Deming. I’m the community development director with the city of Des Moines. I’m also the SEPA responsible official with the city of Des Moines. I’m here to speak about the SEPA document and how it affects the city.

Des Moines has experienced airport-related impacts for many years, including aircraft noise, overflights, air quality concerns, traffic disruptions, and pressure on the community’s quality of life. SAMP should be evaluated in the long-term context. For residents, these impacts are experienced cumulatively — aircraft noise, construction noise, roadway traffic, emissions, truck activity, and land use conflicts do not occur in separate categories in daily life. They combine to affect sleep, health, travel, outdoor activity, parks, schools, neighborhoods, and overall livability.

We are very disappointed in the draft EIS. We know there are citizens in these cities adjacent to the airport who are and will be severely impacted by this project — there is not “no impact,” and simply saying this is wrong. Not only is information withheld, but we are not being given enough time to review the EIS. The cities have repeatedly asked for more time, and we are told either no, or it is “under consideration.” We need an extension granted now to give us — the citizens and the city — more time. The port has had years to prepare the document. It will affect people for decades, and it’s thousands of pages. You have given the public only 60 days, and it includes multiple holidays in that review. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Ms. Deming. I will go ahead and move back to our virtual speakers. However, let’s get the table in-house queued up with Kevin Casey, Linda Wong, and Lindsay Harris, please. Moving back to our virtual speakers list — calling one more time for Adama Hayoth. Adama, if you’re calling in by phone, it’s star six to unmute.

[No response.]

I will come back to Adama when we’re through with the rest of the list. Moving in this order to Stuart Jenner, Diana Leo, and Lars Ericson. Beginning with Stuart Jenner.

**Stuart Jenner (Normandy Park; volunteer blogger, Highline Journal):** Thank you. I’m Stuart Jenner. I reside in Normandy Park. I am also a volunteer blogger for a website called the Highline Journal.

A port commissioner recently stated environmental justice is a small topic — that’s sadly very revealing about the attitudes of the port. Sixty days goes very fast when the data is from different years with different definitions — some from 2022, 2024, various other years are in there. There is no overall search of all these documents, these 6,000 pages. Multiple port employees have not kept promises made at open houses to reply to emails with follow-on questions that I have.

Completely missing from this Sustainable Airport Master Plan is the definition of “sustainable.” How is this plan any different from any other expansion plan? There’s no demand management of airplanes or people getting to the airport. Seattle has trip and parking reduction as a central strategy — the port’s strategy is completely opposite. All you’re doing is adding parking and roads. You should explore off-site check-in like Boston. Assuming vehicle emissions are going to drop by 50% seems ludicrous, given that the U.S. EPA is no longer mandating fuel economy. There’s no carbon capture, there’s no space reserved for electric planes, there’s no data showing reduced air and water cleansing from tree removals yet by new tree plantings — is that really going to have a significant impact on air quality, or is it just a feel-good talking point?

This plan claims no significant impacts, so what are the tipping points or health dangers? An example of the vagueness of this is in Appendix C, air quality — when passengers board planes or workers are at the tarmac, are they exposed to more than 9 ppm of CO2? Can’t tell from what’s in the data here. By looking only five and ten years out, and ignoring longer-term impacts from the entire buildout of the master plan, this plan isn’t sitting right. There are no upper bounds on what we’re headed for with CO2, GHG, or other pollutants. Using tons of pollutants when the air pollution levels are specified in parts per million makes it very hard to figure out what the real impacts are going to be. Page six has levels of air quality in ppm, but where are the ppm tables for the airport under these plans? The only data appears to be on page 469, but that’s data collected away from the airport.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Mr. Jenner. Hang on a second. And our next speaker virtually is Diana Leo.

**Diana Leo (Vice President, Government Affairs, Bellevue Chamber of Commerce):** Hi, can y’all hear me?

**Clerk Hart:** We can.

**Diana Leo:** Great. Hi, good afternoon, commissioners. My name is Diana Leo, and I am the vice president of government affairs for the Bellevue Chamber of Commerce, representing hundreds of employers across the east side. We’re encouraged by the breadth of voices at the table today.

SEA’s future is not a Seattle issue — it’s a regional issue, and it deserves this commission’s full support. For east side employers, from global technology companies to small exporters, connectivity is everything — to vendors, to customers, to talent. SEA is the gateway that makes that possible. One reason our region became a global leader in innovation and commerce is that we’ve had an airport equal to our needs. That advantage is now at risk. SEA handles 53 million passengers a year today, a number projected to reach 57 million within the decade. Those travelers are coming whether we’re ready or not. The question is whether they arrive at a world-class airport or a congested one that turns opportunity away from our region.

The port has done impressive work maximizing today’s facilities, including improvements delivered ahead of the World Cup, but SEA has reached the limits of its current footprint. That’s why the Bellevue Chamber urges the commission to advance the Sustainable Airport Master Plan. The second terminal means 19 new gates, added roadway and curbside capacity, a new parking garage, and more TSA checkpoints. If SEA can’t keep pace, businesses will relocate and supply chains will reroute elsewhere. On behalf of Bellevue’s business community, thank you for hearing from a broad cross-section of regional partners today. We urge you to move the SAMP forward — our region’s economic future depends on it. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Ms. Leo. And our next virtual speaker is Lars Ericson.

**Lars Ericson (Seattle Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce):** Good evening. My name is Lars Ericson. I’m with the Seattle Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce, and I’m speaking on behalf of our 2,600 members.

Moving people and goods throughout the world is the lifeblood of business, and exchanging ideas and innovation, for our members. SEA is more than a gateway — it is indispensable to our success. Our employees, business partners, and customers depend on the access that SEA offers. Our advantage of being a center for innovation is at risk if we fail to invest in ensuring that SEA can accommodate future demand. SEA has reached the limits of what is possible within its existing facilities. We believe that SEA’s proposal to build a second terminal is exactly the kind of investment that keeps regions like ours competitive. If our airport cannot handle the passenger demand, businesses will locate elsewhere, because they won’t be able to get their employees and customers in and out of our region — supply chains will reroute through other hubs, new opportunities will pass by our region.

This means now is the time for the Port of Seattle to move forward. SEA expansion is essential for our region’s future, and our economic success depends on it. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Mr. Ericson. And moving to our in-house speakers, beginning with Kevin Casey.

**Kevin Casey (Riverton Heights neighborhood, SeaTac):** Hello, my name is Kevin Casey. I’m a private citizen, and I live at the 2700 block of 146th Street in the Riverton Heights neighborhood of SeaTac — approximately a half mile north of the airport. And South 146th Street is the access point to the employee parking lot. All of the streets in the Riverton Heights neighborhood are unimproved streets — there are no sidewalks, so there’s gravel on the side of the road, and beside that there’s ditches. And the traffic that goes by is not just known by the volume but by the behavior. Your employees drive poorly in my neighborhood, and they’re threatening — they drive fast. And the South 146th Street / 24th Avenue South intersection is the highest injury-accident intersection in the Riverton Heights neighborhood, and it’s the sole access point to your employee parking lot.

I believe that you could mitigate — traffic is identified as the primary mitigation package in the SAMP proposals. I understand the passion for all the other opinions that have been expressed here, but traffic is not just quantified by the volume of traffic — it’s qualified by the behavior of the people who use the Riverton Heights neighborhood as a speed throughway to get to the employee parking lot. And I believe an adequate and appropriate mitigation package would be to reconfigure the access to the employee parking lot solely off of South 24th Avenue, and remove the access on South 146th Street — just simply remove it. All the traffic can go into the parking lot through that reconfiguration, and spare the Riverton Heights neighborhood from your employees’ behavior. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Mr. Casey. Our next speaker is Linda Wong.

**Linda Wong:** Commissioners, would you be here tonight if two airport-impacted cities and a group of concerned citizens had not invoked state law to demand this hearing? That fact should sit with you as you listen to every comment tonight, because it tells you exactly how much confidence the cities and people most affected by Sea-Tac airport have in the integrity of your process.

I hear we have a fiduciary duty — to whom? All of Washington except the people who live with the impacts. Nearby cities pay for the improvements and roadwork for airport cargo. Their economies pay when people are sicker and can’t work. They pay healthcare costs, not the port. We pay with our futures — our kids can’t learn as well as kids in neighborhoods without airports and freight corridors. So who gets, and who pays? When the Port of Seattle has a hand in shaping city comprehensive plans that push harms into nearby cities, and then the DEIS ignores those harms — that is not fulfilling your duty, that is shifting your costs onto the communities you are supposed to serve.

In Cedarhurst, a paycheck-to-paycheck community is about to be turfed by an industrial rezone. There is no automatic buyout, no relocation assistance. One resident said she puts up with the noise and pollution in exchange for stable housing, because she’s experienced homelessness before, and this is affordable housing and it’s better. Now the city is rezoning her property following a plan created with the Port of Seattle — she’s not sure what will happen. Even if Burien wanted to help, its entire 2026 human services budget is $53,000. For scale, that’s roughly three port employees, for this resident. The port is an uninsured driver who totaled her car, but she still has to make the payments. So who gains?

I know you’re only required to listen tonight, so let me put this on the record so your silence itself can be the answer: before the final EIS, publish a per-city cumulative impact table — Burien, Des Moines, SeaTac, Federal Way — showing measured health outcomes, displacement risk, housing cost, and public transport, alongside the local airport-related tax revenues and job counts, so that each community can see for itself if it is net-benefiting or net-losing from airport growth. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** And our next speaker is Lindsay Harris.

**Lindsay Harris (Cedarhurst neighborhood, Boulevard Park):** Hello, I’m Lindsay Harris, and I live in the Cedarhurst neighborhood, in what has been called the North of Airport project zone, in Boulevard Park. Currently, we are facing a double impact from both the Sustainable Airport Master Plan and major city zoning changes driven directly by airport compatibility.

Because my neighborhood sits directly beneath the flight path and experiences severe aircraft noise, the city of Burien is actively pushing to phase out single-family residential zoning in my neighborhood to adapt. My neighborhood has been mapped as being incompatible with airport usage, and city staff have followed the airport’s compatible land use guidebook as a map to push this forward. Due to the airport’s proposed expansion, my neighborhood is currently being targeted for industrial business rezoning in a historic and fully residential neighborhood. This will create increased economic and environmental displacement risk, in addition to the burdens and impact this neighborhood already experiences. This would also create increased risk for hundreds of people with existing social, economic, and health vulnerabilities in this neighborhood.

Several Burien planning commissioners told myself and other residents at just yesterday’s public hearing that this taking of residential zoning is necessary to not subject any future residents to the burdens of the airport — that the health and public safety of future residents depend on no longer remaining even on the Burien city side of the current flight path, and the situation is made more acute by the proposed expansion. The expansion’s 30% increase will add flight capacity equivalent to a new runway without physically paving one, and will cause more economic and physical strain on city roads, parks, underground water, and public health for my neighborhood. Many residents here — I have personally talked to people who have lived here for the past two generations and have been steadily impacted by the airport — don’t understand how we can be asked to shoulder even more burden. Many residents in my neighborhood remember the Third Runway as the scar that was left on this place without any compensation for burdens felt into today. To carry even more seems at best an afterthought and at worst an insult to my neighborhood and the neighboring communities that might meet this same fate. This experience and impact of residents is why this belongs in the DEIS. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Ms. Harris. And we’ll move back to our virtual speakers. However, let’s go ahead and get Anne Kroeker, Abdirahman Omar, and Sue Cook to the table here, please. And going to our virtual speakers, I’m going to call again for Adama.

[No response.]

Okay, and then I’m going to move to Sarafi Allen, Dan Leinsky, and Michael Woody, in that order, beginning with Sarafi Allen, please.

**Sarafi Allen (Deputy Director of Planning and Community Development, City of Redmond, speaking for Mayor Angela Birney):** Good afternoon. My name is Sari Allen, and I am the deputy director of planning and community development for the city of Redmond, speaking at the request of Mayor Angela Birney, who was unavailable today. I would also like to note that I live in South Seattle along the flight path and personally appreciate the port and all the public testimony I’ve heard in taking the time to grapple with this challenge of how to manage our region’s growth.

As stated, our region has grown dramatically, bringing jobs, people, and economic strength, but as we know, with our current housing crisis, growth also brings challenges when infrastructure doesn’t keep pace. Long-term planning is essential, and maintaining a world-class airport is part of that responsibility. SEA was built for 30 million passengers — it now serves 53 million, with 57 million expected soon. This growth will continue whether we prepare for it or not. The proposed second terminal is a necessary, responsible investment that will reduce congestion, improve traveler experience, and support economic vitality. Importantly, the project is funded through airport revenues and grants, and does not require any local taxes.

Redmond’s innovation economy relies on global connectivity. Our businesses, residents, and workforce depend on an airport that can reliably move people and goods. Without expansion, we risk losing opportunities and competitiveness to other regions. This is the moment to engage, ask all these questions I’ve heard, and support smart infrastructure planning and mitigation efforts. SEA’s expansion is essential for the future we know is coming, and the port needs our support to plan ahead. Thank you for the time.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Ms. Allen. And our next speaker is Dan Leinsky.

**Dan Leinsky (AvAir Pros, airline technical representative at SEA):** Good afternoon. My name is Dan Leinsky, with AvAir Pros. I’m the airline technical representative here at SEA, and my comments today are on behalf of all airlines currently serving SEA.

SEA airlines have been following the progress of the Sustainable Airport Master Plan since early planning began in 2014. Airlines are eager to see SAMP progress out of the environmental review stage, since this represents a critical milestone that all future development relies upon. SAMP is an extremely important element for improving the customer experience at SEA. SEA’s customer experience is strained by the current facilities — this environment often results in increased arrival/departure delays, roadway congestion, limited ticket-counter lobby positions, and long security wait times. This master plan will provide the necessary infrastructure improvement in these areas.

From an airline operations perspective, the current facility is often challenged by rampside congestion, increased hard-stand busing operations, difficulties managing high baggage volumes, and many other challenges often unseen by the public but nonetheless a contributor to their travel experience. Through SAMP, we can develop our airport to address these operational deficiencies, provide the public with a facility that serves their needs, and provide an economic environment that allows aviation businesses and their employees to flourish.

It’s also important to recognize our current point in the development process — much work still needs to occur to bring SAMP projects to fruition. This includes additional planning, design, and construction activity, all of which will require future commission authorizations. SEA airlines recognize that these things take time, and getting through the environmental approval process is required before these activities can commence. Now is the time for the port to move forward — SEA expansion is essential to our region’s future, and our economic success depends on it. SEA’s airlines are looking forward to partnering with the Port of Seattle as SAMP proceeds into its next stage of development. Thank you for your time.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Mr. Leinsky. And our next speaker is Michael Woody.

**Michael Woody (Chief Engagement Officer, Visit Seattle):** Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is Michael Woody, and I serve as chief engagement officer for Visit Seattle, the convention and visitors bureau for Seattle and King County, speaking in support of the Sustainable Airport Master Plan’s near-term projects.

At Visit Seattle, our mission is to grow the visitor economy by attracting meetings, conventions, leisure travelers, and major events — such as the one we just had with the FIFA World Cup — from across the country and around the world. That work depends on strong, reliable access through Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. In 2025, Seattle and King County welcomed 39.7 million visitors, who spent $8.8 billion in our local economy, supported over 68,000 jobs, and generated $840 million in state and local tax revenue. Those numbers show the scale of tourism’s impact on our community and the opportunity ahead.

SEA is the front door to our region for visitors, meeting planners, airlines, international travelers. Airport capacity and ease of access directly shape whether Seattle can compete for future growth. A second terminal with added gates, roadway capacity, curbside space, parking, and security checkpoints is an investment in our competitiveness — it will help us attract more flights, serve more markets, improve the visitor experience, and expand both domestic and international visitation. For Visit Seattle, investing in SEA is investing in the future of our tourism economy and our ability to welcome the world. We urge the Port of Seattle to move forward with the second terminal and the improvements needed to support this region’s future. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Mr. Woody. And then moving to our room, beginning with Anne Kroeker, please.

**Anne Kroeker (Des Moines; co-lead, Saltwater Climate Action; Saltwater Unitarian Universalist Church):** Hi, my name is Anne Kroeker, and I live in Des Moines. I’m also co-lead of the Saltwater Climate Action group out of the Saltwater Unitarian Universalist Church, and with members of Beit Havering — they are about five miles south, outside of the official purple rim that the port and FAA have determined is where the noise and the effects are. But it is clear, and as anyone knows, it goes 5 to 10 miles at least, because of the low and directed flights that have become lower and more directed over the last 10 years.

I did want to highlight that these people are affected for their Zoom services and for their in-person services, and they work outside on their campus — pulling ivy and planting trees — and of course they have to be outside for that. I will submit more comments regarding that. But I did want to say this really sounds like the Sneetches — the ones with stars on their bellies and the ones without. If you’ve ever read that story — because when the fellow comes into town and starts mixing it up, who gets stars and who doesn’t — they then realize, oh, we’re all in this together. There’s a lot more to be said, but that is exactly what happens. I lived in Bellevue, and if you are on the east side and you don’t experience this 24/7 disruption, you don’t understand — you simply don’t understand. And we all want progress, and we all want it, but we don’t want it at the expense of — it should never be at the expense of — and that’s what you all have to figure out.

A lot of people have given a lot of suggestions on how to do that, and they need exploration. And I also wanted to say that the results when you read the SEPA EIS just don’t add up. And when that happens, and they don’t equal the results, one has to go back and look at what individual pieces we are missing to equal this final result that doesn’t make sense to most people. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you. And moving to Abdirahman Omar.

**Abdirahman Omar (advocate; former neighborhood district president):** Hello, commissioners, my name is Abdirahman Omar, advocate for the district — former president of this neighborhood as well. In terms of environmental hazard and health aspects of expansion of the airport, it’s really personal. I’ve seen many of our communities — African diaspora in the region — going to the health centers, Harborview and others. I highly encourage all of you to look into the zip codes of those visiting Fred Hutch and Harborview Medical Center about cancer. We have a growing number of youth in cancer units. This is environmental injustice, and I encourage you to look into also the parks that our families and youth use on a weekly basis — Wetzel Sit Park. Look into it — the majority of those are people of color, youth of color, Highline School District — the majority of those impacted.

When I look into the economic mobility, it’s also not visible, based on the conversations I’ve had with members of our youth and families — they are not familiar with the DEIS, they’re saying we did not get input at all. And I would encourage you to consider looking back on ways you can mitigate the expansion. We are also familiar with — the families and community of South King County objected to the expansion, but we have alternatives. The basic economic theory is utility maximization — that’s a class I took more than 20 years ago, market economics. The resources are limited, but let’s use what we have in a more effective way, without jeopardizing the health, economic well-being, and longevity of our communities. I’m echoing and supporting Senator Orwall and others who speak against the expansion. Thank you for your time, and thanks for considering our perspective.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Mr. Omar. And then our next speaker is Sue Cook, please.

**Sue Cook (Burien homeowner, 25 years):** Hello, can you hear me? Hi, my name is Sue Cook, and I am a resident of Burien — a homeowner for 25 years — and this is the first meeting I’ve come to like this, and I wanted to come and meet you all and see you and look you in the eyes, so that you would see someone who is affected directly by the policies that you enact. And I was able to take time off work to come here today, but I represent many of my neighbors who were not able to come today — who are working, who are working two jobs, who are taking care of their children and their parents, people who don’t speak English very well and are completely unaware of what is going on, what is going to impact them directly.

So I just want to tell you a little story about my experience when I moved to Des Moines — sorry, to Burien — 25 years ago. It was a house that I could afford. It was a nice house, with a nice yard, in a nice neighborhood. It happened to be right on a busy street, and I knew that the Third Runway was coming, but the port package was available, and we had the port package put in — the insulation and the new windows and the new doors. And when the Third Runway finally was finished, it helped make it more livable to be in that house, and to help sustain that neighborhood and help sustain the economic base of that neighborhood.

Now affordable housing is at a crisis point — Seattle and the whole South Sound region is so dramatically affected by what goes on at the airport that I really want you to think about all the people — all of my neighbors — who need a fair shake. We need a fair shake and some mitigation to help shoulder the burden. Thank you so much.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Ms. Cook. And then I’ll go ahead and move back to our virtual speakers. However, for the table, can we please get Billy Heatherington, Joey Balden, and Zachary Shields, please. And then moving to our virtual signup list, I have Dennis Sills, followed by Kelly Coughlin-Games, followed by Maria Randazzo. So beginning with Dennis Sills, please.

**Dennis Sills (Vice President of Advocacy, Downtown Seattle Association):** Thank you. Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is Dennis Sills. I’m the vice president of advocacy for the Downtown Seattle Association. On behalf of our more than 2,000 members, I want to express our strong support for the SAMP. DSA submitted a letter on June 22nd with our full comments.

Seattle-Tacoma International Airport is the front door to our region and a critical economic engine for downtown Seattle. The World Cup demonstrated just how important that role is — during the tournament, SEA experienced three of its busiest travel days on record, serving approximately 1.2 million passengers over three weeks as visitors from around the world came to Seattle. Downtown experienced some of the highest pedestrian volumes we’ve recorded since we began tracking foot traffic, underscoring the strong connection between a thriving airport and a thriving downtown.

SEA connects businesses to global markets, brings visitors who support our hotels, restaurants, retailers, and cultural institutions, and helps employers attract the talent they need to grow and compete. Passenger demand will continue to grow, and we must invest now to ensure SEA can continue to meet that demand efficiently. The proposed expansion — including additional gates, improved passenger processing, expanded roadway capacity, and other infrastructure improvements — will strengthen regional mobility and enhance the traveler experience. A modern, competitive airport is essential to supporting tourism, business investment, and job growth. We appreciate the port’s thoughtful planning and encourage you to continue advancing the SAMP. Thank you for your leadership and consideration.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Mr. Sills. And moving to Kelly Coughlin-Games, please.

**Kelly Coughlin-Games (CEO, Snoqualmie Valley Regional Chamber):** Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is, as you heard, Kelly Coughlin-Games. I am the CEO of the Snoqualmie Valley Regional Chamber, and I really appreciate the opportunity to speak today.

I recognize there are many perspectives surrounding the future of Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. I’m here to offer the perspective of the businesses and communities we represent throughout King County. For our businesses, connectivity is essential — SEA airport is more than a transportation hub, it is a critical gateway that connects our region to visitors, customers, employees, and markets around the world. King County welcomes millions of visitors each year — they support our hotels, restaurants, retailers, farms, outdoor recreation businesses, and local events. Many of these visitors began their journey through the SEA airport. Reliable transportation infrastructure helps ensure that they continue to discover communities throughout King County, supporting small businesses and local jobs.

We’re especially grateful for the Port of Seattle’s continued partnership in sustainable tourism and regional destination stewardship. Communities throughout King County are working hard to welcome visitors responsibly, support their small businesses, and protect the natural and cultural assets that make our region so special. We encourage continued planning that balances economic opportunity, community input, environmental stewardship, and the needs of future generations. Thank you for your time, your leadership, and your commitment to planning for Washington’s future — and we do support the expansion.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Ms. Coughlin-Games. And moving to Maria Randazzo, please.

**Maria Randazzo (MSC Cruises):** Good evening, commissioners. My name is Maria Randazzo, and I’m speaking on behalf of MSC Cruises. I’m speaking today in support of the Sustainable Airport Master Plan near-term projects.

MSC Cruises brings a significant number of travelers through the Pacific Northwest every year, and Sea-Tac airport is a critical gateway for guests. As demand continues to grow toward 2032 and beyond, we believe the terminal, airfield, and cargo improvements in this plan are necessary to keep that gateway running reliably. Sustainability is something that MSC Cruises takes seriously in its operations — this past year, MSC hit the International Maritime Organization’s 2030 carbon intensity target five years ahead of schedule. They have expanded shore power connections across most of their fleet and are on a clear path towards net-zero emissions for marine operations by 2050.

MSC Cruises understands firsthand that growth and environmental responsibility are not competing goals — they can and should move forward together. Reliable airport access is essential to this region’s visitor economy and to the jobs and businesses that depend on it, including MSC Cruises. MSC supports the port’s continued investment in Sea-Tac infrastructure, and we look forward to this airport continuing to serve as a welcoming gateway to the Puget Sound region. Thank you for your time.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Ms. Randazzo. And before we move to our in-house speakers, I’m going to call for Adama one last time.

[No response.]

**Clerk Hart:** Mr. Commission President, members of the commission, that concludes our virtual sign-in sheet. Moving back to the room — I do have Billy Heatherington.

**Billy Heatherington (Business Manager/Representative, LiUNA Local 242):** Thank you. Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is Billy Heatherington. I’m proud to represent LiUNA Local 242, which we are a neighbor to the airport, just down 99 in Des Moines. Here today to support the 31 projects in the Sustainable Airport Master Plan. There’s been a lot of experts that have come up here — I’m not an expert on everything, but I do want to speak to my passion today.

LiUNA represents nearly 6,000 hardworking men and women, more than 300 of whom live either under the runway or neighboring the airport here. They aren’t just workers, they’re your neighbors. The SAMP represents billions of dollars of investment that will improve the airport experience, address congestion, and create opportunity for our members. That means a family wage that puts food on the table and helps build a secure future. And LiUNA is just one of 19 affiliated building trades — you’ll hear from Joey here in a minute — so there’s thousands of workers in the building trades that are right here. And you know what’s most important to them is a job — there are thousands of jobs that would be created underneath this SAMP, and also the permanent jobs that we’ve created here at the airport upon its completion.

Also, I want to talk a little bit about the apprenticeship opportunities and the opportunities for the next generation to work on these projects. I work a lot with the Highline School District and their apprenticeship sector, and we need opportunities that don’t burden our youth with college debt, and that allow them to have a living-wage job and have a family too in this region. It’s simple — our region is growing. I think you heard from Mayor Mullet, there’s been a lot of studies done at the state level and we’re still not any closer to another airport in this region, and even all the studies show that even with this expansion we’re going to be at capacity by 2040–2045. So we need to move forward, and move forward responsibly — get the expansion done here while we look at other options, like was explained earlier, Everett or other areas in our region to expand as well. So again, we’re here in support of the 31 projects, to move them forward. And I also wanted to take a second to thank the staff for all the work they’ve done putting all this together. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Mr. Heatherington. [pause] Okay, moving to Joey Balden.

**Joey Balden (Assistant Executive Secretary, Seattle Building Trades Council):** Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is Joey Balden, assistant executive secretary with the Seattle Building Trades Council, and we, along with our affiliated union membership, are in support of the Sustainable Airport Master Plan near-term projects. These projects will provide many good-paying jobs and benefits for workers and their families in and around King County.

These projects also require apprenticeship utilization, which Billy just mentioned, which helps starting construction workers around the area build their careers while gaining extensive on-site training. Not only that, but the port’s project labor agreement uses priority-hire programs for young workers who successfully pass a pre-apprenticeship program in the local areas, so that workers can actually live while earning high-paying wages in the areas that they work. People like to speak about addressing affordability in the area — well, good-paying, skilled labor jobs help mitigate that issue. Please continue to support the plan. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Mr. Balden. And moving to Zachary Shields.

**Zachary Shields (Senior Planner, City of SeaTac; member, StART Aviation Noise Working Group and Part 150 Technical Review Committee):** Good evening. Thank you for the opportunity to comment, commissioners. My name is Zach Shields, and I am speaking as a senior planner for the city of SeaTac. Among other responsibilities, I sit on the StART Aviation Noise Working Group as well as the Part 150 Technical Review Committee.

First, I’d like to say that the city appreciates the work that went into this SEA DEIS, but we remain concerned that it does not fully disclose or evaluate the long-term consequences of the proposed 31 SAMP near-term projects. SEPA is designed to support informed decision-making, and that requires a clear analysis of direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts, plus a meaningful look at alternatives and enforceable mitigation. In several key areas, the DEIS falls short. SeaTac is especially concerned about assumptions regarding future operations, surface transportation impacts, incremental expansion, and the way other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects contribute to cumulative effects.

Airport expansion affects our local streets, our neighborhoods, businesses, housing plans, public infrastructure, emergency access, public health, and long-term land use decisions. SeaTac has already absorbed decades of incremental airport construction, operational changes, roadway modifications, parking expansion, cargo activity, utility work, and land use conversions. Each individual project may have been described as meeting acute demand, but together they have reshaped the city. For SeaTac, the impacts of the 31 near-term projects are not temporary or abstract — airport-related traffic affects local corridors, construction affects business access and residents’ daily travel, noise and emissions affect quality of life, port-owned land and aviation-related constraints affect housing redevelopment and the city’s ability to implement its comprehensive plan.

The DEIS review should account for the full cumulative burden on SeaTac, including past, present, and reasonably foreseeable airport projects. It should also distinguish between regional airport benefits and local city impacts. Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Mr. Shields. Thank you, speakers. Our next speakers from the room are Judy Davies, Jeff Paulson, and Brec Lebeg — those three speakers will be followed by Will Booth, Sandy Hunt, and David Davies, I think.

[pause]

And on the list, we will begin with Judy Davies.

**Judy Davies (Des Moines; represents the Davies family):** I apologize for the lack of eye contact, but I’m going to read this so I can get through it. I’m Judy Davies, and I represent the family of the Davies that live in Des Moines about a block from Mount Rainier High School. I’ve lived in this area my whole life, and I am well aware of the realities of planes and plane noise.

I’m here to complain about the quality of life for locals in these local cities if this expansion is allowed. I’d like to suggest that we hold this meeting outside at Mount Rainier High School, but I know everyone would think that’s laughable, because we couldn’t do it — every few seconds we would have to stop and wait about 8 seconds before we could continue to talk, and we’d have to wait again and again. This expansion would make our skies even more noisy and unbearable.

Of course, people who are making money will try to continue to make that revenue, and actually make more money if possible, and who wouldn’t want to jump on the coattails of that and make money too? So, of course, the port wants to expand, even at the expense of these people and their families. This decision requires ethics, humanity, and self-control. Personally, I think planning this expansion is shameful. Every city with two airports at some point says enough — we have to find a new location. And there’s pushback and pushback, but eventually they do find something and make it work. I think it’s easier to put the burden on the community that has the current airport than to try to push it somewhere else. But again, I think that decision is simply shameful in this situation. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Ms. Davies. And our next speaker is Jeff Paulson, please.

**Jeff Paulson (local resident, parent, frequent SEA traveler):** Good evening, commissioners. My name is Jeff Paulson. I am a local resident, parent, and frequent traveler of Sea-Tac airport. Seems to me like this is going to happen anyway, and so what I want to do is talk a little bit about the study, about what I observed when we were at the last open house meeting, as well as what can be done to try and make things like outdoor activities a little bit more reasonable for people like us who live here.

Going back to the initial comment regarding the study — we were at the open house a couple weeks ago, I think I talked to maybe one or two of you guys — and the gentleman we were talking to indicated that there will be no noticeable noise increase, despite the fact that there’s going to be between a 20 and 30% increase in airplanes. I think we can all sit here in this room and decide that that comment is somewhere between dishonest and a bold-faced lie. I don’t like it when I talk to somebody who I’m trying to do business with and I feel that they are being dishonest to my face.

Second part of that — when we learned about how the study was incorporated, we were told that the noise-measuring devices were only measured indoors, which I think is an important aspect. But as a parent and a youth sports coach, both at the Des Moines fieldhouse as well as North Sea-Tac Park, your comment is exactly wrong — I would be yelling at somewhere between 10 and 25 children to come around, and then I would have to sit there and hold my hands up and say wait, and an airplane would come over and land, before then we could start again with the discussion regarding the sport we were attempting to play.

Now, all that said — we live by the airport, these things happen. But what I’d like to ask for is, on the back end, with these additional planes coming in, with the additional revenue that will be driven to our economy — which I think is a great thing — I think a portion of that needs to be disseminated down to the people both within the flight path, i.e., the purple lines that we’ve indicated, as well as outside of that. I live about two blocks west of the purple line, and it’s pretty funny to me that the people two blocks over can get something within a port package, yet we are not eligible for that. Thank you for your time.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Mr. Paulson. And then our next speaker is Brec Lebeg.

**Dr. Brec Lebeg (Co-chair, Climate and Health Task Force, Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility):** Thank you. Greetings, Mr. Chair, members. I’m Dr. Lebeg. I’m a co-chair of the Climate and Health Task Force of Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility.

As a 30-year Air Force flight surgeon, I loved flying. But now we know that burning fossil fuel produces PM2.5 particles that cause heart and lung disease, dementia, and premature deaths. Because transport is the largest source of carbon emissions in Washington, transport policy is health policy — that’s why a doctor’s here talking to you. Aviation is the most energy-intensive particle emitter per passenger mile. Those harms, and real money costs, are silently shifted to airport communities and the health care system without informed consent — to treat the increased illness, and it raises insurance costs for all of us.

The UDub study told us that SeaTac residents have two to five years shorter lifespan. In plain language, those planes are poisoning these people. What to do? Washington law and climate science require us to reduce emissions. We call on you to ban short-hop flights, cap the total number of flights, and do not expand the airport, for our health. The alternative — trains — are the least energy-intensive and lowest emitter per passenger mile. WPSR says more trains, not more lanes, and not more planes. Rather than expand airport ops and increase flights, we advocate rapid mode shift to rail — more north-south Cascades trips, and restore Seattle-to-Pasco passenger trains like we had until 1980. If we keep doing what we’ve been doing, we’ll get more of what we got — you know that old saying. So we ask you to choose healthy transport policy. Thank you in advance for maintaining public health.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Mr. Lebeg. And our next speakers are again Will Booth, Sandy Hunt, and David Davies, followed by Susan Fedor, Karen Valoria, and Mike Brown. As soon as our speakers are seated, we will start with Will Booth.

**Will Booth (Director of Operations, local 501(c)(3), City of SeaTac; StART member):** Good afternoon. My name is Will Booth. I am the director of operations of a local 501(c)(3) based here in the city of SeaTac. I am also a member of StART, and I live right across the street, so I can walk here.

As stated earlier, we understand that unlike me and other fellow community members here, you are not here voluntarily. Many of us have almost zero confidence in this body, especially regarding the integrity of your process when it comes to the SEA airport. You’ve heard the growing cost of things like street repair and healthcare. However, I’m here to discuss housing, specifically affordable housing. There is a community of nearly 600 seniors, many of whom have a disability or two, or three, or four. Many of those are also veterans or surviving spouses of a veteran — nearly 90% of whom are living on a fixed income. Like myself, we moved to this community for the cost. However, housing and rental prices keep rising, and with the expansion of the airport potentially causing some of these increases, residents are fearful of losing their homes because they can no longer afford the increased rent. Then there’s the fear that the current property owner will eventually put the property up for sale once again, and current residents will be forced to find a new place to live without any way of covering the high cost of moving.

How does this connect to the SEA airport, you ask? Well, this property of homes is literally directly across the street from the airport — it is potentially a great location for airport expansion, if for nothing else, storage warehouses. So my question here is: even though there are state programs to assist with communities being shut down and helping to cover some of the moving cost if qualifications are met, is the port ready to step up and pay their fair share? If so, how do we learn about this — who do we talk to, where do we go to apply? We need a name, a phone number, and an email — not a general information line where we get a pre-recorded message that takes about 30 to 60 days to receive a response. We need actual information.

And as stated, we all know you’re only required to listen today. However, I too want it on record: before the final EIS, publish a per-city cumulative impact table including SeaTac, Burien, Des Moines, and Federal Way, showing the actual housing cost, displacement risks, measured health outcomes, and public cost transfer. If this table appears, we will know you heard us today. However, if not, we know you chose not to — which, as you know, speaks volumes. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Mr. Booth. And our next speaker is Sandy Hunt.

**Sandy Hunt (Defenders of Highline Forest; former union leader, Highline Education Association):** Hi, my name is Sandy Hunt. Good afternoon. I’m a Defender of Highline Forest and a former union leader with the Highline Education Association.

I encourage all community members to dig deeply into one or two sections of the SEPA document and submit your comments by July 21st. I know people are feeling what they’re feeling, and I think you really need to express that to our commissioners. I’ve attended a number of the storyboard sessions, and I learned that without doing any of these projects, the operations are projected to increase by 20%. If we do these 31 projects, I believe they increase to 23%. That means for the billions and billions of dollars that we’re spending, we get a 3% increase in flights. Now, we would like to know what the actual higher-end capacity will be, and why aren’t you doing an EIS based on that high-end capacity, when we hear that in 2041 we’re going to reach capacity rather than this 3% increase. Please make the maximum potential capacity more prominent in the analysis, and provide impact modeling for a much broader GSA, as well as for the flight path neighborhoods.

Second, I urge the commissioners to require stronger analysis and mitigation recommendations from the staff regarding cumulative impacts and the environmental and socioeconomic consequences of this board’s expansion — because cumulative means combined. Table 5.3.1 lists projects individually, but we know if you look across, for example, just the commercial space and highway construction, we’ve lost over 200 acres of trees, vegetation, and wetlands alone. The community experiences these losses collectively, not one at a time. Finally, communities around the airport are already overburdened and are disproportionately impacted. We need better policies to consider these impacts and use the resources generated by the port to improve the lives of the people near the port, not just the ones in Bellevue, Redmond, and Issaquah.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Ms. Hunt. Our next speaker is David Davies.

**David Davies (born in Des Moines, 1965):** My name is David Davies. Thanks for listening. I was born in Des Moines in 1965 — spent my whole 61 years here under the airport. And I didn’t plan on saying anything tonight — my wife said I should sign up just in case. And then the mayor of Bellevue called in, the mayor of Issaquah called in, the CEO — airport called in, Seattle called in — all sorts of peripheral folks who refer to the region that don’t live here. And so I thought, did any of them, when they were putting their pitch in, say, “Well, we want to do this project, we’d like to be a good neighbor to those it’s affecting”? And not one of them did. The fine gentleman who came up and petitioned for it being good for jobs — it is good for jobs — but not one of them said, “But let’s help those people who it’s on their back.”

This project is on the back of three communities — Des Moines, Burien, Federal Way, SeaTac. If you people don’t make the decision to be a good neighbor and consider the people it’s affecting, then it will just be another negative thing. I think if you polled those four towns and said, “Has Sea-Tac airport been a good neighbor?” — that would not turn out to be a good petition, because I think 90% of the people would say no, it’s a terrible neighbor. They don’t take care of their people, they don’t consider the impact of what they’re doing. So what I’m asking isn’t that you don’t do it — it’s going to happen, growth happens, expansion happens, people need jobs. But while you do it, my hope is that you will be a good neighbor and say, “How can we support those people that it’s affecting in a real way?” Yes, it’ll cost money, but it’ll make more money if you do it the right way. Thanks for listening.

**Clerk Hart:** Thanks, Mr. Davies. And I’d like to invite Susan Fedor, Karen Valoria, and Mike Brown to the table — these speakers will be followed by Katie Cresley, Ken Pitts, and Alexi Gargalo. And when you are seated, we’ll begin with Susan Fedor.

**Susan Fedor:** For the record, my name is Susan Fedor, and I appreciate the opportunity to offer comments today. As part of the SAMP, it’s my understanding there’s a total of 56.4 acres of tree canopy proposed for removal for increased cargo, construction, and roads, which puts into question how much consideration has been given to the effects of climate change, since trees have been scientifically proven to be our most effective defense.

In May, I attended a conference led by scientists, restoration practitioners, and indigenous leaders that focused on different methods that could ease the impacts of climate change. Climate change isn’t just a result of burning fossil fuels and greenhouse gas emissions — it’s also the direct result of excessive extraction and degradation of our forests, which overwhelms our waterways, excess runoff and stormwater, and disrupts the earth’s ability to regulate itself and maintain some level of ecological balance. The continued destruction and fragmentation of our native forests has triggered a cycle of flooding and drought — this will only continue to grow in force and scale in the coming years. The atmospheric rivers that hit our region this past winter resulted in mass flooding that caused millions of dollars in damage. During the 2020 heat dome, 117 people in Seattle lost their lives as a direct result — it was the deadliest weather-related event in our state’s history. What we’re experiencing in climate now is as good as it gets.

Cutting down those 56 acres would mean a mass loss of carbon capture, air filtration, stormwater mitigation, and transpiration — also known as evaporative cooling, which is often the least-considered characteristic. Our big trees release up to 100 gallons of water vapor every day. If you’re wondering why our city continues getting hotter and drier, it isn’t just climate change — it’s the removal of millions of gallons of water from our atmosphere every year by way of mass tree loss. This, in conjunction with adding more flights, diesel trucks, and ground equipment, will only further exacerbate the PM2.5 air pollution in zip codes that are already the hardest hit in King County. And those same big trees cannot be adequately replaced by future growth of saplings, because it assumes those saplings will even survive what’s coming.

The scale of our future resilience depends on the decisions being made now. What does it say about the values of a leadership that would prioritize commerce over the well-being of our communities and the health of the ecosystem that sustains us all? I respectfully request you determine a path forward that is truly sustainable and doesn’t further jeopardize our collective future. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Ms. Fedor. And our next speaker is Karen Valoria.

**Karen Valoria (20-year Burien resident; Burien Airport Committee; StART):** Good afternoon. My name is Karen Valoria. I’m a Burien resident, a 20-year Burien resident. I’m also a member of the Burien Airport Committee and a member of StART, but I’m talking to you today as a 20-year resident of Boulevard Park, which is directly under the air flight path in Burien. It is an immigrant community — lots of immigrants, lots of underserved people. And as previous people were saying, people can’t come to these meetings — they’re working too hard, they have childcare issues and they can’t come. Who wants to come to the airport in the middle of the day? So because I wasn’t ready to speak, but I felt compelled to — which is why the notes on the napkin.

But these people are your constituents also — the people who live under the flight path are your constituents also. We have a higher incidence of asthma — our children do — than any place else in King County. I’m used to, right now, after 20 years, I’m used to stopping conversations on the deck because the plane’s going over, but I’m living in a house with a failing port package. We feel, we smell, and we hear the airport every few minutes, every day. So it was an insult when I read the draft environmental impact statement saying that the SAMP has no — there’s no negative impact on the neighboring communities, because there is — it’s like they’re telling us don’t believe your eyes or ears. This is the real thing, and we have all these other bogus reports telling you that.

I just want to say I know the airport’s going to expand anyway, but just throw us a bone, man. Expand the port packages, give us more trees, do what you can, work with us, because we can’t move — we can’t move. Thanks.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Ms. Valoria. And our next speaker is Mike Brown.

**Mike Brown (Representative, Pacific Northwest Regional Council of Carpenters):** Good evening, commissioners. My name is Mike Brown. I’m a representative of the Pacific Northwest Regional Council of Carpenters, and I’m here to speak in strong support of moving forward this master plan.

I know we just held a soccer tournament here in Seattle called the World Cup, and I wanted to let you guys know that out of the 16 host cities, Seattle ranked number two. And that didn’t happen by mistake — that was hard work put in by the Port of Seattle, and everybody who works for the Port of Seattle should be very proud of themselves. I want to applaud you guys. And in those articles I was reading giving you guys that ranking, it kept coming up that the reason for the ranking was a strong airport. So a world-class airport to keep up with the future — if we want to continue to have a world-class airport, we need Terminal 2, we need this master plan.

And as a representative of 57,000 union carpenters, they need this too — 20,000 of those are in the state of Washington. Those provide good working jobs, with health benefits, a pension, and apprenticeship utilization. It’s very important, and again, thank you for all the hard work you guys did — you guys hit a home run. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Mr. Brown. And I’d like to invite our speakers, Katie Cresley, Ken Pitts, and Alexi Gargalo, to the table, please.

[pause]

And when you’re seated and ready, we’ll begin with Katie Cresley.

**Katie Cresley (Publisher, Highline Journal; SeaTac resident; Highline Public Schools Capital Facility Advisory Committee):** First off, I loved computers — where did my notes go? Good afternoon, commissioners. Thank you for being here today and taking the time to listen to your community — this is where we live.

My name is Katie Cresley, and I’m a SeaTac resident and publisher of the Highline Journal, a local online news publication serving the Highline community. I also served on the Highline Public Schools Capital Facility Advisory Committee for the past three years. One table in the DEIS statement caught my attention — it identifies schools and libraries that remain eligible for sound mitigation, including Puget Sound Skills Center, Beverly Park Elementary School, and the Des Moines library, as well as the Boulevard Park library. This made me wonder: what is the plan to complete mitigation at these sites? It has taken considerably longer to rebuild schools than they anticipated — have previous funding agreements kept pace with today’s construction costs? If not, will the port work with Highline schools and with our local libraries to close those gaps?

As the airport grows, so will its impacts on its neighborhoods, its children, and my hope is that every Highline student has the healthiest possible environment to learn and succeed. Our kids already face enough challenges — we shouldn’t ask them to overcome unnecessary environmental impacts too. They can’t speak for themselves — this is our job. For a project measured in billions, protecting Highline kids is just a rounding error. I respectfully ask — I plead with you — please work with Highline schools and our local libraries to update previous funding agreements to reflect today’s costs, so that every eligible school and library receives the protection that it needs. Thank you for your consideration.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Ms. Cresley. And moving to Ken Pitts.

**Ken Pitts (Pacific Northwest Regional Council of Carpenters):** Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is Ken Pitts. I’m a proud member of the Pacific Northwest Regional Council of Carpenters. This is my message: growth does not happen by accident. It happens when leaders are willing to plan ahead, make hard decisions, and invest before a system is pushed past its breaking point.

Sea-Tac is already one of the most important economic engines in Washington. It supports businesses, moves people, connects family, brings visitors to our state, and helps keep our regional economy moving forward. But an airport that is this important cannot afford to stand still. If the port does not grow with the needs of the region, the region feels it — travelers feel it through delays and congestion, businesses feel it when access becomes harder, workers feel it when opportunities are limited, communities feel it when investments go somewhere else because we did not prepare for the future.

The demand at Sea-Tac is not going away. More people are traveling, more businesses are relying on regional access, and our economy is only becoming more connected to the rest of the country and the world. The question is whether we are going to meet the growth with vision, or fall behind because we waited too long. This expansion is not just about a larger airport — it is about keeping the port competitive, keeping our economy strong, and making sure major investments create real opportunities. That includes good jobs, state-registered apprenticeship pathways, and careers that allow workers to build skills, support their families, and take pride in building something that will serve this region for generations. Staying stagnant is not neutral. I urge you to move forward with this master plan with the vision and urgency this moment requires — and I don’t want you to just hear this message, I want you to feel it, because this master plan is going to create jobs that provide life-changing wages for my brother and sister members. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Mr. Pitts. And our final speaker that we have signed up today is Alexi Gargalo.

**Alexi Gargalo (Pacific Northwest Regional Council of Carpenters):** All right, thank you. Good afternoon, commissioners, and thank you for the opportunity to speak. My name is Alexi Gargalo, and I’m here to speak on behalf of 20,000 union carpenters, and we are in support of the Sustainable Airport Master Plan.

SEA airport is a huge part of our regional economy — it connects people, supports businesses, and creates jobs. But if we don’t keep up with the growth we’re already seeing, we’ll all feel it through more congestion, delays, and fewer opportunities. That demand isn’t going to go away — more people are traveling, our region continues to grow, and we can either plan for that now or end up trying to catch up later. This project isn’t just about expanding the airport — it’s about keeping our region competitive by creating more jobs and good opportunities. This of course includes registered apprenticeship opportunities, careers for people and families, and while they’ll be building these projects, they’ll be able to add to the growth of the region and support the economy. I encourage you to keep this project moving forward and invest in the future of our region. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Mr. Gargalo. Mr. Commission President, I understand that there are some speakers that had intended to speak here today that signed in on a different sheet, so we’re trying to get some clarity about that. They are here in the room and would still like to speak. In fact, if I could have — if there’s two or three of you, however many there are, that want to speak — please come to the table, go ahead and identify yourselves for the record.

[cross-talk — clarifying number of remaining speakers]

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you. And just for clarity, are these the only two speakers remaining? Okay, thank you. Please go ahead and identify yourself, whoever wants to speak first, and then I’ll start the timer.

**Barton Deacy (Des Moines Airport Advisory Committee; StART member):** This is Barton Deacy. Joe and I are here from the Des Moines Airport Advisory [Committee] — also, we’re StART members. I think I want to indicate that we don’t have a lot of confidence in this process — whether through StART or anything else, that there will really be meaningful mitigation. The airport expansion has to go on. So I really want to put on the table compensation for the affected communities in the form of some kind of community impact funding that would regularly benefit the cities, to offset these impacts that aren’t going to be, that really can’t be mitigated, and haven’t been and won’t be.

So, having — you’ve heard about some kind of — we get 1% of our sales tax in to run our services — maybe there should be some kind of transfer directly from the port and SEA to compensate these communities. I don’t know what that amount would be. You’ve heard a lot of talk about our mayor, our state senator, recommending some kind of partnership meetings. So let’s get together and talk about what that will look like, and have that truly help sustain these communities once these improvements continue. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Mr. Deacy. And if we could have our next speaker identify themselves, please.

**Joe Dusenbury (Des Moines resident; StART community representative):** Yes, my name is Joe Dusenbury. I’m a resident of Des Moines, and like Barton said, I’m one of the community reps on StART.

**Clerk Hart:** Joe, can I please get you to spell your last name for me, please?

**Joe Dusenbury:** D-U-S-E-N-B-U-R-Y. Thank you.

My comment is about the finding of no significant impacts in the SAMP process. It measures the difference in impacts between doing the proposed project and not doing the project. Your staff and consultants have a chart that shows the projected growth in passenger volume for each option — from now until 2037, the two lines show that the difference in passenger volume between the two options increases to about 5 million annually. The SEPA measures the impacts of the plan to accommodate that increase, not the cumulative total of the impacts. Unfortunately, the residents of SEA’s fence-line cities do not live between those two lines — we must live with what’s happening now, plus all the future impacts, regardless of which line you choose.

At 2,500 acres, SEA is literally the smallest top-tier airport in the country. It is also one of the most constrained — it is surrounded by dense urban areas. SEA has three parallel runways, north-south, with a north-south weather pattern — there is no way to modify the flight path to spread the noise and pollution around like some airports with cross runways can. These factors make any normal mitigation measures impossible.

Does this project even make financial sense? The incremental passenger growth between doing the project and not doing the project tops out at about 5 million passengers in 2037 and beyond. This project is going to spend billions of dollars just to add what amounts to less than a 10% increase in our [passenger] volume. Please reconsider your plan — you’re spending billions of dollars to accommodate a relatively minor increase in volume. Thank you.

**Clerk Hart:** Thank you, Mr. Dusenbury. Mr. Commission President, members of the commission, Executive Director — that concludes our signups here today.

**Commission President Calkins:** All right, we are now at the close of our comment period. I want to thank you all for your interest and participation this afternoon and evening. Again, all comments made here today will become a part of the official SAMP SEA draft environmental impact statement record. I also want to give a special thanks to Steve for joining us today to listen as well. Hearing no further comments and having no further business, if there is no objection, we are adjourned at 6:15 p.m. Thank you all.

---

This is a machine-generated transcript generated on the fly by Google/Youtube/AI. Accuracy totally not guaranteed. Provided only as a convenience and to help people with disabilities. Caveat lector!