HB1791 is a bill of the 2023 State of Washington Legislative session, which attempts to re-constitute the failed CACC process, commonly known as “the search for a second airport. As of today, the bill has passed the House and is under review in the Senate. You can follow its progress and provide your own comment at the above link.
Today’s testimony (video) included remarks by both detractors (StopTheAirport , Enumclaw Plateau Community Association) and key supporters such as Tom Dent (R) Moses Lake, and the City of Yakima, which, thus far is alone among cities in Washington in showing an interest in accommodating a new airport.
To illustrate the complex politics, detractors specifically asked that Tina Orwall’s (D) Des Moines, amendment be removed. Although the amendment strengthens language calling for studies and mitigation of externalities in the new airport, they are concerned about any attempt to make a second airport more palatable. For these groups, as in the Third Runway fight thirty years ago here, it’s all-or-nothing.
Thank you, Chair.
My name is JC Harris. I am a member of Des Moines City Council, right next to Sea-Tac Airport, but I speak today as a private citizen and representative of SeaTacNoise.Info, which provides community advocacy for the region.
I speak in support of HB1791 with the following warnings.
Every time this subject has come up since the 1970’s, it gets 2nowhere. And the reason it gets nowhere is because people in other communities see how poorly governments have addressed the negative externalities of Sea-Tac Airport vs. the actual benefits and rationally say, “No thank you”.
In 1976, community members, the FAA, the Port of Seattle and King County came together to create the Sea-Tac Communities Plan, a framework to find a way for communities to live in harmony with the airport for the long haul. Unfortunately, over time we walked it all back, leading to an environment where communities have to fight over every mitigation.
The primary defect of this bill is that it provides no consideration for, or relief to, residents near Sea-Tac Airport. And I ask you to consider that this bill, and every aviation bill going forward, should address the relief we were promised in 1976 but never received.
You cannot expect other communities to embrace an airport next door until they have evidence that communities around Sea-Tac are better treated. Water, Air, Health, Noise, Parks, Education, Business. Until ways are found to improve our experience, you will 1never get buy-in elsewhere.
Sea-Tac will always be the primary airport for the State and will always be pushed to the max. Because one last bit of history. Every time people thought Sea-Tac was filled? The means was found to add capacity. But that added capacity never comes with commensurate mitigations.
The only options we are offered seem to be “Wait for hydrogen!” “Wait for SAF! Wait 25 years. We shouldn’t have to suffer for another 25 years.
Thank you.
1That is not exactly true. In every ‘second airport’ search, there is always one City that shows a great deal of interest. This time round it seems to be Yakima. Unfortunately, none of the places that actually want a second airport ever meet the needs of any of the main stakeholders in government and industry.
2Most recently, the Flight Plan Project from 1989-1994. That slog took five years and the end result was to enable legislation to move forward with a Third Runway.