We believe in local solutions. We focus on developing as much policy here at Sea-Tac Airport, using the Sea-Tac Communities Plan of 1976 (STCP) as our guiding star. The STCP was the first plan of its type in the nation and provided a complete blueprint for a sustainable airport community vision. Unfortunately, it was swiftly hijacked–by local politics! Despite that, it was the right approach because it was so comprehensive. It enumerated all the issues we think about today and created a useful framework for addressing them.But people forget. So today, the prevailing view seems to be almost the opposite. Various airport groups across the nation advocate collectively for relief from the FAA and Congress. While we strongly support Federal reform, we are convinced that the fastest way to get there is to make Sea-Tac Airport the pilot for a variety of mitigations and policies that could then scale up to the Federal level. Solve for Sea-Tac. Solve for every airport in America.For several reasons, including geography, history and politics, Sea-Tac Airport has always presented one of the most challenging environments in the United States for surrounding communities. Finding solutions that work here will work anywhere. And because we did it before, all activists and governments should be working on pilot programs to fix Sea-Tac Airport.
Your 2025 State Calendar
State Bill Introductions Updated daily as new bills are filed.
HB1303/SB5380 |
This Washington state legislation aims to improve environmental justice and public health by requiring the Department of Ecology to incorporate environmental justice considerations into their environmental review process. Specifically, environmental justice must be added as an official element in the environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) and as a component of environmental assessment (WAC 197-11-444). The overall goal is to reduce environmental and health disparities across Washington state communities and improve health outcomes for all residents. |
SB5652/
|
Starting January 1, 2026, qualifying port districts must obtain an assessment before approving any significant port action. This assessment must be conducted by the University of Washington’s department of environmental and occupational health sciences, working with the local county health department, to evaluate potential adverse cumulative impacts on overburdened communities and vulnerable populations affected by the action.
Port districts have the authority to spend money to address and mitigate environmental impacts in their district or general area. This includes funding for remediation, studies, and recommendations regarding environmental and cumulative health impacts. They can contract with nonprofits and other entities for expertise, and may use funds (including those authorized under RCW 53.54.040) to address both current and historical environmental harm affecting overburdened communities and vulnerable populations. |
Ongoing Support
Policies and legislation we are actively proposing and promoting at each major level of government:
Municipal
Airport Legislative Advocate
We feel that the local communities need a full-time professional advocate for aviation issues. The current approach of reacting to each airport expansion in an ad hoc manner has only led to a series of failures and resentments. Discussion.
Fixed Site Air Quality Monitoring Network
This is the key to obtaining regulatory authority
Port District Property Tax Levy
Title 53 governs Port Districts like the Port Of Seattle. Currently, the Port has a Property Tax Levy which has been disastrous for airport communities.
The Port’s Taxing authority needs to be reformed and repealed
Avigation Easement Reform
Title 53 governs Port Districts like the Port Of Seattle. Currently, §54.030 (3) demands that home owners provide a perpetual Avigation Easement in order to receive sound mitigation. This also prevents homeowners from receiving compensation of any kind as a result of damage incurred by airport operations. As absurd as it may sound, the prevailing legal thought is that if an airplane fell on your property you would not be able to sue the Port for damages for which they were partially responsible.
Port of Seattle Commission Districting
Title 29A governs all aspects of elections in the State Of Washington. Currently, §29A.92.040 says that Port Districts with at-large Commission seats ( like the Port Of Seattle) can voluntarily decide to switch to a District-based voting system. However, the mechanism for a voluntary switch is not specified. The only specifics pertain to making sure the public is involved in the districting plan to make sure it is equitable. There is also another section which provides for a court-ordered switch to a district-based Commission, but that would only occur if there was a voting-rights violation of a ‘protected class’. Unfortunately, people living under the flight path do not currently qualify.
Federal
Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) Reform
Passenger Facility Charges are collected as a fee on every ticket sold. We recommend that a portion of those fees be directed kicked back to the communities surrounding each airport in the form of block grants to be used specifically for remediating airport impacts. Discussion.
Airport Improvement Program (AIP) Reform
Currently AIP grants are limited to new sound insulation. This should be expanded to second chance programs. AIP grants should also be expanded to include other mitigations. And a certain percentage of annual grants should be required for mitigation in each annual request.
Aviation Impacted Communities Act (HR6168)
HR 6168 is a bill sponsored by Congressman Adam Smith which makes improvements to community engagement with the FAA. A letter to Adam Smith
No Substitutions or distractions
The issues we oppose are just as important as the ones we support
- Although many of our policies align with climate change, we’re not trying to save the planet.
- We do not support any political party. We don’t care how fantastic any politician is on issue (x), we only care about their position on our issues.
- We are also not interested in any other good works done by any agency, including the Port of Seattle.
- We are unwilling to accept solutions that are twenty five years off in the future.
We only care about reducing noise and pollution and improving the health of communities under the flight path. Now.
Sustainable Aviation Fuel
In theory, SAF is carbon-neutral. Just not for residents near Sea-Tac Airport. And the current strategy is to require only 10% SAF by 2029.
Second Airport
It is not that we ‘oppose’ an airport. It is that such an airport is several decades away. Plus, it will never reduce the number of operations around Sea-Tac Airport. This has been one of the toughest things for people to wrap their heads around. But in fact, the Port of Seattle would be the first to admit that such is the case.
However, any second airport negotiations must include mitigation for residents near Sea-Tac Airport.
Electrification
Electric airplanes are a great idea. Again, they are many decades away. Also, another tough pill to swallow is that the majority of noise generated by commercial aircraft comes from the airframe, not the engines. So even a zero-noise engine will be almost as loud as current fossil-fuel powered craft.
Why Electric Airplanes are no panacea
Autonomous unmanned vehicles (AUM)
You may be more familiar with the term ‘drones’. We consider AUMs to be not merely a distraction, but a potential threat. It is quite likely that Sea-Tac will be a main hub for this emerging technology due to the existing infrastructure and logistical advantages. Despite being electric powered, they are far from noiseless and the negative potential of (literally) thousands of such operations weekly over our neighborhoods is not an appealing prospect.