King County wants to trade its Airport to the Port of Seattle in exchange for a potential 43-mile bike trail. Of course, the Port doesn’t own the trail (currently a BNSF rail line) yet, so it’s going to buy it from the rail company, just as soon as Boeing — the company after whom the airport is nicknamed — can figure out how to move its widebody 737s from Kansas. Got that?
Anyway, it makes sense — the County doesn’t need to be in the airport business. But the Port’s claim that it has “no plans” to change the aviation mix is another story:
[Port of Seattle CEO Mic] Dinsmore said the Port will be meeting with residents and users of Boeing Field to talk about long-term planning for the airport. He said there are no plans to change the current mix of aviation operations there.
“We want to talk to the neighbors and users of the airport to make sure we understand their needs and desires,” said Dinsmore. “We also want to put to rest any fear that Boeing Field might become a busy passenger airport.”
Yet he also says, “The nature of King County Airport would not change, because we would continue along the strategic plan begun by the county, which does envision a profitable airport.” So what exactly was in that strategic plan? Apparently it was ambitious enough to accommodate Sims’ attempt to lure Alaska Air and Southwest last year. So what’s stopping them from pursuing more commercial flights?
First of all, the Port doesn’t want commercial flights leaving Sea-Tac, especially with a $4B third runway under construction. After all, that’s why they all but blackmailed Sims into calling off his efforts.
Under this new agreement, the Port would control both Airports, so there wouldn’t be a turf war with both sides fighting for Southwest’s business. My guess is that the Port is going to keep their word for another decade or so, until the recently-expanded Sea-Tac hits capacity. Then they’ll manage a slow, orderly expansion of King County Airport / Boeing Field into a commercial facility. And Seattle will have our very own LaGuardia! (And we’re sure it’ll be named after Ron Sims, all though Sims Airport is a pretty bad name. Sorry, Ron).
Now Playing: Episode 366
Obama staffs up, Detroit comes to DC and finally, Iraq and the US come to a security agreement.
Links Mentioned: Iraq SOFA … pros and cons of a bailout.
Interesting. Maybe Sims is bolstering his credibility as a green for another run at state-wide or federal office? Hope he does … I like Ron Sims.
Still — faced with the $600 Christmas ticket home (thanks Northwest Airlines, my rectum feels MUCH better now) — my feelings about the Port assuming control of both airports can be summed up as: competition = good for consumers, monopoly = bad for consumers. Seems to me the last thing this insular and isolated community needs is for its only tenuous link to the rest of the country to be subject to a monopolistic provider. I know SnoCo has mooted an airport from time to time, but how likely is it in this NIMBY (or BANANA) hotbed we call the PacNor that a new airport is ever going to get built? Not very. Boeing Field is Seattle’s last, best hope for reasonable airfare for the foreseeable future.