— from Mia Kartiganer —
I love solving puzzles. It requires an agreement to a set of rules that may initially be unclear. Sometimes that’s half the allure. The Master Plan (MP) for the Port of Orcas feels like my kind of puzzle. First, there’s a chasm between proponents and detractors filled with misinformation and misunderstanding to wade through. Then there are the actual rules of engagement, the RCWs, FAA compliance, zoning, and safety.
Months ago I studied the different versions of the Master Plan, I asked questions. Lots of questions. I concluded that in accordance with the FAA’s requirements, borne of their dogged investigations of crashes in similar settings to ours, the Port must widen the runway. This isn’t about landing larger planes, it’s about making it safer for those that already do. It’s about maintaining the much needed services of Fed-Ex and Kenmore that many of us rely on.
There is one version of the MP that maintains the present length of the runway; it’s the one I prefer. There are also versions that extend the runway south to the fenceline, hence the re-routing of Mount Baker Rd.
But in my latest reading of the MP all of these months later, with a greater
understanding of the smaller components of the bigger picture, I found the glaring details that I had forgotten or overlooked.
Every version of this Master Plan, this widening of the runway, includes property the port does not own and laying tarmac on wetlands. This suggests that DOWL, the company paid $650k, (10% by us) to solve our
puzzle was not concerned with the agreed upon rules, the most important being the stewardship of our environment and a buy-in from our community. No environmental impact study will support moving forward with this project. But we need to be vigilant in not allowing our port or county to find a work-around. Either way, the process will be long and allow for more community engagement.
“We must turn the lights on and open the doors.”
Meanwhile, we have an opportunity to refocus the Port Commission toward its other responsibilities; the health and well being of our ecology, economy and community. Affordable housing issues and income disparity are leading to a loss of workforce. The unchecked addition of VRBOs and the seasonality of our status quo is not a sustainable model. As your Port Commissioner I will encourage the growth of cottage and light industry that leans towards repurposing waste and recyclables into readily usable and
marketable products, bringing more non-tourism income to the island(s).
Whenever there is this much concern and confusion in one of our taxing districts, it is incumbent upon our elected folk to put light on the issues so we can understand what is being weighed. Without knowing the restrictions they must operate within, it is impossible for us to fairly measure their efficacy. We must turn the lights on and open the doors. I look forward to working collaboratively with the port commissioners, as a public servant, in mindful and innovative stewardship of the port and all that entails, for the benefit of the island community as a whole.
Nicely said, Mia.
I love the depth of thought and commitment to ethics you bring to the table. You have my vote!
Well said and thought. Your willingness to hear all angles and represent the voters, and fairly assess all positions and viewpoints, including on-the-ground safety and quality-of-life impacts, is a convincing argument for my vote; as is your willingness to collaborate with both port commissioners and the public.
I disagree with one point you made that separating the runway isn’t about larger planes. Planes up to a 79 foot wingspan will be allowed to fly directly over and adjacent to high-density low income housing and the commercial core of Eastsound village, increasing noise and crash risks exponentially – in the highest density and most environmentally sensitive area on the island.
Under the AIP (Airport Improvement Program, the program providing the grants for almost all the airport projects), anyone who thinks they can land and take off from the airport is welcome to do so. The larger the plane, the greater the risk. I want my representatives to represent the large segment of the population impacted by these changes.
In light of the climate crisis, I don’t think that continuing to grow the aviation industry is sustainable. I want for my elected (or appointed) port commissioners to look at not just dollars to be generated, but at what is ecologically and economically responsible for the youth of today, and future generations – should we be so fortunate to have them.
None of the plans extend the pavement beyond its current location. NONE. The rerouting of Mt Baker road is to remove an existing safety deviation for the existing location of the runway. The drawings are very clear.
Well written. Thanks, it makes one ponder.
One factor in many Orcas ‘conversations’ regarding community planning is the arrogance evident from the outset that insults the intelligence and excludes real community participation in favor of convenient outcomes..
– almost. by. design.
With ten dozen governing boards here, it is impossible to adequately monitor the constant round of musical chairs passed among cronies with hidden agendas that violate reasonable and fair assumptions about civic responsibility. This inherently favors longer-term and more privileged residents who have the spare time to network at midday meetings and volunteer their privileged “Services”..
Instead of us who clean their toilets.
Suddenly a long history of malfeasance and obfuscation are revealed when an astounding *fait*accompli* that violates these assumptions comes to light.
A simple proof of this lies in the regular outcries that arise while simple civic improvements fail repeatedly: Like our Public Health District. Or fair housing for the non-bankrolled, non-vacation renter.
The diagnosis: Distrust in governance, the downside of our corrupt-by-complexity nonprofit-dependent civic structure.
As a simple low-cost approach to transparency I would propose:
+That every Orcas Issues and Island’s Sounder article discussing local governance include the picture of anyone mentioned who represents us, or want to.
+That all election materials and lists of board members, including online materials, include pictures as well.
It is easy for nice words in public to mask hidden actions taken in poorly attended boardrooms by individuals rendered anonymous by numbers. Or by “elections” of unopposed cronies..
WANTED!! real transparency: let’s see your pic, pal.
This may be a small community, but .. honestly, WHO are YOU?
Would I know you in a checkout line? I should.
I realize i didn’t explain the wingspan issue in my last comment. Two things are driving this: Kenmore makes over 500 flights a year and anything over 500 flights a year for a commercial airline automatically bumps us from a category A airport to a category B airport. This means that runways need more separation to accommodate up to 79 foot wingspans – a legitimate safety and noise concern for those of us who live under the flight path or next to it.
As to KJ Weighley’s comment that there are no plans to lengthen the runways, I hope he or she can answer this: Why do all the DOWL Plan Drawings show the runway as longer by at least 200 feet?
Anyone who wishes to see the absurdity of the DOWL proposals (that cost $650,000) for expanding the footprint of the airport and moving Mt. Baker Rd. can find them at the library. They used to be up at the front desk; now you’ll have to ask for them but they’re there.
Thank you Mia! Well said, I look forward to hearing more from you.