Contributed by Eric Gourley
In 2002 I wrote a check to the Port of Orcas for $397.59 because it and the FAA had forced me to pay for a “deer fence” that I did not even want. Private property owners were also forced to provide an easement to the Port through their land for this fence. We did not solicit any kind of a fee from the Port for the easement.
Now the Port and the FAA seek to deny these owners, who granted them an easement, access to the runway unless they pay an access fee. These and past owners have been accessing the runway since 1959 when they were granted access under the Ferris Deed. Why is it necessary for the residents who already have a deed guaranteeing access to the runway to have to re-establish their non-fee prescriptive right over the last 50 years?
The private owners have only enhanced the overall quality of the airport. They have not presented any safety hazard, and they do not create an unfair financial burden to the Port. What is at issue is that the FAA has a great document called the Airport Improvement Plan that basically states all residential properties should be prevented access to the runway. One of the ways to eventually achieve this is to levy an unwarranted fee that will ultimately be used to restrict owners from accessing the runway. It is simply a clever way to get around a long coveted deed that was drawn up to promote the land surrounding the airport as an aviation entity.
The Port, especially Commissioner Eimers, is again seeking a fee because of bureaucratic blackmail from the FAA. In effect, Eimers is reducing the value of the private properties guaranteed access by the Ferris Deed if this fee is levied. Eimers has a lease on a hangar on Port property that he is selling. Since a fee would substantially affect the private property owners’ values in a negative way, it gives the Port hangar properties an unfair advantage. This is a conflict of interest. Eimers should recues himself and not partake in any action or discussion regarding this issue.
It is unfortunate that the covenant urging residential development backed by a legal deed is being denigrated by a “cookie cutter” plan that does not apply to an island community such as Orcas. What good is a covenant or a legal deed over the span of time if bureaucracies are permitted to circumvent the law with unscrupulous manipulations?
