— by Katie Wilkins, Orcas Issues reporter —
Members of the public packed the airport conference room for the most recent Port of Orcas meeting on April 11. Many came to find out who would be nominated for the last vacant commissioner seat, and to hear about the status of the Airport Master Plan.
There were three potential nominees for port commission: Greg Ayers, Pierrette Guimond, and Poke Haffner. After each candidate had the opportunity to introduce themselves, Poke Haffner was nominated and then appointed to the port commission by unanimous vote. Haffner came to Orcas from Alaska three and a half years ago. She worked for the Attorney General’s office in Alaska for many years, which gave her experience interacting with the Department of Transportation and the FAA. Bea von Tobel recommended her for the port commission.
All of the port commissioners who have been appointed to fill vacant seats will need to run in elections this November if they intend to keep their seats. This list now includes Clyde Duke, Bea von Tobel, and Poke Haffner. Greg Sawyer’s current term expires at the end of the year, meaning that his seat may also be contested. The deadline for filing to run for port commission is fast approaching; candidates must file between May 13 and May 17. More information from the county’s elections page can be found here: https://www.sanjuanco.com/1221/Elections-Office. When introducing himself at the April 11t meeting, Greg Ayers announced his intention to run for port commission this fall.
After Poke Haffner assumed her new seat, most of the remaining meeting time was devoted to a conference call with DOWL’s Leah Henderson, one of the company’s lead consultants hired by the port to help draft the Airport Master Plan. Henderson provided an outline of what has been completed so far and what tasks remain before the Airport Master Plan is finalized. The plan contains six chapters. Chapters one, two, and three are posted on the port website. Henderson reported that the FAA has already approved chapter two and “concurs” with chapters one and three. (Not all chapters have to be formally approved.) Chapter four is the only remaining chapter that requires FAA approval.
Before the remaining chapters of the airport master plan can be submitted to the FAA, the port commission must first approve them. To that end, DOWL is scheduled to make a final presentation to the port at its next regular meeting on May 9. This meeting is planned as an opportunity to update the public on the Airport Master Plan as well, and will take place at a venue yet to be determined—one larger than the airport conference room.
Commission chair Greg Sawyer stressed that he wants port commissioners to be prepared to approve the Airport Layout Plan (essentially a map of the airport according to the new Airport Master Plan) by the May 9 meeting. There are no special meetings currently scheduled until then. Meanwhile, commissioners may discuss the Airport Layout Plan, whether by email or in person, in groups of two—groups of three or more would constitute an illegal meeting.
Once the Airport Master Plan has been approved by the port and the FAA, there will be a 30-day public comment period, followed by a final presentation to the port commission. The plan will then be finalized and published. Stay tuned for details of the May 9t meeting as the date approaches.
So now we have 3 new appointed commissioners who still have not had any discussion about the proposed master plan. There was comments from Chair Greg Sawyer and current part time airport manager Tony Simpson on having to close Mt Baker Road in order to extend the runway ?
Do we care about the atrocious negative impact of this proposed expansion plan ?
I wonder about all of the turnover in the Port over the last year. Beyond the question of ‘why,’ there is also a serious question about the implication of this on the Port Master Plan. Essentially, almost all of the Commissioners and the Management has changed since the Master Plan project began. We have no elected this interim Commission, and they have, for the most part, not been involved in Master Plan developments and have not had time to consider the wishes and comments of the community. AND YET, it seems these will be the Commissioners that have the final approval power over the Master Plan?? This is a further disenfranchisement of the community’s democratic process and of the community’s ability to retain any voice at all in the very real effects on Eastsound’s land, landscape, and character resulting from the Master Plan. Shouldn’t all Master Plan procedures be put on HOLD until after the elections this fall?
This has not been a transparent process with very little community involvement which is required by the FAA. The Commission chair said he wants other commissioners to approve it by May 9 – where is the discussion and evaluation of issues and impacts. This plan is being steamrolled through and opposition will have to go directly to the FAA to raise objections.
This has not been a transparent process that includes community involvement driven by a small number of people. The Commission chair wants other commissioners prepared to approve the plan by May 9 without adequate review of issues and impacts. The FAA requires community involvement and opposition will have to go directly to the FAA.
Accountability? We don’t need no stinkin’ accountability.!
Last I heard there was a general hullabaloo and outcry at the last presentation of said “Master Plan.” Is this the same plan that apparently was to be thrust forward despite this lack of community support? Or has the reconstitution of this governing body meant a reconstitution of this plan as well?
I’m confused.
And if the plan has been changed, I for one would like to see the individuals responsible for the preemptive clearcutting of the trees along one of the town’s last beautiful walking paths, out there on there hands and knees replanting that forest:
A just penance, I’d say. ..now that you have some free time.
Seems a bit odd to go to the effort of straightening Orcas Rd and clearcutting the tree tunnel, then allowing the Port to turn Mt. Baker Rd–the truck route– into a new hazard.
There HAVE been changes to this Master Plan, to answer Leif’s question… and the public does not know about them. Many things in their “Preferred Plan” 8-15 year timeline have been moved forward to the 1-8 year timeline. Who knows how far forward they’ve moved the Mt. Baker Rd closure and reroute – since we won’t be privy to that information until the “Final” Master Plan comes out – then we’ll have 30 days to comment. We are encouraged to comment now on what’s on the Port website, yet not given the essential information we need in order to comment with any real knowledge of what’s going on.
Our elected Port commissioners have the ultimate power over county officials and any empty promises they make that “the road won’t move.” IF we want the FAA to hear us we need to be bringing our grievances to them – and not expect the port manager, consultant, or commissioners, to represent us and the concerns of small-plane pilots; it’s not in their interest!
It all hinges on permitting – and the county permits everything in the UGA. I have yet to see permits denied, even when there is a SEPA required – which the FAA is now saying it isn’t, for all the further disruption and potential destruction of Eastsound Swale. There seems to be no concern for, nor understanding of, watersheds and wetlands and their many essential functions.
RE: The eelgrass beds surrounding the North of the airport: We SAY we want to save the orca whales and salmon habitat. If we really do, then we should be involving ecology and lean hard on the Port to prove that these will not be harmed by the port; including their plans to do a land swap and allow a desalinization plant built on the west side, which would pipe waters out and in via the north shore on the port’s west side.
Hmm. Well this seems so sane and sanguine, I mostly want to know if the reconstituted governing body will represent actual community needs instead of enacting their own private agendas. .
At our expense. And we’re not just talking dollars but sense.
It seems having the best rationale that expresses the sanest options in alignment with the most responsible values is insufficient to protect us from petty acts of autocracy.
Hopefully every drive past the airfield will remind us of what is in store for us is we don’t get this right.
It. Is. An. Island.
No extra turf for “turf wars.” No “urban sprawl;” no exceptions for privilege; no room for I-got-mine-ism or boardroom baloney. Stewardship. whataconcept