Published Wednesday, November 20, 2002, in the San Jose Mercury News

Letters to the Editor

Airport expansion: Find a better way

I was one of 200 volunteers who collected 24,000 signatures and put 
the Airport Traffic Relief Act on the 2000 ballot. I personally 
talked with thousands of people who were concerned that the San Jose 
airport was to double the number of planes with no traffic 
improvements to get to those planes. The initiative had overwhelming 
support, particularly the rail link.

The act does not prohibit security changes. This argument is 
deceiving, playing on people's fears. The most important aspect of 
security is adequate traffic flow around the airport during 
emergencies.

Only because of the traffic relief act has the city been planning and 
getting funding for traffic improvements. Three portions of the 
improvements have plans and funding. The fourth, the people mover, 
has plans but the airport refuses to fund it. It would cost less than 
a tenth of the cost of the complete project. Its refusal is holding 
back the expansion.

I am shocked that during this time of budget shortfalls and reduced
airplane usage, when we are asked to tighten our belts, that the
mayor is asking for $1.7 million for a special election to speed
up the expansion (Mercury, Nov. 14).  The mayor says that federal 
safety requirements must be met; again, the traffic relief act does
not stop security and would increase safety.

There must be a better way to make the airport safer and more 
efficient, without trampling on workers, services, communities and 
commuters. Wouldn't it be more sensible if the money spent on an 
expensive special election and campaign were instead used to make 
necessary security and traffic improvements?

Patti Bossert 
San Jose 


The San Jose Mercury News archives are stored on a SAVE (tm) newspaper library system from
MediaStream, Inc., a Knight-Ridder Inc. company.