http://www.Acterra.org/news/12-01/SFOrunways.html
San
Francisco voters get say on runways
by
Richard Zimmerman
30-Dec-2001
Proposition D, which gives San Francisco voters the right to vote on development
projects requiring 100 acres or more of bay fill, passed in a landslide
on November 6. The amendment to San Francisco's City Charter won with
over 75 percent approval in the election, garnering more "yes"
votes than any other proposition on the San Francisco ballot.
While Prop D did not mention San Francisco International Airport's proposed
runway project, it is the only project proposed to date that would be
affected. Indeed, since the Bay Conservation and Development Commission
(BCDC) came into existence in 1965, the largest bay fill project ever
approved was 84 acres; SFIA's proposed runways would require almost 1,000
acres.
San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown and airport management opposed the Charter
amendment initially but ostensibly switched sides after the San Francisco
Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to place the amendment on the ballot.
However, Brown and his allies were reported to be attempting to run a
bill in the State legislature that would negate the San Francisco vote
by requiring a Bay Area referendum.
San Mateo County's Voice
In October, Governor Davis signed Senator Jackie Speier's (D-San Francisco/San
Mateo) bill, SB 244, confirming San Mateo County's right to approve the
proposed runways.
Now the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors must hold a public hearing
and vote to approve any land that would be transferred to San Francisco
for the runways. The bill clarified that San Mateo County does have jurisdiction
even when the land in question is submerged, and extended the public comment
period to 120 days.
Airport Expansion Update
Reports indicate SFIA will lose as much as $100 million this fiscal year.
But despite the recent decline in air travel, Mayor Brown and SFIA are
pushing ahead with the needless runway expansion, even while dropping
other projects at the airport.
The Sierra Club's Bay Protection Campaign has called for an end to the
runway expansion project. "We call on Mayor Brown, the Airport Commission
and the Board of Supervisors to immediately suspend planning work on Bay
fill runways," said Jane Seleznow of the Bay Protection Campaign
and Chair of the San Francisco Bay Chapter. "The city should stop
wasting money on lobbyists, lawyers and consultants for an assault on
San Francisco Bay."
Since the terrible tragedy of September 11, the airlines have requested,
and received, some $15 billion in aid from the federal government. The
airlines said this money was needed to offset the losses incurred when
the FAA grounded all flights after the terrorist attack.
In fact, the airlines were in trouble before September 11.
The real problem for the airlines was the economic slow-down, coupled
with poor management practices such as overscheduling. The airline business
is driven by the economy, not the other way around as SFIA claims.
SFIA's data shows that the number of flights at SFIA was only off by 3.5
percent for the year as of August 31, but the number of passengers was
off by 5.2 percent for the same period. In other words, the number of
travelers was decreasing _before_ September 11.
However, the recent decline in flight operations does demonstrate a way
to solve the problems at SFIA without building runways into the Bay. The
relatively small decrease in flights led to a dramatic reduction in delays
at SFIA. "There are no weather related delays at SFIA now,"
said Kandace Bender, Director of Communications for the Airfield Development
Bureau.
Department of Transportation data shows that the number of commercial
flights in September 2001 dropped by six percent over September 2000,
but the arrival delays at SFIA went to zero. That is, the number of flights
barely changed but delays disappeared. Clearly runway configuration at
SFIA is not the only major factor in delays.
The airport rejected alternatives to the runways that would reduce the
number of flights by small amounts, saying the reduction would be insignificant.
For example, high-speed trains would reduce the number of flights by seven
percent according to the Regional Airport Planning Committee, but SFIA
said that was not enough to make a difference in delays. The current situation
shows how wrong the airport is.
As Seleznow of the Sierra Club has said, "It's time to take a step
back from this irresponsible boondoggle and instead craft truly regional
transportation solutions that protect San Francisco Bay and our quality
of life."
------
About the author: Richard Zimmerman is a windsurfer who is active in the
San Francisco Bay protection campaign, and tests San Francisco Bay water
quality on a regular basis.
RELATED
San Francisco
Chronicle:
Critics Question Impartiality of SFO Runway Study
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2000/06/12/MN6659.DTL
San Francisco Chronicle:
County May Yet Have Runway Say
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2000/11/30/MNS125233.DTL
San Francisco Magazine:
The Clash Over The Runways
http://www.sanfran.com/features/SF0105bay1.htm
Save the Bay:
The Largest Bay Fill Project in 60 years
http://www.savesfbay.org/sfoexpansion.html
Runway expansion and bay fill maps
http://www.sfba.org/sfo/runways.htm
Sierra Club:
San Francisco Airport Runway Fill Proposal Will Devastate San Francisco
Bay...
http://www.lomaprieta.sierraclub.org/BayCampaign.html
Bay Conservation and Development Commission
http://www.bcdc.ca.gov/
Protect Our Bay
http://www.protectourbay.com/
This article
appeared in the Winter 2002 issue of EcoAdvocate, the newsletter of Acterra:
Action for a Sustainable Earth. For info please visit http://www.Acterra.org
Copyright 2001 Acterra; Permission is granted to reproduce this article
for not-for-profit educational purposes only. Please include all contact
info and footers.
-30-
|