From: sarah shifley

To: Commission-Public-Records

Subject: [EXTERNAL] CORRECTION: Comment for 11/17/20 Port Commission Meeting

Date: Sunday, November 15, 2020 8:07:34 AM

WARNING: External email. Links or attachments may be unsafe.

Please confirm that this comment has been received and will be provided to the

Commissioners and included in the meeting minutes.

Thanks!

Sarah

_______________

Dear Port of Seattle Commissioners --

My name is Sarah Shifley. I am a Seattle resident and co-lead of the 350 Seattle

Aviation Team. I am writing to provide comment on agenda items 10(b), (c), and

(d).

Agenda Items 10(b) and 10(c)

The October 8th presentation on your proposed 2021 budget and the Commission

briefing slides assert that the Century Agenda was the starting point for creation of

this budget and that the proposed budget was developed to achieve the Century

Agenda. (For example, during the October 8, 2020 public briefing on the Aviation

Divison's 2021 budget, COO David Soike stated that the budget is "really developed

to make the [Century Agenda] achievable." He also mentioned that the Port

"serves" the community as a public entity and his presentation slides include the

bolded statement that the "Century Agenda drives... the budget.")

A foundational concept in the Century Agenda is that the Port is a "public agency."

The Century Agenda also purports that the Port strives to be a model for equity and

sets goals for reductions of all types of emissions and air pollutants from Sea-Tac

operations. Looking at the proposed 2021 budget, it's as if these key components

of the Century Agenda never existed. In many ways, the budget runs counter to

Century Agenda goals and reads like a shameful play book on bolstering

airline corporations' profits at the expense of impacted communities and the

climate.

The budget does not reflect that the Port serves the public and shifts costs from

large corporations to individuals. I understand that the Port will be passing on cost

savings to airlines and using federal stimulus money to cut airline usage fees. At

the same time, you are asking taxpayers to pay $78 million, with additional

increases in 2022 and 2023. Why are stimulus funds being used to cut costs for

huge corporations while you push more costs onto individuals? This move is all the

more reprehensible given that many people are facing severe financial hardships

due to the impact COVID-19 has had on employment rates.

There is also nothing in the budget that will, in any meaningful way, reduce

emissions from fuel burned at SeaTac -- by and far the largest source of emissions

from Port operations. The Port continues to rely on biofuels, which it deceptively

refers to as "sustainable aviation fuels," as the single method by which it will

achieve emissions reductions. However, WSU staff has confirmed that using

biofuels does not reduce CO2 emissions from fuel burn, and they are unable to say

how much, if any, biofuel use at Sea-Tac would reduce other particulate emissions

or radiative forcing. And with the growth the Port is pushing for, any reduction in

pollutants or climate warming from biofuels will be overwhelmed by new

emissions. Meaningful reduction in emissions will only come from meaningful

reduction in flights, and the entire budget is aimed at increasing, not reducing

flights.

The budget also does little to address the massive inequities caused by Sea-Tac

operations. As I and many others have repeatedly testified to you, marginalized

communities and communities of color bear the brunt of air and noise pollution

from Sea-Tac operations. This pollution leads to a wide array of life-threatening

conditions, higher rates of pre-term births, lower learning outcomes in children,

decreased mental health and increased changes of developing dementia, and

decreased property values and tax bases. Nowhere in the budget is this

acknowledged or addressed.

Here are some steps you should take to create a budget that is in line with its

Century Agenda, serves the public, and helps achieve sustainability and equity.

Redirect costs currently paid by taxpayers onto airport users.

Pause any spending on Sea-Tac projects that are not necessary for safety.

Halt the "Sustainable Airport Master Plan" (SAMP) and redirect funds

earmarked for the SAMP review and projects to research and development of

modes of passenger and cargo transportation in our region that are actually

sustainable (i.e., not airplanes burning biofuels), such as rail.

Fund programs to ensure accurate accounting, reporting, and education

regarding all types of emissions from Sea-Tac.

Redirect money earmarked for Sea-Tac expansion projects (e.g., IAF and

NASF) to mitigation projects to immediately reduce harms to airport impacted

communities such as sound insulation and air purifiers for homes, day cares,

and schools.

Invest in research to determine how best to reduce air and noise pollution on

airport-impacted communities.

Agenda Item 10(d)

I urge you to reject the proposal to spend $22 million on upgrades to the Sea-Tac

parking garage and instead focus on reducing CO2 emissions through the only

effective means -- degrowth.

One justification offered for this massive expenditure is that it will reduce CO2

emissions by 17-20 metric tons per-year. But that number needs to be put in

context: in 2017, CO2 from fuel pumped at Sea-Tac exceeded 5,800,000 metric

tons. And those emissions had a three times greater warming impact on the climate

than on-the-ground emissions. By comparison 17-20 metric tons is pretty much

nothing. Another justification for the $22 million expenditure is that it will increase

the number of EV charging stations from 48 to 96, but that's still less than 1% of

spots in the garage. These justifications appear to be functionally nothing more

than greenwashing.

The Port of Seattle should not be pouring money into parking infrastructure at Sea-

Tac as we make our way further into the last decade during which we can take

action to avoid a severe climate catastrophe. Instead, it should be taking steps to

meaningfully reduce emissions at Sea-Tac through the only possible means:

degrowth. And it should be using available funds -- such as this $22 million -- to

mitigate the harm air and noise pollution from Sea-Tac operations have on impacted

communities.

Thank you,

Sarah