Julie Muhlstein, who once wrote a nice article about me, has planted herself on the dark side of the Paine Field controversy. (Jan. 24 column, “County residents will have to accept that things are changing.”)
Making a not-so-subtle dig at people with manicured yards and hot tubs (a group that excludes me, although I do mow my lawn), she implies it’s selfish to oppose what she sees as progress.
Well-known point: 30 years ago I was told of the negotiated agreement that would prevent the conversion of Paine Field to a commercial airport. I believed the promise and bought. Not well-known point: that so-called environmental study has a curious view of mathematics. They take noise and amortize it over 24 hours, concluding, therefore, that there’s miniscule noise in any minute. That’s like saying bullets do no harm, because, ground into grains and shot at you over a day, it wouldn’t hurt.
When neighbors argued against the Boeing pier, I demurred, thinking the disturbance to me did not make an argument against the thousands of jobs at risk were the 787 to leave. This is different. I live here 24/7/365. People who want to save a half hour of driving for a yearly trip to Vegas don’t win this one. Nor do those who claim that a commercial airport means jobs. It may. But how many, and at what cost? Does the county really gain from an unpredictable amount of jobs, compared to the lost revenue from falling property values? That’s not a fatuous argument. How many manicured lawns and swimming pools are there in SeaTac?
Sid Schwab
Everett
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
