With the Powerball jackpot now projected to be over a billion dollars, we finally have a way to pay for our new terminal! If fact, if the Aviation Department buys a ticket and it wins, I pledge to be there politely applauding at the ribbon cutting. I’ll even offer to hold the ribbon. Hopefully, the jackpot will climb well past the 1.4 billion currently projected so we can payoff all the consultants in addition to the inevitable cost overruns.
I would also hope that some money can be set aside for those who will lose their jobs when the new terminal opens. These would be the shuttle drivers, baggage handlers, skycaps and ticket agents whose jobs are set to be eliminated or automated according to the proposed designs. Also no longer needed will be all of the experienced building engineers who currently manage the various systems that keep the place running. That likely will be handled by some guy sitting at a computer monitor in India.
I’m not suggesting that we keep KCI “as-is” merely as a jobs program. I am simply pointing out that in addition to everything else that Aviation and other city leaders tend to leave out of the conversation, there are lives to consider beyond those whose names would be put on the plaque.
For those still proud of the 2010, JD Power Ranking. Here is a more current, representative look at the best airports in the world: http://www.aci.aero/News/Releases/Most-Recent/2016/02/29/Airports-Council-International-announces-2015-Airport-Service-Quality-Award-winners
I’m struggling to find out what your major concerns are throughout this entire website.
As a fiscal conservative, I can understand if you don’t want the city to go into debt over this, but the Aviation Department is proposing revenue bonds which are paid through the revenue they generate. This is much like borrowing money from mom or dad because they absolutely know you will pay them back when you generate income. Are you too worried about the future of revenue for the only international airport in this metropolitan area? Jobs come and go as buildings become outdated or improve, and by unifying the airport into one terminal, all of the airport employees and services will be centrally located. As a passenger, that seems understandably convenient and less wasteful. The unique design of the three terminals can be replicated, but ultimately who cares when people are just trying to get to their destination? We could fly out of a barn as long as people are offered luxury and priority seating classes.
Thank you for your thoughtful and well-worded comment. There are many things about which to be concerned, with most involving a lack of accurate (you can decide whether intentionally or not) claims from the city regarding need and option and of course cost.
I understand what you are saying about bonds. However the revenue of which you speak comes from two places: passengers and airlines. Most experts agree that parking rates will spike. It’s hard for the airlines to pass along all of the increases so that increases their cost of doing business here which then makes other cities more attractive. Of primary concern are the above average number of non-stop flights we currently enjoy. A primary reason for this is our low cost to the airlines in the current configuration. Raise the costs and take away our advantage and we’re vulnerable to losing them – a nice competitive advantage when trying to woo businesses currently in markets where all they have are flights to the major hubs.
Thanks again for joining the conversation!
I would agree that for a medium size airport, we enjoy the luxury of having many non-stop flights to many cities. However, that number has fluctuated up and down over the years primarily as a result of supply and demand. Sure, landing fees play into the equation but it isn’t the only variable the airlines look at when deciding to offer service.