Minutes Exhibit 8
Port Commissron Special. .
Meeting of October 25, 2016

TESTIMONY of

David E. Ortman
Attomey-at-Law
7043 22""1 Ave NW.
Seattle, WA 981 17
(206) 789-6136

Before the Seattle Port Commission
Seattle, WA
October 25, 2016  2:00 PM]

Agenda Item 6.c. Flight Corridor Safety Program Phase 1

This project represents yet another $3,231,000 for Sea-Tac at a location not viable into the
iture.

The Third Runway, which opened in 2008, resulted in a Washington State Auditor's ofce report
that the Port wasted nearly $100 million in construction contracts. An internal investigation
found numerous instances where Port employees broke state law or Port policy, and identied 10
instances of civil fraud.2

The Port's Third Runway EIS also failed to disclose signicant changes to inbound and
outbound commercial airplane patterns and noise impacts.3 Because of SeavTac's N/S
orientation, north Seattle and Shoreline residents are adversely impacted at a much greater
frequency by landing patterns into Sea-Tao. Many inbound ights track north along Puget
Sound, past Sea-Tac, with low turns back south (oen under 3,000 feet), along with past mid-
night outbound overights that combine for noise impacts up to 21 hours a day.4 As a resident
16 miles north of SeaTao, in 2012, I successfully appealed our property tax assessment resulting
in a property tax reduction due to Sea-Tac overflight air trafc noise. This reduction in property
values throughout Seattle due to Sea~Tac is an unacknowledged cost of the Third Runway.5

Sea-Tao cannot support projected increases in passengers. In 2015, Sea-Tat: served 42 million

passengers. The Port's Master Plan projects 66 million by 2034.6 So what to do? Negotiate
with the Washington Congressional delegation to move Joint Base Lewis-McCord to Moses

1
It would be far more public "friendly" if the Port were to hold its Executive Sessions at 11:00 AM and
begin the Port Conunission meetings at noon This would allow the public to attend at least part of the
meetings during the public's lunch hour.
3
See: htmII/wmvhistorylinkorg/Filelnll
3
See attached Seattle P-I article, January 8, 2009.
4
While Sea-Tao does not control ight paths, the FAA has in the past diverted noise complaints to
a phone
sex line. See attached ill/yNortlnves-tcom article, September 28, 2011.
5
See attached statement of Will Coghlan
6
See: http://wmvponseattle.org/Business/Conschtion-Projects/Airport-Projects/Pages/ajrport-master-
planaspx

Lake, one of the largest commercial airports west of the Mississippi, with an under-utilized
13,500-foot main runway, one of the longest in the nation, and far closer to the Yakima Training
Center. Eastern Washington could use the "business." Then move SeaTac to JBLM served by a
rapid transit system 'om Seattle, Tacoma, and Olympia.

Agenda Item 7.c. Preliminary Tax Levy and the Draft Plan of Finance 2017-2021.

Over the next 20 years, the City of Seattle wants over $100,000 of our property taxes for the
privilege of living in Seattle. That is a formidable amount while living on retirement savings.
And a not insignicant amount of that is the Port property tax levy, upon which King County
taxpayers have never voted.

The Port's Tax Levy PowerPoint is not the model of clarity.7 Page 25 depicts three areas of Tax
Levy Funded Projects: Maritime - Fishing Industry Support; Maritime - Strategic Investments -
Cruise Facilities; and Economic Development - Strategic Investments. As far as Fishing
Industry Support, the Port loves to claim multiplier benets from international trade. A Febmary
2015, "Ties that Bind" report by the McDowell Group stated, "Including multiplier effects,
nearly 24,000 Puget Sound jobs and $1.3 billion in labor earnings are tied to Alaska's seafood
industry."8 That would appear to be a base sufcient to md Port shing industry support, not
King County property taxpayers.

As for Cruise Facilities, again, costs for cruise facilities support should be borne by the mega-
cruise industry and passengers, not King County property taxpayers.

As for Economic DeveIOpment, T91 is billed as providing short-term and longterm moorage for
commercial workboats and shing vessels, including factory trawlers, tugs, barges, ferries,
breakbulk reefer vessels and rollon/roll-off vessels. Again, upland development costs should be
borne by the users, not King County property taxpayers.

In summary, this is a request for the Port to end its property tax levy.




7
Page 30 of the Pan's PowerPoint also includes RCW 53.25.030 denition of "marginal lands." RCW
53.25.0200) declares that "The existence of such marginal lands characterized by any or all of such
conditions constitutes a serious and growing menace which is condemned as injurious and inimical to the
public health, safety, and welfare of the people of the communities in which they exist and of the people of
"
the state." The denition of "marginal Ian   includes "The existence of lots or other arms which are
subject to being submerged by water." RCW 53. 25. 030(5). These are also known as wetlands, which are
not a "menace to the public health, safety, and welfare of the people of this state." The Port could generate
some goodwill by requesting that the Legislature delete subsection (5) from RCW 53.25.030.
3
See; http://www.seattlemaritime101.com/news-l/

Port tries to reassure public about third runway

Use mischaracterized, Sea-Tac neighbors say
By KRISTEN MILLARES YOUNG, P-I REPORTER
Published 10:00 p.m., Thursday, January 8, 2009

The Port of Seattle told a group of angry Sea-Tac Aimort neighbors at Thursday's Highline Forum
meeting that the new third runway is being used as it was intended, despite elected ofcials' and citizens'
protests to the contrary.

"We did the best we could to project what was going to be the noise associated with operation of
runway," Port of Seattle Aviation Managing Director Mark Reis said.

He later added that the Federal Aviation Administration whose air trafc controllers
are in charge of the
third runway's daily use, is "seeking ways not to
use the third runway during night hours" from 10
pm. to
6 am.

Des Moines Mayor Bob Sheckler is co-chairman of the Highline Forum and the former chairman of the
Airport Communities Coalition, a group of cities that Spent more than $15 million suing the port in
an
unsuccessful effort to block the third runway's construction.

The port's argument for building the third runway has always rested
on its assertion that about 44 percent
ofthe year, poor visibility and bad weather conditions require air trafc controllers
to [and planes on only
one runway, rather than two, causing delays. Now, they can land planes on two
runways during poor
weather -- and can continually stage landings and departures
on all three. Neighbors said the port has
overstepped its past promises by using the third runway so much, while the port counters that wintry
conditions contributed to the heightened usage -- which, in the end, it does not control, the port said.

In 1997, the port estimated for its supplemental environmental impact statement that
by 2010, 27.7
percent of planes landing at SeaTao each year would do so on the third runway.

Now, the port's gures show that 44 percent of all planes arriving at Sea-Tac landed
on the third runway
from its opening day Nov. 20 through Dec. 17, which airport spokesman Fem Coo
g wrote "reects the
low visibility conditions ofNovember and December
as you would expect."

"The premise seems to have changed from being used
as a foul-weather type of facility," state Sen. Karen
Keiser, D-Normandy Park, said. "it's been shifted, and I am very concerned about what that does to the
process on the EIS" -- the environmental impact statement required to get the third runway permitted.

"Why go through it if you are going to change the operations after all the construction is done?"
Keiser said.

Reis replied that "when the rationale for the
runway was articulated from the economic perspective, we
were able to articulate what the economic benet was  the EIS never said the runway was only going to
be used in foul weather."

Des Moines Mayor Sheckler, who has acted
as chairman of the Airport Communities Coalition, told the
Seattle P-I the port had mischaracterized the third runway's
use when advertising the project to the
community and responding to neighbors' concerns.

During the meeting, he said that whenever anyone questioned the port about the third runway's use, foul
weather was the answer.

"They really emphasized that one idea -- that it was only going to be used for that purpose," Sheckler
said. "That is why so many people in the public are upset about it."

After the meeting, Port Commissioner Pat Davis said that the port had not deliberately misconstrued the
third runway's purpose.

To mitigate the third runway so far, the port has bought 64 homes and insulated 1 14 more as part of an
FAA program called the Part 150 process, which requires that airport operators study and mitigate the
noise effects of airports.

The port is tracking the newly situated noise created by planes landing and taking off along the
new
runway's more westerly ight path in order to determine whether additional noise mitigation is warranted.

A formal Part 150 process will begin in November -- one month alter the reopening of the airport's
longest runway, which is being closed for reconstruction from April through October, leaving the third
runway and the center runway to handle all of Sea-Tac's air trafc.

"The afternoon that they opened the third runway, the planes started, and it's been nonstop," Sea-Tao
neighbor Ted Turner said.

"My wife came home and cried for two weeks -- this is hugely affecting my personal life, my family; it
has damaged me seriously."

Turner said his home's value has plummeted; he said he tried to move when the third
runway was
proposed but couldn't find anything comparable.

"Our neighborhood flat lined while everything around us skyrocketed," Turner said. "I can't nd anything
now, though I sure would like to move."

Bothell resident Mike Hughes owns a Burien rental home whose tenants called to ask for
a $300 monthly
rent reduction because of the noise, threatening to move out if they didn't receive it.

"The chance of me re-renting a house with airplanes over it, especially at this time of
year, is slim to
none," Hughes said, later adding he was hoping tojoin his neighboring property owners in redeveloping
their parcels as light industrial, as permitted by new city zoning.

"The quality of life  the fuel, the noise, the exhaust  I could sell the house as a residence, but I am sure
it would be rather difficult."

The port's Reis said during the meeting than an anomaly in the port's ight tracking numbers since then
prevented the port from releasing more current data, which he said was in conict with the FAA's
own gures.

Read more: htt ://www.seattle i.com/locaI/anicle/Porttries-to-reassure- ublic-aboutthird-rumva '- 
l297055 .th#ix7_z l sztMSz7

August 1, 2012

Statement of Will Coghlan:

My name is Will Coghlan. I live at 7038 Jones Ave N.W., in north Ballard
with my wife Elspeth and our 10-month-old son. We moved to Seattle from
New York in 2010. We rented an apartment on Capitol Hill from August
2010 to December 2010. At that time we noted noise and airplane ights
over Capitol Hill from planes landing at Sea-Tao.

We moved to north Ballard and bought our house on November 29, 2010.
During the process of purchasing our house, we were not informed that the
Federal Aviation Administration had re-routed north bound commercial
airplanes at low altitudes over north Ballard in order to make the turn back
south to land at the Port of Seattle's newly constructed third runway.

The re-routing of commercial airplanes at low altitudes over north Ballard
has had a detrimental impact on our neighborhood. Despite the fact that we
have some double paned windows throughout the house, the frequent low
over ights, especially after midnight and early in the morning, creates a
noise nuisance, eSpecially for our young son.

Had we known of this noise problem at the time of purchase we likely would
have offered a lower price or looked elsewhere.

Sincerely,

Will CoghlanV
7038 Jones Ave NW
917-208-4306

FAA directs complaints to phone sex line - Print View - MyNonhwes...                 http://mynorthwest.com/'?nid=l89&sid'553478
MYNoEthwestE
swarm

Click to Prlnt Thls Pa e

Updated Sup 2!. 2011 - 11:48 am
FAA directs complaints to phone sex line
In what was apparently a very unfortunate mistake. the Seattle Air Trafc Control Tower was unknowingly sending those with complaints about air trafc noise to a
phone sex line.

David Ortman lives In Seattle's Ballard neighborhood and told 97 3 KIRO FM he reached out to the Federal Awation Administration to complain ab0ut loud
low-flying commercial planes over his home.

"Plane alter plane after plane," Ortman said of the all-day and ail-night air trafc. 'When you think the last one has gone. another one comes over"

He called the Seattle Air Trafc Control Tower, but reached a voicemail prompting him to dial on 800 number to leave a noise complaint after hours He dialed the
number. but what he heard had nothing to do with airplanes.

"Exciting local people want to talk to you newt" shouts a perky, female recording on the other end of the dial. who prompts the caller to dial yet another 800
ntmber

Ortman dialed the next number. and was met with low. sultry music and the sound of a woman's voice.

'Hey there sexy guy." the recording says "Welcome to an exciting new way to go live chemo-one with hot (expletive) girls,"

Ortman said he was 'shocked" by the recording. which offered up "hundreds of hot girls" for "95 cents per minute," and thought he had dialed the rst 800 number
by mistake

'I thought, oh wel. I either I misheard it. had taken the number down wrong." he said. "Sol called it again"

There was no mistake.

When asked about the trafc tower's recording, an FAA ofcral said they were not aware the number was wrong According to the ofcial, it appeared a secretary
had simply misspoken. and replaced the last number of the complaint hotline with a 2 instead of a 7.

The trafc control tower could not say how long the incorrect recording had been in use. but as of Tuesday afternoon it had been changed.

The Port of Seattle runs the real 800 number. and says it has not changed in around 10 years. The correct number for air traffic noise complaints is
1-800-325-1147 or 208-787-5393 lo cal locally.























I   no                                                                                                                        en's-Anti  IO'I'HII