Welcome to PatsFans.com

Massport to add $4.50 Logan passenger fee

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by Real World, Mar 18, 2009.

  1. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,013
    Likes Received:
    194
    Ratings:
    +451 / 6 / -2

    Nice!


    Massport to add Logan passenger fee

    By Greg Turner
    Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - Updated 1m ago

    Massport will tack on a fee of up to $4.50 per passenger to pay for safety and security projects at Logan International Airport. The Massachusetts Port Authority’s board of directors announced the proposed “passenger facility charge” after its meeting today. The move requires a filing with the Federal Aviation Administration.

    Massport said it will impose the fee to finance the design and construction of Logan projects including the lengthening of runway 33 left, which stops at the edge of Boston Harbor.

    The airport manager wants to build a 600-foot-long pier into the harbor that would support an “engineered material arresting system” that can stop a plane that overshoots the runway. A World Airways DC-10 jet slid off the icy runway in January 1982 in a chilling disaster that claimed two lives.

    The $60 million project is slated to be finished by 2013, two years ahead of a congressional deadline, according to Massport CEO Thomas Kinton Jr. The new passenger fees would also help pay for runway status lights and various runway and taxiway rehabilitation projects, Massport said.
  2. Stokes

    Stokes Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,423
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Yeah we'd better build that pier because 2 people died 30 years ago...

    I'm SURE this money will only be targeted to these projects, not used to pay for more cushy jobs and BS pension plans.
  3. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,013
    Likes Received:
    194
    Ratings:
    +451 / 6 / -2

    The good news is, this will really help to improve our ranking in the Health Index.
  4. sdaniels7114

    sdaniels7114 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    5,742
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    Screw this, and while we're at it lets send the controllers home and shut off the RADAR, aprroach navaids and runway lights too. Back in 1937 pilots just 'felt' their way through the soup and hoped there was concrete below them when they finally popped out. Besides the John Han**** and Prudential buildings are a good 3 miles away and all the other high rises just ain't high enough to be much of a danger. Not to mention the fact that once one large transport jet smashes into a skyscraper it just isn't as psychologically devastating anymore.
  5. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,013
    Likes Received:
    194
    Ratings:
    +451 / 6 / -2

    On second thought, my bank account number is 123456789, the deed to my home is in the mail, and I'd like to know the proper spelling of the entity, I should make the beneficiary, of my estate.
  6. MrBigglesWorth

    MrBigglesWorth Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    8,338
    Likes Received:
    16
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0

    I'll never understand why they didn't build a second airport instead of that stupid bigdig.
  7. Tunescribe

    Tunescribe PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    Messages:
    16,469
    Likes Received:
    297
    Ratings:
    +826 / 5 / -14

    #61 Jersey

    Yet another great reason to avoid Logan Airport. Manchester, N.H is my airport of choice.
  8. Stokes

    Stokes Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,423
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Yes because building a crash pier for all zero of the accidents that have claimed lives on that runway since 1982 will keep us safe from the terrorists. In fact, let's up the fee to $100 each since you just can't put a price on safety and we are sure that the money will be spent prudently by Massport.
  9. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    i don't understand... link please...

    passengers on what? the tunnel? who's paying this $4.50?
    Last edited: Mar 18, 2009
  10. sdaniels7114

    sdaniels7114 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    5,742
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    This is why I get a kick out of people like you or Real World. You read one flippin' article and suddenly you're an expert on how money should be spent in aviation. Here's a clue, the arresting system isn't about saving lives. They've already solved the problem of planes sliding into the water by just not letting any land on that runway when the weather isn't co-operative.

    So now you end up with an airport that mostly can handle 70-100 aircraft movements an hour being reduced to 30 or 40. That leaves guys like you sitting on the ground in Atlanta or Chicago because some waste of money federal hack actually looks at the big picture and decides its safer for your plane to wait on the ground at your departure point rather than wait in a holding pattern over Logan as your plane's fuel supply gets lower and lower. Its the wasteful, economically damaging waiting time that they're trying to eliminate.

    The runway incursion warning system on the other hand is strictly about safety. Google up the term 'Tenerife' and you'll learn about what happens when two 747's end up on the same runway at the same time.
  11. Stokes

    Stokes Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,423
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    And I am equally amused by the fact that you think that this $4.50 per person is really going to be targeted only to these amazing, worthwhile projects and that those projects will be completed on time and on budget.

    We're not basing our opinion on one article, we're basing it on how well this state performs at spending our money on public works projects. MA has a long and distinguished history of taking taxpayer money and redistributing it to a series of hacks and shysters rather than making sure it is spent wisely. Same reason we oppose the gas tax and toll hikes, I'd rather see the pension and healthcare systems for state employees reformed, or remove a few of the cushy "jobs" (wink wink) that supporters and relatives of pols seem to get.

    edit: Also PC I think this would be added to the cost of a ticket, similar to the 9/11 security fees you pay. I could be wrong though.
    Last edited: Mar 19, 2009
  12. Leave No Doubt

    Leave No Doubt PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    May 10, 2008
    Messages:
    5,609
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0

    Exactly. +1 for that :) In the main forum there was a small discussion about MA and how our taxes here aren't nearly as bad as we think compared to say CA, and I agree with that. However, it's the bolded part of your post which truly speaks to why we complain so sardonically. Just reference the Big Dig; that should open a world of understanding as to where we're coming from.

    EDIT: Our govt compares to that of Chitown on the corruption scale. That's a fact.
    Last edited: Mar 19, 2009
  13. Stokes

    Stokes Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,423
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Agree, NOTHING gets done in Boston unless the right palms are greased and someone important's idiot son is hired at $80K a year to sit in an office and pick his nose.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>