Port of Oakland approves Oakland Airport Connector project. Well, according to the Trib, anyway.
Do you ever read an article in the newspaper and think “Wow. How did that even happen?
I don’t really spend much time these days pointing out errors in media coverage of Oakland. Not that there aren’t plenty to point out, it’s just that my writing schedule is overfull as it is. Besides, most of the stories that bug me have like, the general idea right, and it’s like, little details that probably hardly anyone cares about that are wrong. So it’s not really worth mentioning.
This, on the other hand…OMG. The Trib today has an article about the Oakland Airport Connector that is just patently untrue. And not “untrue” in the sense that there’s some specious claim written in the story as fact, like if they had said, “This will be a great benefit for our economy” or something like that (although there is some of that in there). And not “untrue” in the sense that they left out key facts, like say, not bothering to mention that the $500+ million project is not projected to produce any significant increase in ridership over the existing AirBart service (although that’s there too).
No, I’m talking about untrue in the sense of just completely wrong in every way. Let’s take a look:
An overhead rail structure connecting the Coliseum BART station to Oakland International Airport got a boost Tuesday night from the Port of Oakland’s board of commissioners, who voted unanimously to give $70.4 million to the project.
Okay. Let’s get the easiest one out of the way first. The vote was not unanimous. It was 5-1. Commissioner Ken Katzoff voted no.
Beyond that, the Port wasn’t even voting on whether or not to give money to the Airport Connector! The Port was voting on whether or not to submit an application to the FAA to impose a Passenger Facility Charge (PFC), a $4.50 per ticket fee that goes to finance capital improvements. The fee would raise $70.4 million for the Port, and might go to fund the Airport Connector. But this is by no means guaranteed, because the Port hasn’t yet approved spending any money at all on the Airport Connector. As explained in the agenda report (PDF):
Even if the Board approves submission of the current PFC application, and the FAA approves the application, the Board will need to separately approve the Port’s participation in the BART-OAC project before the Port will be committed to use PFCs for that project. The Board will have a subsequent opportunity to approve or disapprove the BART-OAC project in the form of Development and Use Agreements currently being prepared and negotiated with BART.
Still, I suppose it’s possible that one could read the Board’s approval of the PFC application as a tacit endorsement of the Airport Connector project. Oh! Oh! Wait! No, you can’t. Why? Because although the Board had the option of voting to submit the application to the FAA and be done with it, waiting for the final approval to show up in July as a formality, they didn’t do that. Instead, they approved the PFC application and also directed BART to study alternatives (PDF) to the Airport Connector, like Rapid Bus (PDF). Ringing endorsement, there.
And also, even if, the Port does end up approving the Airport Connector and using the PFC to fund their contribution to the project, they will not be giving the Airport Connector $70 million. They would contribute $43.9 million to the project, and the other $26.4 million would cover their financing costs.
So every single thing about that sentence is just flat-out false. WTF?
Get Updates
Newest Comments
- len raphael: Unconfirmed that MJQ laid off 100 employees today, blaming RDA court case. How much did she and the CC waste in legal fees betting against Jerry’s lawyers?
- ralph: No, Livegreen, Occupy Oakland is doing plenty good. They are the poster children for the new, “This is Your Brain on Dope” Campaign.
- Livegreen: They seem to b determined to shut down Oakland and little else. They’ve forgotten Wall St. I can’t help but think the Officers who were preventing them from breaking in to City Hall could have spent...
- gregory mcconnell: The Occupest disrupted City Hall today. They managed to make it difficult, but not impossible, to go into City Hall. They demanded that people who accosted cops on Wednesday should be released. I was out...
- livegreen: I watched the M-Y mtg last night, & it was painful. Jose is a nice guy, but he has difficulty running a meeting that gets anything done. They debated for about 1 hour whether they should discuss recommendations...
- len raphael: The murder of 5 year old Gabriel Martinez. Got a call from an acquaintance who lives in East O and often gets supper at his family’s taco stand. She asked where she can sign up to help on the recall.
- Ravi: I’m sure that all of those Quan diehards (“a recall would be a waste of time and too expensive”) are very gratified that this lovely and deserving woman is having such a good time. No doubt they prefer...
- len raphael: JQ “”I’m actually having a lot of fun,” she said after rehashing many of the lower moments from her first year in office.” “http://www.insidebayare a.com/news/ci_19651889R...
- Ravi: And regarding police reform and the crime thing, Judge Henderson could decide to put OPD under Federal jurisdiction because the terms of the NSA haven’t been fulfilled by the City Administration. Those folks in City...
- len raphael: Harbinger of things to come to the City Council when they eventually have to make similar decisions. But they won’t. The Fed bankruptcy judge will do it for them.
- livegreen: Yeah, but OUSD has to do something. There are way too many schools for the school population. There’s simply no choice. At least they’re willing to make the tough decisions. Unlike the City of...
- len raphael: Are those school board recalls entirely over the school closing decisions? Different groups or one umbrella?
- Ravi: Two recall petitions for Quan; five recall petitions for five school board members.
- len raphael: City says there are now 7 concurrent recall petitions. Not clear how many are for Quan and how many for Council Members. Direct democracy at work.
- Ravi: Can the Oakland City Council lead? Nope, nor can the Mayor. It’s up to the citizens, who are deeply divided and have been for a very long time.
- len raphael: Oakland Local is the only on or offline general circulation media that shows understanding of the depths of our fiscal situation and understands that it’s causes precede the real estate crash. One of these...
- Mkilian: Related to the Cal Supremes haircut to Oakland with respect to RDA and the immediate need for a “fiscal operations plan” is another issue put forth in Oakland’s internet newspaper, Oakland Local, is...
12 Responses to “Port of Oakland approves Oakland Airport Connector project. Well, according to the Trib, anyway.”
June 18th, 2009 at 7:34 am
I am so glad I read this because I was really disappointed when I saw the headline on the Trib website this morning. Have you sent this post to the reporter who wrote the story? She should get a chance to correct it asap. Or to her editor. BTW, I saw that Perata came out in opposition to the Connector.
June 18th, 2009 at 7:38 am
I sent an e-mail last night when I first read the story.
Yeah, the Perata letter is excellent. You can read the whole thing here (PDF).
June 18th, 2009 at 8:03 am
And then they wonder why newspapers are going bankrupt. Gee, when your job is to provide somewhat reliable information…FAIL.
June 18th, 2009 at 8:06 am
The port and nancy nadel seem to be buddy buddy. They give her money to disburse as she sees fit for air pollution mitigation. I don’t know how effective that has been.
We should have our next blogger party at the port of oakland PARK!
June 18th, 2009 at 8:22 am
The really bad thing about this article is that other news organizations are picking up on the Tribs story and perpetuating the inaccuracies. I heard a radio report this AM on the way to work that said “According to the Oak. Tribuine, the Port of Oakland approved funding for the $500 millon OAC, a 3 mile light rail system to replace the existing bus connector.”
Is this just bad reporting or is something else at work?
June 18th, 2009 at 9:56 am
Perata’s letter was good till the end. What’s his “favorite” an all-bay commuter ferry service about?
-len raphael
temescal
June 18th, 2009 at 10:05 am
It’s like the reporter from the Trib didn’t even go to the meeting and just lifted text off of a pre-arranged PR-flack press release from BART.
Hey, that’s just as plausible as gross incompetance.
June 18th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
Makes me wonder if NPR’s CA Report will pick it up & run the story. Sometimes they just lift the headlines. Shows how the decline in journalism is even negatively impacting the best.
Is there anywhere anyway we can complain about such outright false reporting?
(Beyond the paper itself). Any truth in journalism or oversight body or local/state FCC (the federal FCC is useless and not staffed or funded to do it’s job).
June 18th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
I just emailed KQED California Report to make sure they don’t repeat this headline.
I emailed a copy of V’s Post & linked it (hope you don’t mind V) so they’d get the details. (At the very least they’ll be turned on to your blog).
California Reports contact info is calreport@kqed.org.
June 18th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
You missed an error! The OAC as proposed by BART is not necessarily rail, but more likely to be rubber-tire like the SFO connector.
June 19th, 2009 at 3:36 pm
The reporter, Janis Mara, has “corrected” the errors in the report. In later editions, the new version appears. No need to do research until someone challenges your facts! As was done on InsideBayArea forums.
June 25th, 2009 at 8:29 pm
Hate the Airport Connector, love Cybertran! Lukewarm on the busses because they have to stop too long while people get on and off, unlike the other choices. Check it out!
Ken’s earlier observation, as above, that the Port and NN are “buddy=buddy” is probably being made without knowledge of the long history of the lawsuit between West Oakland Neighbors (WON) and the Port, the beginning of the Port’s culpability that it was contributing to WO’s higher-than-just-about-anywhere asthma rate. The issue of clean air remains one of the principal drivers of economic develeopment in West Oakland (relating as it does to trucking, logistics, Army Base reuse, etc.), and, if anything, we all owe a large debt to WON – founded in Nancy’s livingroom back in the last century!
Thanks,
– S