Tampa Tribune Errors: How Many in One Editorial?

I continue to be amazed at the errors major newspapers make. The recent Tampa Tribune editorial criticizing our new airport had so many blatant misstatements, one can only wonder if they were intentional.

Clearly the Tampa paper does not think the Panhandle deserves infrastructure dollars – that much is obvious. But it’s hard to believe a real paper with real journalists would print so many false statements.

Here’s a sampling of the of the errors:

The most blatant misstatement is about the size of the new airport. The Tribune claims Panama City’s new airport will be larger than Tampa’s. That’s wrong, and it’s hard to believe they didn’t know that.

The new Panama City – Bay County airport will have a 100,000-square foot terminal with seven gates and an 8,400-foot runway. In comparison, Tampa’s airside terminal alone is more than one million square feet, with approximately 59 active gates and a 10,000-foot runway. In this comparison, how is Panama City’s airport larger than Tampa’s?

The misstatements don’t stop there.

The Tribune says this is a developer-driven project. Not so. Our community has been grappling with inadequacies at our existing airport since the mid-1980s, applying one band-aid solution after another. Our new airport will meet our region’s air service needs for at least the next 50 – 100 years.

And, importantly the West Bay Sector Plan, of which the new airport is a part, is the product of hundreds of hours of citizen meetings and represents a collective judgment of a wide cross section of the public to include leading local environmentalists and conservationists.

The Tampa paper claims the new airport site is remote. It is not. According to the FAA’s analysis, the new airport site is conveniently located near the center of its service area, close to our region’s most rapidly growing communities.

The Tribune falsely claims 2,000 acres of wetlands will be destroyed building the new airport. Wrong again. The airport is going to be built on the site of an industrial pine plantation, a site that has been clear cut for more than fifty years.

The truth is, when the airport relocates and the sector plan is implemented, 41,000 acres – more than 60 square miles – will be designated for conservation forever, protecting the entire West Bay watershed.

The paper falsely claims federal and state taxes are funding the airport relocation project.

In fact, the federal and state funding for the project is coming from dedicated transportation funds. This money is generated by transportation user fees (for example user fees collected when you purchase an airline ticket) and the money is solely available to be spent on transportation projects.

If it’s not spent in Panama City, it will be spent on other airports (like Tampa’s perhaps?)

Contrary to The Tribune’s misstatement, the FAA, after five years of study, concluded a new airport was needed and recommended relocation of the existing airport. The FAA then backed their conclusions by pledging a minimum of $72 million towards the project.

The Tampa Tribune has consistently made false claims about the relocation of the Panama City airport – It begs the question: “Why?”

All the errors in the editorial could have been avoided if the Tampa Tribune had called Airport Executive Director Randy Curtis and asked for verification of the facts. But according to Curtis, they never called.

Bu then, if you don't want to know the truth, why would you call the person who can provide the facts?