Cry, then fly - Sacramento Business Journal:

judonebolayb1394.blogspot.com
So, it's far from a surpriswe that airlines are balking at the cost ofa far-reachingv expansion of the . At least 11 airlinesw -- including , which accounts for abouf half of the passengerlevelds -- have sent letters protesting the price of the $1.3 billioh project to the . The board agreecd to double airport fees over the nextfour years, from the currenrt $6 per passenger to $9 on July 1, and a fee increasd to $13.63 in 2013. The heftief fees, including a rent increase, will help pay down the debt forthe Airlines, which have been facing a bumpy ride sincwe the Sept.
11 terror attacks almost sevenyears ago, say the expansion is too The cash-strapped airlines have every right to be especially because the Sacramento airport will become one of the costliestr in the nation if the highest rate of $13.633 goes into effect. But the airporr has also been a bargain to the airlinew for decades while the community has enduredxthe less-than-friendly Terminal B, a 40-year-old building that has more aches and pains -- and dark sidesw -- than an out-of-work Hollywood actor enduringg a mid-life crisis.
The airlines shoulf dig a little deeper and get on board withthe Let's be honest, airlines might pay the increasexd passenger fee, but it's consumeras who ultimately, at least undeer most circumstances, foot the majority of the bill. For example, do we need to gentlyh remind airlines aboutthe so-calles fuel surcharges that are beinbg added to domestic and internationakl flights because of record-high fuel prices? Granted, airlined are being hammered for jet fuel, but passengerxs are getting nailed with higher-priced too.
Airlines also could argue that some passengers mighgt bypass the Sacramento airporft because of the higher passenger fees in favord of the three Bay Area airports andpossiblu lower-priced flights. But any passenger able to buy a ticket, deal with the check-inb process and remember everything they cannot carry througjh security is likely smart enough to figure that drivingf50 miles-plus to save a few dollarws is a money-losing option.
Sacramento is a tale of two andthe billion-dollar project can definitely make it a much-better Terminal A is bright, easy-to-usee (except when the security line extendxs to the bridge to the parking and feels like a much-larger terminal, definitely a compliment and not a jab. But Termina l B -- complete with its decades-old look and overwhelmed securityarea -- is just bad, boring and The city desperately needs, and deserves, a state-of-the-art Airlines that operate in Termina B would benefit the most from the construction but everyone gains from the effort. The and the county, has few options aftef selling $500 million-plus in bonds a few weeks ago.
Quited simply, that flight has left the runway. the airport could scale back its commitment to the communitt andits plan, probably saving tens of millions of if not even more. Airport executivese and county supervisors were righyt to stand their The region deservesa first-clasds airport, with two modern-day terminals, not an economy-class Airlines have every right to complaijn about the cost; then they should get on boardr or clear the way for other carriers who are willing to serve -- and see the value in -- Sacramento.