Letters to the Editor

Analyze costs, benefits of proposed airport

To the Oak Ridger:

The city is currently proposing to sponsor construction of a general aviation airport at Heritage Center (the former K-25 site). This sure is a sexy, high profile project, isn’t it? But let’s take a closer look, because it may or may not be a good idea. 

First, the Metropolitan Knoxville Aviation Authority spent millions between 2012 and 2018 on studies and preliminary designs for an Oak Ridge airport, but then suddenly dropped the idea. We need to understand why before we agree to something that seasoned airport professionals decided not to pursue.

Second, the proposed airport would occupy 235 acres of scarce industrial land in Oak Ridge. Several existing industrial buildings would have to be demolished. Rail access to areas south of the Turnpike would be cut off. This would reduce the amount of land available for development and eliminate tax revenues.

Third, funds to construct the airport, estimated at $55 million, would be provided by a combination of federal and state grants. Promoters assure City Council that city money would not be required for construction, but as the sponsor, the city would ultimately be responsible for operating the airport, and this would run an estimated net annual deficit of $150,000 to $300,000 to be paid for by Oak Ridge taxpayers. Perhaps this is worth paying, but studies so far do not show benefits for the city, only for companies and individuals.

To date, the City has not completed its own due diligence effort, but has moved forward on the strength of information supplied by the airport’s promoters. But without an independent cost-benefit analysis and due diligence assessment, how can Council, and citizens, judge whether the airport would offer a net benefit for Oak Ridgers? Before the city proceeds further, I ask that City Council and the City Manager to appropriate funds to prepare an open, independent, and professional cost-benefit analysis that is supported by verifiable data and reasonable assumptions. This will provide Council with trustworthy information and analyses to support informed decision-making.

Chris Wieland Oak Ridge

Ukrainian refugees face tragic dilemma

An open letter to Tennessee Sen. Marsha Blackburn and Bill Hagerty:

There’s a dire need of help for many Ukrainian refugees in the U.S. being required to return home too soon, where dangerous, inhumane conditions of Putin’s genocide persist.

Local churches and Rotary Clubs are helping families of Ukrainian refugees who migrated to Oak Ridge in April, escaping Putin’s war with literally just packs on their backs. Currently, there are 12 refugee women and children living in one house.

While all Ukrainian refugees are grateful for our providing safety and sustenance, there are thousands, including hundreds in Tennessee, who arrived April 12-24. They were given “paroled” passports, a category requiring them to leave the U.S. by April 10. It was assumed Putin’s war would be over by then.

“Paroled” holders aren’t eligible for “Temporary Protection until October 2023” or “Uniting for Ukraine,” relief programs allowing longer stays. It all depended on their exact arrival date.

We are asking for your help, please, to change the law that now has them (including ours!) in limbo, traumatized by prospects of their children going back to inhumane conditions of persistent bombings and warning sirens, and lack of electricity, heat, and clean water.

Syd Ball  Oak Ridge