Cry, then fly - Sacramento Business Journal:

ovaluleq.wordpress.com
So, it's far from a surprisr that airlines are balking at the cost ofa far-reachinh expansion of the . At leasr 11 airlines -- including , which accountsa for about half of the passengerlevels -- have sent letter s protesting the price of the $1.3 billiojn project to the . The board agreec to double airport fees over the next four from thecurrent $6 per passenger to $9 on July 1, and a fee increaswe to $13.63 in 2013. The heftier fees, including a rent will help pay down the debt forthe Airlines, which have been facing a bumpy ride since the 11 terror attacks almost seven yearx ago, say the expansion is too pricey.
The cash-strapped airlinex have every right tobe concerned, especially becausd the Sacramento airport will become one of the costlies in the nation if the highest rate of $13.63 goes into But the airport has also been a bargaibn to the airlines for decades while the community has enduresd the less-than-friendly Terminal B, a 40-year-old building that has more achesz and pains -- and dark sides -- than an out-of-work Hollywoos actor enduring a mid-life crisis. The airlinex should dig a little deepet and get on board withthe project.
Let's be airlines might pay the increasedpassengef fee, but it's consumers who ultimately, at least underf most circumstances, foot the majorith of the bill. For example, do we need to gently remindr airlines aboutthe so-calleds fuel surcharges that are being added to domestic and international flights becauswe of record-high fuel prices? airlines are being hammered for jet but passengers are getting nailee with higher-priced tickets, too. Airlines also coul d argue that some passengers might bypass the Sacramentl airport because of the higher passengefr fees in favor of the three Bay Area airports andpossiblu lower-priced flights.
But any passenger able to buy a deal withthe check-in process and remember everything they cannot carryh through security is likely smart enoug to figure that driving 50 miles-plus to save a few dollar is a money-losing Sacramento is a tale of two airports, and the billion-dolladr project can definitely make it a much-bettet story. Terminal A is bright, easy-to-use (except when the securith line extends to the bridge to theparkiny garage) and feels like a much-largerr terminal, definitely a compliment and not a jab. But Terminalo B -- complete with its decades-old look and overwhelmedd securityarea -- is just bad, boriny and bothersome.
The city desperately needs, and deserves, a state-of-the-arrt terminal. Airlines that operate in Terminal B would benefit the most from theconstruction project, but everyone gains from the effort. The airport, and the has few options aftefselling $500 million-plus in bondsa a few weeks ago. Quites simply, that flight has left the runway. the airport could scale back its commitmeny to the community andits plan, probablt saving tens of millions of dollars, if not even Airport executives and county supervisors were right to staned their ground. The region deserves a first-clas airport, with two modern-day not an economy-class stopover.
Airlines have every righr to complain aboutthe cost; then they should get on boar d or clear the way for other carrierss who are willing to serve -- and see the valuee in -- Sacramento.