Unfettered Letters

Lack of drinking water at KCI

I share Diana Lambdin Meyer’s concern regarding the lack of water fountains in secured areas of KCI noted in “The Watchdog” (6/25, Local, “Parched KCI passengers go thirsty”). Joe McBride, representing the Kansas City Aviation Department, did not solve the problem with his cavalier comment that bottled water is available. Many of us do not wish to purchase oversized bottles of water. And what about travelers who might need a quick drink of water to prevent choking?

I appreciate the expense that installing water fountains might entail after the airport’s renovation, but why not choose an acceptable, less expensive answer? The Aviation Department could install water coolers and small cups for the secure areas of the airport.

This may not be a perfect answer, but it is far better than McBride’s response.

Jan Duncan-O’Neal
Overland Park

The future of unfriendly flying

If you think Barbara Shelly’s future flyer has problems (6/6, “‘This is the pilot: That’ll cost you 5 bucks’”), imagine future flyer, economy class, with added security.

To the already long lines, arbitrary charges and other indignities, add worldwide background check, strip and cavity searches, electric stun-gunning or sedating (the unconscious passenger is the only truly trustworthy passenger), destinations stapled to foreheads, passenger boarding and deplaning handled in the same reliable time proven methods used to safely transport our luggage — dumped on a carousel, flopped on a conveyor belt and stacked compactly in an area completely without seats. Seats are only necessary when conscious.

This would certainly allow more people to be jammed on the planes and you could do away with snacks, meals and even those inconvenient bathrooms, after the passengers/luggage were deplaned, the compartment could simply be hosed out.

The airlines could make more money, the skies would be safe from terrorists, and the sheep will arrive safely at their destination ready for slaughter or shearing.

Will FitzPatrick
Kansas City

Abetting the enemy?

After reading your front page article (4/9, A-1, “If truth be told, you don’t need ID to board a jetliner”), I was reminded how desperate reporters must be to get something published in the paper.

Why must you tell our enemies that there are ways to circumvent the system (even though additional screening is required)? I can see it now: people purposely not bringing their IDs to the airport, overwhelming an already overworked TSA.

This is just another example of the elitist media waving their right to a free press without thinking about its effect on the country as a whole.

Dave Krause
Overland Park

Chimp performers

Thanks for focusing some attention on KCI’s use of a chimpanzee in its new ad campaign (3/3, Local, “Use of chimp in airport’s ad angers PETA”). One clarification: PETA protestors were at the airport, not outside the zoo.

In the jungles and rain forests where they belong, chimpanzees have exceedingly complex social structures. They seek out mates, raise children, explore and play.

When used as props in the entertainment business, they are beaten into submission, treated like equipment and denied everything that’s natural to them.

There is no justification for demeaning and debasing our closest animal kin. Concerned readers can learn more by visiting NoMoreMonkeyBusiness.com.

Jennifer O’Connor
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals
Norfolk, Va.

Experts assert that it is impossible to train chimpanzees and other great apes for entertainment without abusing them.

The Humane Society of the United States, the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA), the Jane Goodall Institute, and the Environmental Media Association, among countless other organizations, oppose the use of great apes in entertainment.

KCI should have taken the time to consult with reputable primatologists before deciding to film this abhorrent commercial.

Julia Gallucci
Chimpanzee Sanctuary Northwest
Cle Elum, Washington

How KCI ranks

We learned on The Star’s front page recently (2/26, “Happy to be ranked near the bottom”) that according to data compiled by U.S. News and World Report, KCI ranks among the top three airports in the nation with regard to having the fewest number of delayed flights as well as the fewest overcrowded flights. Surely something can be done to make KCI as miserable as some of the other major city airports.

Perhaps the Aviation Department could pay outrageous fees to an out-of-state consulting firm to recommend a plan that will substantially increase the number of overcrowded and delayed flights.

I would suggest that they engage the same consultants who recently recommended that the city abandon its extremely convenient triple-terminal design, in favor of a single terminal that will virtually guarantee longer lines and greater distances to departure gates.

It’s a perfect match: Delayed flights will give passengers more time to navigate longer lines, and those who can’t make it to distant gates on time can stand by and help overcrowd the next flight.

Bernie Papin
Lenexa

I take offense to reporter Mike Rice’s statement comparing the combination of peanut butter and mayonnaise to people always being unhappy at airports (2/26, A-1 story: “Whether it’s delayed flights or cramped planes, happy people and airports seem to go together about as well as peanut butter and mayonnaise.”)

PB and mayo is one of the best tasting sandwiches around.

I dare anyone to try it and tell me otherwise!

Erich G. Oberle
Lenexa

KCI not for shopping

In regard to Joe Guarino’s letter on Kansas City International Airport and one terminal (1/21): I would love to have connection walkways between the terminals. However, I thought one went to an airport to fly somewhere, not to have a true retail experience. I don’t know anyone who would go to the airport to just to shop.

Shelly Brown
Liberty

KCI, business travelers

In response to Rep. Sam Graves’ As I See It (1/15, “Customer convenience is first”), our airport is not convenient to business travelers, and the reality is that they make up 70 percent of an airline’s business.

Besides convenience to the everyday traveler (connections, parking) a one-terminal system would combine the traffic to form a true retail experience. Many airports have great shops, restaurants etc.

Think of the boost to the local economy, the jobs it would create and the impression it would give to travelers about what a great city this is. Everyone knows that travelers spend a lot of money in airports. Why don’t we take advantage of that?

A one-terminal system could also serve as a showcase first step into our wonderful, under-rated city. Maybe a fountain in the middle of the new terminal. How about a museum that shows off how important our history is to the landscape of America itself?

Our airport can still be convenient to the vacation traveler. We just need to be a little creative. In the past several years Kansas City has done some wonderful things to upgrade its image. Let’s keep the momentum going by building a first-class airport.

Joe Guarino
Kansas City

Arrivals and departures

Wanna cut down on the delays of arrivals and departures of planes at Kansas City International Airport? At the gate ramps, put in parking meters with slots that accept $500 bills only.

W.H. Leach
Salisbury, Mo.

Don’t ruin KCI

I find it unbelievable that 12 persons setting in Kansas City’s City Hall (along with the mayor) will have the final say about a possible new terminal that would replace the airport’s three C-shaped terminals.

These same 12 self-absorbed persons cannot have abandoned buildings torn down or the sewer system fixed. But they can try and make a fool of the mayor over a new contract for the city manager, when the mayor should have had the final say.

Now these same 12 councilpersons, who represent fewer than 500,000 people, will have the power to commit the metropolitan area of 2 million to their actions.

The security expenses will never equal the estimated $1.5 billion price tag. Try and estimate the cost 15 to 20 years in the future. Also they seem very concerned that concessionaires can make more money, all at the cost to the traveling public.

Just ask the traveling public in Kansas City, and the majority will say leave it as it is. If is not broken do not attempt to fix it.

Richard Koop
Raytown

Editor’s note: The plan, developed by the city’s Aviation Department and consultants, also must receive approval from the Federal Aviation Administration.

Scrutinizing KCI plan

How gratifying it was to see again in that I’m not the only person who is quite satisfied with the airport as it is (1/9, Local, “KCI plan to get scrutiny”).

We like the layout, and we don’t need more restaurants and shops and longer lines through security.

Expansion has another downside, though, that I haven’t seen mentioned. Airplanes are disastrous contributors to carbon emissions and thus to global warming. It seems insane to plan for so many more daily flights in 20 years that we’ll need more airport space. Surely by then it will be abundantly clear that we need fewer flights, not more.

Perhaps by 2028 we will only need Terminal C, and the others can be made into energy-efficient housing for airport personnel!

Karin McAdams
Prairie Village

I’d like to offer my observations as someone who uses KCI frequently.

I travel in and out of this airport virtually every week, sometimes twice per week. I travel across North America, and have become familiar with most airports in the United States and the major ones in Canada.

I’m all for improvement and making our metro area the best it can be in all regards. But, speaking from experience, I believe KCI is a great airport. The recent changes in the terminals have been nice improvements. The short-term and circle parking are great. The new economy parking is an improvement.

The major pain I experience is waiting for the red buses, to transport me from one terminal to another. Ten to 15 minutes is the norm, and I have waited as long as 30 minutes.

I’d suggest buying more buses and hiring more drivers. This would be an easy fix.

A longer term improvement, sticking with the three terminals, would be to build some sort of rail transit between the terminals. That surely would be more cost effective than starting over and would preserve much of what is awesome about KCI.

Lane M. Crosser
Lenexa

New Paseo Bridge

I read that the design for the new I-35 bridge over the Missouri River is now in jeopardy because of a perceived conflict with the Federal Aviation Administration over landing patterns at the Wheeler Downtown Airport (12/14, A-1). It seems the mid-span support column will be too high and interfere with certain approaches to the airport.

The article also said that the FAA acknowledges that it really cannot prevent the design from being built as is.

So I vote for building the bridge as designed, post haste. Let the FAA figure out what to do about its landing patterns and let motorists (who would benefit most from the new bridge) have our signature river crossing. Do not delay! Time is precious!

Timothy Earl Osburn
Parkville

The FAA’s recent issue with the new Paseo Bridge is just plain silly. It seems the FAA would like to keep Kansas City a cow town forever. If we were to accept its position, we could put in place a lovely concrete deck bridge with no redeeming aesthetic qualities whatsoever.

But wait, we would also need to keep building construction under 10 stories in height. In consideration of the FAA and the executive jets at Wheeler Airport, we should raze all buildings over 10 stories and begin immediate bulldozing to lower the surrounding hillsides over 96 feet in height. Then we would be truly in line with the lyric: “Everything is up to date in Kansas City. We’ve gone about as fer as we can go…”

The real question should be: What is Wheeler Airport doing to contribute to the economic future of Kansas City? Is it profitable? If not, perhaps we should close it and redevelop it with businesses and living spaces which will contribute to a sound economic future for Kansas City.

S. Preston Moore
Overland Park

KCI’s design

The following information appeared on CNN.Money a few days ago: “(The) president of America’s Research Group said research shows that mall traffic was down since late November… ‘Our consumer surveys tell us that more people think malls are inefficient. They can’t park near the stores where they want to shop and they can’t get in and out (of malls) quickly.’.”

People who are avoiding malls for Christmas shopping for these reasons will avoid airports that have the same inefficiencies.

Arguments that centralized security screening is more efficient are dangerous and ignorant. Terrorists target areas with large groups closely packed together because they are assured of more victims. Highly emotional, inexperienced criminals need mass targets.

Military and law enforcement personnel are trained to disperse to avoid presenting a single lucrative target. Dispersed security actually makes passengers and visitors safer at Kansas City International Airport.

Jack Hammell
Leavenworth

I’d like to agree with Jennifer Randle’s note (12/12, Letters) about being against the proposed changes to our unique and convenient airport.

All of my relatives live out of town, and when they fly in for a visit, the first thing they comment on is how easy it is to get their luggage.

When we are figuring out how much time we need to get to the airport at the end of their visit, they usually say, “Your airport is so easy. You can get your ticket, drop off your luggage and go through security right in the same area.”

They spend the extra time visiting with us instead of walking four miles through a terminal and moving like herded cows through along security line.

What other city has an airport like ours? I love it! Leave it alone. Why fix what isn’t broken?

Like Jennifer wrote, it would cost much less than a billion dollars to build an additional circular terminal if needed.

I have an idea. Let’s use the “extra” money we save to pay for light rail to get us out there.

Now, that would be wise and convenient.

Jenny Whitehead
Kansas City

KCI future

If the graphic in The Star is accurate (12/8, Local, “Vision for KCI layout still the same”), the favored master plan for the improved airport gives us 52 ramps in a single terminal when the existing facility has 54 ramps. That seems like a step in the wrong direction.

The consultants tell us it is possible to build a centralized security checkpoint center that would service the three existing terminals, and practically in the same breath they tell us such a configuration would not help the concessionaires and retailers. So is that the main priority?

Have these consultants spent any time at Kansas City International Airport to find out why it was ranked first among medium-size airports for customer satisfaction? From curb to boarding pass to gate, KCI is unmatched for convenience to the traveling public.

How does putting the concessionaires and retailers in a single concourse help them reach maximum profits when the majority of travelers flying out of KCI do not have to spend hours waiting for connecting flights? Giving such importance to the retail operations in an airport seems better suited to the hubs where you have the time to wander around while you wait for your next flight.

Paton Eliot
Overland Park

Saturday’s KCI article explains why consultants persist in recommending an unpopular plan to replace, rather than upgrade, our airport terminals. They say the airport is inefficient because it requires more checkpoints. Most important, apparently, is the “inability for retailers to reach maximum profits.”

Cost-benefit analysis can support any desired alternative, depending on what factors are considered. If user-friendliness and customer satisfaction were valued appropriately, they would certainly outweigh “maximum retailer profits.”

Better inter-terminal transportation, as in Atlanta, would be a good expenditure. Don’t create the long security lines that others suffer at Washington-Dulles and other airports.

Don’t fix what is not broken.

Roy Busdiecker
Overland Park

Don’t change KCI

So the vision for KCI has not changed (12/8, Local, “Vision for KCI layout still the same; A single terminal remains consultants’ top choice in the proposed master plan they unveil”). Consultants from Orlando think they know more than we do about our airport.

For what, in all likelihood, will cost more than $1 billion, KCI can eliminate multiple security checkpoints and allow airport vendors to “reach maximum profits.”

I know that when I fly, I am seeking one huge security checkpoint where I can stand in line for hours, then visit boring retail shops paying inflated prices for cheap tourist items. And the pleasure of being able to stand in line or wait for a seat at restaurants with bad food, again at inflated prices — not.

Do these consultants think travelers and citizens here are idiots?

If the airport needs to grow, let’s add a fourth circle terminal for perhaps 10 percent of the cost while keeping the convenience we have learned to enjoy.

We can pay for a lot of security checkpoints, for a lot of years, with over a billion dollars.

I hope the City Council and the Federal Aviation Administration have some members with common sense who know to turn down this proposal.

Jennifer Randle
Overland Park

I would like to express my opinion on the proposed KCI expansion.

I am a frequent flier from KCI to Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport. I would think most people would agree that KCI is very convenient in both security and walking distance to your gate from your car.

To say KCI is “inefficient because of the inability for retailers to reach maximum profit” is totally bogus. If Kansas City and Platte County must pay a billion dollar figure to help maximize retailer’s profits, then we should be building another retail mall instead of a new airport. Last time I checked, I go to KCI to fly to another destination, not shop or have a gourmet meal.

Chris Catalano
Leawood

The chimp likes it

Is this just another example of our public institutions spending money on both sides of an issue?

This letters column has been featuring many writers alarmed by the Aviation Department’s hiring of outside consultants to totally change Kansas City International Airport, presumably resulting in just another single terminal/single security line traffic jam.

The feature photo on the front page Nov. 3 shows an out-of-town chimpanzee soon to be featured in advertisements (paid for by our Aviation Department) touting our current traveler-friendly KCI terminals.

Are the same people approving these opposing expenses?

I hope all the local language arts instructors don’t have to pay extra for this great example of irony.

Ted Sullivan
Kansas City

Transportation infrastructure

This week more than 2,000 aviation professionals are in Kansas City as part of the 16th annual Airports Council International-North America conference. They are coming together as an industry to examine issues, trends and strategies that will help our nation’s airports move toward an integrated transportation vision for the 21st century.

Building a national transportation network is an imperative looming large. From our nation’s federal reservoirs and public works facilities, to our airports, railroads, highways, bridges, tunnels and dams, it’s clear that Americans’ quality of life and our country’s ability to compete globally must be examined and improved.

Our infrastructure must be able to cope with real-world complexity and environmental demands, and professionals like those attending the Kansas City conference are thinking about the critical issues affecting airports today and well into the future.

Americans depend greatly on the capacity, health and resiliency of all of our infrastructure systems. The need is great; the time is now.

HNTB is proud to be among the infrastructure professionals participating in this conference, and we appreciate the attention it draws to this important issue.

Terry K. Miller
CEO, HNTB Architecture Inc.
Kansas City

KCI’s future

The wrong direction

Kansas City International Airport ranks first in a national passenger satisfaction survey, yet “Kansas City officials” spend $3.3 million thinking up ways to scrap it.

The major reason cited appears to be costly security. The paper reports that the federal government is paying $173 million on a 4½-year contract. A new airport is guestimated somewhere over a billion dollars, and likely more with the inevitable cost overruns.

Seems like that billion might cover security for another 25 to 30 years. Surely we can get more bathrooms and concessions in the gate areas without scrapping the whole concept.

John Evan Stark
Overland Park

Challenges are real

For all the beauty and convenience I find in our Clarence Kivett-designed airport, the arguments for a new terminal are meant to address the economic viability of our airport’s future rather than redress any aesthetic shortcoming of the present.

We must confront the challenges that the current terminal configuration presents. Primarily, the scattered arrangement of the security checkpoints requires more screeners per passenger than most other airports without any assurance of increased safety.

Moreover, almost all of the retail establishments in the terminals are separated by the checkpoints from the passenger waiting areas. This arrangement provides a strong disincentive for retailers to lease space from the airport relative to other airports.

The present situation is a prescription for economic obsolescence as airlines, businesses and passengers may resist the increased fees necessary to make up for these imbalances.

Jeremy J. Deeken
Kansas City

Don’t ruin KCI

My family and I certainly agree with your readers that our KCI airport should remain as it was designed, with hubs. The design is beautiful, easy to access, accommodating to everyone and also with excellent parking and transportation facilities.

As for security, its design in itself is safer because instead of having one large airport that could be penetrated, we have several hubs, separate from one another.

The original plan included four hubs, but only three were built. With the land we have, instead of spending millions of dollars paying some architect to think of ways to tear it down and start all over, put in the fourth hub.

A security station could be located at the beginning of each hub, which would eliminate the need for one at each airline gate. Passengers departing from arrivals could exit at the opposite end of the hub.

This plan could keep the integrity of the original plan, maintain the convenient circle parking and still allow the passengers easy access to their airline gates.

Someone needs to go back to the drawing board before ruining a marvelous and well-designed airport.

Pat Kreiling
Kansas City

Guns in the airport

In response to Ian Johnston’s letter (9/18), it is not illegal to bring a firearm into airports because many travelers fly with them. This is perfectly legal, and each airline will have its firearm policy and procedures posted on its Web site.

Many of my co-workers and I travel out of state for firearm training classes and hunting trips. We are required to bring our personal firearms with us for these events. If it were illegal, we would have to choose another form of travel.

Bill Maas may have just committed an honest mistake.

John Hoskins
Blue Springs

This is an answer to the letter saying that it should be a crime to carry a weapon into an airport. These people need to know the laws. You can take a weapon into an airport as long as it is broken down, in your luggage with no ammunition.

I’ve done it several times. I have a right-to-carry permit, and I’ve taken weapons to Florida and other places, but you need to declare it at the ticket counter.

Gary Parlier
Independence

Proposed KCI changes

Kansas City International Airport needs upgrading to be able to serve as an airline hub.

It is true that the current design at KCI allows passengers to walk from the gates to curbside parking in very little time. However, because of limited availability of direct flights, passengers to and from KCI also have to spend a large amount of layover time at airline hubs awaiting connecting flights. Once, while traveling from New Orleans to Kansas City, I spent four hours in Atlanta awaiting a connecting flight.

Because of current design limitations at KCI, Kansas City is the only major city in the Midwest that does not function as an airline hub. As a result, passengers endure high ticket fares and a colossal waste of time at airline hubs. The city misses out on millions of dollars in sales taxes and airline landing fees. Businesses that normally relocate to cities with airline hubs do not come. And the publicity generated by having a large number of passengers passing through the airport is missed.

Al Taka
Mission

It doesn’t take a $3 million-plus study to prove what we all know — traveler convenience isn’t a priority.

Bringing everyone into a central area to go through security would force people to traverse long distances to get to their gates. On their way, they would pass many vendor stations offering an array of products to buy. This large amount of foot traffic isn’t generated by KCI’s current setup, which puts the priority on the traveler.

The convenience of travelers to get from curb to plane is unprofitable for business.

What isn’t mentioned is that savings in security personnel at the gates is reduced by the necessity of running all those products through security. If all that merchandise isn’t carefully examined, our security is compromised.

V. Loughead
Raytown

Should be a crime

I am writing in response to “Bill Maas won’t face state charges” (9/13, Sports Daily). How in the world can the state of Missouri not have a law prohibiting a person taking a weapon into an airport?

So Maas said he wasn’t going to commit a crime and that he “forgot” the gun was in his bag. How can authorities prove intent? How do the authorities know someone wasn’t going to commit a crime?

To me, this legislature is not paying attention to what is really important: our safety.

A loophole? Shame on us.

Amid reports coming out saying our airports are still at security risks, how can someone take a gun into an airport and not be prosecuted under state law?

Please, Missouri lawmakers, make this loophole go away and make our airports safer.

Ian Johnston
Overland Park

KCI a model

Just a quick response to those thoughts of redoing the Kansas City International Airport. I have read some very well-stated arguments for keeping it as is, and I totally agree.

The one factor eluding the engineers and designers is that this airport seems to have been designed for handicapped citizens. It is so easily accessible to all, but mostly to my friends who need to reach their departure and arrival gates with minimal walking.

This plan must be reconsidered, as KCI is the most user-friendly airport I have ever used in my world travels. Maybe the designers need to visit Heathrow, O’Hare or Atlanta (on crutches) to see what works and what is not convenient.

Carolyn Wheat
Knob Noster, Mo.

I traveled extensively, here and overseas, during my working years and still do in retirement. Thus I got to look at several airports worldwide. Only a few among these I would categorize as passenger-friendly, and KCI surely stands out as one.

In my opinion, trying to redo the airport is less to do with passenger comfort and security and more with vested interests. Why not put the anticipated cost of rebuilding to work and use the earnings to improve security, if that is the compelling reason? As the saying goes: Don’t fix it if it isn’t broken.

Gur Ranhotra
Lenexa

Don’t change KCI

Our Kansas City International Airport is the most convenient of all airports.

My spouse worked for TWA for 25 years. We traveled all over the United States and the world, and still travel with American Airlines. KCI is our favorite for picking up people and for personal travel.

Our many flying friends are unanimous in wanting it left as is. If everyone loves KCI, why in the world would a few want to spend millions of dollars to change it? I seriously doubt that airfares would be lower with a new airport.

Going through security here is a piece of cake compared with other airports, although it is still thorough. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!

Betty Walters
Roeland Park

Don’t change airport

Kelly Roberson (8/28, Letters) claims that KCI needs changes. According to Roberson, KCI’s present passenger-friendly configuration is expensive to the airlines, which thus charge passengers more. A new giant terminal would mean cheaper prices, Roberson thinks.

Unfortunately, Roberson is wrong: Current KCI prices are considerably below average compared with similar airports. In fact, building an enormous new terminal would end up enormously raising the prices for local travelers and taxpayers deep into the 21st century.

Second, Roberson claims that a new giant single terminal would allow Kansas City to once again become a hub city. Are you kidding? Can you say Eastern, Braniff and TWA? We were hub cities for each of these airlines, and when they left town, travel crashed. Moreover, prices in hub cities inevitably are greater than in airports like KCI, where healthy competition between airlines exists.

Roberson’s suggestions point to financial disaster, not to mention the loss of the most passenger-friendly airport around. Your columnist C.W. Gusewelle had it right. The only reason to change KCI is to provide obscene profits to certain parties in the city. Swapping KCI for a giant single terminal is nothing less than a swindle to the traveling, taxpaying community.

George Gale
Westwood Hills

So an out-of-town firm is hired to “consult” to the tune of several million dollars and suggest improvements to our “outdated” international airport. Without rehashing all the points that some of the other letters to the editor have articulated, our airport is about as user-friendly as it can be.

Now they want a billion dollars for a new airport?

I only have one question for the consultants (and the same question applies to all us if this is approved): Are you guys nuts?

Dave Lewis-Jones
Lenexa

Water at KCI

Trying to get water from the lavatories at KCI is a joke. The city should have seen the need for water fountains in secure areas when they remodeled these areas, especially when the food concessionaires aren’t open.

David R. Muenks
Lee’s Summit

Change for KCI

When TWA teamed up with the city in the late ’60s and early ’70s to build a new hub airport in Kansas City, they came up with a brilliant design that would allow for a walk of less than 100 yards from your car to the gate.

At the time the airport was completed in 1973, this design was ideal, a model for airports around the world. Then 28 years later, on Sept. 11, 2001, the world changed.

The new security requirements have forced each airline to have their own security checkpoint. This is expensive to the airlines, and those carriers that do decide to serve Kansas City are left with one option: pass the expense on to the passenger by raising fares.

A new single-terminal airport will help airlines lower fares in and out of Kansas City as well as attract new carriers looking for a less-crowded alternative to Chicago or Dallas. It will also be more accommodating to large aircraft. These large aircraft will allow for nonstop travel from Kansas City to points across the globe.

A new airport will allow Kansas City to become a hub city once again, which only brings jobs, business and money to our community.

Kelly Roberson
Blue Springs

Air show re-enactment

I notice that the final event scheduled for the air show over the weekend was a re-enactment of the attack on Pearl Harbor. Wasn’t there a battle we won that could be re-enacted? Would we do a re-enactment of the attacks on the World Trade Center?

I’m sure they have their reasons, I just don’t know what they are.

Blaise Miller
Olathe

Don’t change KCI

As usual, C.W. Gusewelle is on target. His recent column about Kansas City International Airport sure put a smile on my face.

I have traveled through many airports, including abroad, and have not experienced one that is as user-friendly as KCI. None.

If the timing is right, you can be in your car headed home 15 minutes after your plane sets down. Tell that simple fact to people who fly in and out of Atlanta, Chicago and New York, and they will tell you how lucky you are.

The news story mentioned centralizing security for the sake of efficiency. What you are really talking about is taking a group of customers who now travel in and out of three terminals and putting them all into one. This isn’t efficiency, it’s overcrowding. It’s layoffs. Those screeners work and pay taxes, and they do an efficient job now.

It’s true that right now you may have to go through security twice if you want to visit the shops and restaurants after clearing security the first time. Well, life is full of obstacles. Are you going to build a new airport so we can shop and eat? We don’t go to the airport to shop and eat.

Dick Saale
Kansas City

KCI easier to use

Yes, we have a great airport. I read in The Star that Kansas City paid megabucks to a company to change our airport. And this company is not in our area, but it knows best.

I have trouble understanding how fewer security employees can do a better job of watching thousands of people. Did we not just finally finish fixing up our airport for better security and added parking? Now the bureaucrats want to tear it all down and start over.

I’ve been to the Denver, Seattle, Dallas and unbelievable Atlanta airports. None are friendly to those with disabilities. Baggage pickup is on another floor.

An article the other day told that millions of people used Kansas City International Airport last year. The picture did not show people standing in long, snaking lines. If you have a disability, you cannot stand in the long lines for very long.

Finding a wheelchair to use is impossible. I never saw many wheelchairs except at KCI. With mass congestion, you can’t find anyone to ask for help.

Ronda Foster
Basehor

Don’t drink the water

I got a chuckle while reading the recent letter from the lady complaining about the “nasty water” in the lavatory at KCI. I was reminded of a scene from an “All in the Family” episode that garnered a big laugh.

In this scene Meathead asked Archie why he went down to the kitchen for water during the night rather than using his upstairs lavatory sink — to which Archie replied with a grimace, “Oh, jeez, Meathead, that’s bathroom water.”

Delores Mair
Kansas City

Don’t change KCI

Star columnist C.W. Gusewelle notes that many find Kansas City International Airport an exceptionally user-friendly airport (7/19, Local, “Big changes at KCI seem ungrounded”). Gusewelle echoes a question that many are asking: Why does the city’s Aviation Department want to raze KCI to build a more “efficient” replacement?

The answer is found in studying recently announced development plans for KCI and surrounding airport lands.

Demolishing KCI is merely one component of a truly massive project (52 square miles). The Aviation Department is making plans that will transform patterns of travel and development in the region. These plans suggest that a more “efficient” airport is one optimized for high-profit cargo handling and aviation support businesses, not necessarily a facility friendly to travelers.

Unless the public demands a role in managing Kansas City’s major travel link to the world, priorities will continue to be dictated by consultants, bureaucrats and political insiders.

Mark Raab
Weston

Thanks to C.W. Gusewelle for his “Big changes at KCI seem ungrounded.” My international travel experience parallels his, and Kansas City International Airport certainly deserves its high marks for passenger satisfaction.

To pay a consulting firm $3.3 million in public money for redesign concepts, before a need is even remotely demonstrated, does bring up some serious questions.

Norman Price
Overland Park

Kansas City International Airport is fine. I totally agree with C.W. Gusewelle’s column of Aug. 19.

I have landed at the same airports he mentioned — Rome, Paris, Amsterdam, New York, Chicago — and been frustrated by their complexity.

I was horrified to read that our city had paid $3.3 million for a study that concluded we need to tear down KCI and build a new airport, especially after a huge amount of money was spent recently remodeling our terminals and improving the parking lots.

Kansas City may not have been able to figure out a rapid-transit system and other things, but the one thing we got right is our airport. Let us keep it.

Delia Tankard
Leawood

Airport water fountains

I always try to read the Letters section in The Star to see what simple things in life are deemed “serious problems” by the writers.

The letter about the lack of water fountains at Kansas City International Airport, forcing the writer to fill her empty water bottle with the “nasty water” from the restroom lavatory, pegged my laugh meter.

Where does she think the source of the water at the lavatory comes from? Does she think a totally different system of water is supplied for the drinking fountains?

Jim Ibach
Olathe

Water at KCI

I have traveled from our airport this summer on several occasions. You are not allowed to take bottled water through security, but can take an empty bottle through.

There are no drinking fountains in the waiting area where you can fill your water bottle after going through security. Your only option is to buy a bottle of water or fill your bottle from the lavatory in the restroom, but that water is nasty.

I have been through airports in Atlanta, New York and Ireland, and they all have drinking fountains. When they added the restrooms in the security area, why did they not add drinking fountains?

Mary Jane Maslanka
Lake Winnebago

Don’t ‘fix’ KCI

Returning home from a week’s vacation back east was a frustrating mess. The small airport we departed from had only one line into a single security area that serviced 12 gates. The line snaked the length of the terminal, then doubled back upon itself. After an hour and a half of snaking through the airport, we got to security in time to hear that our plane’s doors were closed and no more passengers could board.

The airline rebooked our 6 a.m. flight for an 8. Not too bad, but we wished we’d not had to get up at 4 to get to the airport “early.”

Flying out from KCI is never a hassle. Flying into KCI is never a hassle. Please don’t change the Kansas City airport. It is by far the most efficient terminal system I have ever seen.

Stephanie Irwin
Sedalia, Mo.

Don’t change airport

Just last week I was bragging on our airport — its ease of check-in, of parking, of how well the security lines move, each serving only four or five gates. Aside from extra security checkpoints, I’m not clear on why we’re inefficient, and these checkpoints are one of the beauties of KCI (7/29, A-1, “Facing the future by starting over; Officials are considering plans for a single-terminal system designed with efficiency and security in mind”).

The story mentioned “people movers.” We all need to walk more, not less.

“Shifting security costs would increase ticket prices and parking fees.” And building new would cost who? What? User fees are better than taxes.

Consultants have been hired for $3.3 million. An entirely new airport, they say, will cost $1 billion plus.

Instead of razing or abandoning the current airport, how about adding another ring in all that airport-owned land? Maybe you could even hub an airline there on the south or west side.

Don’t ruin what we’ve got. Send Michael Boyd away. He’s a consultant. Consultants have to say you’re inefficient and outdated. Don’t let him turn us into a Denver with security check lines of 45 minutes checking every person going to every gate in the entire airport in one area.

KCI is ranked first in customer satisfaction among medium-sized airports for a reason. Don’t destroy that.

Daniel L. Stueckemann
Bonner Springs

I couldn’t believe what I was reading. Tear down the airport? What is wrong with these people? What a waste of money.

I love the way KCI is built. Would we be any more secure with the new design? I doubt it. If someone wants to blow something up, they will find a way no matter what. I think KCI security does a great job now.

Whose pockets are going to get lined with this idea? What politician wants this now?

Apparently people have too much money and don’t know what to do with it.

Lyda Fleehart Loehring
Jefferson City

Airport plans

Leave it alone

The enlightened city officials who view our airport as “outdated” must not travel very much (7/29, A-1, “Facing the future by starting over; Officials are considering plans for a single-terminal system designed with efficiency and security in mind”).

Experienced travelers know that Kansas City International Airport is the best airport in the nation from a local traveler standpoint. The original architects designed for the convenience of the traveler, and that’s exactly what they delivered.

Now, we are told that we must sacrifice this convenience for efficiency. Efficiency, presumably, in the form of a single bottleneck security checkpoint in order to reduce costs.

And to occupy waiting travelers who will now have to show up hours early, they will provide lots of revenue-enhancing trendy shops to keep us busy.

I find the current airport exceptionally efficient for me, a traveler. Leave it alone. We don’t want another Hartsfield or O’Hare here.

Bennett Dickson
Leavenworth

I was horrified to see that city officials are considering a billion-dollar change to the airport. I have been in a lot of airports, and not one is easier to deal with than ours. I have never been thrilled with the 40-minute trip out to KCI, but at least when you arrive there, the rest is easy.

Our security system is infinitely more comfortable for the flyer than any other I have seen. Maybe it’s more expensive, but that cost is miniscule compared with a new airport. Put the billion dollars in an interest-bearing account and see whether that won’t pay for the added cost.

The issue of going in and out of security to get to retail is bogus because the system is so easy at KCI.

Certainly, you need some food service, but it seems that much of the retail in other airports is there to amuse people who are forced to arrive hours before their flights because of slow security lines. Or it is there for those with layovers.

At KCI, you don’t have to arrive excessively early, and if you are in transit, the security system allows easy exit and re-entry.

Perhaps we should look for new officials instead of a new airport.

Gretchen Schwarz
Kansas City

Thank you for the article on the upgrades being suggested for KCI airport.

I want to be among the first to show my support for anything that makes KCI more crowded, more confusing and more commercial like every other airport in the country. Being able to drop someone off 20 feet from the gate is definitely overrated.

I’m hoping that besides giving us a more hectic, big-city airport experience, they could use our tax money for all of the upgrades. And I’m crossing my fingers and toes that it takes well over a decade to build and comes in way over budget.

Zac Davis
Blue Springs

Build in Johnson County

Airlines have always hated KCI’s design — it is a hub killer. To hub here is a nightmare for them. Ask any crew member. Furthermore, after 9/11, the current terminal renovations should have been scrapped. It is not a good post-9/11 design.

I believe a new terminal will attract more hub traffic, and in turn the flying public will pay less for flights here. Also, that traffic will create new revenue for the city.

However, I also believe that Kansas City and the airport authorities will move at their standard glacial pace. So maybe we will be lucky enough to have Johnson County step up to the plate and build a new, world-class commercial airport and terminal. This would be even better, as many travelers wind up in Johnson County already.

Michael Koperski
Olathe

Airport security

The “Seeing KC airport makes a believer out of lawmaker” article in The Star on Wednesday (5/31, Local) was of great interest to me.

U.S. Rep. John Mica of Florida and U.S. Rep. Sam Graves of Missouri had visited Kansas City International Airport and touted “its unique security system.”

I recently experienced KCI’s “unique security system” firsthand.

I flew out of KCI on May 18 on my way to Honolulu. My carry-on bag, purse, shoes and person were screened with seemingly great care.

As I was packing on May 27 in Honolulu to return to Kansas City, I discovered — to my horror — a knife and surgical scissors in my carry-on bag. My horror only grew when I realized that I had passed through the “unique security system” at KCI with no problem.

With all due respect to Reps. Mica and Graves, “unique” hardly begins to describe the security at KCI.

Let’s get serious about airport security before a tragedy occurs.

Linda VanDell
Kansas City

Midwest, AirTran

Your editorial supporting “separate carriers” shows appreciation for Midwest Airlines’ service at Kansas City International Airport but misses the benefits of a merger with AirTran (4/30, “Separate carri