April 9, 2003

By Shadi Rahimi

In an unprecedented victory for San Francisco's open-government law, a Superior Court judge ordered April 2 that the city must provide the public immediate access to draft reports on San Francisco International Airport's runway expansion plan, even though the federal government has refused to release the same documents.

City attorney spokesperson Matt Dorsey told us the city will not appeal the order. The city had claimed it would abide by the Federal Aviation Administration's contention that the records belonged to the feds and should remain sealed, even after the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force ordered the city to release the reports last April.

The ruling creates a national standard by which to judge how much power the federal government should have in enforcing secrecy when it participates in city projects, said Alan Ramo, director of the Golden Gate University Environmental Law and Justice Clinic and attorney for the environmental coalition that filed the suit.

"This is really the first court decision to say that the policies of the federal government cannot preempt a city's decision to let the public know what the city is doing," he said. "The decision means that the federal government can't walk in and tell a progressive community like San Francisco that they can't have more democracy than what is allowed by the government in any federal or city project."

The reports – paid for in part by the city and prepared by San Francisco-based consulting firm URS Corp. – are central to the battle over whether the city should fill in 1,000 acres of the bay to expand the runways. While expansion proponents argue that larger runways will help with fog-induced delays at the airport, opponents contend that coordinating with other Bay Area airports is a better alternative.

Because the reports are supposed to include important information on the environmental impacts of new runways and examine how the plan could affect air quality, traffic patterns, and recreational activities, they could influence public support for the runway proposal.

Leo P. O'Brien, executive director of San Francisco BayKeeper, said it is important for San Franciscans to understand what the environmental costs of the project are for the bay, since for the past two years the airport has lauded the benefits of the project while refusing to release information on the potential damage it could cause. By viewing the documents, Bay Area environmental groups and members of the public hope to catch any mistakes and "illuminate any attempt to spin the truth," Ramo said.

Ultimately, without the city's Sunshine Ordinance, environmentalists would likely have "failed in their quest" for the documents, said California First Amendment Coalition executive director Kent Pollack. It was the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force's ruling that defined the conflict between disclosure and allowing the feds to keep the records secret.