Opinion: Scare tactics won't fly

In trying to gain support for Albert Whitted Airport, St. Petersburg City Council member James Bennett tries to portray Albert Whitted Airport as a tool against terrorism.

The campaign to pump more taxpayer dollars into Albert Whitted Airport has reached a new low. St. Petersburg City Council member James Bennett -- a pro-airport zealot -- has manufactured a link between the airport and the nation's fight against terrorism, and he is trying to scare everyone into believing it.

Bennett wrote letters to Florida's two U.S. senators and U.S. Rep. C.W. Bill Young noting that "the city facilities of Albert Whitted Airport and the Port of St. Petersburg could be important factors on the Homeland Security front." He is referring to a grant the University of South Florida College of Marine Sciences in St. Petersburg will be seeking as part of its research into Micro-Electro Mechanical Systems (MEMS) technology. MEMS integrates computer chips with tiny mechanical devices, such as switches or sensors.

Bennett used a presentation by Larry Langebrake, director of the college's Center for Ocean Technology, to bait the hook. At a council workshop on Tuesday, Langebrake spelled out a doomsday scenario in which terrorists slip a weapon of mass destruction into Tampa Bay on a ship or submarine. Using MEMS technology in aquatic sensors and an unmanned airplane flying out of Albert Whitted airport, the nation might uncover the plot, Langebrake told the council. But first, USF needs the city's cooperation to get a federal grant and the use of Albert Whitted Airport. No other airport will do, according to Langebrake, not even one whose business is homeland defense: nearby MacDill Air Force Base.

In short, if supporters can't trick St. Petersburg residents into sinking more tax dollars into the airport, then they'll try to scare them into it. Such a cynical campaign could end up damaging the credibility of the Center for Ocean Technology, which would be a shame. MEMS research is important to USF and has the potential to bring some economic benefits to the city, but that has almost nothing to do with Albert Whitted.

We can understand a certain amount of exaggeration by Langebrake as he competes for federal grant money pouring into research that is loosely labeled "homeland defense." (Among his other claims: St. Petersburg and Pinellas County could become the next Silicon Valley.) When questioned by council members Jay Lasita and Rene Flowers, who have kept an open mind on the airport issue, Langebrake backed away from some of his rhetoric. He apologized if he had brought "any undo alarm to the citizens" with his speculation on terrorism. And when pressed on the importance of the airport to USF's overall research program, Langebrake admitted that "the airport is one small aspect of the MEMS program" and "certainly the airport is not critical" to the success of that research.

In fact, the greatest economic potential for MEMS research is in other fields, according to Peter Betzer, head of the USF College of Marine Sciences in St. Petersburg. He said the business community is interested in supporting the research, but mostly as it pertains to medical and environmental applications. And the importance of homeland defense to the program? "Very, very tiny," he said.

Perhaps Langebrake had no idea he was being used by the pro-airport forces. There is nothing wrong with USF's doing research from airplanes flown out of Albert Whitted, although St. Petersburg residents will need a lot more information before they'll support turning their downtown into a home for experimental, unmanned aircraft. But he is doing his program no favors by entering the debate over what to do with the publicly owned airport property and the tax dollars it drains away from other needs. He should leave that decision to St. Petersburg residents. Also, some USF administrators see the airport -- with its noise pollution, limitation on university construction and potential threat to student safety -- as a liability to the campus.

What is unforgiveable is that Bennett and others would wrap themselves in the flag, make up a phony "homeland defense" purpose for the airport and then try to scare the public into taking the bait. We wonder if there is any limit to what the pro-airport forces will do to advance their cause.

St. Petersburg residents should not let themselves be fooled by such dishonest tactics.

Back to Opinion

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright

From the Times
Opinion page