Plenty of time to assign blame, the priority is just get it done. This an own goal when we least need it.

"the Port Owners will act in the best interest of themselves"

The bottom line is it is going to cost $40M to rebuild the existing and $80M to move to a new site. Nothing is going to happen until the funds are found for this and additional $$$ for the purchase of the assets if the Govt. goes down that path.

Either way it doesn't happen over night, it will be a long drawn out process during which no one is rebuilding the GBIA.

New terminals $35M
Cargo terminal and Customs offices $6M
Tank farm $4M
Crash rescue/ tower $15M
Extend, widen runway, provide taxiways and aprons to current faa/ iata standards $20M.

Taking the GBIA from the shareholders by any means including 'eminent domain' would be a blood bath, Hutch will fight it tooth and nail, having far deeper pockets than the Government, taking it all the way to the Privy Council, as they have done on other issues. The resulting brawl will do irreparable damage to the reputation of the Bahamas in the world investor view. Look at Hutch's annual report, the Bahamas barely makes a mention, however you are kidding yourself if you think they are simply going to walk away. Like it or not we need to quickly deal with the situation as is.

Rebuilding GBIA close to $40M, activating and upgrading East GB or West GB double that (circa $80M) and still on land that floods.

The Dutch coastal defenses were the result of a major flood caused by a heavy storm that occurred on the night of Saturday, 31 January 1953 and morning of Sunday, 1 February 1953. The floods were a combination of a high spring tide and a severe windstorm over the North Sea caused a storm tide. Realizing that such infrequent events could reoccur, the Netherlands, carried out major studies on strengthening of coastal defenses. The Netherlands developed the Delta Works, an extensive system coastal storm surge barriers. All I am saying is that it is worth getting some experts to give an opinion.

Taking the GBIA from the shareholders by any means including 'eminent domain' would be a blood bath, Hutch will fight it tooth and nail, having far deeper pockets than the Government. The resulting brawl will do irreparable damage to the reputation of the Bahamas in the world investor view. Look at Hutch's annual report, the Bahamas barely makes a mention, however you are kidding yourself if you think they are simply going to walk away.
Also the idea of moving the GBIA to higher ground sounds easy but is beyond the reach of the government finances. You are looking at acquisition of land, infrastructure, etc., and a 4-5 year program. As 40+% of the island flooded where do you find a couple of hundred acres above the 'new' flood plain. You really need to work with what you have and try to make it as flood resistant as possible. Also the terminal built in 2002 was elevated based on historic data is this now obsolete? Is Dorian with its 20'+ surge the new norm. If so then 40+% of the island should be off limits for building
A suggestion, the Dutch have been living and building airports below sea level successfully since the 1950’s, an expert opinion/ recommendation from them would be money well spent.

Speaking with intimate knowledge of process of construction of the GBIA , the dates being thrown out appear to be wildly optimistic at best. If the 12/18 date is real, then a lot of parts need to be in motion as we speak. Here are a few points to note:-

1. The GBIA will need extensive temporary buildings to open any time soon. They need to be purchased/ leased and shipped to the island and then installed. These would need to the suitable to last 18- 24 months use and the climatic conditions (ie hurricanes). Unless they are already being shipped now, then a 12/18 opening will not happen. Also it would be doubtful if the US would allow pre-clearance to recommence from the temporary facilities, not the end of the world but an inconvenience. This has been their past practice.

2. Security equipment (baggage scanners, personnel scanners etc.), baggage handling, ticket terminals, IT infrastructure, ground handling equipment, vehicles needs to be borrowed/ purchased/ leased and shipped to the island. What is the state of the crash Rescue vehicles, are are a must have to open. What is the state of the Control tower and its infrastructure?

3. Assuming that the decision is made to rebuild the Pre-clearance terminal in the present location/ elevations, then it is at-least a 12- 18 month minimum construction period from signing of contracts would be realistic.

4. The Pre-clearance terminal design was the first pre-clearance after 9/11. No doubt the US DHS will use this as an opportunity to redesign of their facilities to meet current standards. This redesign and their approvals will take minimum 6 months.

5. It would be a complete waste of money to rebuild the Domestic/ Non pre-clearance Terminal in the existing location. This was always intended as a stop gap measure after the hurricanes of 2004-5, it is a converted hanger. The 2002 Pre-clearance Terminal was designed with a future multi bay extension to include the Non-preclearance and international/ Domestic flights. Assuming the decision is made to rebuild the existing then this would make a lot of sense.

6. The bottom line is that to restore the GBIA to a fully function pre Dorian condition, you are looking at least 2- 2.5 years i.e. 2022-3. And this is separate to the owner ship/ funding issue being resolved.

7. Also it would make sense to seek expert advice on how to flood proof the GBIA. A suggestion, the Dutch have been living and building airports under sea level since the 1950’s, an expert opinion would be money well spent.

Bottom line, media speculation/ vague promises from government and deafening silence from the shareholders does not bode well for the future. The shareholders/ government need to be holding detail discussion/ planning sessions now if the airport is to open any time soon. Maybe they are but who knows?