You can still get chowder at the Anthony's at SeaTac and it's better than Ivar's anyway.

You suck. The best thing in the airport is Ivar's....

Why does keeping Ivar's have to be a Republicans vs. Democrats issue?

@3 It's not a partisan issue, but that's how the Stranger is covering the story for some reason. I get that one random person who identifies as a republican is tweeting their disappointment about the decision, but that doesn't make this some sort of party line decision.

Coverage elsewhere has focused on the Port's bid process. It's definitely worth checking out some of the other reporting on this story.

@4 Dig deeper on Twitter and you might change your tune. Many of the angry #KeepIvars folks are conservative tweeters. Makes sense, I guess, as it is symbolic in a way of the Auld Seattle.

And I would urge you not to conflate a quick Chow section update on dining options at SeaTac with news coverage of the bid process. This is not an attempt at that, and would look very different if it did.

I'm not conservative at all. But as between the very average pub food of Stone House Cafe and Ivar's, I'd choose Ivars.

Don't take Ivar's away!

Maybe I'm the odd duck, but everything isn't AUTOMATICALLY better because it's a local chain.

Hey Republicans, Amtrak still serves Ivars clam chowder!

Portland will always have us beat, by having a Laurelwood "pub" in the Alaska terminal in PDX. Beers there cost no more than beers on the "outside".

Ivar's is in the same category as Dick's. It's shit "food" which the natives sentimentalize due to its association with their first corporeal experiences in the backseat of an old Buick. That said, tossing out a long-time rent-paying tenant is lame.

*Bakeries*??? Fuck that shit. Ivar's chowder admittedly is no great shakes but they are local color and the fish & chips are perfect comfort food.

Pubs in general suck too. Zero pretensions at the Ivar's walkup.

Two things:

1. Salt & Straw is a PDX ice cream shop with no Seattle connection at all. How they won the lotto for a SeaTac Airport lease is beyond me.

2. Slate makes great coffee. Amazing coffee, even. However, they're going have to completely re-think their processes. Nobody wants to wait 20 minutes for a deconstructed latte at the airport.

@14 Salt and Straw appears to be women-owned, which is apparently heavily weighted in the bidding process.

@5 You lost me. First you were telling me to dig deeper into this article, but then you concluded by pointing out this wasn't intended to be a substantive piece.

I understand that the Stranger doesn't offer substantive local news coverage. My point is that this is actually a pretty intriguing local story. We are the only major municipality that has a port district that relies on a local tax levy: the Port will receive $72 million in tax revenue from local property owners in 2017. In light of the Port's apparent inability to support itself like every other similar facility, it's troubling that revenue is not a factor in the Port's selection of its tenants.

Look at it this way. Seattle's mayor proposed a $275 million levy to fund efforts to combat homelessness. This levy was to be in place for 5 years, so that works out to $55 million per year. This proposed levy was quickly abandoned in the face of significant backlash. The thing is, we are spending far more than that every year on a port district that has been plagued by corruption and self-dealing. Meanwhile, competing port districts are able to cover all of their expenses through facility leases. Why can't our port do this? Think about it: if the port was self-sustaining, we could spend more money on the homeless, and your property taxes would actually be lower.

Ivar's generated more revenue per square foot than any other leaseholder. But, the port got rid of Ivar's. Guess what: now its up to us to make up the shortfall in property tax revenue.