This is soooooo stupid, I'm going to have to think about this one.

A PILOT WALKS INTO A BAR!!!

Why would anyone write a news article about one pilot moving From St. Clair to Sullivan?    It’s not news. What is news is the controversy that it produces.  Ron Blum’s plan to run off all of the pilots in order to make it easier to close the airport is slowing down.  It actually kind of hit a derailment with Airevac.  Ron Blum was trying to get rid of the pilots, and instead got rid of the one of thing that St. Clarions were proud of.   Airevac left St. Clair after about 8 years, a now the city has no way to recover the cost of the improvements made to the airport to get Airevac to stay in the first place.   So, there is an article in the local news media about one guy moving his airplane to Sullivan.  BIG DEAL.  But the article also goes on to spout about the airport losing money every single year.   The article makes it clear, AUDITED CITY RECORDS; this comment by the city is delusional.  Why doesn't the city just explain the records?   Instead, the city has taken a course to show that the people making these allegations are misguided.  After all these records have been audited, how could this be true?  They have been audited and therefore they must be accurate.  Repeat this over and over again, but in regards to the facts, well just sidestep, brush off, change the subject, divert attention, bellow out irrelevant crap, do whatever it takes to divert attention to the truth.

The following is an example, and not the only one, of what the city started to do to the airport.

 Did the Auditor find in the airport records where the city charged the airport for 10 taillight bulbs on 4/12/07?  For what purpose does the airport need ten 1157 tail light bulbs?  

To catch this, one would have to know what 1157's are.  

The tenants did not have to look very hard to find this, once we got the information.  Getting the information was hard.  I required repeated request for records according to FAA regulations, intervention by the Missouri House of representatives, and the Missouri State Attorney General Office to get the airport records that are supposed to be made available to the public, in a manor prescribed by the U.S. Department of Transportation.  It took over two years to get this detailed information.  

No wonder MoDOT told the city that the airport could be self sustaining if it would just follow the rules.   Federal Law also requires a compliance audit to confirm that an airport sponsor is following the rules, when they receive a Federal Grant.   The Specifications for a compliance audit a very clear and detailed.  The audit states, that it did not identify any deficiencies in internal control over compliance…   It does not state how hard they looked. 

The continued reporting that the airport operates in the red according to audited, un-audited, or whatever kind of records you want to look at does not matter, a close look at the records will show other items charged to the airport, charges made to the operations of the airport, and not to capital improvements, charges to operations that were spent for Airevac, and being paid for by fixed wing tenants.  The airport records are in bad shape already, but when someone is intentionally trying to make them worse, does not show very well for the city.   

The point here is:  if the city cannot or does not wish to defend its record keeping, the next best thing is to attack the opposition.   This has been the SOP since 06, make it look like the airport tenants are bad people, and the airport is the down fall of the city financially.   Make it big, keep it simple, and tell it over and over and soon everyone will eventually believe it.  AH.

CONCERNING THE NEWSPAPER ARTICLE.

I received an email from Mr. Domke on Thursday Jan 2^nd.   The paper publishes on Friday mornings.  I did not check my email until Saturday.  I was going to reply to comment to the online article, but have decided not to do so.  In December, I received an email from the tenant that recently moved to Sullivan, which stated that the reason he was leaving, was due to the poor condition of the taxiway, the lack of fuel, and the high hangar rent.   St. Clair is $40 a month higher than similar surrounding facilities.   With four tenants, airport income will be around $8500 for 2014 with a rental rate of $175.  If the rate was competitive, as outlined by the FAA guidelines, the airport income could be $15,000.   This action by the city to keep hangar rates above market rates, to discourage full occupancy, demonstrates intent to not follow FAA guidelines.    

In September of 2010 MoDOT Aviation sent a letter to the city stating that “Based on the information provided by the City for their 2009 revenue and expenses for the airport, it is possible for the airport to sustain itself if management and operational practices were executed in accordance with Federal Aviation Administration guidelines and circulars and in compliance with federal grant obligations.  Our office is available to assist the City with any questions related to the airport and can provide FAA documents related to compliance with federal grant assurances.”   The FAA has stated repeatedly that the prime obligation of an airport sponsor is to operate the facility for the benefit of the aviation public.   The number of tenants on the airport will have no bearing on the decision by the FAA in regards to a plan submitted by the city to close the airport; if the city does present a plan.  The FAA has stated that there is no support for what the city has submitted so far, anywhere in the entire FAA organization.   The FAA has not lifted the hold on the closure issue due to a formal complaint, and an ongoing United States Department of Transportation Office of Inspector General Investigation of the airport management.    

The audited financial statements also show depreciation of a 1.6 million asset at the airport.  No one has stated what this was where it is, or when it was completed. 

The key element here is, if management and operational practices were executed in accordance with Federal Aviation Administration guidelines and circulars and in compliance with federal grant obligations.  Until the city understands this and realizes that the direction they have chosen to proceed is not going to get them what they want, the airport closure attempt will continue to sink into a quagmire that will end up costing the city and city taxpayers  more and more money.