JUST A NOTE HERE

.

The two following paragraphs are posted here for comparison.  Paragraph 1 is taken from the redevelopment plan for the city, and paragraph 2 is taken from the airport fact book, which is published on the city website. 

1:       

Second, the airport constitutes an economic liability to the City from an operational standpoint in that the airport underperforms financially. According to City records, from 2004 through 2007, the City’s expenditures on the airport exceeded airport revenues, resulting in four straight years of losses, requiring airport operations to be subsidized from the City’s general fund. In late 2007, the City terminated all services at the airport. Only then in 2008 was the airport able to generate enough revenue to cover its own basic operational expenses. Currently, the airport is of limited use and utility. No fuel or

other goods are provided. Not even restrooms are available.

2:

The City of St. Clair, MO requests release from all federal obligations related to the

St. Clair Regional Airport precisely because the airport has never, in its history, provided any positive impact on the economic well-being of St. Clair, and little if any positive impact of any kind. The airport provided, at best, limited value when it was built, currently provides absolutely no value, and has no credible indications of being of particular value at any point in the future other than being an additional and unnecessary place to land – for small, single-engine personal pleasure aircraft.

What is important to understand here, is that the period from 04 to 07 was used to show a loss for the airport. If the years from 2002 through 2008 were included, the airport would show a profit. 

Paragraph two is unique.  It has the appearance of a rant.  The style and context of this paragraph is what attracted a major St. Louis newspaper to do a story about the airport. 

The first sentence of paragraph 2 proves a complete mis-understanding of the relationship of an airport and its sponsor.  The purpose of a sponsor is to insure the positive economic impact of the airport to the aviation public, not the sponsor.  The statement “The airport provided, at best, limited value when it was built” is also the opinion of a nonaviation individual.  Thousands and thousands of members of the aviation public obtained their pilots license at this airport and it has provided an enormous value to the aviation public. 

There is a major point that needs to be observed here, and that is the difference between what the city has stated and the actions of the city.  It is clear that the city has intentionally and purposely managed the airport to bring it to the condition as described in the airport fact book for the purpose of closing it.