Several emails were sent to MoDot Aviation and this is the response.
"Regarding the wishful intention of closing the St Clair airport I would like to file a complaint concerning the mis-interpretation of the Relocation requirements of the NEPA act and the determination that the tenants at St. Clair are not dislocated people in the FONSI. The Law is clear on this and consultation with OFFICE OF REAL ESTATE SERVICES Director, Virgil R Pridemore of the Federal Highway Administration, Mr. Pridemore stated that the purchasing of land was not a requirement to be considered to be a dislocated person.
Can you please tell me what are MoDot Aviation's intentions for relocation?
I addition, The city of St Clair claims it subsidizes the airport with city money. Can you tell me how much the Casablanca subdivision, (which are all leased homes owned by a corporation) is paying in rent to use Airport road? It appears that the owner of the Casablanca subdivision is using Airport road, which is airport property, for commercial use. Was a lease ever negotiated? or does this company get to use the road which is airport property for free? Is this revenue diversion?"
This was the first answer on June 7th which was sent on May 4th
" I received your email below requesting that an informal complaint be opened concerning the relocation costs for tenants at the St. Clair Regional Airport. Mitigation for displaced persons must follow the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act. The Uniform Act establishes minimum standards for federally funded programs and projects that require the acquisition of real property or displace persons from their homes, businesses, or farms as a direct result of acquisition, demolition, or rehabilitation for a federally funded project. It is my understanding that the closure of the airport is not considered a direct result of acquisition, demolition, or rehabilitation for a federally funded project.
Therefore, it is my understanding that the closure of the airport and the notification of airport tenants would be covered under negotiated leases. The City would be obligated to terminate the lease and provide notice of same as outlined within the lease agreement.
As for your questions regarding the entrance road, it is my understanding that historically, the City has used City funds for maintenance of the airport road. Apparently some significant maintenance of the road has occurred since Air Evac left the airport, and all of that work was paid for with City funds. Because City funds have been used to maintain the road, and not airport funds, I will not be opening a Part 13 on this matter. Thanks,
Amy Ludwig
Administrator of Aviation
Missouri Department of Transportation
Phone: (573) 526-7912"
A reply was sent on June 7th ans still no answer??? Looks like two different opinions on relocation, seems demolition of a federal project is covered in her answer, and has no intention of asking the city to collect rent on federal property.
"We will get back to you on the relocation, obviously we disagree as with the rest of this unfortunate situation. The FONSI called this a federal project.
We would like to see proof that the city used city money to maintain the road and how much? The significant maintenance was done after the facility was built for Air Evac. The road was destroyed during the process by a private corporation and was therefore fixed as a result.
Where does the law say that no revenue should be collected for any reason for the use of federal funded property for any reason. Thats why the city is paying rent for the lift station. Which is determined by what they say is the current value of the property which is also a disagreement. The city is paying around $300 a year for a 60x60. We pay $175 a month for a hangar. How much should they have and should be collecting for 176 leased homes owned by a for profit corporation?
You all seem to think that know one needs to conform to the rules because of the new legislation but they way we read it is that it doesn't go into effect until the city pays for it all. Is this true? The airport should be maintained in a safe and serviceable condition until this time.
Also remember this airport was donated by local families to be an airport. How would you feel if you donated something similar and someone used it for something for their own personal agenda? "
That's approximately $63,360 a year for the last 3 years that should be charged for using the federal road. The city claims they are loosing money on the airport. In addition to the aircraft hangared their at $175 a month.
Fortunately they are a few new people concerned about this issue. Leadership that is focused on draining the swamp and getting rid of crooked politicians.
The city of st clair and a few politicians are attempting to close and sell the st clair airport property at less than 1/10 of what it is worth.
The last sentence of the email says it all, What if this was your donation and someone tried to give it away for someones else's profit?
For those responsible for this fiasco, just do the right thing.
If the airport is sold it must be Fair Market Value and relocate the residents to another airport, very simple.
The bill passed to close the St Clair airport https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-bill/2759
No comments:
Post a Comment