OTHER AIRPORTS IN TROUBLE

There have been a lot of page hits from Wichita KS.  If you are reading this, and you are experiencing airport problems, we would be interested in knowing about them.  We are communicating with the Huron County airport in Ohio, and are exchanging ideas and experiences with airport sponsors.  We would like to hear from other airport users that are having difficulty.   

We are thinking that It would be a good idea for users with similar trouble to be able to communicate with each other.

2008 MODOT LETTER

This post is the 2008 MoDOT letter mentioned in the next couple of post.

PROPAGANDA, AND FOR WHAT PURPOSE?

From the Jan 7^th council meeting

Mayor Blum asked if there were any other items the Board would like to discuss, but it would be his recommendation to the Board that we once again do what they ask us to do, we have done this all along, and at some point there has to be foul cried on our part, we are doing everything they are asking us to do,

Including this here.

On May 21st, 2013 the Feds came back with this.

In order to address the remaining questions relating to Item 4, any future Air Evac leases should reflect a similar percentage increase in the base monthly rate to the increases experienced by other tenants from 2007-2013 pursuant to Title 49 United States Code Section 47107. In the alternative, the City should provide its cost allocation methodology for its rental rates. This methodology should be consistent with the FAA’s Rates and Charges Policy.

Also included in the 12/21/2012 letter from MoODT.

An acceptable corrective action plan would also include a City commitment to modifying its lease with AirEvac at the next available opportunity to include an escalation provision which would increase AirEvac’s rent at the same rate as the other airport tenants in order to work towards achieving airport self-sufficiency.

What did the city do to in response to the May 21^st letter?  Articles that address this issue cannot be found in any local news publications that mentioned the contents of this letter.

“Propaganda

Once understood how necessary it is for propaganda in be adjusted to the broad mass, the following rule results:

It is a mistake to make propaganda many-sided, like scientific instruction, for instance.

The receptivity of the great masses is very limited, their intelligence is small, but their power of forgetting is enormous. In consequence of these facts, all effective propaganda must be limited to a very few points and must harp on these in slogans until the last member of the public understands what you want him to understand by your slogan. As soon as you sacrifice this slogan and try to be many-sided, the effect will piddle away, for the crowd can neither digest nor retain the material offered. In this way the result is weakened and in the end entirely cancelled out.

Thus we see that propaganda must follow a simple line and correspondingly the basic tactics must be psychologically sound ...

What, for example, would we say about a poster that was supposed to advertise a new soap and that described other soaps as 'good'?

We would only shake our heads.

Exactly the same applies to political advertising.

The function of propaganda is, for example, not to weigh and ponder the rights of different people, but exclusively to emphasize the one right which it has set out to argue for. Its task is not to make an objective study of the truth, in so far as it favors the enemy, and then set it before the masses with academic fairness; its task is to serve our own right, always and unflinchingly.”

Mein Kampf

And for what purpose?  See the following post.

THEY’RE PICKING ON ME

Blum is trying to paint a picture of being persecuted and picked on by the FAA and MoDOT.  Imagine that, a bully complaining about being bullied. 

Mayor Blum asked if there were any other items the Board would like to discuss, but it would be his recommendation to the Board that we once again do what they ask us to do, we have done this all along, and at some point there has to be foul cried on our part, we are doing everything they are asking us to do,

Including this here. 

This is pure political propaganda.

Blum has repeated over and over and over, what he believes to be, and has reported after the FAA DC meeting, that the FAA is guiding them on a step by step process of getting an FAA closure, and that the city has “done everything they have asked”.   

MoDOT along with the FAA, but especially MoDOT, has been looking into the finances of St. Clair since 2008, when the city admitted that they were not using all of the airport revenue for use on the airport.  The city has been reluctant to cooperate.   How did they respond to a FEDERAL OIG investigation?

The hotline complaint investigation confirmed the City deposits airport revenue into the City’s general fund. During the investigation, the City was asked to present a clear accounting history of airport revenue. In its reply, the City provided accounting ledgers and general fund records from 2003 through 2008. The FAA reviewed the documentation provided and made the following determination:

The City‘s financial records are not complete. Airport revenue and expenses must be separate from the General Fund so separation of funds can be determined.

Six years of trying to hide financial information from the Federal Government. 

§46313. Refusing to appear or produce records

A person not obeying a subpena or requirement of the Secretary of Transportation (or the Under Secretary of Transportation for Security with respect to security duties and powers designated to be carried out by the Under Secretary or the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration with respect to aviation safety duties and powers designated to be carried out by the Administrator) to appear and testify or produce records shall be fined under title 18, imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.

ANOTHER EXTENSION

FORMAL COMPLAINT DECISION

The FAA publishes their findings on a website for their formal complaints.

http://part16.airports.faa.gov/index.cfm?page=CaseFileResults

As of 10:20 on Wednesday, nothing yet.  I appears that the city is under the impression that the March 3rd date was for a determination on closure, when it is actually for a determination on the formal complaint.  The findings of this case one way or another has nothing to do with closure of the airport.  The city has many obstacles to over come in this process, which apparently they are not aware of.

PART 16 COMPLAINT

As of 2:30 today there are no new part 16 decisions on the FAA Formal Complaint data base.

TERMINATION OF AIREVAC LEASE

The city council voted to release Air Evac from their lease at the rate of $300 per month for 17 months.  And the city will retain the building, as stipulated in the lease. 

From the MoDOT Dec. 21^st letter on Hangar Rates.

In order to demonstrate compliance with federal grant obligations, a corrective action plan is required which documents that the City’s current lease agreement with AirEvac is consistent with the City’s rental structure for businesses operating at the Airport. An acceptable corrective action plan would also include a City commitment to modifying its lease with AirEvac at the next available opportunity to include an escalation provision which would increase AirEvac’s rent at the same rate as the other airport tenants in order to work towards achieving airport self-sufficiency.

The city had an opportunity in the termination of the Air Evac lease, to increase the rate for the final 17 months of the lease, or to require an additional rent payment that would have satisfied the above determination.  

USE THE AIR EVAC HANGAR

This is concerning the use of the Air Evac hangar or the city maintenance hangar for the restoration of the city museum documents and other items damaged in the fire at the city museum.  The tenants at the airport would not oppose this action, and would consider this an excellent idea to use either of the buildings to help the museum recover and restore these items.  

IN CASE YOU MISSED IT

                                                                                                                          105 West Capitol Avenue
Mo DOT                                                                                                                       P.O. Box 270
____________________________________________                                  Jefferson City, Missouri 5102
Missouri Department of Transportation 573.751.2551
David B. Nichols, Director Fax: 573.751.6555
                                                                                                                  1.888.ASK MODOT (275.6636)

May 21, 2013

Mr. Rick Childers
City Administrator
City of St. Clair
#1 Paul Parks Drive
St. Clair, MO 63077

Re: St. Clair Regional Airport
March 26, 201 3 Correspondence

Dear Mr. Childers:

Thank you for your March 26, 201 3 letter. The corrective actions described in your letter demonstrate that the City has made significant progress in addressing the action items contained in my December 21 , 2012 letters and Jim Johnson’s December 28, 2012 letter.

However, there are still a few items that must be addressed in order for the City’s corrective action plan to be accepted by MoDOT and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The purpose of this letter is to outline the items which require additional action and to provide the City with guidance to ensure that its corrective action plan is accepted.

Routine Maintenance Items

For Item 1, “Grass and Weeds in Cracks on Runway and Apron”, the City’s response suggests that pavement cracks are only sprayed once a year. However, if weeds begin to grow out of pavement cracks after the annual spraying has occurred, these weeds should be sprayed as needed. An acceptable corrective action plan will include a commitment from the City to ongoing routine
maintenance of grass and weeds in cracks on pavement surfaces.

For Item 4, “Rotating Beacon Inoperative”, and Item 7, “Runway Lights Broken and Mounted Improperly”, ongoing routine maintenance must continue regardless of the status of negotiations on the City’s closure request. An acceptable
corrective action plan will include a commitment from the City to ongoing routine maintenance of the rotating beacon and the runway lighting system and will not condition that commitment on the outcome of closure discussions.
Compliance Plan Correspondence
For Item 3, which relates to main hangar storage, the actions proposed are acceptable and address the compliance issues raised, but additional information is

Our mission is to provide a world-class transportation experience that delights our customers and promotes a prosperous Missouri.

Mr. Rick Childers
Page 2
May 21, 2013

needed for MoDOT and the FAA to accept the City’s corrective action plan for this item. Please provide me with documentation demonstrating that the $ 11,700
transfer to the new airport account has occurred. Please also provide
documentation of the public auction to sell any items remaining in the hangar and documentation demonstrating that the auction proceeds were transferred to the new airport account.

For Item 4, which relates to Air Evac’s lease, MoDOT and the FAA agree that inclusion of a CPI indexing clause in the next Air Evac lease will help to ensure that Air Evac’s monthly rental rate reflects current economic conditions. MoDOT and the FAA also agree that different categories of tenants can have different rental rates, so long as a consistent methodology is utilized to establish fees for
comparable aeronautical users of the airport.

Although the City’s letter indicates it will include a CPI indexing clause in its next lease agreement with Air Evac, the letter does not state whether the base monthly rental rate for Air Evac will increase from $300/month when the Air Evac lease is next negotiated. Without this information, MoDOT and the FAA cannot determine whether the City’s proposed corrective action plan for Item 4 is acceptable.

The City’s March 26 letter stated that its lease rates reflect a variety of factors that differentiate certain types of tenants from one another. The differences between Air Evac and the fixed wing tenants may substantiate different rental structures for businesses operating at the airport and for other fixed wing tenants, but without any type of documentation outlining the City’s rental structure for businesses
operating at the airport, MoDOT and the FAA cannot determine whether Air
Evac’s lease agreement is consistent with such rental structure.

In order to address the remaining questions relating to Item 4, any future Air Evac leases should reflect a similar percentage increase in the base monthly rate to the increases experienced by other tenants from 2007-2013 pursuant to Title 49 United States Code Section 47107. In the alternative, the City should provide its cost allocation methodology for its rental rates. This methodology should be consistent with the FAA’s Rates and Charges Policy.

MoDOT is available to work with the City to address these remaining corrective action plan items and to identify steps the City can take to ensure future compliance. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. As soon as a response is received on these remaining items, I will coordinate with the FAA to determine whether the City’s corrective action plan is acceptable.

Sincerely,

Amy Ludwig
Administrator of Aviation

cc: Mr. Jim Johnson, Federal Aviation Administration
Ms. Lynn Martin, Federal Aviation Administration