Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAirport.Minutes.06-06-1995AIRPORT BOARD dfINUTES Tuesday. June 6, 1995 irport "Business Se"ice Center" xrr ATTENDANCE Members present : J. Fred Waltz, Steve Nester, Steve Robertson, Bill Walker, Mike Wandrick Members absent Allan Maki, Dan Ovorboy, Others present State Senator Peter Kinder: Doug Leslie, Asst City Manager/Public Works Dir, Greg Chenoweth, Airport Mgr. Sands, Bloom, Airport Admin Secretary. 1. CALL TO ORDER Mr. Waltz called the meeting to order at 1:05 PM. 11. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING Mr. Walker made a motion to approve the minutes of the 52/95 meeting as mailed. Mr. Nester seconded and the motion passed unammauly. BE OLD BUSINESS Chairman Waltz temporarily dispensed with the agenda and asked staff to give Senator Emden a presentation on the Federal Contract 'lower Program (FC'T) and how it relates to C'ope's Air Traffic Control Tower Chenoweth explained the basics of the program and how FAA determination for continued funding appears to be based upon a Bonefit/Cost HVC) ratio. He continued to say that the ratio is essentially based upon the federal cost of operating die facility compared to the number of actual air traffic operations at the field However, the formula has numerous other factors that weigh into the final anah'sis - including some subjective factors. Ile then mentioned that the City had engaged an organ nation in Washington, D.C., Aviation Management Associates, Inc. (AMA) to act as the Cih's contact in Washington on this issue. AMA has successfully assisted several other airports in the country at risk of losing federal funding for their towers through the FCT. He added the idea that if PAA discontinued the funding, that the idea had been discussed regarding possible State of Missouri financial assistance as an economic development tool. Senator Kinder then asked how much it costs to operate the lower. Mr. Leslie responded that the contract amount is upproxielatch S 175,000 per year. Chenoweth pointed out that there are additional costs of nhnintaining the lower that are now borne by the FAA. Those costs are also calculated in with the final figure for operating the tower. So the FAA's final analysis will include both the contract cost ($175,000) plus the cost ofmaintaining the tower which had been requested of the FAA and were not yet available. Leslie went on to say that Missouri had been the hardest hit ofall states under the FAA PC 1 program with at least 3 Lowen slated tin closure the first year. All of these towers had been determined to riot meet the B'C ratio. Chairman Waltz explained that the Cape Girardeau Regional Airport ICGH was originally rated at around 30 on the BC ratio and we need to reach 1.0. Walt, further commented that there were many other issues germane to the tower controversy. Among them, he mentioned I I'I'lie FAA chances dictating that an carriers now operating under Part 135 will soon he regulated under fart 12 1. These are a more strict set of standards. In addition, as it is now understood Pat 121 carriers are required In AN at airports with a tower. The current air carrier, -I'W E will be affected by this change. 2) 5nplanemenls and load factors are continuing to increase and these are a factor in the B/C ratio. Senator Kinder inquired as to what a load factor was. Chenoweth explained it as the ratio of seats available on a plane to the number actually filled. An 18 passenger aircraft with 9 passengers would have a load factor of 50"n. Waltz continued the histo,Ni issue by explaining than Cape Girardeau became awair as c:niy as Oct 91 that the tower might be on the "hit list". I hen in Dec 94, official word was received that we were targeted N lose federal funding for the tower contingent upon a re-evaluation of the BIC ratio in October of 1995. And if we lose the tower and due to the Part 135 to 121 regulations, we may well lose our air carrier service. Neither of which is a positive action for the cormorants, and region overall. `. He then informed Kinder That as a measure of advocating the tower to the FAA, we have been aligning ourselves in order to challenge the FAA's contention that we do not meet the B'C ratio. We have been gathering the numbers Airport Board Minutes .lune fi, 1995 Page 2 of 5 and information needed to gel our BC ran,, near the 1.0. If we can even near that point, then the politicalf, subjective information that we have been gathering would possibly put Cape over the To figure. Ile then went on to say that at this time he was unsure as m what Senator Kinder could du to help an the tower issue. But that the tower was important and needed to be supported Kinder then asked if Lloyd Parr of the Mo. Highway & Transportation Department, Div of Aviation was apprised of the situation, and Leslie replied affirmatively. Chenoweth mentioned however. that the Div of Aviation had tat previously expressed a real concern with the issue. Mr. Leslie then mentioned the importance of the tower in terms of the overall national airspace system. Several air carrier aircraft not intended for arrival in Cape have recently diverted to CGI due to in Flight emergencies. Our airport being certified to IAR Part 139 standards, possessed the emergency equipment needed to adequately address the situation. However without a tower, the aircraft would not have been able to have the equipment waiting when the aircraft touched down. Kinder stated his views regarding the seriousness of the issue and that he would contact Floyd Parr with the Div of Aviation in order Io help direct his attention to the issue. Further miscellaneous ideas as to the situation were brought up. The need to increase the traffic count, how this was very bad timing with the gaining boats coming in, the renovation of the terminal, the new FBO in place and another coming soon. Steve Robertson noted that he has always paid property taxes on his aircraft I Ie was curious where those funds were going. He continued in that perhaps those funds should be used to help with the lower in addition to the other possible funding ideas mentioned in paragraph 5 of the tower memo in the agenda packet. Leslie then mentioned that City staff and Advisory Board representatives had met with tom Schulte of Senator Kit Bond's local office on June 5. 1995. Several ideas had been discussed at that time. Waltz mentioned how all of our good efforts up to this point needed to be coalesced into a focused, logical and defined sequence to make the greatest impact in order to get the BC ratio up to, near or over I A. If the figures gel near 1.0 we would then let the subjective information carry the decision on through to achieve continued funding. It w;u mentioned to Kinder how the PAA had not been overly supportive in demonstrating how the B/C ratio is determined. Leslie pointed out that upon checking the data, erroneous information had been used by FAA in determining our B/C ratio. Chenoweth then mentioned, to further point out the confusing methodology of the FAA's B/C ratio to Senator Kinder, that CGFs most recent B/C number had appreciated to a .43 ratio. This was despite CGI actually having had fewer Air Traffic Operations during the evaluating time frame. Robertson then asked if there was a window of opportunity to redress the issue if by nothing else than through litigation. He based the comment upon the report that FAA may be changing the fart 135/1 a_ 1 regulations and closing the tower. Through the loss of both the tower and the air carriers, it would appear to be an overly stern use of federal regulator)power to severely damage a local economy. Expanding upon that concept. the Board then summarized for Mr. Kinder "s benefit, the FAA has never implied that CGI could not have d tower -just that they I PAA) would not pay for it. Senator Kinder then reiterated that he would see that Mr. Parr of the Div of Aviation is aware o'thc situation and then excused himself from the meeting. In expanding norther on the funding issue, Leslie mentioned how the AMA representative had related past experience in getting the PAA to agree to partial funding assistance. While FAA had reportedly Hal out said no to a 'cost sharing" plan, mention had been made of the possibility of a lower funding "partnership" with the FAA. This is a matter of frequent negotioting with I'AA officials in Washington. Staffrelated that Mr. Barnett of AMA had noted in previous phone conversations that certain funding responsibilities had been taken on by other communities (re. minor maintenance ofthe tower facility, future tower equipment upgrades, janitorial etc). This Airport Board Minutes .lune 6. 1995 Page 3 of 5 local and relatively inexpensive action had brought [lie cost to the FAA of operating the tower low enough so as to make the H'C ratio rise above the acceptable 1.0 figure. It was through ideas such as this one presented by AMA: ideas that require a good set of integral contacts in Washington to make them work, that prompted staff to get AMA on our side. Staff reported that Mr. Barnett and a colleague would be in town soon to perform an on-site evaluate of the airport Waltz suggested that when Barnett comes into town, then a meeting should be arranged so the Board can visit with AMA. Chairman Waltz reported that he felt as though significant progress had been made on the tower issue since the last Board meeting. I he asked if there were any further comments to be made on the issue. Robertson asked about an enplanement "tax' . Leslie and Chenoweth explained that FAA had instituted such an idea a few years ago. It was termed a "Passenger Facility C'harge'. It is a highly regulated fee and is collected by the airport wishine to do so. I lowever the mazimum that can be charged is £3 per person and that amount goes against the airport's federal funding lar improvement projects. Staff pointed out that even with a minimum of 10,000 cnplanements, only $30,000 could be realized. Waltz then mentioned the importance to the tower of the upcoming transportation tax question. The tax question is slated to be on the August '95 ballot. If federal funding did not continue, then this tax could help lice up funds in other areas that might then become a possible source to offset the costs of the tower. A. Update an Balloon Fest '95 Chenoweth reported that plans for the event were coning along well. I he Balloon Fest sponsors were anticipating `r. at least 10,000 and as many, as 30,000 people to attend. He reported that through the efforts of Larry Weller a local businessmaNpilot and himself, contacts had been made with the national chapter of the Experimental Aircraft Association. Initial figuresgiven by that organization were []tat as many as I50 aircraft may tum out for the event. Chenoweth expressed some reservations about that loge a number showing up, but even if 30 - 50 aircraft come, it will have heen more than had been originally planned As the FAA had only been contacted in the last monOt, it was mentioned that if they are invited earlier nest year a quite large cadre of unique aircraft may show up. I'or safety measures, Taff is planning to erect a perimeter around the festival grounds to keep pedestrians from pandering onto the active areas of the airfield. The location of the grounds will be on the area south of the Air Evac facilities and in the field smith ofthe public ramp. B. In other business items, Walker asked about the drive through gate near Air Evac Chenoweth noted that it had been accidently damaged by an Air Evac employee. It was in the process of being replaced. C. Leslie mentioned the upcoming bid opening on June 15 for the ramp construction and repair project. D. A question was brought up about the lettering on the main airport entrance sign. It did not appear right. Staff said they were checking into it. E. Robertson asked about advertising in journals such as "Trate-A-Plane'. I le felt that it would be good say to stimulate h'ar,n nt aircraft onto the field. Staff reported that they were looking into and would act upon it vep soon. IV. A. Restaurant Operations Discussion 'I he Board discussed at length the concerns of the Council towards the restaurant losses. StatYpassed out the sales .,� recap for May (the P&L statements had not vet been compiled by Financing Dept). In addition the Board was shown a cope of restaurant projections based upon recent sales, and expenditures. Staff pointed out the trends loom when it was taken over in Sept of 1994. These trends showed continually lower loss margins as well as confinually Airport Board Minutes June 6, 1995 Page 4 of 5 growing Gross sales. It as also pointed out that in any food service business, there is a period that is expected to be only marginally profitable if at all. This is due to the time that it takes to build up a clientele This restaurant is no different No real marketing efforts were expended under the auspices of the previous lease holder and subsequent restaurant manager for the City, who resigned in May. Until some marketing ideas can he implemented, the clientele base will most likely ant build and losses will continue - albeit those losses hem - less and less each month. Dr. Walker mentioned the restaurant lease bid process and expressed some concern over the length of time the bids sa'ere advenisedStaff reported this was standard for such bids and in addition that the bid packets were seal to prospective bidders almost'_ weeks before the bid closing date. Dr. Walker then mentioned that he knew of an individual that may wish to lease and operate the restaurant. Mr. Nesler too, felt that he might know of someone that is interested in the lease. Staff reported that they would have the Purchasing Dept, generate a copy of the bid packet that was sent out and would get it to then[. Mr. Nesler then .Dated that he felt the restamar t is a very important part of the airport and that it's loss would he a severe blow to the future development and use of entire field He felt that what was missing was some sort of a marketing niche to draw people out to the airport to eat. I le then recommended that the City hire someone at a very reasonable rate as a consultant to come in and assess our current operations. This consultant would then make recommendations as to changes or whatever such as a marketing tool such as a niche, to make it more profitable or at least more na mmerative. He offered his expertise in helping to find someone. Waltz suggested that Nester get the costs for this and being them to the next meeting. Robertson felt that the problem was in the marketing. I Ie mentioned an idea of generating a coupon fin getting the Nash Road employees into the restaurant. He did not feel that the overhead was the problem - it was the lack of sales. Something needed to be done to bring the customers in. It appeared at several points in the discussion to he a unanimous consensus that the restaurant was viral to the effectiveness of the airport. Mr. Nesler inquired about the newspaper article that reportedly hurt the restaurant, Staff reported that it was an article in the Southeast Missourian discussing the Citv Council's retreat. AI that meeting the restaurant was discussed and termed a' losing proposition" by local newspaper staff who then put it in print Staff reported drat business chalet instantaneousIv fel l off by around 35 - 30 4'0 over the next few weeks. The restaurant staff were getting calls almost a month later asking if they had opened backup or were they still closed The callers seemed to read the article as having said the restaurant had been dosed at that time. Business finally picked back up and that we wcrc having some really good days recently. Nesler then turned his attention to the bid and asked if there was anything in it that could be removed to make the process simpler. Leslie informed him that it could deliniteh be somewhat streamlined. 'I lie Board then made several suggestions on more marketing ideas to make the restaurant more cost effective. In any case the Board reiterated their feelings that keeping the restaurant if very important to the airport, Staff reported that they would make the Board's feelings known to the City Council and would report back to them. Non -Agenda Items A. Dr. Walker called attention to some handouts regarding the Visionaire manufacturing facility being discussed for CGI. He mentioned that a meeting would be held soon in conjunction with local business leaders and the Visionaire people to discuss the possibility of locating here in Cape. Waltz reported that John Mehner related to him that Visionaire was basically waiting to hear from local investors and that it was not that the Cit had failed in any way to assist in locating the plain in Cape. Leslie asked Walker about the competition for the plant Walker .� replied that Ames, Iowa suns basically the oohother player expressing an interest in the facility. Airport Board Minutes .lune 6, 1995 Page 5 of 5 B. Chenoweth distributed the monthly Air Traffic Counts and what [nplanement information was available that earl' in the month lir the previous month. C. Chenoweth then announced to the Board that Sandy Bloom, the Airport Administrative Secretary had accepted a lateral move within the City to the Convention and Visitors Bureau. He went on to say that this was a position Mrs. Bloom had been eyeing for over a year and it finally became available to her. He underscored how she would be missed and that while she could never be replaced a new person would be hired soon to till the vacancy. D. Robertson expressed a concern about receiving the minutes lust before the nest meeting. He suggested that a draft copy be forwarded a week or two after the meeting so the Board could have a chance to better absorb the information. VE ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, Mr. Walker made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Wandrick seconded and the motion can'ied unanimously '. The meeting adjourned at approximately 5::0 PM. Minutes prepared by Greg Chenoweth, Airport Manager Minutes Approved by: Chairm , Airport Advisory R