An Engineer’s Observations of the Airport Board Presentation
- Filed under Blog Posts
Below are some of the observations I made at the Spencer County Airport Board (“Air Board”) meeting on February 19th and my conclusions about the process being used by both ENTRAN and the Air Board.
- (1) There was no operating budget presented for a new airport in Spencer County. Without knowing what the projected income and operating expenses would be, it is impossible to know how much tax payer dollars will be required each year to support a new airport.
- (2) No detailed analysis of the economic benefits to Spencer County was presented. Without good estimates of any economic benefits, it is impossible to determine if the millions of tax payer dollars required to build a new airport would be a good investment.
- (3) The presentation only identified the number of aircraft owners potentially INTERESTED in locating their aircraft in Spencer County. It did not identify the number COMMITTED to moving their planes to Spencer County if a new airport is built. Further, since some of the planes in question are already operating from private property in Spencer County, any projections for incremental property taxes should be based on owners COMMITTED to move minus those planes already in the county.
- (4) A recent study performed by an expert in aviation economics, GRA, looked at thirteen Kentucky airports between 2001 and 2005. The study showed that none of the airports were self-sufficient, and eleven of the thirteen relied on annual funding from local governments. That means local taxpayers are being forced to pay for airports which are largely used for recreational purposes by a very small group of people. I think that is why we have not seen a proposed operating budget for this airport. The GRA study can be seen at the Shelby County link under Sister Campaigns (enter “airport” in the search block and look for the GRA presentation.)
-
(5) According to the ENTRAN presentation, the factors used to determine the top three sites were:
- Terrain
- Airspace
- Vehicular Access
- Environmental Features
- Cost
- Residential Impacts
The analysis along with scores for each site were not presented. I expected to see a formula to calculate an overall score for each site and the resulting scores. ENTRAN did not present any formula or scores. Apparently, none were used. Thus, it is impossible to see how the top three sites were actually selected and whether the reasoning is sound.
- (6) At the last Air Board meeting, I learned that a site considered early in the process is located on property which belongs to the U.S. Corps of Engineers. However, the site was eliminated as a candidate because the U.S. Corps of Engineers is unwilling to sell that property. That is not one of the factors ENTRAN lists in its report. In fact, one of the final three sites ENTRAN selected in Oldham County was owned by the government and was not for sale. If the property owner’s refusal to sell is a disqualifying factor, all of the current top three sites in Spencer County should be rejected because some or all of the owners are unwilling to sell.
-
(7) Both Shelby County and Oldham County recently considered the possibility of building small airports. Both counties discovered serious financial and logistical downsides relating to potential airports in their respective communities. After reviewing an analysis of existing small airports including their level of activity, economic impact and cost to local taxpayers, Shelby County decided it would be a waste of time and resources to pursue the matter any further. Simply put, the existing airports are not drawing companies to their communities and do not pay for themselves. Rather, they rely on additional funding from local taxpayers.
Oldham County quickly assured its residents, on the record, that it would not use eminent domain to acquire land for an airport. They have not yet determined if an airport is a wise decision financially. They are in the process of conducting an independent financial analysis (something ENTRAN failed to do for them as well) before they spend their remaining funds (see Oldham Era Article on the Resources Page.) Fiscal Court should follow their example, stop further work on site selection and form an unbiased committee to determine both the costs and benefits of an airport in Spencer County.
-
(8) The Air Board is assuming they will obtain a large amount of funding from both the federal government and state government. However, there is absolutely no guarantee that all or any of that money will be available. Kentucky is in the midst of a serious budget crisis and the new administration is in the process of slashing budget items that are not related to vital services. The federal government is facing a 3 trillion dollar deficit and a down economy. It will also see a change in the administration at the end of the year. In the midst of a budget crunch, there can be no guarantee that Congress or the new administration will approve funding millions of dollars to build small airports (especially when there are multiple airports a short drive away from the proposed new airport). As taxpayers, why would we want them to approve such items at our expense?
Even if the federal and state entities provide every cent of the money that the Air Board asks for, which is unlikely, there will still be a shortfall of at least $500,000! With the local government constantly short on funds for vital services, do we want to spend one-half million dollars of local taxpayer money on an airport that only a few people will use? I should also note that, during the recent “informational meeting,” members of the Air Board and ENTRAN acknowledged that it is highly unlikely this potential project would receive federal funding all at once. Rather, they admitted that it would probably be spread over 5 to 10 years. Thus, the construction would be forced to take place in slow stages. Surrounding property owners would be forced to endure a construction eyesore for that period of time.
-
(9) The ENTRAN report cost a lot of money, but fails to provide any of the important analysis that is necessary before the community can make an informed decision on this issue.
Duane Tobbe
- Permalink
- February 28, 2008 @ 8:20 am
Blog Entry #1
- Filed under Blog Posts
This will be a blog which will be kept regularly updated by Mike. Comments and discussion will be available, and we look forward to hearing from you!