They can't be serious

[LindaLu 0]

Have you dogs out there at nationals seen the local news? I'm posting this news link, because I received an email of another news item about Eloy's new financial threat. Maybe a bunch of you out there could talk to the press and get them to flood the papers with it.


Eloy, AZ


Letter I received (sorry - it's long):

Guest Opinion - Bryan Burke

Eloy airport economy could crash
I read the recent story on airport fees (Eloy Enterprise, 12 October 2006) with dismay. There is a lot more to the proposed fee of $6,000 a month for Skydive Arizona to operate than most people - including the Eloy City Council - seem to realize. I urge the area papers to give this matter more exposure so the citizens can see that an economic disaster, if not a real crime, is about to take place at the Eloy Airport.Fifteen years ago I did some of the construction work when Skydive Arizona moved to Eloy. Once or twice a day I had to set down my tools to pump $30 worth of fuel into a plane passing through. The airport was virtually dead. Then Skydive Arizona opened for business. Along with thousands of other skydivers, I've been coming back every year. Since I help out during some of the big skydiving events, I'm pretty familiar with the operation and I know owner Larry Hill well. Furthermore, I work with skydiving businesses in several other states.

I'm used to seeing cities try to drive small, marginal businesses off their airports or impose stifling fees on the successful ones. But when I learned that Eloy was planning to slap a whopping $72,000 annual use charge on Skydive Arizona it came as a shock - and made me wonder what was going on. Why would the City of Eloy vote to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs?

It is no secret that the skydiving center pumps a tremendous amount of money into the area economy. Last year, along with associated businesses, they paid employees and contractors around $2,000,000 and put another $225,000 in property and sales taxes into the government's hands. Several thousand skydivers a year visit the facility, and they spread a lot of money around. Casa Grande benefits as much from the purchases made by skydivers as Eloy does from the tax revenue.

It is also no secret that the business has operated for fifteen years on an understanding with the City that it could use the runways for free in exchange for that economic benefit. During that time Skydive Arizona has paid over a million dollars worth of fuel taxes into the federal fund that paid for most of the recent airport improvements, so "free" is a relative term. Until James McFellin became the Eloy City Manager, the arrangement was seen by both the city and the skydiving business as a win - win situation.

Suddenly the City Manager came to the conclusion that use of the Eloy Airport by Skydive Arizona was worth several thousand dollars a month, and if the new fee stands, Larry Hill plans to move his business elsewhere. How did this come about? The manager claimed that the airport was running at a loss and that the users had to make up the difference. If it is that simple, the airport budget and management plan should tell the story. And what a story they tell!

Mr. McFellin hired a transportation consultant who has admitted publicly that the "consultation" was to say exactly what Mr. McFellin wanted - and I guess he wanted a lot of money. That "consultant" looked at eleven airports in Arizona to determine what a reasonable fee for airport use would be. The trouble with his research is that he looked at airports where people actually get something for their money. All of the eleven airports studied have much larger runways than Eloy, most of them at least twice the size. Eight have modern terminals. All but two have control towers and secured fields. All but one has at least one airline, and all of them have computer weather service and rentals cars. All of them have lights that work. In other words, they don't have anything in common with the Eloy Airport, which lacks every one of those amenities!

Just in case you don't believe me, I have enclosed a copy of the study's cover page and the "selected airports" table. I'm a little astonished that the author was bold enough to claim that Eloy compares to someplace with a 12,000 foot runway, emergency vehicles, functional navigation aids, rental cars, airlines, terminals, weather services, police, and complete fencing. Those might be worth a few thousand dollars a month - to a business that needs them, which skydiving does not.

Mr. McFellin's "pay their fair share" argument is obviously malarkey, so something else must going on. I turned a few more pages of the study for a look at the airport budget numbers that were cited to justify the huge rate increases, thinking they might reveal something interesting. Boy, do they ever!

Let's look at the airport budget for Fiscal Year 2005-06 as shown in the study. Revenues were $73,636.04. Expenses were $181,450. What? $181,000? Given the humble nature of the Eloy Airport, something seems wrong with this picture. Let's look closer at the expense list, a copy of which I enclose.

$75,400 was a grant match for improvements and a lease/purchase expense for land. That's easily covered by the annual taxes Skydive Arizona pays already, and it's an expense the City will not have every year. The rest of the budget is for annual upkeep costs. Believe it or not, employee costs, vehicle, building, grounds, and equipment maintenance, and other expenses added up to $94,500. $60,300 of that was for the employees.

I'm sure the tenants of the run-down hangars would be shocked to learn that it costs $94,000 to mow the weeds three or four times a year, which is about the extent of the City's attention to the airport.

The insurance ($6000) and utilities ($3,500) might be accurate, but the rest of the expenses appear to be very heavily rounded up. Then there's $2,500 for "Travel and Training." Since the airport has no staff, maybe that was meant to be "Travel and Dining" for the Airport Manager, who happens to also be - surprise - the City Manager!

The projected budget for the next five years is even more interesting, forecasting a yearly deficit of $227,264! Yet the costs of maintenance and repair stay the same, as do insurance and utilities. So does the land purchase and grant match. What could possibly drive the cost of operating the airport up by 60% in one year when there are no plans to make any improvements to the facilities or do better maintenance?

Well, the budget for employees (and here the report specifically says "including the airport manager") goes from $60,300 to $135,000! That's more than double the 2006 budget, which already strains credibility to the limit since city employees rarely visit the airport and apparently don't know or don't care that the navigation beacon (the biggest, most obvious light on the airport) has been broken for months.

The two other items that increase are vehicle fuel/oil, going from a modest $250 to an unbelievable $20,000! I know gas prices have gone up, but not that much. Oh, one other item goes up, from $2,500 to $3,000. That's the travel and training budget. Maybe the Airport Manage wants to put a few lobsters on the menu.

Here's another striking thing about the budget numbers. Those that remain unchanged are numbers that are public record: Insurance, grants tied to federal and state funding, etc. The ones that change are discretionary numbers that the City Manager controls. Where does the money really go? Where would the new fees go? All the evidence suggests the City Manager is doctoring the books to raise money at the airport that will then be diverted elsewhere, just as it appears is being done now on a smaller scale. The fake budget is necessary because it is flat out illegal to divert money generated by the airport to the city's general fund, or any other city expense for that matter. It has to be spent at the airport.

The numbers are right here in black and white. I wouldn't have believed them either, until I saw the study. Here's another weird thing about the study's numbers. The initial proposed fee for Skydive Arizona's use of the airport wasn't $6,000 a month. It was $15,000! That would be an astounding $180,000 a year from Skydive Arizona, and other businesses on the airport would have to kick in another $68,000 above their current rates. I guess even McFellin realized that was a little too bold. Supposing the fees didn't instantly drive every business away, there is still the fact that hiding $70,000 is a lot easier than hiding a quarter of a million dollars. Imagine how much "gas" the city would have to buy to hide that much money! Why, it would take at least three fictional airport managers to conceal it all!

It's enough to make one cry. First, the City Council spent money for a totally bogus airport study, which delivered exactly what the City Manager asked for and offered no alternate proposals. (If you look at the entire study, the first 18 pages are large print, double spaced explanations of how the airport needs to bring in several hundred thousand dollars a year for imaginary expenses. The final half is copies of a lot of Federal Aviation Administration documents on airport management and fees, added to bulk up the study and give it an official look. I wonder how much the City paid for that!) Then, they bought the story that the airport is running at a loss, apparently because they never even glanced at the budget figures or checked to see if they were remotely realistic. Finally, they voted to do one of two very bad things: either drive a successful business out of town or commit a crime, depending on whether Larry Hill packs up and leaves or pays the fee.

Why the City Council can't see they are being used by an unscrupulous bureaucrat is a mystery. The Airport Study is an insult to the intelligence of anyone who reads it, but apparently McFellin calculated correctly that almost no one would. I urge the press to take that trouble for them, talk to the players involved, and report honestly to the people. By the way, this is the third scheme (that I know of) Mr. McFellin has come up with to try to squeeze money out of Larry Hill. The first two were proven to be illegal and were dropped. It's getting to be an ugly pattern. If he succeeds this time and Larry Hill moves on, the City of Eloy (not to mention all the businesses in Eloy, Arizona City, and Casa Grande patronized by skydivers) will lose - big time.

Bryan Burke, Bellingham, WA

Linda Lu
CRW Diva #73

[BillyVance 34]

This is already being discussed in the General Skydiving forum.

"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

[LindaLu 0]

Oh! Sorry. I never look in any forum but this one. I'll take a gander over there. Thanks!

Linda Lu
CRW Diva #73

[faulknerwn 36]

Yep. Please take comments to the main thread :-) Thanks!
W