Loading...
1988MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE COX FIELD AIRPORT COMMITTEE January 21, 1988 The Cox Field Airport Committee met in a special session, Thursday, January 21, 1988, at 11:30 A.M., Council Room, City Hall. Councilman Clifford, Chairman of the Committee, called the meeting to order with Mayor Burnett and Councilman Fendley present. Also present was City Manager Malone, City Attorney Haynes, Director of Facilities, Dick Boots, and Deputy City Clerk, Joe McCollum. Dick Boots presented a a copy of a memorandum to each person present concerning Cox Field Operations under the guidance of the City as compared with F.B.O. Chairman Eric Clifford discussed the mowing at Cox Field being contracted out the last six to eight months, and stated that he felt the City was not in favor of doing the mowing. Dick Boots, Director of Facilities said that mowing a thirty foot border every two weeks prevents the clogging up of the equipment with dead grass clippings. T. K. Haynes, City Attorney, asked about bermuda grass in this situation. Mr. Clifford asked if the fuel flowage would increase under the City's Operation. He also stated that he felt the F.B.O. could not survive and keep up the mowing. City Attorney Haynes said the Committee should determine what the contract should be. Mr. Clifford stated that he was not in favor of the City operation of Cox Field Airport. Mayor Burnett suggested that the Airport Manager could do the yard mowing around the terminal area. Dick Boots said that Mr. Collier could not do it health wise, but there were other things Mr. Collier could do such as generally assisting everyone at the airport, and could contract with F.B.O. as Airport Manager. The Committee discussed the present F.B.O. running out of gas on occasion. Councilman Clifford stated he felt it was in the best interest of the City of Paris to leave the operation of Cox Field Airport with a private individual, with Mayor Burnett and Councilman Fendley in agreement. Councilman Clifford said he had no objection to either individual who desired to take over the F.B.O. The Committee discussed five (5) acres of fine mowing around terminal and hangers with an estimated cost of $13,000.00 for all of the mowing. The Committee recommended that the City not repurchase fuel truck. Mayor Burnett stated that a close look should be taken at the Airport Budget for the next fiscal year. The Committee recommended that bids be taken with a private individual, assign the lease, A.M. until sundown, the City provide mowing, observation and crash, fire and rescue, employees,and our Airport Manager will check ATTEST: JOE MCCOLLUM, DEPUTY CITY CLERK Page 2 on mowing, leave the F.B.Q. get longer hours from 8:00 qualify Collier for weather F.B.O. will qualify his runways. ERIC CLIFFORD, CHAIRMAN MINUTES AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD MEETING TUESDAY, JANUARY 26, 1988 COX FIELD PARIS, TEXAS The meeting was called to order at 6:00 P.M. by Victor Abeles, Acting Chairman. The following members were present: .Victor Abeles Joe Burress J.W. Ashmore, Secretary Greta Greb Also present were Jim Collier, Airport Manager, and Dick Boots, Director of Community Facilities. Members absent: Bill Boothe, Chairman. The minutes of the November 26, 1987 meeting were approved as read on a motion by Greta Greb, and seconded by J.W. Ashmore. Report was heard on Security Gate by Greta Greb and Dick Boots. Mr. Petty withdrew his bid on the gate because they no longer make the type of gate he would have used. Victor Abeles turned in another bid on the gate by Stanley Emerson. (Copy attached) J.W. Ashmore made the motion to recommend to the City Council to accept Pridemore's bid and give it one year trial. Joe Burress seconded the motion. It was a unanimous decision. The Board was told that since the cost of the Security Gate was over $1,000.00, the City Council must authorize going out to bid on the Security Gate. Dick Boots will take care of the Bid Procedure. Discussion on terminal repair was led by Earl Smith, City Engineer. (See Attached Copy.) Greta Greb made the motion to get the City to consider getting Mr. Lightfoot to come look over the terminal and request that this project be put into next year's budget. J.W. Ashmore seconded the motion. Earl Smith recommended that the road, parking lot and drain be started on first. The Board next heard discussion on the possibility of getting Paris certified as a Weather Observation Station. Greta Greb recommended the F.B.O. to be Certified. The recommendation was revised to (1) update City employee, (2) Request the F.B.O. to join in on the certification, (3) To contact Exec Express Airlines for future cooperative working agreement. The discussion of the discontinuation of Part 139 Certificate was heard next. Greta Greb made the motion not to relinquish the certificate. Victor Abeles seconded the motion and it was unanimous. See attached copy. Discussion of the F.B.O. Lease was next on the Agenda. Mr. Sadler introduced Mr. & Mrs. J.B. Richie to the Board Members. No action was necessary. Information was merely reported. Greta Greb wanted to know what was to be done with the fuel tanks. No action was taken. The new F.B.O. owner may use the tanks. Greta Greb made the move to adjourn. J.W. Ashmore seconded the motion. COX FIELD TERMINAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR LONG -RANGE RENOVATION When an individual arrives at Cox Field, their first impression of the Airport Facility is very important. Whether it is the general public, local flying public, industrial representatives or other visitors arriving at Cox Field, these individuals must realize that the City of Paris is proud of their Facilities. The recommendations for modernizing and renovating the Airport Terminal should have a far reaching affect on future private and industrial growth in Paris. After inspecting the terminal building, it appears the structural integ- rity of the building is excellent with the exception of the roof. There are no cracks in the floor slab. The heat and air units seem to be functioning properly and are approximately five years old. The following is a list of possible renovation needs. 1. Remove metal window framework and windows on the east side of the building and replace with brick veneer and double pane windows. 2. Install a new roof and add rain gutters where needed. 3. Install a new drop tile ceiling in terminal where existing ceilings are over 8' high. 4. Install new light fixtures throughout entire building. 5. Renovate restrooms and restroom fixtures where necessary. 6. Rework electrical wiring where needed. 7. Remove existing wood counter in front of airline office and replace with a new, more modern ticket counter. 8. Repair all wall cracks. 9. Repaint all interior walls, woodwork, doors and frames. 10. Install heavy duty panelling on all interior brick walls. 11. Strip, clean and seal floors in entire building. We recommend that an architect be hired in the 1988 -89 budget ($3,000) to prepare plans and specifications for this renovation project and that the cost of the renovation be placed in the 1989 -90 budget. There are several areas of concern at Cox Field that we feel should be dealt with as soon as possible. The entrance circle and parking area must be addressed. The existing paving should be removed and a new 2" asphalt overlay be applied. The longer this project is overlooked, the more deterioration of - 2 - asphalt, curb and gutter will take place, thus increasing the cost of the project. The cost of -this project will be given to the Advisory Board at a future meeting. The second area of concern is.solving the problem of soil erosion that is encroaching into the two roadways above the creek. To solve this problem, headwalls must be constructed above and to each side of the tinhorn culverts. If these headwalls are not constructed soon, we will have to build two entire roadway sections. The approximate cost of constructing the four headwalls is $13,000. We consider this a priority project. Hopeful- ly, this project and the resurfacing of the entrance circle and parking area can be requested in the 1988 -89 budget. The Cox Field Facility is an important part of Paris and Lamar County. As happens many times, important projects are put on the back burner for numerous reasons. We have completed projects in the past several years that were desperately needed, but we still have some major projects that we must complete. Hopefully, by doing this future planning, we can realize the importance of these projects being completed and insure that the Airport Facility continues to serve Paris and Lamar County in the best way possible. Dick Boots Earl Smith Director of Facilities City Engineer � - U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration DEC Mr. Michael Malone, City Manager City of Paris 135 First Street, SE P. 0. Box 1037 Paris, TX 75460 Dear Mr. Malone: Southwest Region Fort Worth. Texas 76193 -0000 Arkansas. Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas Part 139 of the Federal Aviation Regulations has been amended and was published in the Federal Register on November 18, 1987. The changes are effective January 1, 1988, and we have enclosed two copies; one should be furnished to the person in charge of aircraft rescue and firefighting. Also enclosed is a list of highlights of the significant rule changes. We urge you to study the new rules carefully, especially the preamble which explains the purpose of some of the major revisions. Contact your assigned certification safety inspector if you have any questions. As the operator of a certificated airport which does not have and is not expected to have air carrier service - over 30 -seat aircraft - you can appreciate the effort that will be involved in complying with these new rules. The consequences,of retaining the certificate are an unjustified use of FAA resources to enforce and administer regulatory requirements and an unnecessary legal burden on the city of Paris. We believe the city of Paris should relinquish the operating certificate. Relinquishing the operating certificate will have no effect on future Federal funding for airport improvements nor on the the city of Paris ability to obtain an operating certificate if the airport receives air carrier service in the future. The airport should continue to meet high safety standards, but it need not be subject to FAA regulation to accomplish this objective. All that is necessary is for the airport operating certificate to be returned to this office. We would appreciate your prompt attention to this matter and return of the certificate at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, G onley Manager, Safety and Standards ranch A 1ag1 2 Enclosures M E M O R A N D U M 12 -14 -87 TO T.K. HAYNES FROM DICK BOOTS THE FAA HAS REQUESTED THE CITY OF PARIS RELINQUISH ITS OPERATING CERTIFICATE. AS STATED IN THEIR LETTER, THIS SHOULD NOT HAVE ANY BAD EFFECTS ON THE CITY OF PARIS COX FIELD OR AIRPORT OPERATIONS. RELINQUISHING THIS CERTIFICATE WILL HAVE NO EFFECT ON FUTURE FEDERAL FUNDING. BE ASSURED THAT THE CITY OF PARIS WILL CONTINUE TO UPGRADE THE AIRPORT AND CONTINUE TO MEET HIGH SAFETY STANDARDS. _ I AM REQUESTING THAT YOUR OFFICE RETURN THE CERTIFICATE TO THE FAA AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. THIS ACTION WILL BE REPORTED TO THE AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD AT THEIR JANUARY MEETING. THANK YOU. DICK BOOTS DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DB:dp cc: MICHAEL E. MALONE MATTIE CUNNINGHAM JIM COLLIER Warren C. ( larmon, Chairman I enry A. Sibley, Jr., Vice Chairman Stephen E. Cone, Jr., Secretary Mel Phillips, Jr., Member Maxey Grossenbacher, Member Walter Umphrey, Mcmbcr `Texas IAeronautics Commissioq December 23, 1987 Mr. George D. Conoly, Manager Safety and Standards Branch, ASW -650 Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration Fort Worth, Texas 76193 -0650 Dear 2 `ry: C.A. (Clay) Wilkins Executive Director P.O. Box 12607 410 East Fifth Street Austin, Texas 78711 (512) 476 -9262 This is to follow -up our discussion at the State Director's Conference in early December concerning discontinuation by your office of Part 139 Certificates for smaller airports. - �- During our conversation, I'm sure you will recall that we expressed a desire that airports providing scheduled passenger service, regardless of aircraft size, maintain a Part 139 Certificate. Recognizing the shortage of manpower in your office, we offered to work with you to determine whether we could supplement you field staff to assure that these communities maintained their certification. With this letter we wish to restate our hope of being able to be of assistance in this area. The Part 139 Certificate is particularly important to smaller communities. helps them identify procedures and facilities necessary to maintain a safe - airport. It draws attention to high priority projects eligible for federal funding. And, just as importantly, it increases the level of confidence -that - passengers have in their airport and in commuter service in general. Prior to any further action by your office to discontinue Part 139 Certificates for commuter airports, we would appreciate the opportunity to meet with you to determine if there is a way to maintain certification for smaller commuter airports. With a copy of this letter, I am taking the liberty of inviting the affected communities to join with us in this discussion if they should desire. Sinc , tat cc: The Honorable John F. Sammons, Mayor, City of Temple The Honorable Sidney Young, Mayor, City of Killeen The Honorable Bert V. Massey, II, Mayor, City of Brownwood The Honorable Billy Joe Burnett, Mayor, City of Paris /Z -Zg- S7 RECEIVED DEC 2 u 1987 CITY MIINA.GEK PARR TEXAS MINUTES AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD MEETING TUESDAY, MARCH 29, 1988 COX FIELD PARIS, TEXAS The meeting was called to order at 6:00 P.M. by Chairman Bill Boothe. The following members were present: Bill Boothe Greta Greb Victor Abeles Also present were Jim Collier, Airport Manager, Dick Boots, Director of Community Facilities, and Juanita Jordon of the Federal Aviation Administration. Members absent: Joe Burress, J.W. Ashmore. The minutes of the January 26, 1988 meeting were approved as read on a motion by Victor Abeles and seconded by Greta Greb. Juanita Jordan representing the Federal Aviation Administration was introduced. Mrs. Jordan discussed the Part 139 Limited Certificate. Topics of discussion were: purpose of having certificate, reason for FAA pulling back certificates, more restrictive inspections, effects on Cox Field, requirements of Part 139 certificate and the need for an exemption letter. The tabling of the security gate by the City Council was discussed. Mrs. Greb re- emphasized the reason that the security gate was recommended by the Board. The security gate was recommended because it would eliminate a large portion of vandalism and burglaries that have taken place and it was not recommended for any personal gain for any member of the Board or pilots. The Advisory Board is again recommending to the City Council that the security gate is a viable concern and that we should go forward with the project. Mrs. Greb asked the City Staff to invite a representative of the Texas Aeronautics Commission to meet with the Airport Advisory Board to give their view concerning the Part 139 Limited Certificate. Mrs. Greb requested that a report be presented at the next regularly scheduled meeting concerning the TAC meeting in Austin on April 6 -7 -8, 1988. The Board recommended that Mr. Collier write a letter to FAA requesting an exemption concerning some of the requlations that go along with the Part 139 Certificate. Victor Abeles made the motion to adjourn. Mrs. Greb - seconded. DB:Dp MINUTES AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD MEETING TUESDAY, APRIL 26, 1988 COX FIELD PARIS, TEXAS The meeting was called to order at 6:10 P.M. by Chairman Bill Boothe. The following members were present: Bill Boothe, Chairman J.W. Ashmore, Recorder Victor Abeles Greta Greb Joe Burress Members absent: none. Visitors: Jim Collier, Airport Manager Dick Boots, Director of Community Facilities The minutes of the March 29, 1988 meeting were approved as read by unanimous vote. Jim Wilhite did not show up for the meeting to discuss NDB. The Chairman moved that it be moved to the next meeting agenda. Mrs. Greb's report on the TAC meeting in Austin: a. One of the major items discussed was "How to Organize Community Support for Your Airport ". Attached is a copy of the article "What's Your Airport Worth ?" b. We can probably expect a state tax on aviation gas. The big question is whether it will be a designated or non - designated tax. c. Any future federal funding will be contingent upon each airport having a current five year plan for airport physical facilities. Any community not submitting such a plan will not be eligible for funding from the federal government. d. The advisory committee discussed forming an Airport Support Group in the community. Committee members suggested several names of community leaders to be contacted about serving on such a committee. After these people have been contacted, the advisory board will take further action. Discussion of estimated cost involved in Part 139 Certificate: Dick Boots handed out copies of the specifications for the Part 139 Certificate. An estimate of $9000.00 was received as the cost of installing lighted guidance signs. We can get 69% funding from TAC if we can get this started right away. That is the only major area in which we are deficient. Dick Boots has sent a letter to TAC requesting the funding. Cox Field Security Gate: Dick Boots reported that the subject was tabled two meetings ago. The bid by Pridemore Fence is still good. Exemption letter to FAA: we have written a letter to the FAA requesting exemption from portions of FAA Regulation 139.311. Certified Weather Observers: No action has been taken on designating or qualifying individuals as weather observers at Cox Field. It would be necessary to send in reports to cover each 24 hour period. The value of such 24 hour coverage is questionable when the cost and inconvenience is considered. An alternative to weather observers and reporting to Flight Service would be an Automatic Weather Reporting Station. No cost figures are currently known on the AWRS. The board agreed that we should discuss this item again at the next meeting. So far as is known, no action has been taken by the City Council. Discussion of 1988 -89 budget preparation: after discussion it was moved, seconded and passed that the board recommend that the following be added to the budget: Build Headwalls at the street culverts - $15,000. Replace road surface in parking area and circle at terminal - $27,500. Architect Fee - $3,500. New Business: Bring thoughts on a five year plan to the next meeting. Vic Abeles thanked Mr. Ritchie, F.B.O. for sending his personnel to the FAA refueling seminar at Mr. Ritchies's expense. Such training increases the quality of service provided to all pilots - local and transient. Vic Abeles discussed the problem of security for the FBO's equipment and stock in the terminal. It was suggested that the FBO write a request to Dick Boots outlining his needs. The meeting was adjourned at 8:10 P.M. Q J.W. Ashmore Recorder JWA:dep i - -_....._ "L. GENERAL AVIATION AIRPORTS- . PAYING THEIR WAY To prove the point that general aviation airports provide economic benefits, consider the findings of two new studies. In one, the FAA acknowledges that a typical general aviation airport with 100 based aircraft and no commercial service saves time and reduce's-- travel costs of those who use that airport over the next best transportation alternative. In dollar terms, that transportation benefit alone is estimated by the FAA to be more than $1 million annually. As another means of comparison, consider another study, a recent and comprehensive analysis of airport economic benefit —good old dollar benefit to a commu- nity. This particular study was completed by an independent, international consulting firm for the Commonwealth of Virginia. There are 80 public -use airports in Virginia; fewer than the national average of 110 per state. Admittedly, Virginia has two international airports, but the number of active aircraft in the state is only slightly less than the national average as are the estimated hours flown in the Commonwealth. Therefore, it's fair to compare Virginia's airports and its diverse economy with those of other states. The study clearly shows that "VirginWs-80 public - use airports allow the State's ,business community to participate in national and international markets; and public and - private funds invested irr.the Common- wealth's airports annually produce economic returns which far exceed the amounts -spent to operate and maintain those facilities." The basis of this information was the U.S. Depart- ment of Commerce's Regional Input - Output Modeling System (RIMS II) whichadmittedly does not encom- pass ALL economic benefits. The study also used very conservative dollar multiplier of 2.8. Many experts believe that a multiplier of 4 or even 5 is realistic. The Virginia study also concludes that: • Each dollar spent by aviation and/or aviation =de- pendent businesses generates an additional $1.52 in economic activity; • Airport jobs are desirable, and the average airport wage was 40 percent higher than the average Virginia salary; • For every job at the airport, nearly three are created in the visitor - related economy; • Aviation - related businesses and their employees annually contribute $105 million in local taxes; • Aviation facilities attract new_ industry,totthe Commonwealth; and, • Many visitors arriving by air spend:about $70 per day in this geographical area. The consultants also made an astounding announce- ment concerning the expenditure of over $28 million spent on airport capital improveqnts. "Airport construction projects are particularly beneficial be- cause dollars spent by state•and local governments are highly leveraged with federal and private funds. The multiplier effects of construction spending are espe= cially strong because each dollar spent on construction generates an additional $2 in economic activity. To- gether, these two factors mean that airport - develop- ment projects produce an impact on the State's econ- omy that is more than25 times the amount contributed -by State and local funds." One of the most important aspects of the study was that of general aviation's impact. Of course, the eco- nomic impacts associated with general aviation air- ports varied. The busiest, Leesburg, generates nearly $28 million per year in economic activity. But, even the smallest general aviation airports contribute more than $100;00 annually to the economy. The point is that Virginia's average general aviation airport has only 23 based aircraft but contributes $1.6 million per year in economic activity, most of which is spent locally.--Total payroll - attributable to the average -- general aviation airport is- over-$400,000. Interestingly, even airports with less than 10,000 operations a year produced economic impact exceeding the amount of money necessary to operate and main- tain the facility. Enough of the facts and figures! What can be learned from this information? It is clear -that if Virginia's general aviation airports generate these significant economic benefits, it can reasonably be assumedthat similar airports across the country —and in your community —do the same. Local general aviation airports produce identifiable economicbenefits over and above the tax dollars spent on operating and maintaining the facilities, and over the intangible benefits inherent with access to the nation's air transportation system. Communities should try to understand the value of their own airports by embarking on an economic analysis. Without that information, the airport is vulnerable to those who criticize the airport for nui- 3 -1 i .._.... I-41Z sance factors like airplane noise or perceived safety risks. Economic impact —jobs, sales, taxes —is often the only defense for an airport being surrounded by houses or coveted by real estate barons. Unfortunately, those impacts usually haven't been calculated or communi- cated to city or county officials and the media. This. comes home to roost when officials hard - pressed to pay for anew watertreatment plant and harassed by anti -noise activists sit downand look at the "high cost" of operating an airport. You and your airport support group must challenge citizens who are concerned about local economic stability and growth, or who care about the tax base that pays for schools, roads and hospitals, to care about their local airport. If you demand the facts, you will discover that deregulation and a changing national economy have not diminished the value of general aviation airports but that they are needed now more than ever. By following the steps outlined in the next section, your group can prove to the community that airports are for people who don't fly. CALCULATING ECONOMIC IMPACT The centerpiece of the Airport Packet is a modular approach to calculating the direct, indirect and induced economic impacts of an airport. "What's Your Airport Worth ?" is a booklet that provides the information and instructions an airport group needs to perform an easy, simplified, cost- benefit analysis that quantifies-the airport's economic contribution _to the region. The. booklet offers a layman's method for accomplishing-a credible study and adds modules of increasingly sophisticated infor- mation that comprise the building blocks for expanding the study. This building -block approach allows the airport group, using available expertise and resources, to decide how detailed an economic study it wishes to perform. . Any airport group can quickly perform a preliminary economic impact study of its public -airport to prove that the facility attracts outside dollars and contributes economic benefits, like jobs, services and taxes. Those numbers are an effective lobbying and public relations tool in defending or promoting the airfield. That kind of information also makes an excellent news item for distribution to the local media. As a demonstration of its simplicity, an example of this basic method conduct- ing a preliminary study follows. The preliminary study can also provide the impetus for an appropriate agency to conduct or fund an in -depth follow -up cost/benefit. analysis. Using this basic method as a starting point sets the stage for a professional, detailed and unassailable audit ofMdi- tional transportation and aviation activity pdyoffs..• Groups can use preliminary results to chmpaign for more intense (and costly) studies by experts using more sophisticated formulas. These£ormulas can then be provided to consultants and universities, which often undertake these more advanced studies at the behest of pilot groups and local government agencies. THE BASIS OF ECONOMIC IMPACT The economic impact of an airport is a measure of the benefits it provides to the community. These benefits include the jobs, wages and expenditures that take place at the airport. They also include the effects of these expenditures in moving from hand to hand through the community, enhancing economic activity far from the airport itself. Economic benefits also include expenditures made by those transient passengers who use the airport but spend their money at other locations. Savings in time and money that the existence of the airport permits represent another economic benefit that resides with the community. Finally, economic benefits also include the intangible effect the airport has on business deci- sions to locate or remain in a specific area. Business location decisions based on airport availability are tangible and harder to identify and quantify. Unfortu- nately, these last benefits and the social values are difficult to measure. Economic impact as a whole comprises direct, indirect and induced impacts. Direct impact is as- sociated with providers of services at the airport. These providers include the airport operator (public or private), fixed -base ope ators, air carriers, freight haulers, concessionaires, government installations, educational institutions, military facilities, flight schools and maintenance operations, among others. The value of direct impact is the sum of all payroll, capital expenditures, operating and maintenance costs, taxes and fees incurred by every provider of services. With some research, a total dollar -value figure can be obtained for almost any facility through the one -page economic survey found at the end of this section. Indirect impact is associated with the users of airport services. These include both corporate and public users, government agencies and aviation and 3 -2 Module #1 As an example, let's assume that ari airport support group has paid a visit to all employers and businesses .. _ on a- general.aviation airport (theirs has about - 80;000. annual local operations). Using the questionnaire, the group determines that the total for wages, fees, charges, taxes, operations and maintenance (0 &M) costs and capital improvements is $5,500,000 (Direct Impact) for the current year. To determine Total Economic Impact add the Direct, Indirect and Induced - Impacts: Direct {total-fromquestionnaire)- $5,500,000 ._- Indirect , non - aviation businesses. The value. of this impact is , Module #2 •'' r the sum of the fees and charges paid; time and cost The group contacts the FAA Airport District Office savings; expenses related to food, lodging,. ground . or Airports Division of the Regional Office and learns transportation, and similar outlays. - that the same airport has 50000 transient opera ;g By quickly calculating the impact of itinerant oper- annually. Calculate the Indirect Economic Impact ations and adding that figure to the direct economic this way: _ = :-impact, a total economic impact is developed. Induced impact is often called "the multiplier effect." Divide by 2 to determine annual t?'$nsient arrivals. It gets this name because a dollar, once spent, does (50,000 _ 2 = 25,000) not disappear but continues to move through the local economy until it.is incrementally exported from the Multiply by the average number of occupants per community. Each new dollar spent effectively "multip- aircraft. Assume 2.5: (FAA estimates 2.5 occupants lies" its own economic effect. There have been a aboard each general aviation flight. multitude of economic studies done to definitively (25,000 x 2.5 = 62,500) establish this multiplier for various geographic areas Multiply that figure by the average dollars spent in and segments of the economy. These studies indicate "the local economy by transient passengers. Local that multipliers ranging from two to seven are approp- Chambers of Commerce or tourism officials can provide riate for airport economic estimates. Since induced the average dollars spent by each visitor. Assume $100. impact is the portion of an impact analysis most subject (62,500 x $100 = $6,250,000) = Total Indirect Impact to controversy, it is a good idea to utilize a very conservative multiplier figure. We recommend a Next to determine Induced Impact, multiply the sum multiplier of three in general but recommend that you of Direct and Indirect Impacts by the multiplier effect obtaip a figure that is applicable for your airport area to determine Total Impact. Assume a multiplier of 3. by contacting the Chamber of Commerce, economic Induced impact = 3 x (direct + indirect impact) development authority or appropriate state agency. _. 3 x ($5,500,000 + $6,250,000) = 3 x $11,750,000 = $35,250.000 Module #1 As an example, let's assume that ari airport support group has paid a visit to all employers and businesses .. _ on a- general.aviation airport (theirs has about - 80;000. annual local operations). Using the questionnaire, the group determines that the total for wages, fees, charges, taxes, operations and maintenance (0 &M) costs and capital improvements is $5,500,000 (Direct Impact) for the current year. To determine Total Economic Impact add the Direct, Indirect and Induced - Impacts: Direct {total-fromquestionnaire)- $5,500,000 ._- Indirect , 6,250,000 Induced 35,250,000 TOTAL $47,000,000 3 -3 Module #3 Another aspect of economic benefit is Tax Impact. In making quick assessments of Tax impact, it is easier to use only the direct plus indirect values. In the case of a much smaller airport than the one previously discussed, assume this total to be $3,000,00O..A ssr-rie that the local tax subsidy is $50,000. The 1 of.. this money that ends up as property tax is typically about one percent. Let's use only the Airport Economic Impact figure for simplic*- If a.state. sales tax is in place, the portion of the direct and indirect total which will be paid as sales tax is typically about one -tenth of one percent for each one percent of sales tax. If, for example, the sales tax is five percent, the portion of the direct and indirect total which will be paid as sales tax is five times one -tenth of one percent, or one half of one percent. .State income taxes and other miscellaneous taxes can easily -reach three - fourths of one percent each. Returning to this example, the Tax Impact would be calculated as follows: Tax type Amount Property tax (1% of $3,Q00,000) _ ($30,000) Sales/Use (0.5% of $3,000,000) _ ($15,000) State Income (.75% of $3,000,000) _ ($22,500) Miscellaneous ($22,500) Total Tax Contribution ($90,000) Compared to the $50,000 in -tax support,--this is a - favorable_balance and indicates a very strong return on taxpayer investment. Keep in:mihd, too; that these figures do not include federal -taxos. Inclusion of federal taxes as well as the tax effect of induced impact are complexities well beyond the -scope of this simplified approach. For more exacting formulas exploring- tr�nsporta- tion benefits, the effects of increased,aviation activity and -aviation's- stimulation of business, contact; the nearestFAA Regional Office fora copy of Measicring the Regional Economic Significance of Airports Existing support groups nationwide'have us* ed economic impact as the pivotal weapon in their battle to save America's airports. ' Finally, publish and distribute the results through- out the community, making sure the information gets the widest possible circulation. Prepare, preferably with the aid of a free -lance writer �or newsman, a complete final report and a summary highlighting the dramatic contributions of the airport. The full study should be available to all who want a copy. Summary pamphlets should by widely distributed throughout the community. You may elect to create a visual program, using slides and/or overheads, to enhance the material when presented to an interested group. Again, help may be available from.a nearby high school or university photography club. If possible, do not allow the study to become out of date. A periodic review should -be conducted and material adjusted as changes occur. A new industry, increased flight schedules, a new operator —all these reflect the continuing economic contribution of aviation to the community. The Direct Impact Formula was developed by EckroselGreen Associates, an airport consulting firm in Madison,- Wisconsin. Theirforniula is endorsed by the National Association of State Aviation Officals (NASAO). By adding the AOPA Intinerant Aircraft formula to the equation, ¢Total Economic impact is determined. 3 -4 TEXAS AIRPORT OPERATORS CONFERENCE Austin. Texas April 8. 1988 THE IMPORTANCE OF AIRPORTS TO THE RURAL COMMUNITY 9:30 AM - 10:00 AM Jerry A. Singer Assistant County Manager, Development Cobb County, Georgia "Rural community survival depends upon an ability to offer the timely use of resources to a changing economic climate." AIRPORTS AND .COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BUSINESS RELOCATION TO THE RURAL COMMUNITY THE AIRPORT AND RURAL COMMUNITY LEADERS AIRPORTS AND COMMUNITY.DEVELOPMENT More than 60 percent of the Fortune 500 companies operate aircraft.' More than half of those with aircraft have three or more. Over-one -half of these aircraft .are turbo -jets. A typical business flight averaged three passengers 4n a one and one -half hour flight 'covering 383 miles.' Typical users were management' and sales staff. Principal aircraft uses were to. 1. Scout for new plant locations. 2. Serve general management oversight over decentralized plant locations. 3. Move sales personnel -and their clients. 4. Move critical parts and materials into production. The largest number of aircraft operating companies among the Fortune 500 group were in: 1. Food Processing. 2. Industrial and Farm Equipment. 3. Electronic Appliances. BUSINESS RELOCATION'TO THE RURAL COMMUNITY A. Rural Community Relocation Strategy - Unspoken Attributes B. Symbols. Constraints. and Motivators THE AIRPORT AND RURAZ- COMMUNITY LEADERS A. Cultivating Support B. Expansion versus Relocation INDEX OF LEADING ECONOMIC INDICATORS • 1. Average workweek of production workers in manufacturing 2. Average weekly claims for state unemployment insurance° 3. New orders for consumer-goods and materials 4. Vendor performance (companies receiving slower deliveries from suppliers) 5. Index of net business formation 6. Contracts and orders for plant and equipment 7. Building permits issued 8. Change in inventories on-hand and on order 9. Change in sensitive materials prices 10. Index of stock prices 11. Money supply 12. Change in credit (business and consumer borrowing) ENDNOTES 1. "Fortune 500 & Business Aircraft" in Business Flying. National Business Aircraft Association, Inc. 1985. 2. Data was collected in a survey of the 1709 members of the National Businessmen Aircraft Association. 3. Series is inverted in computing index; i.e., a decrease in the series is considered upward movement. MINUTES AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD MEETING TUESDAY, JUNE.28, 1988 COX FIELD TERMINAL PARIS, TEXAS The meeting was called to order at 6:00 o'clock,p:m. by Chairman Bill Boothe. The following Board Members were present: Bill Boothe, Chairman Victor Abeles Greta Greb Members absent: Joe Burress J.W. Ashmore Also in attendance were the following: Jim Collier, Airport Manager Eric Clifford, Mayor Bill Booth, Councilman Dick Boots, Director of Facilities The minutes of the April 26, 1988 meeting were approved as read by unanimous vote. Dick Boots reported ,that the TAC had approved specifications for the lighted guidance signs and that the bids would be opened on Wednesday, July 6, 1988. Jim Collier discussed complaints from several pilots concerning the beacon. The beacon has been adjusted three times but it is still not functioning properly. The City staff was requested to find out what airports have the same type beacon and make a comparison concerning candlepower, angle and distance seen. Dick Boots reported on Certified Weather Observers. To have regional distribution of the weather reports, reporting must be made a minimum of five days per week and seven days a week was preferred with six observations per day between 8 a.m, and 3 p.m. The cost of weather balloons would be between $2,700 and $3,800 per year depending on 5 or 7 day observations. Mr. Abeles moved the item be tabled. It was seconded by Mrs. Greb. Mr. Boothe reported on the Airport Support Group Meeting that was held at Mrs. Greb's home on June 24, 1988. The Board thanked Mrs. Greb for her hospitality. All members felt the meeting was beneficial. A suggestion was made to request this group come together again in August at the Airport Terminal for a short meeting and a tour of Cox Field. Mr. Boothe discussed the Five Year Plan. The previous Five Year Plan was reviewed. Ninety per cent of the items on the past plan have been accomplished. Mr. Clifford said he would discuss with the City Manager the possibility of setting a meeting with the FAA and TAC to prepare another Five Year Plan for Cox Field Airport. Dick Boots reported that the City Attorney, Fixed Base Operator and Airport Manager met .._to ..discuss .terminal office space. Offices will stay as they are until the future of Exec Express is known. If the airline office becomes vacant, there seems to be no problem with moving the FBO to where the airline is presently located. Dick Boots reported on the Automatic Weather Reporting Station. Due to the high cost of installing such a system and maintaining such a system, the Board decided the project should be cancelled. The resurfacing of. the parking area was discussed. Due to the high cost of the project, a suggestion was made to possibly do the work in several phases with _one phase being done per budget year. Mr. Abeles requested that a report be given at the next meeting concerning Crash, Fire and Rescue operations at Cox Field. The Airport Manager discussed the condition of the outer perimeter fencing at the Airport. A video showing the fencing was presented to the Board. The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Dick Boots 1: E, MINUTES AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD MEETING TUESDAY, AUGUST 30, 1988 COX FIELD TERMINAL PARIS, TEXAS The meeting was called to order by Chairman Bill Boothe at 6:00 P.M. The following members were present: Bill Boothe, Chairman J.W. Ashmore, Secretary Vic Abeles Joe Burress Greta Greb Members absent: none. Also in attendance were Jim Collier, Airport Manager, Eric Clifford, Mayor of Paris, and Dick Boots, Director of Community Facilities. The minutes of the June 28, 1988 meeting were approved as read by a unanimous vote. Discussion of the Five Year Plan was postponed until a later meeting. Dick Boots reported that Gifford Electric will be replacing the beacon in the next two weeks. Our Fire Dept. Training Office will be training FBO personnel on CFR equipment and technique beginning September 7, 1988. Regarding Cox Field entrance triangle, it was proposed that an appropriate sign be placed in the triangle. When such a sign is constructed, the Paris Garden Club has stated they would be glad to landscape the area. The sign area would be constructed off the state right -of -way. 1988 -89: The budget did not include the headwalls, parking area, and architect fee. The budget has not yet been printed. New Business: The culvert at Sylvan Road has been installed to allow hay equipment entry at the rear of the airport. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:40 P.M. MINUTES AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD MEETING TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 1988 COX FIELD TERMINAL PARIS, TEXAS 1. The meeting was called to order at 6:00 P.M. by Chairman Bill Boothe. The following members were present: Bill Boothe, Chairman J.W. Ashmore, Secretary Vic Abeles Greta Greb Members absent: Joe Burress Also in attendance were Jim Collier, Airport Manager, Dick Boots, Director of Community Facilities, and Eric Clifford, Mayor of the City of Paris. 2. The minutes of the August 30, 1988, meeting were read and approved by unanimous vote. 3. Discussion of the Five Year Plan: The five year plan presented to the advisory board was reviewed and the advisory board recommended that the five year plan be put into effect at the earliest possible date. The city is going to meet with the FAA after the October 10, 1988 City Council meeting that will be addressed by three personnel from the FAA. 4. Update on beacon replacement: The beacon has not been replaced as of this date. However, the new beacon will be installed as soon as some of the lighted guidance pole signs are replaced. 5. Report concerning FAA inspection: There are three things that must be corrected immediately. a. The overruns on each end and side of the runways are much too rough and undrained for use by the emergency vehicles. b. The taxiway reflectors are missing. The reflectors are in stock, but the airport manager has been unable to get the replacement reflectors installed. He will continue to make every effort to get the reflectors replaced.ASAP. C. The foam tank liner is broken preventing the foam dispenser from dispensing foam from the fire truck. The airport manager is co- ordinating with the fire department on repair replacement of the foam tank and the use of any alternate system. Also, the inspector questioned the poor drainage of the airport and the cutting of the hay (grass) that obscures some of the taxiway signs from certain angles. 6. Status of installation of lighted guidance signs: project has been completed. The colors on two of the signs are being changed to com- ply with regulations. 7. Airport Personnel: There have been no changes in the number of per- sonnel. The FAA is opposed to having only a part -time airport manager. 8. Airport Support Group: No new action has been taken on the activities of this group. It is recommended that minutes of this advisory board be mailed to those who have volunteered to serve on the support group. 9. Methods of fund raising for airport improvement: Details of any fund- raising activities are to be postponed until the airport support group is better organized and ready to function. 10. New Business: a. When any new "hazard to flight" is to be erected in the airport proximity, the airport manager is requested to send a written notice of such proposed construction to each person with a hangar lease at Cox Field. b. The next meeting will be scheduled for Tuesday, November 29, 1988, rather than in October. 11. The meeting was adjourned at 6:55 p.m. J.W. Ashmore Recorder JWA:dep