Corporate PIMBY: it not only looked like a subsidy, talked like a subsidy, it was a subsidy—a free ride to go with their $100 pork burger.

“It’s Staying!” It’s going? Which is it? “Despite the cost of running it, despite opposition from the local residents, MAC is keeping Flying Cloud Airport open,” according to the Minneapolis Metropolitan Airport Commmision's (MAC) Tim Anderson.

In 1990, in the midst of a significant 8 year down trend, when general aviation traffic decreased by 38% at the nation’s busiest airports, the FAA projected that over the next 12 years from 1991 to 2003 there would be relatively small growth in general aviation.

How did MAC respond to these FAA projections? They came out with a study in 1990 which claimed that four of the six relievers would not be able to handle the increased forecasted capacity and they would have to expand. The thinking of Commissioners back then was if MSP relocated there would be a greater need for the relievers locally. Of course that didn’t happen, the need wasn’t and still isn't there.

In 1995, just 4 years later, MAC reversed their 1990 position, and pondered how they could dump some airports. One of the commissioners wanted to examine whether the subsidy to the relievers had value to the public. Not surprisingly, he's no longer a MAC commissioner.

In a revised Hearing Officer’s Draft from 1994 MAC said “they had made significant progress towards making each Reliever Airport and the Reliever system as self-sufficient as possible under the circumstances and that the MAC system of airports already meets one of the objectives of the self-sustaining requirement by not using local tax revenues, even though MAC has the authority to tax.” This song-and-dance is flat out false. Few Minnesotans using MSP knew they were paying the very tax MAC said they didn’t charge—it comes in the form of a hidden tax or fee through parking, ticket taxes and other fees at the Minneapolis Airport (MSP). It not only looks like a subsidy, it looks like a local tax from which 99% of the public receives absolutely no return on their dollar.

In 2000, plans to expand the relievers, which were shelved 10 years prior, were committed to a $93.1 million budget to expand all six relievers from 2001 to 2006. In 2005 that amount would only cover the expansion of one reliever airport, Flying Cloud in Eden Prairie.

The rationale back in 2000 was to distribute the capacity because MAC could not dictate where planes went. Because federal tax dollars help build airports, MAC can not direct planes and pilots to a particular airfield. But, that’s exactly what they're doing, dictating where planes will go by picking some airports over others for expansion. Chauncey Case, aviation planner for the Metropolitan Council, explained it by referring to Twin Cities- area shoppers. "If you live near Brookdale that's probably where you go. You don't want to drive across town to go to the Mall of America."

What an authentic parallel—an area shopper and a corporate aircraft owner or hobbyist or PIMBY—planes in my backyard types, who want their aircraft a hop, skip and jump from their place of business, according to MAC. Close enough, but of course in someone else's back-yard. Those of us who ride the bus, carpool or drive two hours to work call it the PIMBY syndrome: a deserving acronym aviation users have eluded for far too long. This kind of back-yard convenience for jet operations is clearly explicated by an industry bent on taking over where the “automobile” dare not travel. When referring to their new light sport planes and jets, air taxis and fractional charters that zoom over house tops with fewer restrictions, the industry has even cited these newer operations for "possible annoyances to communities who will try to restrict their use."

In 2003 MAC commissioners said they would take a realistic look at the reliever system: at the time they weren’t charging users landing fees and they were doling out 30 year old rates. That's realistic fiscal management? This finally went public because of NWA’s rates and charges lawsuit against MAC: if it looked like a subsidy, talked like a subsidy, it was a subsidy—a free ride to go with their $100 pork burger.

In 2005, in what the Star Tribune characterized as MAC’s first attempt at a business plan for all six metro-area relievers, the topic of subsidies emerged again with a 15 year old notion that some of the relievers might have to go. Though MAC says they are developing an economic plan that will get rid of subsidies, their financial history doesn’t substantiate it. This May they doubled parking fees which are now the most expensive in the nation. Yes, the flying public pays those fees/taxes every time they go to MSP; these are the taxes MAC says they aren't exacting on the public.

So, which is staying and which is going is anybody’s guess? Eden Prairie residents really only know one thing for sure, MAC doesn’t care how much it costs to run Flying Cloud Airport, nor, do they care who opposes it, or whose pocket they pick to pay for it, Flying Cloud will not be closed in the “foreseeable future,” according to MAC, though other relievers may close.

Despite overtures from the same development company that bought El Toro in California for a reuse and redevelopment site for $1B, MAC refuses to discuss the financial upside to both MAC and the community from the redevelopment of Flying Cloud. It’s clear that there are other locations at their disposal to expand reliever capacity, and none of these locations could garner the reuse upside from valuable land at Flying Cloud.

It’s clear the relievers, including Flying Cloud, are operating under capacity while running up deficits, despite subsidization. There are some 5,000 public-use airports like Flying Cloud and another 14,000 non-public general aviation airports that are languishing under a diminished Airport Trust Fund and set-aside funds, inconsistent and voluntary national security guidelines, and federal land-use restrictions endemic to airport development, which impedes their ROI.

Despite a determination by Congress, the FAA and the GAO that relievers don’t relieve, nor cause delays at major hubs, MAC continues to pull the wool over its own cockpit. It was evident to Congress back in 1994 that the reliever set-aside funds were not needed, so they were reduced. In 1996 the set-aside was completely eliminated. AIR 21 had a limited version of the set-aside. That means the airport improvement grants made available to general aviation airports were reduced because the need was no longer there— money is no longer there.

Believe anything MAC says? In 2000 Tim Anderson told an audience of Eden Prairie residents, against expansion, that MAC wanted to allow planes weighing 22,500 pounds, which might correspond to about 40,000 pounds fully loaded. In 2005 the weight jumped to 60,000 pounds plus which violates their 2002 legal commitment to the city. They’ve already reneged on the pact they made with the city in 1978 - what's going to stop them from breaking other commitments in the 2002 agreement?

Anderson projected that an average of 20 takeoffs and landings a day by corporate-sized jets in 2000 would rise to 66 by 2010 at FCM. The FAA determined that MAC’s estimates for the expansion were over-projected by 50%. So, it's more like 33 projected operations daily as compared to 20 operations daily. That's $90 million for 13 more operations a day. Any number of operations can be performed by a single aircraft. Assuming an optimistic case of one new aircraft for each set of take offs and landings, that would be 6 or 7 new aircraft at Flying Cloud. Recognizing that there are at least 3 other airports in the Metro area that could accommodate aircraft that need a 5,000 foot runway, you have to come to the conclusion that we are spending over $90 million to make life a little more convenient for, at most, 6 or 7 aircraft owners, PIMBYs.

If 6 or 7more cars daily (or even 60 to 70 daily) going to and returning from, was the rationale for expanding highway 312 west to Chaska, Chanhassen and other western suburbs, there wouldn’t be bulldozers, land movers and excavating crews in our part of town right now.

You do the math. MAC obviously can’t.


Vicki Pellar Price
talktrans research group
talktrans1@mn.rr.com
www.talktrans.com