Letters to the Editor...
To Editor The Grove Observer,
I have great respect for your publication and your stated objective of separating the factual reporting of news from editorial comment. Both provide important contributions to public awareness, information and discussion. However, your article “Airport Board Has Marathon Meeting” in the April 14, 2006 edition of The Grove Observer significantly crossed the line of mixing fact, opinion and editorial comment in what was presented as a factual reporting of the Grove Municipal Airport Managing Authority (GMAMA) meeting. Let’s address the article point-by-point. (Editors Note: Modern day journalism does allow for interpretive reporting, news analysis, etc. as witnessed in the Tulsa World and occasionally in The Observer.)
GMAMA did not “argue” over the proposed 10 cent per gallon increase in markup on fuel sales. A proposal to increase the markup was made by the Budget Committee and GMAMA discussed pricing philosophy and pricing strategies. Subsequently, it appointed a committee to survey other airports in the region regarding fuel markups, lease fees, hanger rental fees and a number of other items of interest. After the results are reported, GMAMA will take appropriate action based on factual, not speculative data.
GMAMA did not complain about the City not paying for snow removal. In FY 2005/06, snow removal was moved from the City Airport Budget to the GMAMA Trust Budget, but was later zeroed out because of state mandated changes in employee benefits. This year $600 was placed in the draft Trust Budget but was dependent on the 10 cent per gallon increase in markup on fuel sales. When GMAMA decided not to increase the markup, at this time, this was one of the expenses that had to be removed to maintain a balanced budget. (Editors Note: One board member did complain that the city used to perform snow removal, should pay for E&O insurance and pavement repairs. We stand behind our statement. And there was heated discussion on the fuel markup)
The same applies to the expense item Pavement Repair that was intended to begin funding hot- sealing of crumbling asphalt that is not covered by any other sources of funds.
At the time of the GMAMA meeting, Grove Municipal Airport’s gas price had risen to $3.70 from $3.10 three days earlier due to the higher cost of newly delivered LL 100 aviation gas to the Airport. Gas prices vary significantly based upon volume, discounts and date of purchase. The Grove Airport does not sell in quantities sufficient to earn large volume discounts. (Editors Note: At the time of the survey done by The Observer, Grove Airport had the lowest fuel sales price in seven states, where the average was $4.11, according to GlobalAir.com. The $3.70 is still below the average, which this week stood at $4.30.)
The Grove Observer requested a copy of the Trust Budget from this writer at the end of the meeting. No extra copies were available at that time. Since the City Offices were closed before the end of the GMAMA meeting, there was no immediate access to a copy machine. The Grove Observer was advised to contact the Airport Manager the next morning for a copy of the budget including changes approved at the GMAMA meeting. This was not unreasonable under the circumstances and definitely was NOT a refusal to provide the budget as intimated in the article. (Editors Note: The Observer requested that the information be faxed after the meeting, as deadline for the week was at hand. Contacting the airport manager the next morning was not an option.)
The comment “At meeting’s end, there was no one left in the room except four Board members and the airport manager” appears to be an effort to “paint” a biased characterization of the meeting. Members of the public attended this open meeting and left at various times, for their own reasons. (Editors Note: The statement remains true. Perhaps those in attendance left out of boredom.)
The article reported, “the airport trust’s attorney fee expenses will run more than $10,000 this year”. It was stated, “fees could run between $9,000 and $10,000 this year after invoices for recent consultations are received”, which The Observer confirmed from its own notes. Such non-factual reporting seems intended to steer readers’ thoughts, rather than to provide the facts for evaluation. (Editors Note: A board member to the left of Mr. Adzigian was heard to add "probably over $10,000" which is where the article information came from. Attorney fees paid to date through March 31, 2006, are $6402.70, according to the City Treasurer.)
Until it was explained, several trustees did not correctly understand the 31% GMAMA budget increase was due mostly to the actual increase in fuel sales above budget projections of 9,000 gallons realized in FY 2005/06 and the higher cost of fuel purchases by GMAMA anticipated in the FY 2006/07 budget. (Editors Note: Some of the trustees kept referring to possible bad weather cutting down fuel sales making the projections unreachable, and member Gary Tripensee voted against the motion even after it was explained several times.)
The discussion of a new terminal building was not accurately described in the context of the meeting. To clarify, the airport engineer reported there is a possibility the FAA may make available a category of grant funds, not previously available to airports like Grove, for the specialized purpose of helping to fund capital projects that do not come under the normal airport development grant funding categories of airport development such as land acquisition, runways and taxiways, instrument landing systems and the like. The engineer simply was apprising GMAMA of this new, possible funding source so GMAMA could determine its interest. GMAMA would not be fulfilling its obligations to its beneficiary, the City of Grove, if it did not at least investigate this possible source of federal funds. The purpose and pursuit of such funds has not yet been evaluated. (Editors Note: We merely stated that the Terminal Building would probably be first on the list of airport improvements, which has been stated at two different meetings.)
The Grove Observer did not accurately report the Young Eagles event scheduled for May 6. The City Council in a previous meeting voted to support this one-day national program. Pilots donate their time, the use of their aircraft and pay for the operating expenses out of their own pockets. To help offset these costs, GMAMA voted to sell fuel to the small number of participating pilots “at cost” for this single event. James Aviation, Grove’s Fixed Based Operator, normally receives a 10-cent per gallon handling fee for servicing aircraft, but has volunteered to forgo its handling fee for fuel sold in support of the Young Eagles flights. (Editors Note: The Observer has previously mentioned this event and supports it and will cover it May 6.)
The Grove Observer reported it conducted a survey of fuel prices in 7 states finding the average price was $4.11. It is not known how many airports or providers were included in that survey. The Budget Committee surveyed 155 airports and 174 providers of LL 100 aviation gas in the five state region of Oklahoma, Kansas, Arkansas, Missouri and Texas. Prices ranged from $2.75 to $6.19 with the combined average $3.64. The average of the 63 providers at 59 airports in Oklahoma was $3.30. 127 providers at 108 airports in the 5 state region were quoting an average price of $3.73 for Jet A fuel. 46 providers at 42 airports in Oklahoma were quoting $3.55 with a low of $2.85 and a high of $4.62
All in all, it is the Budget Committee’s view that Grove’s fuel prices are generally competitive, with airports in the five state region, all factors considered. Fuel prices are highly volatile and can fluctuate dramatically based on the date and quantities of the last lot purchased and the discount structure. Grove Municipal Airport is not able to buy in large enough quantities to achieve any notable discount. And, as one can see, in recent weeks at gas stations all around the area, the price of gas-at-the-pump can jump day-to-day. So, price surveys are only truly valid on the day of the survey. (Editors Note: We stand behind our survey 100% and price comparisons on the day of the survey (GlobalAir.com). The fact that the airport raised its price a couple of days later and another survey was taken is moot to our article. And the $3.70 is still below the average, $4.30 on 4/25/06)
Having corrected factual components of the article, this writer believes the markup on fuel should be increased to provide additional, needed revenue to undertake hot seal repair of several badly deteriorating asphalt surface areas that are not covered by grant or other funding. This is necessary to preserve the airport asset for the beneficiary, the City of Grove, and to provide for safe operation of aircraft by minimizing potential foreign object damage due to crumbling operational surfaces. (Editors Note: Why should the fuel markup be based solely on the price of the last purchase of fuel? The fuel markup should "float" based on competition and future fuel costs, which is what the auto service stations on the street do.)
One last note, a packet is prepared for every GMAMA meeting and all attendees are listed in the minutes of the meeting. This listing has been a practice of GMAMA for a long time. I am not aware any other Board of the City provides such a listing. (Editors Note: The Observer has arranged to obtain a copy of the materials to be discussed, for future meetings.)
David Adzigian,
Trustee GMAMA
(Editors Note: We thank the writer for taking the time to give us his opinions. We encourage such letters).
I have great respect for your publication and your stated objective of separating the factual reporting of news from editorial comment. Both provide important contributions to public awareness, information and discussion. However, your article “Airport Board Has Marathon Meeting” in the April 14, 2006 edition of The Grove Observer significantly crossed the line of mixing fact, opinion and editorial comment in what was presented as a factual reporting of the Grove Municipal Airport Managing Authority (GMAMA) meeting. Let’s address the article point-by-point. (Editors Note: Modern day journalism does allow for interpretive reporting, news analysis, etc. as witnessed in the Tulsa World and occasionally in The Observer.)
GMAMA did not “argue” over the proposed 10 cent per gallon increase in markup on fuel sales. A proposal to increase the markup was made by the Budget Committee and GMAMA discussed pricing philosophy and pricing strategies. Subsequently, it appointed a committee to survey other airports in the region regarding fuel markups, lease fees, hanger rental fees and a number of other items of interest. After the results are reported, GMAMA will take appropriate action based on factual, not speculative data.
GMAMA did not complain about the City not paying for snow removal. In FY 2005/06, snow removal was moved from the City Airport Budget to the GMAMA Trust Budget, but was later zeroed out because of state mandated changes in employee benefits. This year $600 was placed in the draft Trust Budget but was dependent on the 10 cent per gallon increase in markup on fuel sales. When GMAMA decided not to increase the markup, at this time, this was one of the expenses that had to be removed to maintain a balanced budget. (Editors Note: One board member did complain that the city used to perform snow removal, should pay for E&O insurance and pavement repairs. We stand behind our statement. And there was heated discussion on the fuel markup)
The same applies to the expense item Pavement Repair that was intended to begin funding hot- sealing of crumbling asphalt that is not covered by any other sources of funds.
At the time of the GMAMA meeting, Grove Municipal Airport’s gas price had risen to $3.70 from $3.10 three days earlier due to the higher cost of newly delivered LL 100 aviation gas to the Airport. Gas prices vary significantly based upon volume, discounts and date of purchase. The Grove Airport does not sell in quantities sufficient to earn large volume discounts. (Editors Note: At the time of the survey done by The Observer, Grove Airport had the lowest fuel sales price in seven states, where the average was $4.11, according to GlobalAir.com. The $3.70 is still below the average, which this week stood at $4.30.)
The Grove Observer requested a copy of the Trust Budget from this writer at the end of the meeting. No extra copies were available at that time. Since the City Offices were closed before the end of the GMAMA meeting, there was no immediate access to a copy machine. The Grove Observer was advised to contact the Airport Manager the next morning for a copy of the budget including changes approved at the GMAMA meeting. This was not unreasonable under the circumstances and definitely was NOT a refusal to provide the budget as intimated in the article. (Editors Note: The Observer requested that the information be faxed after the meeting, as deadline for the week was at hand. Contacting the airport manager the next morning was not an option.)
The comment “At meeting’s end, there was no one left in the room except four Board members and the airport manager” appears to be an effort to “paint” a biased characterization of the meeting. Members of the public attended this open meeting and left at various times, for their own reasons. (Editors Note: The statement remains true. Perhaps those in attendance left out of boredom.)
The article reported, “the airport trust’s attorney fee expenses will run more than $10,000 this year”. It was stated, “fees could run between $9,000 and $10,000 this year after invoices for recent consultations are received”, which The Observer confirmed from its own notes. Such non-factual reporting seems intended to steer readers’ thoughts, rather than to provide the facts for evaluation. (Editors Note: A board member to the left of Mr. Adzigian was heard to add "probably over $10,000" which is where the article information came from. Attorney fees paid to date through March 31, 2006, are $6402.70, according to the City Treasurer.)
Until it was explained, several trustees did not correctly understand the 31% GMAMA budget increase was due mostly to the actual increase in fuel sales above budget projections of 9,000 gallons realized in FY 2005/06 and the higher cost of fuel purchases by GMAMA anticipated in the FY 2006/07 budget. (Editors Note: Some of the trustees kept referring to possible bad weather cutting down fuel sales making the projections unreachable, and member Gary Tripensee voted against the motion even after it was explained several times.)
The discussion of a new terminal building was not accurately described in the context of the meeting. To clarify, the airport engineer reported there is a possibility the FAA may make available a category of grant funds, not previously available to airports like Grove, for the specialized purpose of helping to fund capital projects that do not come under the normal airport development grant funding categories of airport development such as land acquisition, runways and taxiways, instrument landing systems and the like. The engineer simply was apprising GMAMA of this new, possible funding source so GMAMA could determine its interest. GMAMA would not be fulfilling its obligations to its beneficiary, the City of Grove, if it did not at least investigate this possible source of federal funds. The purpose and pursuit of such funds has not yet been evaluated. (Editors Note: We merely stated that the Terminal Building would probably be first on the list of airport improvements, which has been stated at two different meetings.)
The Grove Observer did not accurately report the Young Eagles event scheduled for May 6. The City Council in a previous meeting voted to support this one-day national program. Pilots donate their time, the use of their aircraft and pay for the operating expenses out of their own pockets. To help offset these costs, GMAMA voted to sell fuel to the small number of participating pilots “at cost” for this single event. James Aviation, Grove’s Fixed Based Operator, normally receives a 10-cent per gallon handling fee for servicing aircraft, but has volunteered to forgo its handling fee for fuel sold in support of the Young Eagles flights. (Editors Note: The Observer has previously mentioned this event and supports it and will cover it May 6.)
The Grove Observer reported it conducted a survey of fuel prices in 7 states finding the average price was $4.11. It is not known how many airports or providers were included in that survey. The Budget Committee surveyed 155 airports and 174 providers of LL 100 aviation gas in the five state region of Oklahoma, Kansas, Arkansas, Missouri and Texas. Prices ranged from $2.75 to $6.19 with the combined average $3.64. The average of the 63 providers at 59 airports in Oklahoma was $3.30. 127 providers at 108 airports in the 5 state region were quoting an average price of $3.73 for Jet A fuel. 46 providers at 42 airports in Oklahoma were quoting $3.55 with a low of $2.85 and a high of $4.62
All in all, it is the Budget Committee’s view that Grove’s fuel prices are generally competitive, with airports in the five state region, all factors considered. Fuel prices are highly volatile and can fluctuate dramatically based on the date and quantities of the last lot purchased and the discount structure. Grove Municipal Airport is not able to buy in large enough quantities to achieve any notable discount. And, as one can see, in recent weeks at gas stations all around the area, the price of gas-at-the-pump can jump day-to-day. So, price surveys are only truly valid on the day of the survey. (Editors Note: We stand behind our survey 100% and price comparisons on the day of the survey (GlobalAir.com). The fact that the airport raised its price a couple of days later and another survey was taken is moot to our article. And the $3.70 is still below the average, $4.30 on 4/25/06)
Having corrected factual components of the article, this writer believes the markup on fuel should be increased to provide additional, needed revenue to undertake hot seal repair of several badly deteriorating asphalt surface areas that are not covered by grant or other funding. This is necessary to preserve the airport asset for the beneficiary, the City of Grove, and to provide for safe operation of aircraft by minimizing potential foreign object damage due to crumbling operational surfaces. (Editors Note: Why should the fuel markup be based solely on the price of the last purchase of fuel? The fuel markup should "float" based on competition and future fuel costs, which is what the auto service stations on the street do.)
One last note, a packet is prepared for every GMAMA meeting and all attendees are listed in the minutes of the meeting. This listing has been a practice of GMAMA for a long time. I am not aware any other Board of the City provides such a listing. (Editors Note: The Observer has arranged to obtain a copy of the materials to be discussed, for future meetings.)
David Adzigian,
Trustee GMAMA
(Editors Note: We thank the writer for taking the time to give us his opinions. We encourage such letters).
posted by Editor | 1:29 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home