Blue Ash Airport Closing Illegal?

N

No Joy

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Jul 8, 2013
Messages
1,387
Display Name
Display name:
No Joy
Blue Ash Airport (ISZ) was owned by the city of Cincinnati and maintained with federal funding. It's no longer an airport anymore.

FAA regulation and federal law: Allegedly you can’t sell a federally funded airport (within 20 years of taking fed monies) to use the monies for anything other than aviation purposes. The City of Cincinnati owned the Blue ash airport. Mayor Mark Mallory and the city of Cincinnati ignored or sidestepped the law to sell the airport.

Pilots hope to save Blue Ash airport
http://www.wcpo.com/dpp/news/region_east_cincinnati/blue_ash/pilots-hope-to-save-blue-ash-airport

Blue Ash Airport in Danger of Closing
http://www.flyingmag.com/news/blue-ash-airport-danger-closing

Pilots to Cincinnati: Keep Blue Ash open
http://www.aopa.org/News-and-Video/All-News/2012/February/9/Pilots-to-Cincinnati-Keep-Blue-Ash-open

Blue Ash airport sale undone for now
http://wvxu.cinradio.org/news/wvxunews_article.asp?ID=10269


http://www.flyingmag.com/pilots-places/pilots-adventures-more/blue-ash-airport#3x9KRcQcPX7cBhqv.99

I think the city of Cincinnati broke the law.

What do you think about it? Why?
 
Last edited:
Lots of previous discussion here on this closure.

Bottom line.

No Joy
 
timwinters said:
Lots of previous discussion here on this closure.
Click to expand...
I see a thread that looks like it was started to discuss it. But the only thread on it I see mainly talks about getting together offline to eat and shoot the breeze.

The city was talking like it was so poor it had to break the agreement with the federal government. However if I remember right after it sold the airport it bought a bunch of expensive real-estate in downtown. IIRC a shopping mall and some high rises. Then I think it invested in a light rail, that most people don’t want.
 
bbchien said:
Just like Meigs.
The Dem administration doesn't give a rip.
Click to expand...
IIRC the mayor and most of city council were/are Democrats. (Cincinnati)

From what I understand the City of Cincinnati refused bids from aviation interests because they had low bids.

They sold the airport, layoff police and firefighters. Yet IIRC the bought a mall and high rises. They are trying to fund light rail, that most people don’t want.
 
No Joy said:
IIRC the mayor and most of city council were/are Democrats. (Cincinnati)

From what I understand the City of Cincinnati refused bids from aviation interests because they had low bids.

They sold the airport, layoff police and firefighters. Yet IIRC the bought a mall and high rises. They are trying to fund light rail, that most people don’t want.
Click to expand...


Funded a street car to the worst part of town:mad2:
 
FWIW they didn't break the law, someone from the FAA passed word to the cities that while they couldn't sell the airport and use the funds for non aviation uses, they could close the airport and sell the land (now not an airport) and do what ever the hell they wanted with the money.

So they rescinded the sale that had already taken place and once the airport was closed closed on it once again.
 
Skylane81E said:
FWIW they didn't break the law, someone from the FAA passed word to the cities that while they couldn't sell the airport and use the funds for non aviation uses, they could close the airport and sell the land (now not an airport) and do what ever the hell they wanted with the money.

So they rescinded the sale that had already taken place and once the airport was closed closed on it once again.
Click to expand...


Our tax dollars at work...sigh
 
Skylane81E said:
FWIW they didn't break the law, someone from the FAA passed word to the cities that while they couldn't sell the airport and use the funds for non aviation uses, they could close the airport and sell the land (now not an airport) and do what ever the hell they wanted with the money.

So they rescinded the sale that had already taken place and once the airport was closed closed on it once again.
Click to expand...
That sounds like the story I heard. I still question if it is legal. It sounds like double talk to sidestep/cheat/break the law.
 
No Joy said:
That sounds like the story I heard. I still question if it is legal. It sounds like double talk to sidestep/cheat/break the law.
Click to expand...

Just a work around to screw us out of our home. They hadn't accepted federal funds for more than 20 years so they could close it, and once it was no longer an airport the Feds had no say in what Cincinnati did with the land.
 
IIRC Blue Ash cancelled the purchase of the airport at a council meeting one night, Cincinnati closed it the next day and Blue Ash then re-purchased it. Totally unethical but legal.
 
They agreed to it in advance, and had the time table set up such that the airport was closed as soon as the sale was rescinded, they closed it, then sold it again all right in sequence.
 
No Joy said:
OK. I didn't pick up on that. If that's true, then it's legal. Thanks.
Click to expand...

Yep, they had wanted the airport gone for a loooong time but were afraid of the political backlash as the local community actually wanted the airport to stay. So they had to wait until someone came up with a plan that would look like they were saving the airport.

So the announced a plan to sell most of the land to the city of blue ash (fine, ISZ wasn't a very efficient use of space) and reconfigure the airport. They then selected the only plan for reconfiguration previously rejected by the FAA for the new layout and quietly wrote in a line saying that if Cincinnati found it uneconomical to reconfigure they could close it.

Very few of us were able to see that they had set the airport up to fail, and they even fooled AOPA who endorsed the deal announcing "No Meigs in Cincinnati!!"

As the plan was to save the airport Blue Ash residents overwhelmingly passed a tax hike to buy the land and ISZ's fate was sealed.

And just incase folks are thinking that this may have just been an unfortunate mistake, Cincinnati refused to hear a proposal from a firm who wished to buy the land for the purpose of keeping it an airport.
 
The City of Cincinnati made it public the Blue Ash Airport was not financially self supporting 7 years ago.

AOPA and other groups were unable to promote a plan that made this airport viable. The City of Cincinnati estimated that $190,000 of the city revenues would be required to support the airport each year for the next 10 years. The FAA was well aware of the airports financial problems and the closure was no surprise.

The airport was offered to the City of Blue Ash, who declined to operate the airport because they did not want to assume a financial liability. Blue Ash also had the option of buying the land and opted not to.

Several other airports in the area were strenthened by the transfer of the aircraft from Blue Ash.

Here is the story from the City.


http://city-egov.cincinnati-oh.gov/...A6EB2AC157179BB4E?rpp=-10&m=1&w=doc_no='2422'
 
Last edited:
Dean V said:
The City of Cincinnati made it public the Blue Ash Airport was not financially self supporting 7 years ago.

AOPA and other groups were unable to promote a plan that made this airport viable. The City of Cincinnati estimated that $190,000 of the city revenues would be required to support the airport each year for the next 10 years. The FAA was well aware of the airports financial problems and the closure was no surprise.

The airport was offered to the City of Blue Ash, who declined to operate the airport because they did not want to assume a financial liability.

Several other airports in the area were strenthened by the transfer of the aircraft from Blue Ash.
http://city-egov.cincinnati-oh.gov/...A6EB2AC157179BB4E?rpp=-10&m=1&w=doc_no='2422'
Click to expand...


Amazing how constant fear of closure and lack of maintenance can cripple airport.

Two flight schools, a 135 charger company, two busy maintenance shops, a decent flying club...


The rotating beacon was out as much as it worked, most of the runway lights didn't work, AWOS was hit or miss, grass growing in the taxiways, and to a lesser extent the runway, snow removal could take days to happen and if the gras was mowed more than a couple times a summer it was amazing.


So, why do you think people were afraid to base planes there?
 
tmyers said:
Politics at it's best!!!
Click to expand...

THere's more to it than that. The City Council of Cincinnati wanted streetcars, despite opposition from parts of the city (note that back in the early 20th century, Cincinnati built part/most of a subway system that ended up failing). The streetcars were intended to help less affluent parts of the city, assure re-election of council folks, and try and boost economic development in the face of a losing economy. The sale of the airport was to fund most of the streetcar project... the city WAY underestimated the cost of the streetcars.

Part of this was the desire of Cincinnati to boost the fortunes of Lunken Airport, which is within the contiguous city limits. ISZ, with a shorter runway, could never draw the jet traffic from LUK, and besides, any business traffic into ISZ would be closer to the Blue Ash corporate area (rather than the city of Cincinnati). Forget that Lunken has it's own challenges.... ISZ was believed to siphon traffic off from LUK. It, therefore, had to go.

Don't think that this is the only boondoggle or political maneuvering by Cincy. They recently entered into a contract to "sell" all the city-run pay parking. After approval, it was discovered that the Port Authority of Cincinnati had a memo stating that there were economic challenges in doing so. The memo/letter had been suppressed from the public during the debate.
 
I think the issue with Blue Ash is like most airports. No one was actively promoting the airport as a viable enterprise. Duncan's view was that the AOPA airport representative sat on their respective hands and did little to nothing to help the airport. Actually his views are stronger than that, but I will not speak for him. Blue Ash is 90% business and businesses utilize aircraft for transportation. It shouldn't have been that hard to keep the airport profitable. The airport could have been saved if Cincinnati wanted it saved, the simple truth is that they wanted/needed the cash for the illfated streetcar to nowhere project.
 
tmyers said:
I think the issue with Blue Ash is like most airports. No one was actively promoting the airport as a viable enterprise. Duncan's view was that the AOPA airport representative sat on their respective hands and did little to nothing to help the airport. Actually his views are stronger than that, but I will not speak for him. Blue Ash is 90% business and businesses utilize aircraft for transportation. It shouldn't have been that hard to keep the airport profitable. The airport could have been saved if Cincinnati wanted it saved, the simple truth is that they wanted/needed the cash for the illfated streetcar to nowhere project.
Click to expand...

And they wanted to boost Lunken.

Had they been able to attract a PT 121 carrier to LUK, this might be a different discussion.
 
Our AOPA ASN lead painted the first X on the runway with a smile on her face according to reports of folks who were there, I was orbiting at TPA and couldn't tell.
 
wsuffa said:
And they wanted to boost Lunken.

Had they been able to attract a PT 121 carrier to LUK, this might be a different discussion.
Click to expand...

Well considering at the time 7-25 at Lunken looked just as green as Gastons when you were sitting on it. LUK has its own problems and very little from ISZ went there
 
Skylane81E said:
Well considering at the time 7-25 at Lunken looked just as green as Gastons when you were sitting on it. LUK has its own problems and very little from ISZ went there
Click to expand...

Oh, I agree that LUK has it's issues. Not the least of which is that it can occasionally end up under water or fogged in. They (naively) thought they could attract Southwest to LUK, which won't happen. If they did, they'd have quickly found that they needed a true GA reliever for FLIBs.

When I bought my plane, I went to HAO because I could get a hangar (not possible at LUK at the time).

There's something in the mind of a politician that makes them think that they can drive business to a desired option by banning/eliminating the ability to use a different option. For example, the Ohio tax people think they can eliminate Ohio residents from going to the Party Source in Newport by trying to "sting" by tracking cars leaving the parking lot.... not realizing that there are any number of routes back to Ohio that they can't stake out.... or that folks might be buying it on their way to a friend's house in Kentucky.
 
wsuffa said:
[snip]
There's something in the mind of a politician that makes them think that they can drive business to a desired option by banning/eliminating the ability to use a different option. For example, the Ohio tax people think they can eliminate Ohio residents from going to the Party Source in Newport by trying to "sting" by tracking cars leaving the parking lot.... not realizing that there are any number of routes back to Ohio that they can't stake out.... or that folks might be buying it on their way to a friend's house in Kentucky.
Click to expand...

And it always seems to surprise them that people change their behavior to optimize their finances based on changes in law or regulation. :dunno: I can't decide if it's really stupidity or just willful ignorance.

John
 
Judge Learned Hand issued the following statement in 1934:

"Any one may so arrange his affairs that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which will best pay the Treasury; there is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes."

Gregory v. Helvering, 69 F.2d 809, 810 (2d Cir. 1934)

jsstevens said:
And it always seems to surprise them that people change their behavior to optimize their finances based on changes in law or regulation. :dunno: I can't decide if it's really stupidity or just willful ignorance.

John
Click to expand...
 
flyingron said:
Neither did the Rep administration.
Click to expand...

And when exactly was the last "Rep" administration in Cincinnati, or Chicago for that matter? From what I recall, it's been a while--a long while.

With that being said, advocating for an airport over things that will have more political impact is a tough sell for any politician these days. As cities and suburbs have grown, airport property has become prime real estate. I was recently in Cincinnati and didn't have an issue with LUK, but Blue Ash would have been preferable.


JKG
 
JGoodish said:
And when exactly was the last "Rep" administration in Cincinnati, or Chicago for that matter? From what I recall, it's been a while--a long while.

JKG
Click to expand...

I thought we were talking about the Feds not enforcing the obligations not the corrupt local politicians renegging on them. I've never heard the Chicago mayoral dynasty ever referred to as an "administration" usually "machine" is the word that comes to mind.
 
flyingron said:
I thought we were talking about the Feds not enforcing the obligations not the corrupt local politicians renegging on them. I've never heard the Chicago mayoral dynasty ever referred to as an "administration" usually "machine" is the word that comes to mind.
Click to expand...

Yes, on the Meigs closure it took 2 to tango.
 
Airport closed to to dirty city politics, but what's so unusual about that? That said, if it was costing the city big money to keep it open I can't blame them for cutting their losses. Certainly wasn't anything at all illegal.

I miss Blue Ash. The place was down the street from my favorite bagel shop, I miss those runs.
 
steingar said:
Airport closed to to dirty city politics, but what's so unusual about that? That said, if it was costing the city big money to keep it open I can't blame them for cutting their losses. Certainly wasn't anything at all illegal.

I miss Blue Ash. The place was down the street from my favorite bagel shop, I miss those runs.
Click to expand...

Not nearly as convenient (for either of us) but I'll give you a lift from HAO or LUK
 
flyingron said:
I thought we were talking about the Feds not enforcing the obligations not the corrupt local politicians renegging on them. I've never heard the Chicago mayoral dynasty ever referred to as an "administration" usually "machine" is the word that comes to mind.
Click to expand...

True. ANd the other words that come to mind with LUK and other similarly situated airports are "economic redistribution".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top