City trying to close FBO. Claims tainted fuel

I met Neidermeyer at the Cafe Wednesday. We talked and I brought him up to speed on the airport happenings.

I received a copy of a letter sent to the FAA by a group of Congressman calling for more oversight of airports that have city owned FBO's. I'll try to post a copy.
 
If you agree with the letter call or write your Representative and let them know. The signature list is growing hopefully. I've had this letter for a few days. Notice it is dated 6 August.

Here in New Braunfels the city has lost $504,000 in 2011. $368,940 in 2010. $361,835 in 2009. They lost money back to 2003 which is as far back as I can find records. 2003 was $64,000

The airport fund had $501,000 in 1997. They cleaned it out plus added a bunch of tax money.

Can anyone tell me why the city wants to be in the FBO business? Only a taxpayer funded business can take a loss like these and stay in business.
 
ultrasonix said:
Letter from Congress to FAA concerning city owned, taxpayer funded FBO's.

http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=27131&stc=1&d=1345429736
Click to expand...

Hopefully, the letter shall garner attention from Congress. However, were I a member of Congress I'd fault the letter's author, those who signed the document, and the final authority upon its forwarding to Congress. At least one person should have corrected the 13 errors in the text. A typo is a factor unto itself. The same mistake having been made 13 times, typographical errors aren't a likelihood, and displays carelessness. The plurality of FBO is FBOs, not FBO's, there having been no representation of possession.

HR
 
:dunno:ERRR, Yup, What he said. I guess the Congressman /staffer who wrote it went to public school just like me. LOL:lol:

Just call you Rep. and ask them to sign it.:yesnod:
 
Lawreston said:
The plurality of FBO is FBOs, not FBO's, there having been no representation of possession.
Click to expand...

http://www.grammar-monster.com/lessons/apostrophes_show_plural_of_abbreviations.htm

I have numerous style guides downstairs that show that abbreviations were pluralized via the apostrophe for decades. Had a college professor who hammered it home, too.

Times change, and I'm still trying to beat it out of my head.

Not because I care particularly about the never-ending style guide changes, so much as there's so many folk playing grammar Nazi these days who think it is inappropriate style, that it's easier not to point it out or ask which Style Guide they based their opinion on. ;)

Here's a more modern interpretation that gives guidelines that lean your direction, but also gives examples of when it can reduce ambiguity.

http://www.writersblock.ca/tips/monthtip/tipmar96.htm

Numbers look particularly stupid without the apostrophe, as that site points out.

1s, 2s, 3s...

1's, 2's, 3's...

Most Government offices use the USGPO Style Guide, which at a quick glance, is mute on the subject of pluralization of abbreviations.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/search/pag...ackageId=GPO-STYLEMANUAL-2008&fromBrowse=true

(It does have multiple pages on abbreviations that will cure insomnia, forever. My favorite in their Guide is that "CPA" should never be used without the accompanying punctuation. "C.P.A." always from the government for a Certified Public Accountant.

Interesting, isn't it?

The super-formal Style Guides would likely demand that "FBO" be abbreviated "F.B.O." which has dropped from non-formal guides long ago, but if the punctuation is included, even non-formal guides still agree that the plural of "F.B.O." can be "F.B.O.'s" and not necessarily be *only* used to indicate a possessive noun.

I'm sure newspapers and the like who are using the AP Style Guide will rarely, if ever utilize the apostrophe.

Enough about that...

Mind your P's and Q's! ;)
 
Doug Neidermeyer said:
Wow, this is really interesting stuff!
I would so much like to start up and run a management company from this airfield, it just seems it would be a very tough job... My visit there today made me think why would I want to run my company from here, why would my clients want to base their aircraft here?
I really feel that this place has real potential... But the red tape and City level politics would be time consuming to deal with...
Would love to know how much it costs to operate that airfield and how much they loose each year...
Click to expand...

To see how much the city is projected to lose one just needs to look at the airport master plan. The citys own consultant estimates losses of hundreds of thousands per year thru 2020. That equals 3.4 million.

Doug, We have a copy at the cafe'. Just stop by. We meet every wednesday and saturday for breakfast.
 
Old thread. Is the pancake breakfast still happening?
 
well that was a nice read! The story sounds all to common these days.

Five years ago and counting, what ever happened in the end if there is one?
 
The airport only has the city operated FBO. Guess they won.

The city inspector that cleared the FBO's repairs is now the manager of city blueprints. Sounds like a demotion to me.

This is the ugly side of Texas.
 
Yeah, I tried to find something, but couldnt. Like bflynn, the only evidence is the city only fuel sales.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top