Day 9 of Our Airport Closure (LONG rant)

nddons said:
Chris, excellent idea, and excellent analogy. With a little research and math, one might figure what that means in $$ per bushel of corn, and you could start a new movement for the aviation industry, at least in ag states.
Click to expand...

My math was based on $2.50/bu corn at 200 bu/acre pretty close to what they're averaging these days.
 
Just wondering if you know if the FAA was properly notified 30 days in advance about the airport closing.

That was the only thing Daley couldn't get out of. The city paid the enormous $10,000 fine after spending $3M in legal fees fighting in court, probably with all of the money coming out of the airport improvement funds like the bulldoze costs.
 
Last edited:
Jay, I remember reading about KIOW in AOPA when you founded the FOICA.

With the university in town, it would seem that closing the airport is a non-starter. Surely the university can provide some sort of pull with the city council and surely it would seem the university would see that a airport nearby only enhances their value proposition. (If only for the football game/alumni aspect). I would think they would be a real strategic ally for the airport.

Short of running for city council I don't know what you expect to happen about the airport closure. It sucks that the airport is closed, and especially that you lost a runway, but all in all, the airport is remaining open.

I'd be more concerned that this runway re-paving turns up evidence of a rare 3-toed iowa ground beetle and the whole airport is turned into a wetland....

Given that they are working on both runways is it possible they could prioritize one over the other? Resulting in opening the airport faster? Maybe a couple of cases of (Iowa? does Iowa even make beer?) Iowa's finest will "motivate" the construction crews to work a little faster.

What is the politics of running for city council of Iowa city anyway? I've found 2 types across the country: The family lineage model, where everybody that is elected is the husband/wife/grandson/cousin of the person they took over for; or the these are the only guys that bothered to go door to door and put up the city council signs.

If you are running, make sure that you switch your political party to the appropriate letter (R or D) that corresponds to the bulk of the makeup. Also make sure you don't stand for anything prior to your election. Just tell folks you'll work hard for them to make Iowa City the best city it can be.

It seems to me that the airport commission isn't the way to go its the city council that you want to be on. Then try to get Mary appointed to the commission! Or vice versa. "Yes, City Councilwoman". I think you could get use to saying that every night at dinner.
 
CJones said:
My math was based on $2.50/bu corn at 200 bu/acre pretty close to what they're averaging these days.
Click to expand...

OK, so the airport yields the equivalent of $600/bushel of corn on that 100 acres of land. That's better than $2.50, and weather matters less!
 
Jay:

Sorry if I overlooked it, but has the city (by now) accepted AIP grant money?

They may well be in violation of their grant assurances in the lease to the corn researchers, if they are leasing that ground to the researchers for a rate which is less than that charged to other users (ie, ground leases to hangar owners).

Also, there is a serious question as to whether the lease to the corn research, and the requisite use of the paved runway associated therewith, is a "compatible use" for the airport and, in the event the FAA did not believe that it was, it could be terminated. Note well; corn crops often draw birds, don't they?
 
Jay Honeck said:
Any time a party -- ANY party -- has such entrenched power, for such an extended length of time, pork, apathy, laziness and inefficiency becomes entrenched, at all levels. Because they have absolute certainty in their job security, politicians here have no incentive to be responsive or helpful. It's extremely frustrating.
Click to expand...

Jay, it certainly has the potential to create apathy but thats not the case in out town. And yes we have an airport in our town. Anyway you have to remember that its not necissarly the party that matters, especially in municipal politics in a small town. Because within a party there are folks that may want to vie for anothers seat. Sometimes the best message to be sent is in the Primary election rather than the general election. I have had some major disagreements with members of my own party . We've had Elected officials that ran on your very premise and won but within the party. In looking at the big picture even a small detail or change may alter the view signigicantly. You don't have to throw out the Rs for the Ds or visa versa just get the right D or right R . If your town is solid Democrat your gonna have a lot better luck getting a change minded Democrat elected vs a Republican with a similary philosophy.
 
smigaldi said:
I agree Chris and good job. But of course none of that would work at my airport, privately owned. But I am happy that the owners are very pro-airport and having been tons of stuff that keeps making the place better. They even started what they call the FOG, Friends of Galt. The FOG has monthly parties and get together. The FBO just added free wi-fi, we got cool jackets too!

Our airport owner is also on the city council to help smooth over relations between the airport and citizens. He tries to stay involved and often invites school groups for tours and has the local EAA chapter do plenty of Eagle Flights.
Click to expand...


Scott you don't know how important that last paragraph is. Good gov't relations are important for airports even those privatly owned. In our Township we have a constant battle between the Airport and some of our citizens. This has created an issue when it comes to Putting in new ramps and hangars. Zoning issues and planning commission issues all are opportunities to work well or screw things up with local gov't officials
 
Jack Spectre said:
Actually they just had blanks so nobody was actually killed (they were actors).

But going back to the original post...what is it with airport commissions being packed with people who don't care or don't like aviation?

Across the board, average citizens who care about how government handles thing are going to have to start stepping up and serving, lest we be at the mercy of bureaucrats who don't really care about the people they serve.

To get the commission to act in the best interest of the airport, you're going to have to forget about the commission for now. Go after the councilmen. Vote in some people who will put aviation people on the commission. You gave 'em the power, take it away. It's still America.
Click to expand...

In cases like this, it's not a lack of the willing and competent being available to serve. It's a case of the powers in charge wanting anybody OTHER than willing and competent folks on committees.

Sort of like Juries - neither side wants a smart, fair, objective jury. Both sides want a jury that will side with them.
 
bdlarkin said:
Short of running for city council

or the these are the only guys that bothered to go door to door and put up the city council signs.

If you are running, make sure that you switch your political party to the appropriate letter (R or D) that corresponds to the bulk of the makeup.
Click to expand...

1. I tried to talk Jay into running what? Eight or nine years ago? Same old thing I hear everywhere ... "I'm too busy" "I don't know how". Hell, I even offered to send him my campaign notes from 5 successful campaigns I ran and won. :dunno:

2. That is the ONLY way to unseat a dynasty. I went door to door in the spring with flower seeds (California poppy) in small baggies. It is stuff like that people remember.

3. City Council is a nonpartisan office. NEVER compromise your principles to run for office. The party you leave will consider you a traitor and the party you embrace will consider you a carpetbagger.

Jim
 
CJones said:
Jay - has your group considered any sort of pro-airport mass-marketing? Maybe if you bypass the idea of swaying the council/airport commission and go straight to the citizens, the growing feeling of pride in the masses will help to sway the ones in power. Maybe like a billboard in town somewhere - "Iowa City Municipal Airport brings $12 million into the community annually - not bad for a couple miles of concrete. Learn to fly today!" ORRRR.. Make it more applicable to Iowa - "Iowa City Municipal Airport brings $12 million into the community each year with only 100 acres of land. That's equivalent to roughly 24,000 acres of corn."
Click to expand...

That's a great idea, Chris. Back when the airport commission was under direct threat, I ran ads for the hotel in the local paper that touted our airport's contribution to the community. Don't know how much it helped, but I'm sure it didn't hurt.

FOICA can't do much, since we don't collect dues, so there is no advertising budget, per se.
 
roebuck85 said:
What about flying off of the taxiways?
Click to expand...
It's untowered, so I guess it would be legal. Not sure your insurance would cover you, however. (Not saying it won't!) I've landed on a taxiway before in similar circumstances at KWYS. These are the NOTAMs I see. Note that the AIRPORT isn't closed.

Iowa City IA [IOW]: August NOTAM #1 Runway 25 precision approach path indicator out of service effective from August 03rd, 2009 at 04:00 PM CDT (0908032100) - September 08th, 2009 at 11:00 AM CDT (0909081600)

Iowa City IA [IOW]: July NOTAM #13 Runway 7/25 closed effective from August 03rd, 2009 at 06:00 AM CDT (0908031100)

Iowa City IA [IOW]: June NOTAM #3 Runway 12/30 closed effective from June 08th, 2009 at 07:00 AM CDT (0906081200)

Iowa City IA [IOW]: June NOTAM #10 Runway 7/25 intersection with runway 12/30 personel and equipment working VCNTY effective from June 24th, 2009 at 07:00 AM CDT (0906241200)

Iowa City IA [IOW]: August NOTAM #2 Runway 7 precision approach path indicator out of service effective from August 03rd, 2009 at 04:00 PM CDT (0908032100) - September 08th, 2009 at 11:00 AM CDT (0909081600)
 
gprellwitz said:
It's untowered, so I guess it would be legal. Not sure your insurance would cover you, however. (Not saying it won't!) I've landed on a taxiway before in similar circumstances at KWYS. These are the NOTAMs I see. Note that the AIRPORT isn't closed.

Iowa City IA [IOW]: August NOTAM #1 Runway 25 precision approach path indicator out of service effective from August 03rd, 2009 at 04:00 PM CDT (0908032100) - September 08th, 2009 at 11:00 AM CDT (0909081600)

Iowa City IA [IOW]: July NOTAM #13 Runway 7/25 closed effective from August 03rd, 2009 at 06:00 AM CDT (0908031100)

Iowa City IA [IOW]: June NOTAM #3 Runway 12/30 closed effective from June 08th, 2009 at 07:00 AM CDT (0906081200)

Iowa City IA [IOW]: June NOTAM #10 Runway 7/25 intersection with runway 12/30 personel and equipment working VCNTY effective from June 24th, 2009 at 07:00 AM CDT (0906241200)

Iowa City IA [IOW]: August NOTAM #2 Runway 7 precision approach path indicator out of service effective from August 03rd, 2009 at 04:00 PM CDT (0908032100) - September 08th, 2009 at 11:00 AM CDT (0909081600)
Click to expand...

Unless the NOTAM suggested you land on the taxi-way (and they do suggest it when they want you to) it probably wouldn't be a good idea.
 
there are no parallel taxiways at Iowa City, or any other taxiways that are long enough and straight enough for takeoffs and landings, unless you are in a pretty STOL bird.
 
weirdjim said:
3. City Council is a nonpartisan office.

Jim
Click to expand...

Agreed, except of course in the one horse towns where you wont even get on the ballot. I probably meant to say to not "highlight" party affiliation if it doesn't match the appropriate party affiliation of the voters. Run as an independent.

Agreed about not compromising your principles, however, and I would never suggest that for Jay.

Brian
N9093K
 
jesse said:
Unless the NOTAM suggested you land on the taxi-way (and they do suggest it when they want you to) it probably wouldn't be a good idea.
Click to expand...
Interestingly enough, at KWYS the NOTAM was for the runway closure, as we see here. We called the airport manager to determine what was going on, and he said they were using the parallel taxiway. ANd they had it marked up and everything, and were even doing part 121 (or scheduled part 135?) ops into the taxiway. I hadn't checked KIOW's taxi configuration for suitability, but Tony says they're unsuitable anyway. Of course helicopters are still perfectly free to use it! (I think we had another thread here about using taxiways a little while back.)
 
gprellwitz said:
Interestingly enough, at KWYS the NOTAM was for the runway closure, as we see here. We called the airport manager to determine what was going on, and he said they were using the parallel taxiway. ANd they had it marked up and everything, and were even doing part 121 (or scheduled part 135?) ops into the taxiway. I hadn't checked KIOW's taxi configuration for suitability, but Tony says they're unsuitable anyway. Of course helicopters are still perfectly free to use it! (I think we had another thread here about using taxiways a little while back.)
Click to expand...

Yea, I hadn't checked the configuration either. I assumed from the way Jay talked about them that they were parallel taxiways.
 
gprellwitz said:
Interestingly enough, at KWYS the NOTAM was for the runway closure, as we see here. We called the airport manager to determine what was going on, and he said they were using the parallel taxiway. ANd they had it marked up and everything, and were even doing part 121 (or scheduled part 135?) ops into the taxiway. I hadn't checked KIOW's taxi configuration for suitability, but Tony says they're unsuitable anyway. Of course helicopters are still perfectly free to use it! (I think we had another thread here about using taxiways a little while back.)
Click to expand...

Didn't they use the taxiways at Midway once :D
 
EppyGA said:
Didn't they use the taxiways at Midway once :D
Click to expand...
I don't remember that. But it would not surprise me that it occurred many moons ago. There are many runways at Midway and far too much traffic for the aviation department to close that place all at once.

Sad to say but it looks like Chicago Aviation department may actually be smarter than the Iowa City city council. That is a new low for a government entity to be ranked as in aviation.
 
smigaldi said:
I don't remember that. But it would not surprise me that it occurred many moons ago. There are many runways at Midway and far too much traffic for the aviation department to close that place all at once.

Sad to say but it looks like Chicago Aviation department may actually be smarter than the Iowa City city council. That is a new low for a government entity to be ranked as in aviation.
Click to expand...

Aren't I a dummy, I of course meant to say Miegs :blush:
 
EppyGA said:
Didn't they use the taxiways at Midway once :D
Click to expand...

The planes that got stranded at Meigs were given permission to take off on the taxiway after a few days of "We dunno...We'll do an enginneering test see if it can support the weight..." nonsense.
 
Found the other thread on [thread=23415]using taxiways if the runway is closed[/thread].
 
gprellwitz said:
Found the other thread on [thread=23415]using taxiways if the runway is closed[/thread].
Click to expand...
I've landed on taxiways a few times -- every time I did it the runways were NOTAM'd closed and suggested you use the taxi-way. When I went in at nights the runway lights were off and the taxi-way was lit with its normal blue lights plus the addition of a few other weak white lights.

I suppose if the airport manager says its ok to land on the taxiway -- you could go ahead and do it. I would prefer they NOTAM that though--if it isn't in writing....
 
jesse said:
<SNIP>

I suppose if the airport manager says its ok to land on the taxiway -- you could go ahead and do it. I would prefer they NOTAM that though--if it isn't in writing....
Click to expand...

I agree- it makes thing much clearer.
 
ive never landed a an airplane on a taxiway but ive landed gliders on parallel taxiways several times.
 
Maybe you should see if someone in the economics department at the university would like to do a research paper on the economic impact of the closure. It would provide ammunition against the idiots responsible for the closure.
 
kkoran said:
Maybe you should see if someone in the economics department at the university would like to do a research paper on the economic impact of the closure. It would provide ammunition against the idiots responsible for the closure.
Click to expand...

Maybe they should start with the info in this link...
Cap'n Jack said:
http://www.radioiowa.com/gestalt/go.cfm?objectid=09C0698D-5056-B82A-37DC2BF17C150AE9
Click to expand...

Summary of the link:
The state Department of Transportation's Office of Aviation has released a report that shows the impact of aviation on Iowa. Tim McClung, the planning and outreach manager for the aviation office, says the impact totals $5.4-billion
Click to expand...
 
Cap'n Jack said:
Maybe they should start with the info in this link...

Summary of the link:
Click to expand...

It tells people how important aviation is to Iowa, but I'm thinking a study showing how much economic activity Iowa City lost due to the closure.
 
kkoran said:
It tells people how important aviation is to Iowa, but I'm thinking a study showing how much economic activity Iowa City lost due to the closure.
Click to expand...

True- but if someone in the economic department wanted a place to start, would you not think this study would be a good place? It wouldn't surprise me if the economic effects on Iowa City were listed...
 
roebuck85 said:
What about flying off of the taxiways?
Click to expand...

Good idea. That IS legal, but -- as Tony (and others) have pointed out, we don't have any parallel taxiways. We DO have taxiways coming off of our (relatively large) ramp, so (in theory) we could use those taxiways as a faux runway.

One interesting development: It's been reported to FOICA by several sources that a Piper Seneca departed the (supposedly closed) runway on Wednesday. Upon further investigation, FlightAware shows three other aircraft that supposedly have used the closed airport in the last few days.

We're not sure how they're doing it -- to use the runway they would need co-conspirators on the ground, in order to move the big, lit-up "X" back into the middle of our remaining 2500' of concrete. It's certainly stirred up the FOICA group, and opens the possibility of others starting to use the airport.

I'm hoping it's the start of a trend! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top