Oceanside, CA airport ...

Here's the latest report on the city's attempt to close Oceanside
Airport:

http://www.aopa.org/members/files/pi...caact0512.html
Oceanside Airport denied state loan
California officials have turned down a request for $450,000 needed to
pay for 10 hangars that would have brought much needed revenue to
Oceanside Municipal Airport, according to a report in the San Diego
North County Times. City officials said without the funding the
airport will lose $40,000 to $50,000 each year, Oceanside Public Works
Director Peter Weiss told the paper.

The scenario painted by city officials continues with a prediction
that in less than a year the airport funds will be exhausted and the
airport will start draining money from the city's general fund. Weiss
said state officials felt the airport, given its present financial
condition, was simply not a good investment.

Weiss said the city will pursue commercial loans and private
partnerships to find the $450,000.

The airport's financial plight has led a majority of the city council
to vote for hiring a private consultant to determine the best use for
the airport if it is closed. Bids on a request for proposals (RFP) for
such a consultant were due November 10.

The hiring of a consultant seems to ignore the requirements attached
to past federal funding. Acceptance of federal money for airport
projects — as Oceanside did last year — require the airport to remain
open 20 years, but acceptance of federal money for land — as Oceanside
accepted in 2003 — require the airport to remain open in perpetuity.
The FAA said last summer that the airport must indeed stay open in
perpetuity. The San Diego North County Times reports confusion at
least among some in Oceanside as to whether the FAA really means it.
The RFP confirms the confusion or lack of willingness to accept the
terms of the federal funding: It asks consultants to identify
potential development if the airport closes in five years, 10 years,
15 years, 20 years, and beyond. All of those time periods are covered
under FAA restrictions, and none would be allowed.

For the past five years, AOPA has worked diligently to ensure the
airport stays open — working with local pilots and AOPA Airport
Support Network volunteers. AOPA successfully opposed implementation
of restrictions based on aircraft type and a ridiculous proposal to
have N numbers painted "under" the wing of aircraft based at the
airport. AOPA is working with the FAA to defeat any attempt to close
the airport.

Because of the council vote, FAA restrictions notwithstanding, a
consultant must be hired. Consultants were told in the RFP to assume
the airport is in a 100-year floodplain and there may be geotechnical
issues such as potential liquefaction requiring deep removals (20 feet
or more) and recompaction of the ground. The consultant is to address
"closure scenarios."

"The city expects an analysis that, at a minimum, specifically
addresses the grant and loan assurances [restrictions] as regards the
requirement to operate the airport as well as potential federal,
state, and third-party litigation," the RFP says.

Three alternatives for continuing to operate the airport are also
discussed in the RFP and are to be reviewed by the winning consultant.
One is to continue to operate the airport, but with minimum
maintenance required to continue airside operations only. The airport
would have to make do with assets currently in place. The second is to
build out the airport per the master plan, but the south side only.
The third alternative is to build out the entire airport per the
master plan.

Oceanside is one of a number of airports with growing problems that
have attracted the attention of AOPA policy officials. Recently AOPA
called a meeting of its California Airport Support Network volunteers
in nearby San Diego at a hotel next to Montgomery Field as an
acknowledgement of the growing controversies in the area.