Jump to content
Paulding.com

AIRPORT APPLICATION FOR COMMERCIAL SERVICE MAY BE IN ERROR


Recommended Posts

It appears that the airport authority has suffered a severe defeat at the hands of the attorneys that are representing the six plaintiffs in a lawsuit protesting the commercialization of our General Aviation Airport.

Based on the attached letter to the FAA the plaintiffs’ attorney has pointed out many discrepancies in the airports pursuit to gain certification of commercial passenger service.

It was also pointed out in the letter that the Airport Authority had never voted to make application for commercial passenger service.

It really appears that the commercialization of the airport is now a moot issue

http://www.savepauldingco.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/7.22.15-Letter-to-Lenfert-FAA-Southern-Region-re-PCA-Part-139-Application.pdf

These facts really put a nail in the coffin for the pro airport folks, And has really rallied the supporters of no COMMERCIAL AIRPORT EXPANSION. Join in the discussion on this issue on face book https://www.facebook.com/savepauldingco

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Whitey:

 

The pronouncement by the anti-airport attorney is hardly cause to celebrate. The anti-airport forces literally bought and paid for that letter which states their case. It has no force of law whatsoever.

 

The one thing I personally took objection to was the statement that the election in November 2014 was decisive proof that the community is against the airport and the false statement that the airport was a deciding factor in that election. It wasn't even on the ballot because the decision was made in the primary election where a total of 5020 people bothered to trek to the polls.

 

I would also point to the fact pointed out in the letter that the commission never took a vote in favor 139 designation. To me that proves that the airport authority, an independent authority operating independently was and continues to be the sole sponsor of the 139 application and the county board of commissioners was never directly a sponsor of the application.

 

As far as sorting out the obvious competing claims, that is going to be done in the courts with such unsolicited letters as the one you linked, having really no more standing in the dispute than the posts on Paulding.com - which is to say 'none.'

 

The way I look at it Mr. Steenland was paid to write the letter to favor the anti-airport side and he did.

 

And that's all right; if it makes you feel good ;)

 

pubby

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whitey:

 

The pronouncement by the anti-airport attorney is hardly cause to celebrate. The anti-airport forces literally bought and paid for that letter which states their case. It has no force of law whatsoever.

 

The one thing I personally took objection to was the statement that the election in November 2014 was decisive proof that the community is against the airport and the false statement that the airport was a deciding factor in that election. It wasn't even on the ballot because the decision was made in the primary election where a total of 5020 people bothered to trek to the polls.

 

I would also point to the fact pointed out in the letter that the commission never took a vote in favor 139 designation. To me that proves that the airport authority, an independent authority operating independently was and continues to be the sole sponsor of the 139 application and the county board of commissioners was never directly a sponsor of the application.

 

As far as sorting out the obvious competing claims, that is going to be done in the courts with such unsolicited letters as the one you linked, having really no more standing in the dispute than the posts on Paulding.com - which is to say 'none.'

 

The way I look at it Mr. Steenland was paid to write the letter to favor the anti-airport side and he did.

 

And that's all right; if it makes you feel good ;)

 

pubby

Pubby I never thought you would agree with this letter

 

I really could care less the letter is pretty clear to me and I am quite sure that it has hit the PCAA right squarely in the top of the head.

 

It all of the secret meetings and the secret off site it is a matter of COURT RECORDS that no votes were taken by the PCAA to apply for 139 certification. Surely you are not contending that they can do this in secret???

 

We have videos of every open meeting never no discussion or vote by the PCAA to apply for 139 certification. Open meetings laws are for the purpose of allowing citizens the knowledge of what is occurring in those meetings by our appointed and elected officials

 

Oh well back to your handlers, you going have to come up with something better that that..

 

The people on P.COM are smarter that what you and David give them credit for.... They can read and understand what they are reading

 

Just so you know, less than 2,000 folks voted to allow for a additional" Fire tax levy" in another primary election less that 2,000 folks voted for the green space land costing I believe $13,000,000

Hell less that 500 folks voted in the democratic primary yet all those ballots were legally cast and the results binding on all citizens. Heck if you had worked harder you may have got 1,000 of your voters out and beat Patti.

 

Only the folks that took the time to go and vote count. \

 

the three candidates that won campaigned against commercial passenger service and won by a landslide and that my friend is a mandate from the citizens of Paulding County

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Mayor of Hiram was elected with 97 votes, she sits on the airport authority and the IBA. Carolyn Wright, Blake Swafford and Calvin Thompson are not elected officials. What gives them the right to decide what is best for Paulding County? How does the PCAA trump the BOC? What is wrong with that picture?

 

Don't feel too bad Pubby, there are a couple of people that got less votes than you did, the mayor of Hiram and maybe the opponents of Vernon Collett.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

The one thing I see as absolute is that if the PCAA, IBA & Propeller stay on the current course, more lawsuits and court sessions are a certainty. I keep going back to the CoC meeting where Brett Smith says Commercial is NOT a deal breaker. If I were him I would stop all mention of Commercial and put all my attention into MRO. I would prove to the community I am the greatest MRO developer this country has ever seen.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Whitey:

 

The pronouncement by the anti-airport attorney is hardly cause to celebrate. The anti-airport forces literally bought and paid for that letter which states their case. It has no force of law whatsoever.

 

The one thing I personally took objection to was the statement that the election in November 2014 was decisive proof that the community is against the airport and the false statement that the airport was a deciding factor in that election. It wasn't even on the ballot because the decision was made in the primary election where a total of 5020 people bothered to trek to the polls.

 

I would also point to the fact pointed out in the letter that the commission never took a vote in favor 139 designation. To me that proves that the airport authority, an independent authority operating independently was and continues to be the sole sponsor of the 139 application and the county board of commissioners was never directly a sponsor of the application.

 

As far as sorting out the obvious competing claims, that is going to be done in the courts with such unsolicited letters as the one you linked, having really no more standing in the dispute than the posts on Paulding.com - which is to say 'none.'

 

The way I look at it Mr. Steenland was paid to write the letter to favor the anti-airport side and he did.

 

And that's all right; if it makes you feel good ;)

 

pubby

Post 2 Primary;

Hughes 93

Smith 324

 

Post 2 Election;

Pownall 5,557

Smith 2,280

 

Post 3 Primary;

Collett 1,170

Haynes 363

Manous 368

 

Post 4 Primary;

Crowe 1,611

Barnett 1,131

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Mayor of Hiram was elected with 97 votes, she sits on the airport authority and the IBA. Carolyn Wright, Blake Swafford and Calvin Thompson are not elected officials. What gives them the right to decide what is best for Paulding County? How does the PCAA trump the BOC? What is wrong with that picture?

 

Don't feel too bad Pubby, there are a couple of people that got less votes than you did, the mayor of Hiram and maybe the opponents of Vernon Collett.

Hey Tundra you forgot Boyd Austin, David Austin's Brother, who is vice chairman of the Airport Authority and Chairman of the Industrial Building Authority for many years got less than 500 votes this past election .

 

Them Austin boys are really trying to railroad this Commercial Airport down our throats.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Post 2 Primary;

Hughes 93

Smith 324

 

Post 2 Election;

Pownall 5,557

Smith 2,280

 

Post 3 Primary;

Collett 1,170

Haynes 363

Manous 368

 

Post 4 Primary;

Crowe 1,611

Barnett 1,131

Pubby .........Please stick to the facts in all the races it looks like 12,897 citizens cast a ballot in the commission races in 2014

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pubby .........Please stick to the facts in all the races it looks like 12,897 citizens cast a ballot in the commission races in 2014

Whitey:

 

You can add elections together. You're adding in Patti and Todd's election in November ... and both candidates were anti-airport meaning that wasn't an issue in the race. If you add all the votes in the spring election, it was just over 5000.

 

pubby

 

PS: What votes did the commission make in the original efforts at the airport. I would almost wager that all the contracts for grading, paving, etc. were approved by the PCAA ... and not the commission.

 

It was always pretty clear to me that the airport authority was the driving force behind the airport and the county, and while the commission did have to approve or endorse things, from the days of Johnny Helms on, basically the commission chairman was the leader and driver of policy in the county. The post commissioners, being part time, were not involved on the various authorities and had little to do with them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only the folks that took the time to go and vote count.

 

 

Hey Tundra you forgot Boyd Austin, David Austin's Brother, who is vice chairman of the Airport Authority and Chairman of the Industrial Building Authority for many years got less than 500 votes this past election .

 

Why does a candidate winning with a seemingly small number of votes matter? As you said, "Only the folks that took the time to go and vote count."

 

The Mayor of Hiram was elected with 97 votes, she sits on the airport authority and the IBA.

 

Yeah, so? She took the majority of ballots, despite a small percentage of eligible voters casting ballots, much like your favored commission candidates did. And her election may have had more voters had it been held during a normal election day, but it was a special election held after the previous mayor resigned.

 

As for having her serve on these boards, it's typical to see elected officials serve on government boards. As for others, it's not uncommon to have citizens appointed in certain board seats. That's part of the checks and balances of the system—you have some folks able to make decisions on a board without worrying about how voters will feel. If every board member had to worry about the next election, some would decide against the right thing to do in favor of the action that would keep them in office.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Why does a candidate winning with a seemingly small number of votes matter? As you said, "Only the folks that took the time to go and vote count."

 

 

Yeah, so? She took the majority of ballots, despite a small percentage of eligible voters casting ballots, much like your favored commission candidates did. And her election may have had more voters had it been held during a normal election day, but it was a special election held after the previous mayor resigned.

 

As for having her serve on these boards, it's typical to see elected officials serve on government boards. As for others, it's not uncommon to have citizens appointed in certain board seats. That's part of the checks and balances of the system—you have some folks able to make decisions on a board without worrying about how voters will feel. If every board member had to worry about the next election, some would decide against the right thing to do in favor of the action that would keep them in office.

Define "citizens" appointed. You do realize a lot of the appointed "citizens" holding Board seats do not live in Paulding County.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does a candidate winning with a seemingly small number of votes matter? As you said, "Only the folks that took the time to go and vote count."...

This was a REAL Election during a critical time in our County's history where the Anti-139 people got out and worked while the Completely Anti-Airport & Pro-Airport people sat on their hands and did little.

 

I was shocked the Post 3 Race did not require a runoff and the Post 4 race was not closer.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Would agree that there is some pretty poor quality commissioners that we have here.

 

I'll always remember Pownall trying to figure out how the fire department can get three apparatus in a two bay firehouse. Clueless.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Define "citizens" appointed. You do realize a lot of the appointed "citizens" holding Board seats do not live in Paulding County.

I only meant citizens as in non-elected officials. I wasn't arguing that they were or had to be residents.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This was a REAL Election during a critical time in our County's history where the Anti-139 people got out and worked while the Completely Anti-Airport & Pro-Airport people sat on their hands and did little.

 

I was shocked the Post 3 Race did not require a runoff and the Post 4 race was not closer.

I won't dispute that, but it seems that few elections in Paulding are advertised as much as they ought to be. With no true daily news source and only a weekly newspaper serving the county, there are few media outlets to let people know about a local election or what said election is about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I won't dispute that, but it seems that few elections in Paulding are advertised as much as they ought to be. With no true daily news source and only a weekly newspaper serving the county, there are few media outlets to let people know about a local election or what said election is about.

 

I do think that I've tried to insert Paulding.com in that void. It is equally obvious that despite making the columns open to all who register, there are forces who seek to undermine that effort.

 

pubby

Link to post
Share on other sites

I only meant citizens as in non-elected officials. I wasn't arguing that they were or had to be residents.

So you approve of appointed folks on different boards having the ability to issue bonds for millions on the backside of the taxpayers in Paulding

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Would agree that there is some pretty poor quality commissioners that we have here.

 

I'll always remember Pownall trying to figure out how the fire department can get three apparatus in a two bay firehouse. Clueless.

I agree FreeBird Austin and Carmichael are the poorest quality commissioners that I can recall in quite some time

 

There is just something about folks that change meeting times without proper notification to meet in secret before the crack of Dawn, Heck both of them have even secretly left the county and attended a two day meeting with out proper notification.

 

It is quite refreshing to see commissioners run a campaign on the issues , get elected and actually full fill those campaign promises.

 

Todd Pownall, Tony Crowe, And Vernon Collett are the first commissioners to do this in quite some time, I admire men who walk like they talk!!!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Whitey:

 

You can add elections together. You're adding in Patti and Todd's election in November ... and both candidates were anti-airport meaning that wasn't an issue in the race. If you add all the votes in the spring election, it was just over 5000.

 

pubby

 

PS: What votes did the commission make in the original efforts at the airport. I would almost wager that all the contracts for grading, paving, etc. were approved by the PCAA ... and not the commission.

 

It was always pretty clear to me that the airport authority was the driving force behind the airport and the county, and while the commission did have to approve or endorse things, from the days of Johnny Helms on, basically the commission chairman was the leader and driver of policy in the county. The post commissioners, being part time, were not involved on the various authorities and had little to do with them.

Pubby I would wager that most if not all the contracts were issued through the IBA

 

Heck it was set up that way The DOT employee was put in charge of the construction. I do know that the County issued the bid on the initial grading I was there when the bids were open, And of course another Million or so was added to the original bid when a problem with rock was encountered.

 

The IBA built the Corporate Hanger, Fuel farm, Terminal, Water Tank, Sewerage line Taxi way expansion through the issuance of bonds and part of the road system.

 

The Land was the first thing paid for by the County and was one of the last things reimbursed to the County.

 

Of course it is immaterial at his point who did what since all the members of the IBA are also Members of the Airport Authority. This is quite a comical arrangement, and a very intriguing way to use tax dollars to build something against the citizens will.

 

I am so happy to see that the Commissioners are going to put the 911 center in the area of the sheriff's department and not allow the Airport Authority to control the emergency responders!!!!

 

I am in hopes that the commissioners will look into saving the tax payers some additional dollars by considering remodeling the youth detention building that is now sitting vacant.

 

Furthermore the construction of the fire station along 278 has been delayed long enough, time to give those citizens in that area the fire protection they were promised when the last SPLOST tax was passed, and the possible reduction in their home owners insurance rates.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Whitey, I am sure I could go back to the 2008 election time frame and find some posts where you sang the praises of the "simple tree farmer" running for chairman. How things change.

 

Austin ran on a platform of lies. He fooled his supporters and promised transparent government.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Whitey, I am sure I could go back to the 2008 election time frame and find some posts where you sang the praises of the "simple tree farmer" running for chairman. How things change.

Yes sir I beat the bushes to get David Austin elected campaigned very hard for him and voted for him in both the elections that he ran, contributed to his campaign.

 

I found him out the night of the last election when I was at his campaign headquarters celebrating.

I discovered that night that he secretly held a required public hearing on the budget and it was not properly posted and advertised... I lost all confidence in him that night.

 

Later that same year October and November of 2012 He secretly participated in secret meeting along with his brother and they voted to have commercial passenger brought to our airport.

 

Both of them then kept it secretly from the citizens for another 11 months, Before a announcement on 10/3/2013

 

I told him to his face that this was wrong ,that the citizens of this County should of been allowed to vote on the airport commercialization.

 

That simple tree farmer has made a a$$ out of a lot of citizens, And I for one WILL NEVER FORGET!!!!

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I do think that I've tried to insert Paulding.com in that void. It is equally obvious that despite making the columns open to all who register, there are forces who seek to undermine that effort.

 

pubby

 

That isn't the same as covering an election and reporting on the issues of it. I remember (and I searched your archives to prove it) there being little to no coverage of the November 2013 elections, one issue of which was Sunday sales in Dallas. One of the members even posted, "I didn't see any posts about this. Are y'all aware there's an election tomorrow?"

 

http://paulding.com/forum/topic/305492-election-day-tomorrow/

 

It still amazes me that the word "News" remains in this site's logo.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That isn't the same as covering an election and reporting on the issues of it. I remember (and I searched your archives to prove it) there being little to no coverage of the November 2013 elections, one issue of which was Sunday sales in Dallas. One of the members even posted, "I didn't see any posts about this. Are y'all aware there's an election tomorrow?"

 

http://paulding.com/forum/topic/305492-election-day-tomorrow/

 

It still amazes me that the word "News" remains in this site's logo.

 

In Nov. 2013, I was having some health issues. In Feb. I had several stents put in. The effort to marginalize the site began long before that time and aspects of it were quite effective.

 

pubby

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In Nov. 2013, I was having some health issues. In Feb. I had several stents put in. The effort to marginalize the site began long before that time and aspects of it were quite effective.

 

pubby

Pubby are you using the correct dates? I think p.com began its decline when you stopped reporting the news.

 

In the October 2013 to May 2014 you stopped reporting the news and used P.com and your popularity on this site to run an election and become the news.

 

You openly sided with David Austin on this site on the most controversial issue to hit this county since I moved here in1976.

 

In addition you complete disregarded facts surrounding the airport as it related to Todd Pownall, and in fact had a problem reporting on anything that the airport group made you aware of.

 

Your choice to marginalize this site, not the members, I feel the same as Stradial. Satellite, Tundra and many others.

 

If you had won the election this site would of been booming , You lost and now you are paying the consequences, You really need to listen to the advice of some of your closest friends!!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right. it was Feb. 2013 when I had the stents. It was in 2012 and before that the support from the site had been evaporating and ... the effort to run was an approach to find another way to subsidize the costs of running the site.

 

On the airport issue, you and the others were and are able to post your opinions as you always have been. That I have a different opinion and wouldn't parrot your opinions is the rub. Bottom line, I didn't accept your opinions as the facts.

 

pubby

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right. it was Feb. 2013 when I had the stents. It was in 2012 and before that the support from the site had been evaporating and ... the effort to run was an approach to find another way to subsidize the costs of running the site.

 

On the airport issue, you and the others were and are able to post your opinions as you always have been. That I have a different opinion and wouldn't parrot your opinions is the rub. Bottom line, I didn't accept your opinions as the facts.

 

pubby

Obviously you sided with David Austin on the Airport issue and it has cost you dearly

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tsk, tsk, tsk.................you didn't even look for the writing on the wall, let alone see it. No one has ever "tried" to ruin this site, you did that all by yourself Pubby. You can't chastise your members and tell them how stupid they are and how superior you are to them and expect them to actually pay money to be insulted.

 

Whitey has ALWAYS stepped up for that he believes in, no punches, no premise, no question. When he's right, he's right, when he's wrong he admits it...........that is a good man. Pay attention and take lessons.

 

Thank you for who you are Whitey!

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Whitey:

 

You're wrong. I sided with progress and what I think is best for the community.

 

If that means that I disagree with you and Tundra ... etc. that doesn't mean I think you are stupid; just not in favor of progress.

 

pubby

Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^ And there it is............everyone else is wrong because he says so. Progress requires business plans and community support, not bullies and pie in the sky dreams. Sorry to break it to you but we are NOT in the ZONE

Edited by tundra
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Where did I say you were wrong. I said you were not in favor policies I think of as progress ... I may want more progress than you want but the one thing I've never seen from the anti-crowd is the prospect for compromise ... No one has said, let us come reason together.

 

Oh tundra ... all I heard from you... sounded like to me was you saying "my way or the highway ... " And I'm saying that as someone who really is independent on this whole thing. (Despite your statements saying I'm in David's pocket - which is absolute BS - I'm just an independent guy who from the first days of this thing counseled compromise ... but the only message I got from you guys remained your way or the highway.

 

I still counsel compromise ... and I still hear nothing but 'you're way or the highway.'

 

So don't characterize my stance as based on some rigid construct of right and wrong when there was and is no effort to solve this issue through compromise. Right and wrong is the language of polarization and division and has nothing to do with plotting an approach that moves us all forward.

 

pubby

Link to post
Share on other sites

Where did I say you were wrong. I said you were not in favor policies I think of as progress ... I may want more progress than you want but the one thing I've never seen from the anti-crowd is the prospect for compromise ... No one has said, let us come reason together.

 

Oh tundra ... all I heard from you... sounded like to me was you saying "my way or the highway ... " And I'm saying that as someone who really is independent on this whole thing. (Despite your statements saying I'm in David's pocket - which is absolute BS - I'm just an independent guy who from the first days of this thing counseled compromise ... but the only message I got from you guys remained your way or the highway.

 

I still counsel compromise ... and I still hear nothing but 'you're way or the highway.

 

So don't characterize my stance as based on some rigid construct of right and wrong when there was and is no effort to solve this issue through compromise. Right and wrong is the language of polarization and division and has nothing to do with plotting an approach that moves us all forward.

 

pubby

May I remind you our group TOTALLY supported an amended or revised IGA. While the Pro- 139 group was TOTALLY opposed. Watch the video of the PCAA meeting for yourself where Todd BEGS the PCAA to come back with ANY counter offer, so that COMPROMISE could begin. The PCAA voted it down before Todd was settled back in his seat. Todd did everything humanly possible to get them to counter offer except build a camp fire in the middle of the room and have the Marshall's handcuff the PCAA and Todd around the camp fire and make them sing together.

 

MAY I remind you our group TOTALLY supports building the 911 center now and building the fire station out on 278. Go to the Support Facebook page and see for yourself how they oppose this COMPROMISE.

 

Attend any PCAA meeting or Support Facebook page and hold your breath till you hear some hint of COMPROMISE.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Where did I say you were wrong. I said you were not in favor policies I think of as progress ... I may want more progress than you want but the one thing I've never seen from the anti-crowd is the prospect for compromise ... No one has said, let us come reason together.

 

Oh tundra ... all I heard from you... sounded like to me was you saying "my way or the highway ... " And I'm saying that as someone who really is independent on this whole thing. (Despite your statements saying I'm in David's pocket - which is absolute BS - I'm just an independent guy who from the first days of this thing counseled compromise ... but the only message I got from you guys remained your way or the highway.

 

I still counsel compromise ... and I still hear nothing but 'you're way or the highway.'

 

So don't characterize my stance as based on some rigid construct of right and wrong when there was and is no effort to solve this issue through compromise. Right and wrong is the language of polarization and division and has nothing to do with plotting an approach that moves us all forward.

 

pubby

What is there to compromise on? We never wanted a airport of any kind period.

 

The chamber and the Shearin administration along with the airport authority pushed for and built a General Aviation Airport with the promise of thousands of jobs. and economic expansion beyond belief. With this statement being made by the Chairman of the Airport Authority......."And believe you me, if there was going to be airliners I would not be a part of this, never ever would I be a part of this" At the time the general aviation airport was being proposed.

 

The citizens compromised here..... and allowed the General Aviation airport to go forward.

 

Now the only other thing that can be compromised is to allow the airport to become a major hub airport for Hartsfield Jackson, and that my friend is not going to happen unless the State and Federal Courts allow it.

 

At the present time it will be years before the courts make the final decision, And in the mean time there will be more changes to the members of the PCAA, IBA and the BOC. And most certainly a new Chairman of the County Commission.

 

Time is on the side of the No Commercial Airport group!!!!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Tsk, tsk, tsk.................you didn't even look for the writing on the wall, let alone see it. No one has ever "tried" to ruin this site, you did that all by yourself Pubby. You can't chastise your members and tell them how stupid they are and how superior you are to them and expect them to actually pay money to be insulted.

 

Whitey has ALWAYS stepped up for that he believes in, no punches, no premise, no question. When he's right, he's right, when he's wrong he admits it...........that is a good man. Pay attention and take lessons.

 

Thank you for who you are Whitey!

Pubby,

This is the truth. You are hurting P.com and yourself. People don't post here because of the insults. There is no organized effort to see P.com go under. If you owned a restaurant would you insult your customers and expect them to return?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't have a lot of time as I have a very busy weekend ahead but I wanted to add something to this conversation. I have spoken with a tremendous number of people in Paulding County in the past few weeks concerning the commercialization of the airport. I can tell you that there are a lot more people in support of commercialization than I originally thought.

 

We have to take into consideration that a lot of these people have jobs in surrounding counties and can't take time off from work and drive all the way from Atlanta, etc. to be able to attend Paulding Board of Commissioners meetings, Airport Authority meetings, etc. - I have heard countless numbers of people say this very thing over and over.

 

Yes, I know there is a group of people that do not want commercialization. Yes, I understand the concerns of those who live near the airport. I also understand that sometimes we all have to work together for the good of our community as a whole - we have to look at the "big picture". As I have said many times before, Paulding County doesn't have the luxury of having natural attractions that bring in economic development. Why not utilize a facility that is already in place and do our best to create our own environment that will bring people and economic development into our community?

 

Its not just about the potential jobs the actual airport and the aerospace industry in general that we need to take into consideration. Its the people that commercialization of the airport will bring in while utilizing our airport for commercial travel - they will spend money here. Its about companies looking to relocate their business or expanding in the future. A community having a commercial airport will certainly be attractive and a great selling point to companies and organizations. Will commercialization of the airport bring in immediate, "substantial" returns? Of course not. It is an investment and just like with any other investment, it takes time for it to grow substantially and prosper.

 

As we all know, over 75% of our work force in Paulding County travels outside the county to work. Also, as I have stated here many times before, the burden of property taxes remains primarily on the shoulders of the homeowners. In my opinion, it is time we as a community try to "fix" these issues and do what we can to improve the quality of life for every single citizen of Paulding County. We HAVE to invest in the future and the airport is an investment. We can't afford to continue our "anti-business" climate and continue to miss out on economic growth opportunities.

 

Hope everyone has a great weekend!

 

P. S. Thank you Pubby for providing us this online community in which we can all voice our opinions, whether we are paying members or non-paying members. I very much appreciate the efforts you put into maintaining this site for our viewing and posting pleasure. I know it has to be beyond frustrating for you at times. Thank you for your resilience, your dedication and determination.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

BeachBum

I know the Chamber and the pro airport people posed the same arguments and selling points that you have in the above post when they convinced the citizens to allow the construction of a General Aviation Airport.

 

Promises were made and many, many promises were broken.

 

Something like this that was born in secrecy in the still of the night, in smoke filled rooms is doomed to failure. I for one am not accustomed to allowing our elected and appointed officials to make deals for the citizens of this county in this manner.

 

If this is such a good deal for the county, Show us the business plan that lays out the success of this project for the citizens of Paulding County. Surely you have seen such a plan to be in such favor of it?

 

You are much smarter than to believe that two flights per week will generate thousands of jobs with a economic impact of $350,000,000 that is being portrayed by the chamber and some of the top business leaders in this County.

 

Why the secret of the business plan???\

 

Heck the last Airport meeting the vice Chairman Boyd Austin did not even know what the part 139 certification (commercial Passenger service) even encompassed, as did a majority of the other members even though he made the motion to accept the secret agreement and was a part of the group including his brother David Austin and Commissioner Carmichael who kept this from the citizens of this county for almost a year!!!!!

 

In October 2012 this authority signed a contract to lease 60 acres for the purpose of bringing in aero space jobs to Paulding Northwest Atlanta Airport. altogether separate from the Commercial passenger service agreement...... Name me one job in almost three years since this agreement was signed that has been created?????

 

How many more years is it going to take to bring any jobs to this 60 acre parcel???

 

Heck.... since the airport was opened in 2008 name me a job that has been created at the airport other than the FBO operator. Beach Bum do you really realize it has been seven years since this airport opened.

 

Do you realize that an additional $26,000,000 dollars has been spent during the David Austin's Administration with another proposed $38,000,000 proposed in the five year plan and only one job has been created???

 

If this was ran like any other successful business adventure, There would be some heads rolling at the Airport Authority and folks would lose their jobs. This has now grown into a $70,000,000 investment for the citizens of this county and we are entitled to have a airport director who knows how to run a General Aviation Airport.

 

This airport is being ran by a airport authority meeting approximately one hour some months that consists of, two folks in the grading business, one in the chemical business, one attorney, one pilot, Three politicians who do not know jack chit about running a airport and a CEO of the chamber who depends on tax dollars to keep the chamber afloat and a airport director who was hired as a DOT employee.............. No wonder it is a failure!!!!!

 

Time to make some changes to the Airport Authority and the IBA, Hire and appoint some qualified folks who can spend more that one hour per month to make our airport successful. No business could ever be successful with this type of meeting schedule and leadership!!!!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Pubby,

This is the truth. You are hurting P.com and yourself. People don't post here because of the insults. There is no organized effort to see P.com go under. If you owned a restaurant would you insult your customers and expect them to return?

 

A better question is whether I Would allow my customers to come in, eat and not pay and insult me on the way out ... and expect me to remain silent?

 

pubby

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A better question is whether I Would allow my customers to come in, eat and not pay and insult me on the way out ... and expect me to remain silent?

 

pubby

 

Even non-paying members 'pay' by page views that should translate into advertising dollars. If that isn't happening then you may want to check your business plan.

Edited by cptlo306
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A better question is whether I Would allow my customers to come in, eat and not pay and insult me on the way out ... and expect me to remain silent?

 

pubby

Pubby,

 

You get more with honey than vinegar. I'm a paying member.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...