Acting Chair Tom Polley called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

MOTION: By Member Denise Jennings, seconded by Member Peggy Lindenberger, to accept the meeting minutes of the February 28, 2002 meeting as written. Motion carried.

OLD BUSINESS

1. MANAGER'S AIRPORT UPDATE

   Operations were reported by Manager Propst as follows:

   • February 2001 - 6,404 operations
   • February 2002 - 7,287operations
   • 12 consecutive months (March 2001 - February 2002) - 89,636.

   Manager Propst commented that, given the south ramp reconstruction and the fall-out from the September 11, 2001 tragedy, the airport is doing much better operationally than he expected; this, he said, is a good sign. He said that he did not have fuel flowage reports, but he assumed that the construction has negatively affected fuel sales.

   South Ramp Reconstruction Project - Manager Propst reported that the slurry seal was being done that day along with striping, and installation of new hold bars. Some of the cabling is already in. The low spots in the pavement were reground and repaved last week, but some of them appear to be worse than they were. He projected that the project might be done in two weeks.

   Letters will soon be sent out to customers offering them the opportunity to select a new tie down space on the south side.

   Manager Propst explained that there are 82 spaces; spaces 1-11 are leased by Aviation Facilities, Inc. (AFI), 12-23 are designated for transient parking, 24-44 are leased by General Aviation Company, and the remaining spaces are for City customers.

   Master Plan Update - The consultant has provided two draft documents. The planning advisory committee is being formed, which will consist of about 20 people. The committee will meet about three times, and will be charged with the task of reviewing draft materials. Invited to participate are airport businesses, constituent groups from Buena Park and Fullerton; i.e., the homeowner's group from Lakeside, and members of other surrounding communities. A balance of individuals who represent supporting or opposing views of the airport is being sought. The committee should be able to represent the public in this process.

   Chuck Blumer asked to represent the Airport Advisory Committee. This issue will be agendized and voted on during the next Airport Advisory Committee meeting.

   FAA Grant Application - Manager Propst reported that he has not heard from the FAA about the $150,000 grant application that was submitted recently. This money would be intended primarily for the design work for the pavement rehabilitation on the northwest corner of the airport.

   Budget Meeting - Manager Propst attended a budget meeting with the City Manager today. It is anticipated that the airport will do about a million dollars in business this year. A half-time service worker will be hired, and recruitment for this position will begin immediately; however, the position will not be filled until the new fiscal year begins. Currently, temporary clerical help is being sought to assist with mounting administrative duties. Overall, the two-year budget process for the airport is simple.

   Airport Advisory Committee Membership - Manager Propst reported that David Malmad submitted a letter of resignation because he does not have time to participate on this committee. He is a member appointed by consensus of the Airport Advisory Committee. This issue will be agendized for the next meeting. He suggested that members consider a possible replacement for this position. Winnie Houston did not seek reappointment; however, the City of Buena Park is attempting to fill her position. The Chamber of Commerce is going to fill Nick David's position, by either reappointing him or finding a replacement.

   Committee Chair Position - Manager Propst explained that as long as he has worked for the airport, Winnie Houston has been the Chairperson. He stated that this has worked, but the committee should decide how this position should be filled, and what the rotation

   should be.

   Questions from Committee Members - Responding to Acting Chair Tom Polley, Manager Propst said that he will be discussing the staff report he drafted for the committee.

2. AIRPORT SECURITY

   Financial Assistance - Manager Propst reported that he has drafted a letter requesting $190,000 from the FAA that will be used for additional security improvements. Money is available to the Fullerton Airport because of the efforts of Congresswoman Sanchez, which was prompted in part, by a meeting with Congresswoman Sanchez that Fullerton Council Member Jan Flory attended in Washington recently.

3. HANGAR WAITING LIST POLICY - STAFF REPORT

Manager Propst explained that he wrote the staff report in response to the committee's request, asking him to address four specific areas: 1) administrative fees, 2) the Switch List, 3) partnerships, and 4) maintenance of hangar waiting lists. He discussed the background information from the staff report; essentially that the 128 hangars owned and operated by the City are over 50 years old, with the exception of those built by 1994; and hangar rentals generate about $500,000, which is 50 percent of the airport's annual revenue, minus approximately $4,000 in losses incurred when a customer leaves a hangar and a new tenant is being sought.

Administrative Fees and Late Charges - Referencing the Fullerton City Council Resolution No. 8684 dated June 21, 1995, which dictates rates and charges; he explained that the copy the committee received was not the most current version, though only two changes were made. He stated that, though not germane to the discussion, the information about late fees has changed. He explained that late fees are 10 percent of the monthly bill, and the $100 administrative fee for late payment by businesses was eliminated. Rates and charges for hangars and tie downs have not increased, except for a small period, since 1991. The field use charge is listed. Once the decision to remove this charge is final, he will present the request to the City Manager and to the City Council. In a discussion with the City Manager today, Manager Propst explained that this fee is more of an administrative burden that generates very little revenue, and that it is not worth collecting. His impression was that the City Manager agreed.

Administrative Fees - Manager Propst told the committee "the $21 fee to be on the Hangar Waiting List is in no way an indicator of demand for hangars." He further said, "It does not generate any usable quantitative data about the demand." The feedback he received from his contemporaries at other airports was to charge a significant amount, such as one month's rent to ensure serious customers; most charge $100, $200 and on up to one month's rent.

The Switch List - Manager Propst said that he believes the policy is well written in regard to the Switch List. Unless there is a compelling reason to change it, he plans to leave it as it is. He explained that a customer on the Switch List recent confronted him about past procedures. Manager explained that he apologized for the policy not being carried out the way it was written, and said that he intended to follow the procedure. He explained that customers on the Switch List are allowed to switch between hangars of the same type, but not to a different type of hangar.

Partnerships - Manager Propst told the committee that after rereading the policy he agrees that it is well written, but that there is room for interpretation. He gave a hypothetical situation to explain. He said,

"If you are a legal partnership...and you get a hangar, and you've been in the hangar for less than a year, and your partner dies or he sells out to you, but you've been his partner longer than a year, you should be entitled to stay in the hangar. However, the hangar transfer fee is going to apply. But just because you haven't been in the hangar for more than a year, I think the policy understands that as long as you have been a partner in the aircraft longer than a year, you can stay in the hangar."

Staff Recommendations - Deposit for Hangar Waiting List - Manager Propst said that he recommends that anyone who wants to be on the Hangar Waiting List ought to be charged a deposit of one month's rent for the most expensive hangar that the individual wants. This deposit would be refundable if an individual wanted to be removed from the waiting list. He also recommended that if an individual on the list moved to the top of the list, was offered a hangar, but refused it, an additional deposit would be required to stay on the list. This, he suggested, would attract serious hangar customers, and would give an accurate forecast of demand. The downside would be that people might complain about their money being held for several years while waiting for a hangar.

Partnerships - Manager Propst said that he requires a legal document to prove partnership. The contract is sent to the city attorney to determine its validity. This issue will be discussed in a meeting next week with the deputy city attorney, Manager Propst, and Ed Kraley, so the city attorney will be better informed to render an opinion when asked about legal issues concerning partnerships. There are several ways to be partners in an aircraft without having title to it.

Manager Propst asked for the committee's response. Once decided, he will write an agenda letter to the City Council with the committee's recommendations. He also suggested that a well-advertised public hearing be held so the community can offer their input.

COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE

Responding to Member Denise Jennings, Manager Propst explained that all deposits may be refundable as long as an individual is not offered a hangar. He also reiterated that individuals can be on more than one list, but they will pay the highest deposit amount.

Responding to Member Peggy Lindenberger, who asked if there should be wording in the policy that dictates a time limit for responding to an offer for a hangar, Manager Propst said he would not want his "hands tied" by such limits. He explained that there are often good reasons why an individual may not respond to an offer immediately.

Responding to Member Jennings, Manager Propst explained that tenants are expected to give a 30 day notice, but they often do not, and notification is almost never given when a new subtenant moves into a hangar. He told about a recent situation that involved a renter who had removed his plane last November, but he was allowing a friend to use the hangar. He also reiterated that it is difficult to speculate on the demand for hangars, and that most airports, except for the very small ones, charge first month's rent. He explained that did not think that first and last month's rent should be charged.

Responding to Member Jeff Harris, Manager Propst reiterated that the original purpose for bringing the Hangar Waiting List Policy before the committee for discussion, was primarily to focus on the issue of the Switch List. He explained that the policy has not been administered properly for the past several years, which has caused some people to be confused and upset. He stated that the policy, as it was originally written was a good one; it was well thought out, it just wasn't administered accurately. He suggested that the former airport secretary probably improvised to fill hangars during the 1990's when there were several hangars available, and doing so was appropriate at the time. In reply to Member Jennings, Manager Propst said he wanted the committee's recommendation on this issue.

Manager Propst explained that in order to plan for the needs for hangars it is important to know the demand and the need. He projected that if there were 24 more hangars available, and that they could be rented immediately. He said he does not know what type of hangars should be built or the elasticity of demand beyond 24 more hangars. He said that the City can build hangars cheaper than anyone because there is no tax or profit involved. This allows the customers to pay a lower rate than if a private developer builds the hangars. The offset to this is that the airport takes all of the risk.

Responding to Member Chuck Blumer, Manager Propst stated that unless the committee can provide him any compelling reasons to change the language in the policy about the Switch List, he intends to leave it the way it is. The other issue to decide on is defining a partnership. He agreed that if the committee made a motion to do so, he would add the wording suggested by Member Blumer from the previous minutes. Essentially, that if individuals have been in a partnership for one year, and one partner leaves the partnership the other partner can continue to occupy the hangar but would have to pay penalties. If the partnership has lasted three years or more, there would be no penalties charged. The intent of the policy was to prevent people from buying airplanes and getting a hangar along with it. He said that the important issue is the deposit for being on the waiting list. He asked for the committee's feedback concerning the rate of the deposit. He explained that the City Council must approve a change in fees. Member Blumer said that he believed that the way the policy has been administered has worked well for the past several years. Manager Propst explained why this might be true, but that recently it has become a concern because customers have challenged the way it has been administered in view of the policy. He stated that the responsibility for enforcing the policy rests with him. He said he thinks the policy is fair and sensible, and should be administered the way it was written. He then explained why. Member Blumer explained why he believes that the way it was administered in the past is fair. Next, Manager Propst suggested that the policy could also say something to the effect that if a customer is already in a hangar he or she should not have to pay a deposit to be on the waiting list for another type of hangar. The only reason a hangar customer would be required to make a deposit is if they have a poor credit history with the City.

Replying to Member Blumer, Manager Propst agreed that holding a deposit for several years, (8-10 even) would cause some people to become upset. He explained that he intends to ask the City Council to borrow money to build more hangars, especially before interest rates are increased. He said that building more hangars would alleviate many of the problems associated with the hangar waiting list.

COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC

Bill Griggs, Sr. of AFI suggested that one issue that has not been discussed was that it is necessary to determine if the individuals on the waiting list, or wanting to be on the waiting list actually have a plane. He said that having a plane before going on the waiting list should be required. Sid Gillman interjected, saying that he is very serious about wanting a hangar, and that he agreed that charging a deposit will help "weed out" everyone who is not serious about having a hangar. He suggested that a deposit of one month's rent should be charged for every list a person wants to be on. He said that a policy should be established without trying to appease everybody. Manager Propst agreed that requiring individuals to have a plane was important, but that they are given 60 days from the time they rent a hangar to have a plane in it. He agreed that requiring a person to have a plane before getting on the waiting list was an issue that the committee should discuss.

Next, Member Propst stated that $21.00 to be on the waiting list is not enough. He said he wants to be prepared to present to the City Council accurate information based on the most current and valid information.

In response to Ed Kraly, Manager Propst said that most of the people he talked to at other airports that had fees to be on the waiting list reported that their hangar occupancy was over 90 percent. He also agreed with Mr. Kraly that the downside of charging a deposit of one month's rent was that some people might have to wait several years to get a hangar.

Member Blumer suggested that every person on the waiting list should be asked if they would be willing to pay one month's rent if they were guaranteed a hangar in one year. This, he suggested, would guarantee that the list would be reliable. Manager Propst replied that he could not promise that to anyone, but that the same could be accomplished by requiring the deposit without a time limit for offering a hangar. Building hangars, he said, would be the best way to resolve this issue.

MOTION: Member Brian Rennie motioned to accept the staff report as written. Member Jennings seconded. The motion passed six to one with Member Blumer opposing.

Manager Propst stated that he wants to agendize this issue for the next meeting, and he intends to send a letter to everyone on the hangar waiting list, inviting him or her to attend a public hearing about the Hangar Waiting List Policy. Included in this mailing would be the staff recommendations.

Member Blumer reminded the committee that the motion that they voted to accept the entire staff report, but each issue should have been discussed one item at a time. Members responded by stating that they already voted. Manager Propst reiterated what his four recommendations were. He restated his interpretation of the partnership policy; that if someone has been in a partnership for longer than three years, but has been in a hangar for less than one year, the remaining partner should be entitled to the hangar. He said he plans to meet with the deputy city attorney and with Ed Kraly to discuss the partnership issue, and that this meeting will ensure that the city attorney is well educated about partnerships. He also explained that the policy will be administered the way it was written, as it has been for the last several months.

Manager Propst suggested that the committee make an administrative decision about the Chair rotation. Members commented that the Chair rotation should be quarterly. Manager Propst said that the airport secretary would draft a chair rotation schedule.

Member Polley said that he has heard of seven planes that were damaged because of the construction barricades. Manager Propst replied that he has only heard on one, and the pilot did not file a claim. He added that the barricades have been announced on a "NOTAM," they have lights, and that the barricades are standard for construction purposes. He said that his personal opinion was that it is difficult to justify any airplane running into anything on the ground. To Member Polley's suggestion to use plastic barricades in future projects, Manager Propst said they tend to blow away, and they are not standard. He said he would ask the engineers about this.

In response to Sid Gillman's inquiry about a hangar maintenance policy, Manager Propst said that the airport staff does not conduct regular preventative maintenance on the hangars; there is not enough staff to do this. He said if there is a problem, staff does their best to fix it as soon as possible. Mr. Gillman affirmed that this is true.

Member Polley asked if the alley on the northwest side could be repaired as a part of the reconstruction project. Manager Propst said he would ask if the FAA would pay for this, but that it is a City alley and not airport property. He thought he might be able to get it funded as an airport access road. He explained that infrastructure funding dictates that arterial street repairs are a higher priority than alleys. Member Polley asked if a large hole (near the Ray's Flying Club gate), which is about two feet wide and six inches deep, in the alley could be repaired. Manager Propst said he would contact the street maintenance staff about this.

NEW BUSINESS

There was no new business to report.

NEXT AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING

The next meeting will be April 25, 2002 at 7:30 p.m.

ADJOURNMENT

8:40 p.m.

Recorded by: Jackie Reinsvold, Administrative Secretary