CALL TO ORDER

Chair Jeff Harris called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Approval of the minutes from the previous meeting was rescheduled until the next meeting.

OLD BUSINESS

1. MANAGER'S AIRPORT UPDATE

   Manager Propst reported on airport operations for the year; noted that operations were down from last month; commented that total operations for the year is significantly high.

2. AIRPORT SECURITY

   Manager Propst informed the committee of the status of the new vehicle security decal system, announcing that several (blue) decals have been issued and several gate cards have been revalidated; no parking citations had to be issued.

   Member John Lake explained to Manager Propst that someone told him that a "Courtesy Notice" had been placed on a vehicle that was displaying a blue decal on the windshield. Manager Propst assured Member Lake that he would discuss this situation with the airport operations lead worker.

   Manager Propst said Fullerton Police recently ticketed vehicles parked over two hours in the terminal building parking lot; he did not expect this to occur again in the near future, because he explained to the police that airport staff has not found it necessary to enforce the parking restriction for several years; however, he warned against parking in the lot over the time limit as a precaution.

   Member Harris asked if airport staff kept a record of the number of citations issued for security decal violations. Manager Propst said no citations have been issued inside the Airport Operations Area (AOA).

   Manager Propst reported that new fencing was installed around the terminal building; fencing allows the public to view the AOA from the observation area without entering the AOA; he talked about other security enhancements that have been established to limit public access to the AOA, and that he will not relax any of these.

   Manager Propst described the status of the airport's security camera installations and repairs; reported that security camera images could be viewed using the Internet by downloading software available from the City of Fullerton's website.

   Manager Propst said that there were no changes to the proposed budget; the budget would be presented to the City Council during their next meeting; he proposed a 15 percent increase in the fee for hangar rents, bringing the hangar rent up to an average of 31.2 cents per square foot. He compared this figure to fees charged by airports in the region and concluded that Fullerton's rate was lower. He said the fee for car parking would increase to $25.00 per month; the field use fee would be eliminated; the tiedown fee would remain $84.00 per month. He said fee increases were in compliance with FAA requirements under the FAA Reauthorization Act of 1996, Public Law 104-264. He reported that the airport budget is over a million dollars, the highest in at least seven years; and, mentioned projected increases in various costs, which included increased costs for Worker's Compensation Insurance.

   Member Chuck Blumer discussed the proposed hangar fee increase, questioning Manager Propst's calculations; and he gave a short presentation illustrating costs per square foot for each type of hangar based on the dimensions he was given by airport staff. He pointed out that rectangular hangars cost more per square foot than the others, inquired as to why, and suggested that costs per square foot be equalized. A discussion followed.

   Manager Propst suggested that hiring an appraiser would be the best way to get a base study to determine the "appraised rate" for Fullerton's hangars; he would hire an appraiser if the City Council advised him to do so. Member Lake stated that the comparison studies Manager Propst already conducted seemed to have provided adequate information and that it should not be necessary to hire an appraiser; he inquired about the cost for hiring an appraiser. Manager Propst concluded that because appraising hangars was a specialty the cost would be $5-$10,000.

   Chair Harris asked Manager Propst if he had ever been asked why the rectangular hangar rents were more per square foot than any other hangars on the airport; Manager Propst said in seven years he had never been asked that question.

   Member Gillman/Manager Propst discussed equalizing costs per square foot for hangars, and recalculating fees before finalizing the new fee structure. Manager Propst explained that there must have been a reason the fees were higher for rectangular hangars; said it would be necessary to research why before he could make any decision about changing the current fee structure; explained he does not have time to do that research; and suggested historical records may not be available. He asserted that his decision to raise rates 15 percent "across the board," based on the current fee schedule, was fair and reasonable; detailed how he calculated the fair market value of the hangars; and said the pricing structure was also based on the age of the hangars.

   Manager Propst offered to recalculate his figures after having the airport service workers re-measure the hangars; explained that he would calculate future increases, every two years, based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI); suggested that anyone who wanted to express his or her opinions to the City Council, could attend the upcoming budget hearing, when the City Council would review and approve the proposed budget.

   Manager Propst/Chair Harris discussed the time frame when the proposed budget would be submitted to the City Council for their review, and agreed that it was not feasible to hire an appraiser before the budget would be approved by the City Council.

   A member of the audience, Bill Griggs, Sr. of Aviation Facilities, Inc., gave a historical account of how the rate for rectangular hangars was established, and explained that the City Council based fees on two factors: the cost of the project, and on what the market would bear at the time.

   Manager Propst declared that the fees charged for new hangars would be set to recover construction costs; they will include a buffer for maintenance costs; and he is confident that pilots would pay the established rate even if the cost per square foot for new hangars is higher than that of older hangars.

   A member of the audience, Bill Gosland, suggested that a tenant in a new hangar could save money by switching to an older, less expensive hangar. Manager Propst explained that the former airport manager, Roland Elder, wrote the Hangar Waiting List Policy, which has not been changed, and is enforced as written.

   In a response to a question by Boris Rimensberger, from the audience, Manager Propst disclosed that tiedown costs at Fullerton are about $20.00 over those of other airports in the region; they will not decrease at the request of the master leaseholders at the airport; there does not appear to be a demand for tiedowns; and lowering rates may not increase tiedown rentals.

   Committee/Manager Propst continued to discuss fees for hangars. Member John Woosley stated that to say rates should be equal per square foot for any style of hangar ignores history; because of the high demand for hangars and the low supply available, even the increased rates are probably too low; and it is difficult to determine fair market value without raising rates until the demand decreases. Member Blumer said that tiedown renters were an example; having left the airport when rates were raised too high.

   Member Blumer/Manager Propst discussed the issue of hiring an appraiser. Manager Propst said,

   If you want the honest, unbiased truth, you hire an MAI appraiser that does airports. What I'm saying to you is, based on my best judgment, 15 percent is fair and reasonable to keep the airport enterprise fund sound. If you all don't agree with that, after the budget's approved or not approved, we can go hire an appraiser. It comes out the of the user's fees, it comes out of the airport money

   Chair Harris briefly summarized the discussion; reviewed the committee's options; suggested that the committee discuss this issue in a future meeting. Manager Propst said anyone disagreeing with airport or City staff's decisions on this issue could present their opinions to the City Council at the budget hearing. Member Brian Rennie agreed that doing so was plausible. Chair Harris suggested summarizing the discussion to clarify the issues. A discussion followed.

   In response to an inquiry by Chair Harris, Manager Propst said he would verify his calculations before going to the City Council, and calculations would be based on new measurements of the hangars. Chair Harris asked Manager Propst if he would notify the committee when he completed his calculations and had revised documentation, to which Manager Propst said, "I will have to make sure that I have that done, clearly before it goes to their public hearing in June. But, I intend to have it measured out next week, and then run the numbers."

   Manager Propst responded to an inquiry by Member Lake, confirming that the proposed fee increase was the first since 1991, 12 years ago, with one exception: in 1994, fees were increased by former Airport Manager Roland Elder, for one year. Member Lake commented that it was a small increase for the 12-year period; that it seemed fair; and his only concern was about the possibility of incorrect data about the hangar dimensions. Manager Propst confessed that he had assumed the measurements he had were accurate, and reaffirmed that he would get accurate hangar dimensions before recalculating the data.

   Member Peggy Lindenberger asked if the budget could be amended after it is approved. Manager Propst explained the budget approval process; his plans for future increases; and explained that fees may be renegotiated or changed during that process, if necessary. A short discussion followed.

NEW BUSINESS

1. DISCUSSION OF THE PURPOSE OF THE COMMITTEE AND THE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF ITS MEMBERS

   Manager Propst explained that Member Lake asked to have this item included on the agenda. Member Lake explained why he wanted to speak on this issue; how as a new committee member he attempted to learn more about the purpose of the meeting by seeking a charter or document that describes the committee, its functions, its responsibilities, the roles of the members and how they are defined; he discovered that this information did not exist. Manager Propst explained the history and purpose of the committee; read from the City of Fullerton City Council resolutions establishing the committee, defining its charge, identifying membership requirements, and describing membership terms. A copy of the Resolution was given to each committee member to review.

   Manager Propst said he plans to ask the City Council to remove the position for the Fullerton Chapter of the Ninety-Nines, Inc. from the membership roster.

   Member Lake suggested that the committee draft a revision to the resolutions that would explain in further detail the functions of the committee. Manager Propst explained that this could be done; however, the document must be reviewed and approved by the City Council in the form of an amended resolution.

   MOTION: It was moved by Member Lake, seconded by Member Blumer, to draft a charter for the committee, and to hold further discussion on this issue during a future meeting.

   A discussion followed; Member Lindenberger inquiring as to how the new committee would be formed; Chair Harris suggesting that forming a subcommittee would be an efficient way to carry out the committee's objective; Member Woosley agreed. Member Lindenberger and Member Gillman volunteered to join Member Lake on the subcommittee. Chair Harris summarized the discussion by defining the purpose, function, and membership of the subcommittee; and asked for a vote on the motion and on the issues discussed.

   On motion duly made, seconded, and affirmatively voted upon by all committee members present, a subcommittee of the AAC was formed consisting of three members charged with the task of drafting the abovementioned document.

   Manager Propst cautioned the subcommittee to consider Paragraph "A" of Resolution No. 7022, admonishing them to avoid "entering into the Council's realm of responsibility."

   Manager Propst responded to a question by Member Woosley about Brown Act requirements pertaining to the subcommittee.

2. MASTER PLAN UPDATE

   Manager Propst introduced Steve Allison, a consultant from P & D Aviation, also known as DMJM Aviation. Manager Propst spoke about Mr. Allison's qualifications; explained that he has worked on the Master Plan update for over a year; said that the FAA requires a Master Plan update about every twenty years, in part, as an assessment tool to determine funding possibilities; talked about the format of the Master Plan update and how it will be used; and praised the quality of Mr. Allison's work on the Master Plan update, affirming that he met expectations by producing a document that will be usable for years to come.

   Manager Propst/Member Blumer discussed the Airport Layout Plan; that the FAA will only approve the Airport Layout Plan (ALP) portion of the Master Plan update; the City Council will adopt the Master Plan update as a planning guide for the airport; the ALP includes hangar development.

   Manager Propst/Member Blumer discussed hangar development; that the Master Plan update is a general plan not an engineered design plan, similar to the City's general plan; and it will be used for hangar development planning purposes.

   Mr. Allison began his presentation, describing it as a summary of the Master Plan; he reported on the Master Plan update project status. Chair Harris asked if the committee could ask questions during the presentation, to which Mr. Allison responded affirmatively. Chair Harris, then noticed that someone was trying to get in the door to the Council Chamber, and asked if someone in the back of the room would open the door for the visitor. Member Woosley apparently recognized the visitor, got up from his chair, immediately met with the person and apparently had to leave the meeting. He left at about 8:35 p.m. and did not return.

   Mr. Allison spoke about design alternatives; his recommended design alternative; and costs for resolving the runway safety area issues that currently exist. He also discussed landside development concept alternatives; explained that of the four alternatives developed, he selected one upon which to base the concept for the proposed Master Plan development; and he talked about the advantages of the recommended concept: it provides for a better mix of hangar sizes and for the greatest number of hangars to be built (a net of 50 additional hangars).

   Mr. Allison described the development phases, noting that all of the major developments were to occur within a span of ten years; he acknowledged that the Master Plan is flexible and could be reevaluated and changed to meet future market demands, which could not be forecasted in the current document; described each phase of hangar development, giving the total number of hangars that would be built during each phase, and explaining how the current structures would be affected; explained that provisions were made in the plan for a potential relocation site for on the northeast corner for Ray's Flying Club, Inc., or another potential user if Ray's does not want to locate to that area.

   Manager Propst/Member Brian Rennie discussed washing planes in tiedown or hangar areas; that it might be prohibited in the near future. Manager Propst explained environmental reasons, and that he foresees a time when planes will only be washed in wash racks with clarifier systems. Member Rennie asked if a wash rack would be built to accommodate larger aircraft. Manager Propst explained that there would be one on the west end to accommodate light twin aircraft. Mr. Allison added that there would be a new wash rack on the north side of the airport that will allow for aircraft to "pull through" to wash area.

   Mr. Allison spoke about Phase 1B of the Master Plan update, mentioning plans for rehabilitating the north east ramp pavement, which is pending approval by the FAA; replacing the VASI on runway 24 with a PLASI to meet FAA standards; constructing 14 hangars to replace the north and south rows of the wooden T-hangars; acquiring avigation easements for runway protection zone areas as recommended and funded by the FAA; developing northeast area of airport; constructing 14 hangars in the site currently occupied by Ray's Flying Club, Inc.; rehabilitating and extend the north access road; constructing 22 hangars to replace the east and west rows of the wooden hangars; and relocating the maintenance area.

   Mr. Allison showed slides of eight "airport plan sheets," which he said depicts each project proposed in the Master Plan update, including the Airport Layout Plan (ALP).

   Member Blumer/ Mr. Allison discussed how the north side building restriction line shown on the ALP were established. Mr. Allison explained that the building restriction line is not established by the FAA, but by airport staff; and that what is established by the FAA are "Part 77 surfaces."

   Manager Propst said that the building restriction line is not a controlling factor in hangar development, but Part 77 airspace requirements are. Member Blumer asserted that space on the north side of the airport should be maximized for hangar development, in the first phase. Manager Propst said a design engineer would be hired to plan the location of hangars, to design them in accordance with all requirements, and to maximize available space.

   Mr. Allison pointed out that many hangars on the south side were built based on a non-standard set of Part 77 surfaces, but redevelopment should be built as close to required standards as possible. A discussion on this issue followed.

   Member Harris/Manager Propst discussed the "localizer minimums;" when and how much they were raised.

   Manager Propst commented that FAA funding for airport improvements could be jeopardized if improvement plans deviate from standards.

   Mr. Allison spoke about easements at the airport, and a short discussion ensued.

   Responding to a member of the audience, Herman Beverberg, Mr. Allison briefly discussed how FAA development standards compared to the Airport Land Use Commission requirements for new developments in the Runway Protection Zone (RPZ). A brief discussion followed.

   Mr. Allison spoke about the Master Plan update financial plan; explained that he conducted a financial feasibility analysis for the Master Plan update; and discussed project costs, and funding sources. He said while the FAA will fund large portions of development, hangar development costs would be financed by the City; hangar fees and leases should be more than adequate to offset the financing of hangar development projects. He briefly outlined the economic benefits the airport added to Orange County.

   Mr. Allison discussed the environmental evaluation included in the Master Plan update; spoke about the various Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) standards that govern and limit residential developments around the airport; and the Accident Potential Zones (APZ) identified by the ALUC, which prohibit and limit residential development and uses in the APZ.

   Mr. Allison concluded by discussing the next phases in the process of finalizing the Master Plan update; reported on the status of the Master Plan update, explaining that it has been compiled and is in draft form pending possible revisions, some of which may result from comments and suggestions from the committee noted at the present meeting; confirmed that the final draft would be prepared and submitted to the City Council for their review and approval on May 20, 2003; said that once approved and executed, the ALP will be submitted to the FAA for their approval and sign off. He explained that the FAA was represented on Fullerton Municipal Airport Master Plan Update Planning Committee; therefore, he does not anticipate any opposition by the FAA to the plans.

Member Polley left the meeting briefly from about 8:45 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.

COMMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE

Member Lake asked Mr. Allison for a copy of his PowerPoint presentation to print in color; Mr. Allison offered Member Lake a disk he had with him.

A member of the public asked Mr. Allison about the potential for developing the south side of the airport, particularly near the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) site. Mr. Allison explained that the south side is fully developed, and long-term leases for the facilities extend beyond the 20-year period represented in the Master Plan update, precluding redevelopment. Manager Propst explained that the OCFA is the only area for potential development because their lease terms are five years; and, seismic requirements may necessitate construction of a new building for them; but the OCFA does not want to leave the Fullerton Airport.

COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC

In response to complaints by a member of the audience, Torger Totusek, Manager Propst explained that the airport has been short-staffed and there have been many new tasks that airport service workers have been required to accomplish; therefore, the removing weeds on the taxi-ways and mowing the grass have been low priority, not intentionally neglected. Additionally, he explained that the restrooms are cleaned daily; and he would discuss these issues with the airport operations lead worker.

In response to a question by a member of the audience, Manager Propst explained that new T-hangars replacing the old wooden T-hangars would rent for more than the older hangars; therefore, renters moving from the old wooden hangars to new hangars will be charged the new rate.

The following member of the audience addressed the committee:

Stan Kohlenberger commended Mr. Allison for his clear and complete presentation, and praised P & D Aviation for the quality of work they did on the Master Plan update draft. He said there were several demands and challenges that P & D Aviation had to confront, discuss, and overcome during planning phases, and they did a terrific job.

ADJOURNMENT

Manager Propst announced that the committee would not meet next month unless there was an item for the agenda, and explained that the charge in the City Council resolution states that the committee is required to meet only twice a year.

The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. The next meeting was tentatively scheduled for Thursday, May 22, 2003 at 7:30 p.m.