"Florida airport future uncertain in aftermath of Charley"

["Stephen Irwin" <stepheni@xxxxxxxxx>]

Friday, September 17, 2004

Airport future uncertain
The Charlotte (FL) Sun-Herald


With more than half its hangars down and its revenues slashed, the Charlotte
County Airport could face an unprecedented financial tumble after Hurricane
Charley. 

Over the next 10 months, members of the Charlotte County Airport Authority
fear they will watch an anticipated $60,000 monthly shortfall gobble up
their reserves by July 2005 -- leaving the authority, which oversees the
airport east of Punta Gorda, virtually penniless.

"This has put us in the situation that our financial picture is not the best
at this time," said Airport Commissioner Don Lee during an emergency meeting
Thursday.

Now, the group is hoping that the Charlotte County Commission will revisit
its decision to give a mere $4,000 to the authority, as the airport leaders
believe they are getting less than that assured by their insurance premiums,
which were paid to an insurance company through a Charlotte County policy.

After Hurricane Charley made landfall Aug. 13, the airport lost more than
half of its hangars, leaving the airport's roughly 40 tenants scrambling for
space, either in an airport-provided portable building or from makeshift
offices in the tenants' own homes.

The loss of business, along with the decreased runway and gasoline use,
means a severe cut in the finances of the authority, which is not supported
by local tax dollars or Charlotte County. Although a $5.4 million grant
obtained prior to the hurricane will help the authority rebuild its lighting
and navigational system, none of the funds can be used to operate the
airport, where losses threaten the airport's future.

At the suggestion of commissioners Michael Grant and Pam Seay, the authority
will look to slash any unnecessary costs, and plans are under way to
eliminate one part-time staffer. At the same time, the group plans to
evaluate whether the airport should take a larger insurance payout than that
specified by the county.

Communication between the airport and the county has already been poor.

Initial estimates on the county's payout to the airport -- funds intended to
cover business interruptions from such disasters -- were much higher than
the $4,000 granted by the county board, said James Parish, airport engineer,
on Thursday. Estimates on the airport's business interruption coverage were
first approximated at $500,000, then $250,000, Parish said. The "business
interruption" is intended to replace lost revenues.

When the $4,000 was granted, the authority balked, and wanted to see the
policy information that reinforced the county's lowered estimate, Parish
said. But the county hasn't provided that in full, making for a piecemeal
review of the airport's possible insurance funds, Parish said.

Bob Pryor, county risk manager, said the county has been forthright and that
numbers have been confused.

Shortly after the hurricane, Pryor said he tried to understand what amount
of business interruptions would be available countywide and to the
authority. At first he thought the figure was $500,000, but then found out
it was closer to $200,000. Pryor said he tried to communicate that to the
authority, and that no lump figure was ever promised to the authority. 

At the same time, confusion over whether the airport buildings are county
property unfolded -- frustrating many at the airport, who questioned the
county's full knowledge of the situation.

Pryor said his office has tried to remain clear on the policy, especially
given the fact that he is relying on files prior to his hiring in 2002,
putting him at the mercy of past data stored by others. 

As shown by the authority's dilemma, one of the biggest questions to come
out of the disaster may be whether the county was sufficiently insured for
business interruption.

"It's too early for me to say if we had adequate limits," Pryor said. "From
this disaster, we'll learn if there were mistakes made and if that's so,
we'll correct them."

For the meantime, the County Commission wants an overall business plan from
the authority regarding the airport, viewed by the board as essential to the
county's economic future. With a solid business plan in hand, the board
could come back and grant more funds to the entity that County Commissioner
Adam Cummings has dubbed the area's "unique asset."

Cummings said the board wants to know any investment it makes won't be
wasted, including on the prized airport, especially because so many other
key areas of the county need the funds. 

"The board really wanted to see some kind of business plan to know what we
were investing in and what we could expect to come out of it from the other
side," Cummings said.


   Post your opinion on this story in the CAA General Aviation Forum
http://www.californiaaviation.org/dcfp/dcboard.php

*****************************************