http://www.telegram.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061015/COLUMN22/610150537/-1/OPINION
- "While departure of Allegiant Air from ORH was disappointing, it may have been been a blessing in disguise"
You got to be kiddin me.
- "Whatever the reasons for Allegiant's decision to, it wasn't the lack of passengers"
Maybe we should figure out why Allegiant left ORH, since they have left no other airport that they serve since leaving ORH and no other airline has taken their place.
- "Create a misture of aviation services that can ensure the airport's long-term viability"
Has this not always been the plan??
- "While in the past, success was measured by passenger travel provided by commercial airlines"
This means that there are no commercial carriers coming to ORH.
- "Despite its setbacks, the airport in Worcester has been a formidable and irreplaceable asset."
Losing on average 1,500,000 per year the last 10 years is not what I would consider a formidable asset?
- "Accompanied by airport director Eric Waldron, and Philip Niddrie, the city’s airport liaison, I had an opportunity to visit Hanscom and meet the Massport officials in charge of the 1,300-acre facility adjacent to Minute Man National Historic Park"
It is no secret that Hanscom has a successful aviation business, and by the way this is where Linear Air is based. Is our current mgmt team just finding finding out about the successful GA business at Hanscom?? Lets hope that although it was the first visit for Mr Nemeth, that Mr Niddrie and Mr Waldron have made several prior visits to learn from Hanscom example.
- "Until it came under the jurisdiction of Massport, which has been maintaining it since 1974."
MassPort has owned this airport since 1959, while taking control of general operation and maintenance in 1974. Let me say that again Massport has OWNED Hanscom since 1959!!!! They are not running Hanscom through 3 year operatinig agreements!!!
- "The Hanscom model is significant because it combines the two key elements our regional airport needs for success. One is strong general aviation.
Any "major' announcements at ORH will be regarding General Aviation.
- "Massport recently invested 2.5 Million in facility improvements at Hanscom, all told has spent 44.5 million on capital improvements.
MassPort owns Hanscom!!! They do not own ORH and would never make this commitment to ORH and you can not blame them.
- "As the two sides enter negotiations, officials should revisit the original management agreement that includes the best option. MassPort taking title to ORH"
Did I read that right??? Finally, the current airport mgmt realizes that they can not get the job done. Extending the current agreement with MassPort for another three years is pointless and will only extend the current awful results.
Sell ORH or lease it for 99 years to MassPort and maybe they can make ORH the formidable asset that it should be.
12 comments:
I think this is the best indication of positive news about the airport reagarding the intent for Massport taking "title" to the airport. It shows Massport is interested in accepting a fiscal burden of the city and it's willingness to invest improving a the facilty. It's an opportunity that should not be wasted.
It's a win-win deal with Massport in place. This could aleviate a lot of the financial burden and debt service forthe city.
-The fire and police would become Massport/State employees I would assume, thus removing payroll and benefit burden from the city of Worcester.
-Support personnel would also become Massport employees.
-Capital improvements to all facilities.
-Increased corporate activity with new hangars and facilities.
-Increase cargo activity
-Finish outfitting the restaurant to attract business.
-Initiate commuter routes to NYC,Chicago etc. to help bring back business travellers.
I don't believe we're giving up an asset, but re-vitalizing one.
Folks, if you have a mismanaged asset......... you sell the asset?
And if it is sold, is the City not req'd to put it out to bids?
This is too valuable to the City to let it go w/o first trying to run the place with a private management team.
If Massport takes over, does ORH become a back up facility for Handscome? They have owned Handscome since 1959 and I dare say, relative to Logan, is Handscome like the unwanted stepchild? Merely a secondary consideration.
Logan reaches capacity and they add more runways to Logan, rather than diverting flights to Handscome?
Would ORH be Massport's 3rd consideration?
258 days left before the current operating agreement with Massport ends. Massport initially came on board to assist the airport financially so it could have time to explore options like private management, etc. so the airport could stand on its own two feet.
Eight years later and the airport is in a position now where we'd be lucky if they agreed to keep picking up the tab as a partnership.
The city can't even release an RFP for the restaurant and we expect to put out a bid for proposal for private management of the Airport in less than 258 days?
Also we've seen endless posts asking about 100,000k salaries and benefits and layoffs. Massport alleviates this issue as city employees now become Massport and State Police employees.
My point is Worcester is being presented with an opportunity to preserve and improve the city's asset.
Jahn:
Two years ago, we recommended inviting management companies http://www.flyorh.com/Vision.html number 13.. Right now we are less then 9 months away from the end of the current operating agreement, we are out of time.
It really burns me to see National Express, who currently runs Stewart, having all sorts of interest in taking over their lease interest. Jahn, imagine how long it would take these guys to put out an RFP for he airport??
The sad thing we are negotiating from a point of weakness with MassPort, since they can simply threaten not to extend the current agreement and wish us luck paying the $2,000,000 deficit. It is simply too late and we need to try and get the best deal possible with MassPort.
MassPort will be good for ORH. They have the deep pockets to spend the monies on the hangars, upgrading the landing system, etc that we need. I also believe they would send commercial flights our way. Hanscom does not have a terminal for commercial flights and the community there is completley against commerical activity.
We should have started this process two years ago. Right now lets just try and get the best deal possible with MassPort.
I agree Bill, time is running out.
Logan and Hanscom have their own agendas. Worcester, at this point, shouldn't feel proud about accepting any "hand me downs".
Better to be a busy stepchild , than an underutilized orphan.
WT:
I did not know that Massport had explored the possiblity of Private management. Where can I locate any information dealing with this topic?
258 days is more than enough time to put out an RFP for private management and the Citys feet are to the fire they will get it done Besides, We may be req'd by state law to put out an RFP for the sale or lease of ORH and that too would have to be done in 258 days.
A Massport takeover merely takes the personnel costs up there and transfers them to my annual Mass state income tax bill rather to my property tax bill. Likewise for Massport covering the debt service. The notion of passing City expenses on to Beacon Hill or Washington makes it less obvious to the average person what we are spending up there. The taxpayers still have to ante up.
A private management company will move the personnel costs to the private sector and there is no way the average comp. package up there will be 100K per employee. Let the private sector decides who earns what.
I am not so sure Worc has been presented with any Massport opportunities for the future up there yet? Yes, rumors do abound.
I agree Logan and Handscome have their own agendas and these agendas compete directly with ORH. If Massport takes over then ORH will always be the third option, if any option at all.
I would like to see government (City or Massport) have nothing to do with the daily operation of ORH.
Bill:
Again, we may have to put out an RFP for sale or lease with only 258 days remaining.
Let's attack the $2M deficit before we lease or sell off ORH. What can we save going to GA?
If we only negoitaite with one potential suitor, of course we are in a weak position, All the more reason to bring other interested parties to the table.
Yes Massport has access to more capital and IMO they will spend this capital at Logan and Handscome first and lastly at ORH.
They first have to bring the comm air service back before they think about spending any money and they have been up there now how many years and they have brought how much commercial air service to ORH?
I suggest that if and when a serious amount of comm. jet traffic begins again at ORH, that the community immediatley surrounding ORH will start complaining and the ROAR mindset will again be making City policy. Not unlike what happens at handscome.
Folks, bottom line, if MY CEO isnt performing up to my objectives (comm. air service), do I sell my business or do I bring in new talent? Massport isnt new talent. Massport is just another government agency.
Jahn:
Massport has not looked into the possibility of a private management company. It was, however, one of our initial recommendations two years ago..
No offense... There is no way in hell that we could get an RFP put together, properly marketed, received the quotes and then pick the best quote over the next 258 days..
Bill
Bill, we may have to get an RFP out if we decide to lease /sell it. If I am a private company that owns airports and I catch wind of teh fact that Worc may be negoitating to sell ORH to Massport w/o putting out an RFP.....well I have to think that as a potential bidder I may be questioning how the City can do it w/o putting out an RFP.
Dave, Thank you for the correction. I had always assumed the state kicked in money to Massport every year. I guess this kind of dispells the thought that Massport has deep pockets ( translation state money) to help ORH.
However like all of these authorities, Massport is a monopoly and as such they can charge whatever they want in user fees (taxes) and the taxpaying public is forced to pay these fees if they want to fly from Logan.
Think Masspike or Mass Water Resources Authority. Where does the user turn if they are unhappy with the prices charged. No where, as there is no viable alternative.
Massport is a government monopoly.
If they get all their money from debt and fees...are they going to raise prices to the Logan traveler/user to finance improvements and daily operations at ORH...or are they going to float more debt when ORH cannot service the debt it currently has?
If you were a Logan customer would you be happy being forced to pay fees knowing that some of these fees are going to help ORH?
Although there evidently is no direct funding from Beacon Hill to Massport, the bonds that Massport floats are tax exempt bonds, so the taxpayers are providing subsidies (money) to Massport. And doesnt the fed'l gov't pay the passenger and baggage screeners? And who pays the state police at Logan?
I am not trying pick an argument here, but I am guessing you went to the Massport website and read what Massport has to say about where their money comes from. My gut tells me someone could go over the records and find gov't money flowing to Logan.
Two governmental entities have tried at ORH and basically failed. Is it not time to give the privater sector a bite at teh apple?
Lastly, I would expect most all jobs in Boston to pay far in excess of the same job in Worc. A 3 decker apt. in Worc rents for $900...a 3 decker in Southie fetches $1900. I'll bet a NYC firefighter makes even more than a Boston firefighter. I think you have to look at the COLA for each locale.
Bill Randell said...
"The sad thing we are negotiating from a point of weakness with MassPort, since they can simply threaten not to extend the current agreement and wish us luck paying the $2,000,000 deficit."
I don't agree. I would tell Massport that you were not retaining the part 139 certification, and would only spend what is required to keep ORH open. Not the terminal, but the runways.
When Massport needs another runway (which the recent report says will happenn), let them bring it back up to part 139.
The City of Worcester derives little if anything from having a commercial airport.
All real good points.
Charley, you are right we could negotiate hard and say that we are going to downgrade to a GA airport.
How is the airport going to do that when all the paid consultants and studies tell us to do the opposite. Although this may be the tactic to take, it will not happen.
Jahn, ORH will have to put together an RGP (I think) but I just do not see it getting the appropriate marketing that it could have had, if it had been done over the past two years via a national campaign.
Jahn, we should attack the 2,000,000 deficit now too, but sadly that has not happened the past ten years, it is not going to start tomorrow.
Thanks for all the comments--they all really make you think.
cHARLIE: If Massport needs another runway, can Handscome handle it and isnt it the first, most logical alternative? It is right in the middle of their catchment area and is probably more convenient????
Yes they've got a battle to fight at Lexington & Concord, but in the long run if folks in the Rte 128 area want to fly, they have to realize that planes need a place to land.
Jahn:
no way in hell could they get another runway in at Hanscom.
Bill
Post a Comment