Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-06-21 Minutes• • • 1 • MINUTES OF A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING OF THE AIRPORT BOARD June 21, 2000 MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT STAFF PRESENT OTHERS PRESENT McKINNEY: LITTLE: RICK McKINNEY, DON LYALL, AND CHARLES WALLACE FRANK BURGGRAF AND TRUMAN SMITH ALETT LITTLE, JANET JOHNS, TONYA POSEY ROB SMITH - ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT GAZETTE; MATT WAGNER - NORTHWEST ARKANSAS TIMES; CHUCK CHADWICK - FAYETTEVILLE AIR SERVICE; KEN SCHOSSOW - WINGS AVIATION; DONALD WILSON - ATTORNEY FOR WINGS AVIATION; TERRY COLLIER - TENANT; DEAN SCHANTZ - ARKANSAS AVIATION TECHNOLOGIES; AND CHARLIE ALLISON - THE MORNING NEWS ITEM #1: Call to Order ITEM #2: Lease Agreements with Wings Air, Inc. a. Fuel and Oil Sales We have two separate leases. One is a ground lease entitled Above Ground Fueling Facility. The other is entitled Fuel and Oil Sales. That is for lease space in the terminal. There are about 425 square feet under lease. Attachment "A" did not make it into your packets. I have distributed that to you today One area of contention is the amount of increase each year and that should be discussed. We have not revised the section regarding the total area. The last time this was discussed, Mr. Schossow indicated that there was one triangle that he was concerned about and he wanted access to that triangle. We do not have a problem with his having access although there is a fire hydrant there that we want to maintain our access to. We are in the process of checking that out and recalculating the square footage. We will also have the utility companies come out do their review. The Water Department has already been out. We will make specific revisions to the square footage but the rate will be maintained. We want to make sure he has adequate room to do what he wants to do. WILSON: I'm here as an attorney and was asked by Mr. Schossow to review these -1- • • • • • LITTLE: MCKINNEY: WILSON: LITTLE: MCKINNEY: LYALL: SCI-IOSSOW: MCKINNEY- LITTLE: SCHOSSOW: LITTLE: MCKINNEY: leases. I have a number of suggestions as a matter of clarification. I have prepared copies of suggested changes. The Board can make their own decision about whether they want to go through these documents word by word. Generally, that kind of negotiation is left up to the staff and we report to the Board only those issues which are in disagreement or need to be discussed by the Board. This Board does not get into negotiations. I began at the very beginning with the Terms. The terms of the agreement are vague and unclear. I have tried to make them specific. For example, the expiration date is not specifically stated and I have included that exact date and it corresponds with the renewal option. The Above Ground lease provides the option to extend for three consecutive periods and I have included the exact date. We don't have any problem making that change. We don't need to review that. We need a final document before us. We don't need to send this forward to the Council if it's not the final document. We also don't have a quorum which is another problem. Alett and I have worked out this agreement and the changes proposed by my attorney, Mr. Wilson, aren't substantive. I retained the services of Mr. Wilson because we wanted to make sure that our agreement was very clear. If these changes are acceptable to Alett, this lease must go back to the City Attorney. Is that correct? It will. We will take time to sit down with Alett and come to an understanding. I don't think there will be a problem. If the changes are simply a matter of clarification and good legal form, I don't think there will be a problem incorporating them and we are glad to do that. When is the next scheduled Council meeting? -2- • • • • LITTLE: MCKINNEY: SCHOSSOW: MCKINNEY: WILSON: SCHOSSOW: MCKINNEY- LITTLE: WALLACE: CHADWICK: In a normal cycle, this would go to Council on July 5th. However, Mr. Schossow has a conflict so this will be on the Council Agenda for July 18`s. Publically, you have said several times that this will go to the Council. I need to make you aware that this document's value is less than $20,000 and therefore, the Mayor has the authority to approve it without Council action. I don't have a problem with this on the Council's July 18'" Agenda. I would l ke a final document to be back at our the Airport Board's July meeting. I'm out of town until July 91h. Can Mr. Wilson be your representative? If Mr. Schossow agrees, I would be happy to be here. We can be in contact by phone. I thought this was a final document and second, Truman had to cancel this morning due to a family emergency. That leaves us with a quorum but without voting because Mr. Schossow and I do business together. We couldn't have voted on this today anyway. What we proposed to do instead of canceling this meeting was to give it a general consensus and send it on to the Council. We can't do that without a final document in front of us. Staff will review the documents and negotiate with Mr. Schossow and Mr. Wilson and then forward it to Jerry Rose for review. I would like to have the Board's feedback from the agreement which was distributed to you earlier this week. Specifically, is the term and amount agreeable to this Board? If you're okay with it, I'm not sure we need it on our July Agenda. Will there be a major contest of this agreement on behalf of the FBO? I have problems with this. But since you don't have a voting quorum today, I would agree to have staff review these documents provided by Mr. Schossow today then have the opportunity to review a final document. Anytime there are changes to a standardized document that the City has previously used like the one we were obligated to sign, I have concerns. The FBO's position is that this tenant is being offered a substantially better deal and it is not equal. -3- • LYALL: WILSON: LYALL: WALLACE: • LITTLE: WALLACE: SCHOSSOW: MCKINNEY: CHADWICK: LITTLE: MCKINNEY: Don fall, Sectary Mr. Wilson, are you newly associated with Wings? Yes. Why didn't you (Schossow) do this earlier? The process is that staff negotiates the contract and brings a final document before us for our recommendation to the City Council. (Alett) Is that correct? Yes. I'm uncomfortable with all this. The Board doesn't have a quorum. Mr. Schossow has new representation. The FBO is not happy. It's my understanding we are not technically an FBO under the new Airport Minimum Standards. We are a fueling facility. Why does the FBO, our competitor, have the opportunity to comment on our negotiations with this airport? I don't see why we have to meet the terms and conditions of my competitor. There is due process. When the FBO came up for contract renewal, we had a subcommittee that worked on that. We were diligent in dealing with the FBO. You are negotiating with a public entity and all documents are open to the public which allowed the public including the FBO to have input. This a federally fimded airport and under FAA regulations it does not allow the right to request exclusive fuel sales or FBO contracts. That same regulation also says that the City or Authority of the Airport cannot enter into contracts with other parties which are not equal or which creates a disadvantage to an existing business on the field. Our Minimum Standards require us to notify like businesses of other potential agreements with similar entities. We send a certified letter so that they get their notice. This Board expects the staff to negotiate the terms. We would like a final document before us at our July meeting at which time we will make our recommendation. You can anticipate this will be before the City Council at their July 18th meeting for additional comment subject to our favorable rewmmendation. Meeting adjourned at 2:07 p.m. -4- Date