It is NOT something the airport could change. It would require a change to Federal law.jshank83 wrote: ↑Dec 20, 2019I am not sure this is something they can change is it? Most cities aren't allowed to get any money out of their airport. Since it was grandfathered in I assume it would have to be approved by DOT or FAA or someone else also. With as much debt as the airport has the extra money should probably be going to that anyway.gone corporate wrote: ↑Dec 20, 2019The Airport's Charter still needs to be changed, so that it's not stuck with $6MM in revenues capped per year,
- 2,929
^^Changing the airport's charter will likely have to involve the FAA and other related agencies, let alone a likely popular vote. Still, changes to the charter are absolutely vital to the airport's long term viability. It is handcuffed to outdated operational language that makes it operate more like a nonprofit bus terminal than it does a competitive asset of the City's and the region's. For example, that $6MM is a mandatory payment to be made by the airport to the City every year, regardless of revenues, regardless of funding sources. It also limits how the airport can invest in itself. Director Hamm-Niebruegge and her team do a hell of a job there under the parameters of a construct that desperately can and should be improved by changing the charter's language to allow the airport to behave more competitively. It needs to operate as a business, not as a quasi-passive nonprofit utility.
Corporations are the backbone to solid local taxation initiatives. Without a good airport, those companies relocate to cities that have better flight options. That's why so many companies keep relocating their HQs to Chicago - so they can have the flights at O'Hare International - even though the State of Illinois is spiraling into bankruptcy and very high taxation. That's why Clayco left STL, and why Boeing set up their HQ in the Downtown Loop, and why Archer Daniels Midland relocated their HQ there from Decatur - access to ORD for flights.
I firmly believe that fixing what's wrong with STL begins with creating a better airport, which will beget new businesses operating here, which will be taxed locally at a rate higher than that of the general citizenry, and from those taxes better actions can be taken to combat crime and further education. All of this begins with making the airport better able to compete, which necessitates the airport's charter being modernized.
Corporations are the backbone to solid local taxation initiatives. Without a good airport, those companies relocate to cities that have better flight options. That's why so many companies keep relocating their HQs to Chicago - so they can have the flights at O'Hare International - even though the State of Illinois is spiraling into bankruptcy and very high taxation. That's why Clayco left STL, and why Boeing set up their HQ in the Downtown Loop, and why Archer Daniels Midland relocated their HQ there from Decatur - access to ORD for flights.
I firmly believe that fixing what's wrong with STL begins with creating a better airport, which will beget new businesses operating here, which will be taxed locally at a rate higher than that of the general citizenry, and from those taxes better actions can be taken to combat crime and further education. All of this begins with making the airport better able to compete, which necessitates the airport's charter being modernized.
- 6,123
The airport has been slowly but steadily improving for a decade now under current leadership. It hit a low in 2008 or so, when American closed the hub and when the tornado tore the roof off C. Since then they've remodeled A, C, and large parts of D (converted into E.) They've paid down debt and brought down landing fees and cost per emplanement. They've attracted new flights and even new airlines. They've remodeled the main terminal, replaced the baggage handing system, and bought new snow removal equipment. They remodeled the customs hall. They've begun plans for improvements at T2 to baggage handling, curbside dropoff and pickup, and landside amenities. Not only are there quite clear ways to improve, but the management knows what many of them are and is pursuing them. The very fact that this process is over means now they can get back to work with their hands free.whitherSTL wrote: ↑Dec 20, 2019That sucks. No other discernible way of improving the airport now.
Anyone have any idea how much public money was wasted on this charade?
Should be none. The mayor said on the radio Rex is paying the full 11 million.RuskiSTL wrote: ↑Dec 20, 2019Anyone have any idea how much public money was wasted on this charade?
- 9,563
$11,000,000 spent to date was paid by Grow Missouri, a Rex outfit. City money spent was Linda Martinez being distracted with this vs doing other things that a deputy mayor for economic development does
And for all this, I believe it might be in everyone’s best interest, including hers, if LM starts finding her opportunity to respectfully leave the mayors office.
Good news is it died without public money being spent. Bad news, imagine if Rex just spent the money to attract a TATL.....any airliners guys know roughly what level of subsidies other cities paid for TATL??
(I understand it's not apples to apples and Rex probably wouldn't have just written the same 11 mil check for TATL)
(I understand it's not apples to apples and Rex probably wouldn't have just written the same 11 mil check for TATL)
- 2,929
Lots to cheer here. Also, massive restructuring of the existing debt load that's saving multiple millions of dollars. The airport's current administration is doing an exceedingly good job; credit is definitely deserved.symphonicpoet wrote: ↑Dec 20, 2019The airport has been slowly but steadily improving for a decade now under current leadership. It hit a low in 2008 or so, when American closed the hub and when the tornado tore the roof off C. Since then they've remodeled A, C, and large parts of D (converted into E.) They've paid down debt and brought down landing fees and cost per emplanement. They've attracted new flights and even new airlines. They've remodeled the main terminal, replaced the baggage handing system, and bought new snow removal equipment. They remodeled the customs hall. They've begun plans for improvements at T2 to baggage handling, curbside dropoff and pickup, and landside amenities. Not only are there quite clear ways to improve, but the management knows what many of them are and is pursuing them. The very fact that this process is over means now they can get back to work with their hands free.whitherSTL wrote: ↑Dec 20, 2019That sucks. No other discernible way of improving the airport now.
For 11 mil they could get about any flight they want.RuskiSTL wrote: ↑Dec 20, 2019Good news is it died without public money being spent. Bad news, imagine if Rex just spent the money to attract a TATL.....any airliners guys know roughly what level of subsidies other cities paid for TATL??
(I understand it's not apples to apples and Rex probably wouldn't have just written the same 11 mil check for TATL)
Indy paid 5 mil for Delta
BA gets around 3-4 mil each for PIT/Nash
Yes, but he was spending $11 million of his own in the hopes for $500 million+ payout to the city.
That’s how he became a buh-billionaire.
It didn’t work this time.Or the last.
That’s the odds and he knows it.
That’s how he became a buh-billionaire.
It didn’t work this time.Or the last.
That’s the odds and he knows it.
- 9,563
Couple things- he become a billionaire by being good at one specific thing, indexing funds. He’s been a absolute failure at using his money to move policy. As we’ve seen with this, better together, earnings tax and many other thingsshadrach wrote: ↑Dec 21, 2019Yes, but he was spending $11 million of his own in the hopes for $500 million+ payout to the city.
That’s how he became a buh-billionaire.
It didn’t work this time.Or the last.
That’s the odds and he knows it.
2nd. The city would have been extremely dumb to take anything less than $1,000,000,000 in cash up front + $10m a year in annual payments, debt paid off and $500m in airport improvements. This was going to be the first privately run airport in the US with 8 companies bidding, someone was going to overpay (knowing well that there were overpaying) just to get their foot in the US market and prove privately run airports can be a thing in the US
- 1,642
It seems a little fishy that less than 48 hours after the African American group gets on board with privatization all of a sudden the Mayor thnks it's a bad idea.
- 1,291
^^ Why try and make this a race thing when it clearly isn't?
Does anyone else find it slightly annoying to see aldermen tweet and share their support for the airport so suddenly? Like WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN?!?
I know aldermen can’t care about every issue 24/7 but it’s annoying that it took a privatization threat to get leaders to show outward gratitude and interest to the airport.
Maybe if they cared this much from the start...
I know aldermen can’t care about every issue 24/7 but it’s annoying that it took a privatization threat to get leaders to show outward gratitude and interest to the airport.
Maybe if they cared this much from the start...
StlToday - Messenger: Unsung hero in end of airport privatization effort attends meetings so you don’t have to
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/col ... 7b6c3.html
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/col ... 7b6c3.html
- 3,762
^ holy crap, the comments actually did *not* make me wanna plunge a screwdriver through my face for a change.
- 71
I don't really think this is fishy in the sense that it makes the Krewson admin look racist, but it does remind me of a thought I had today - that part of the motivation for pulling the plug on airport privatization is Krewson wanting to do a power play and say ***** you to the north city aldermen who thought they had a big payday for their wards coming with privatization - maybe payback for holding up her BoF nominees? I'm not sure, though, as it's not clear to me that Krewson isn't just superficially upset that the BoF process is stalled.leeharveyawesome wrote: ↑Dec 22, 2019It seems a little fishy that less than 48 hours after the African American group gets on board with privatization all of a sudden the Mayor thnks it's a bad idea.
I think the media got this right...
1. Mayor is seeking re-election, this was incredibly unpopular. Probably improved her odds XX% with the optics of ending it.
2. Business pressure.
My theory... Rex wasn’t getting the results (team) he wanted, so he closed the tab.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
1. Mayor is seeking re-election, this was incredibly unpopular. Probably improved her odds XX% with the optics of ending it.
2. Business pressure.
My theory... Rex wasn’t getting the results (team) he wanted, so he closed the tab.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I also really don't get the race angle. I haven't seen that anywhere but here and it seems awfully misguided. I understand in a city like St. Louis it's easy to make things about race, but it just seems lazy here. Aldermen recently introduced a bill that would give the public a vote before the sale of any city asset (I don't think it's a secret how that vote would have gone after this process), the airlines (and airport management) have come out on record of being pretty skeptical of the whole process, and the business community wasn't behind it. It certainly didn't help having the PD uncovering Linda Martínez showing her ass in the closed door meetings either. I mean come on, any politician would kill a deal with that kind of opposition.
I tend to agree with this. I think the mayor realized it wasn’t going to make it thru so there wasn’t any point to keep it going. It was time to take a different approach to improving the airport.sc4mayor wrote: ↑Dec 23, 2019I also really don't get the race angle. I haven't seen that anywhere but here and it seems awfully misguided. I understand in a city like St. Louis it's easy to make things about race, but it just seems lazy here. Aldermen recently introduced a bill that would give the public a vote before the sale of any city asset (I don't think it's a secret how that vote would have gone after this process), the airlines (and airport management) have come out on record of being pretty skeptical of the whole process, and the business community wasn't behind it. It certainly didn't help having the PD uncovering Linda Martínez showing her ass in the closed door meetings either. I mean come on, any politician would kill a deal with that kind of opposition.
- 9,563
I know elected officials here are petty but they're not petty to pass on $2,000,000,000 because someone didnt approve their people to a Board that isnt going to do anything.JacksonPolyp wrote: ↑Dec 23, 2019I don't really think this is fishy in the sense that it makes the Krewson admin look racist, but it does remind me of a thought I had today - that part of the motivation for pulling the plug on airport privatization is Krewson wanting to do a power play and say f*** you to the north city aldermen who thought they had a big payday for their wards coming with privatization - maybe payback for holding up her BoF nominees? I'm not sure, though, as it's not clear to me that Krewson isn't just superficially upset that the BoF process is stalled.leeharveyawesome wrote: ↑Dec 22, 2019It seems a little fishy that less than 48 hours after the African American group gets on board with privatization all of a sudden the Mayor thnks it's a bad idea.
Civic Progress and RBC + polling at 70% against was the one and only factor.
I think it was a strong move by Krewson politically. Instead of appearing beholden to some regional council or aldermanic control, as is so often the case, she presented a single clear voice saying “we’re not doing this.” Which apparently is in line with what most voters wanted.