A private investment firm from New York has been in contact with Barrow County leaders about the possibility of buying the Northeast Georgia Regional Airport and making into a regional facility for “light” passenger aircraft. No offer has been made and the discussions are in the very early stages, said those close to the situation.
Plans by the county to expand the airport runway led to a firestorm of controversy late last year and throughout 2008. The issue was a major debate in county elections last summer, elections that saw a number of incumbents voted out of office.
The latest twist in the ongoing airport saga came Tuesday night when outgoing board of commissioners chairman Doug Garrison alluded to the possibility of the county privatizing the airport by selling it. Garrison’s remarks came during his farewell comments to the board and were not part of the meeting’s officials business.
Nevertheless, the comments caught the attention of activists who have been opposing county plans to expand the airport beyond local general aviation use. Friday morning, Concerned Citizens of Barrow County, an airport activist group that has been following the issue, put out a call to members about the county’s discussions, saying they “potentially could become a tireless nightmare for all citizens that work and or live in Barrow.”
The CCBC email said the group was concerned that the county might attempt to do a quick deal before Jan. 1, when new members take their BOC seats. The new BOC will likely replace a majority of airport authority members after Jan. 1, say those close to the situation.
But Brett Smith, one of the principals of Propeller Investments in New York, said Friday that the firm had been evaluating several sites in Georgia and that Barrow was just one of several locations being looked at. He said no site studies had been done and that the discussion was just preliminary in nature.
Smith also said his firm would “not do anything without the support of the community.”
COUNTY CONTACTED LAST MONTH
Garrison said the firm contacted him about a month ago by phone. He said he told company representatives he was going out of office at the end of the year and that any decisions on such a move would come under a new administration. He said he met with the firm, but that there was no offer on the table.
Garrison also said that his administration would not take any action on the idea before the first of the year. The chairman said the facility is owned by the county’s airport authority, but that he didn’t know the legal obligations of the county government that might be involved in any potential sale.
The chairman said that it might be a good move for the county to privatize its airport, making the facility taxable and relieving the county’s debt obligation for adjoining industrial land, but that he didn’t know the scope Propeller’s plans, other than it was apparently for some kind of “light” passenger service.
MEETING THIS WEEK
Incoming BOC chairman Danny Yearwood said he was invited to meet with some of Propeller’s leaders earlier this week. Yearwood said that he, along with Linda Moore, Barrow County Chamber of Commerce’s vice president for economic development; David Smith of the Winder-Barrow Joint Development Authority, which owns industrial land next to the airport; and county administrator Keith Lee met with officials with the firm Tuesday night.
Yearwood, who was elected last summer and takes office Jan. 1, said he told the company that he couldn’t commit to anything.
“I told them to make a package and I would present that to the board and the citizens of Barrow County,” he said.
Yearwood said it was his understanding that the firm wanted to offer some kind of regional passenger service with planes up to 737 in size.
Outgoing county commissioner Bill Healan said that he didn’t know anything about the discussions until this week after Garrison’s remarks Tuesday night. Healan, who has been critical of the county’s earlier airport expansion plans, said the facility doesn’t currently have the kind of infrastructure to support anything beyond general aviation use. The runway, he said, would have to be totally rebuilt to handle larger aircraft.
LONG CONTROVERSY
Airport expansion plans have been controversial in Northeast Georgia for the last 20 years after the City of Atlanta made a high profile bid to build a second Atlanta airport in the area. A 10,000-acre site was targeted in Jackson County in 1989, but a firestorm of protests put a stop to that effort.
Business leaders from nearby Athens-Clarke County have long promoted the idea of a regional airport in Northeast Georgia, although that county’s airport has had a difficult time keeping one regional carrier in place. The business leaders created a regional airport group in the 1990s, but it has not been active in recent years.
The issue in Barrow County began in 2005 when the airport changed its name from Winder-Barrow Airport to Northeast Georgia Regional Airport. In 2007, the county bought 250 acres for expansion and condemned another 16-acres later in the year. In addition, the FAA announced in 2007 it was funding a $1 million study on building another airport to serve the Atlanta area.
Controversy about those moves ensued and the Barrow BOC adopted a resolution in late 2007 that said the facility would not become a second Atlanta airport.
But discussion over extending one runway to 7,000’ continued into 2008. Allegations over insider real estate deals around the airport were rampant during the 2008 elections and the airport expansion controversy played a large part in the overturning a majority of the BOC, including the election of Yearwood as chairman.
As far as the land deal goes, it is obvious that Mr. Smith was compensated quite well for his property. It seems that purchase would be a welcomed blessing in these economic times. Check the real estate records at the court house and see what other local land sale brought in $750,000 for 13 acres!! I wished my farm was next to the airport, I would encourage them to buy the whole thing and I would sweeten the deal if necessary. If Mr. Smith did not want to sell, he would understandably be dissappointed but likely not because of the compensation given for his land. Besides, since it was a "condemnation", Mr. Smith was not taxed for the $750,000 compensation, not a bad deal after all.
Mr. "Anonymous", if you were so concerned about noise, pollution, crime, etc, in around the vicinity of the airport (which I assume you must reside), shouldn't you be barking about the railroad instead of the airport. Let's address your concerns in a fair and just manner:
1) Noise.......I have never heard a plane that was louder than the CSX locomotives. And they run day and night, averaging two trains per hour in any 24 hr interval, check it and see! Don't forget the horns at every crossing (2 short bursts and one long draw through the crossing).
2) Pollution.....let's think about this for just a moment. Trains come by your home loaded with thousands of gallons of diesel fuel, releasing tons of exhaust into the air, carrying who knows what kind of chemicals and petroleum products as freight........and you want people to believe that you are remotely concerned about pollution. Sorry, but I just don't buy that one. Find another angle for your misguided agenda.
3) Crime and danger.........I have never felt threatened or have I been a victim of a crime perpetrated by an aircraft owner / operator. A railroad hobo, likely, but never an aircraft owner. The chances of a train derailment far outweigh the odds of a plane crash so your smokescreen of concern for danger are again "derailed", no pun intended. Check out the national news, a train derailed in Minnesota this week sending several cars into the Mississippi River. Is that dangerous enough for you? Furthermore, my commute through downtown Winder has never been delayed by an approaching or departing aircraft, but all of us have certainly been "parked" at the downtown train crossing as the trains pass by all hours of the day and night. So realistically, a train really can be an inconvenience and danger to you, it's just real peculiar that you fail to mention it. Again, it fails to meet your shallow agenda.
Mr.Anonymous, your comments completely contradict your perspective concerning the airport. You made an attempt to establish a conspiracy theory about the private investor (Propeller, Inc) showing interst in purchasing the airport. You think ol Doug Garrison made some shady deal to set this up.....whatever. Isn't it likely that this private firm sees an airport with potential in earnings and growth and therfore feels like the airport may be a good investment? If you can deviate from your willful neglect of common sense for a few seconds you will completely comprehend this possibility. With the improvements that have been completed and projected it's really no suprise that an offer such as this has been tabled. What is suprising is that you people, in your infinite wisdom, do not see the value of the airport to the community and the local economy. Seriously, if a private investment firm has interest, then the airport must be doing something right. I can't think of any other government facility that would be an attractive purchase for a private entity. Think about it!!
"Toldyouso", I'm not gonna leave you out of this fireside chat. You seem to have a theory about Doug Garrison's career path once he leaves office. You claim he is going to get rich by listing his ill gotten gains or "fruits of their public service". If your inane banter of suggestions and theories were correct, then Doug probably wouldn't have to work. If he orchestrated all of these shady deals while in office, then certainly he earned enough not to have to work for a living, assuming you're telling the truth. Think about your stupid comment for a moment and ponder why entering the real estate field in this day and time would be beneficial for any warm blooded mammal. He would have been better off giving up his real estate license because I don't think he'll be inking any contracts for a while (read the paper and you might comprehend that comment) You just think Garrison is ruthless, stick around for the "Danny Yearwood Show". This poor county is destined for some unfavorable times. He is the pinnacle of incompetence and ignorance. Is this guy really the best that Barrow County had to offer us? I would certainly hope not! Barrow county desperately needs an enema!
"Big goals can create a fear of failure. Lack of goals guarantees it"-------think about it!!
Thanks Barrow Journal, keep up the fair and informative local coverage, it is appreciated.
Don
My thanks to the BarrowJournal for reporting both sides of a story and having these pages available for us to voice our concerns and thoughts. Chris Smith, aka uneducated,uninformed,embicile,idiot.
The noise, pollution, crime comment is obviously talking about an expansion of the airport. Few people have a problem with the airport as it is now.
And YES, there are most definitely times when government money should be refused!!! Government money ALWAYS means more government regulation and intrusion. I should not have to explain this. There is nothing free in this world, especially when it's from the government.
--------------------------------------------
How about giving back the land you stole for a penny on the dollar in the name of the airport!
Goodbye, Good Riddance, Garrison!!!
IF HE IS being honest, that might be a better scenario than the shenanegins that the current administration and AA have tried to pull for the last 2 years.
Just something to think about...
I personally don't care who OWNS the airport, as long as it does not 1) cost me any money or sleep (read: night flights) OR 2) increase the noise/pollution/danger/crime near the airport. That would obviously include any extension or expansion.
Arguing on the internet....will you people ever learn?
Chris, I appreciate your response. I guess my abhorrence for the biased responses caused me to respond in a negative tone and I offer my earnest apology. In retrospect, those were harsh words. Also, I was not being boastful about "my years of federal service". That statement was nothing more than a reassurance to you (and the other readers) that I have seen firsthand the distribution of federal grant funds and have witnessed the benefits savored by the participating communities. There is a genuine satisfaction in seeing federal funds serve a plausible contribution to a community of people versus watching it wasted on unregulated programs (bailout &%^$#). In this case (Mr. Anonymous) it's apparent that the federal money should not be refused, let's use it for our community.
Some of you claim that you have no problem with the airport as it is now but are against an "expansion". Installing the ILS system is not an expansion of any sort. The ILS system provides a safe and reliable means of getting aircraft into the airport during inclement weather. This type of improvement is necessary for sustaining general aviation traffic. I would safely assume that any runway extension would be years down the road, if at all. Some citizens/politicians are under the impression that large passenger jets will be arriving at Winder airport, again, urban legend; there's just not enough real estate, period! The airport improvements would be suitable to serve general aviation / corporate aircraft only. Corporate traffic is what Barrow needs to generate economic growth, which is certainly welcomed. Therefore, it is important to support the "improvements" at the airport.
Megan and Spelling police, please forgive me for the misspelled word. My key jamming got a little too fast. And for the record Megan, I don't use spellcheck, I typically don't need it, but I can sense that you likely rely on it!! Thanks for your contribution on the misspelled word but your input on the policies being discussed would be valued even more. I realize you rely on Spellcheck to spell for you but you might consider an entry level civics / history / or political science course to allow you the privilege of independent thinking on discussions such as this. You might find it beneficial!! And yes, this comment was snotty, rude, crude, and repulsive just like your response. Enjoy!!
Don
You must be extremely new to this discussion. You are not 'safe to assume' that it is an 'urban legend'.