This is an unfortunate, but totally predictable turn of events for the airport. Stephanie Morgan brought a new level of aviation expertise and professionalism to this airport as well as an outsider’s perspective. I am not sure what “difference of philosophy” has suddenly occurred between her and the City Manager, but I have a good idea. I believe a lot has to do with the City’s relationship with its current airport consultant. I think my Dad’s opinion that was published on this website on November 24, 2015 says it all. I am reposting for those who have not seen it previously.
John McGill says:
NOVEMBER 24, 2015 AT 2:40 PM
Why? A longer list than Lou’s could be made of the airport management blunders on our wonderful public asset, but it would be just as befuddling to try to figure out why the City always seems to stumble on the airport.
I have spent more time than most contemplating the same question because my family’s livelihood is at stake. Then again, the pocketbooks of every local taxpayer are also on the line. We all deserve an answer.
Year after year, millions of dollars flow into airport projects. Since the projects are largely grant funded, they do not get much local scrutiny. The public may not pay a lot of attention, but those in the airport community often question the prioritization & even the wisdom of some projects when so many of the airport’s basic needs starve for attention. The answer is always the same: “We can get a grant. If we do not act now, we will lose the money.” The lure of easy money is the answer. Money drives airport decisions.
“Follow the money.” Remember that saying? Follow the money on the airport, and you will find the answer to the befuddling questions.
A lot of individuals and organizations engrafted to the City make money off airport improvement projects. Those in the decision making chain (City Staff, Airport Advisory Commission, and City Commission) are always won over by the same argument: “We can get a grant. If we do not act now, we will lose the money.” And that argument is made by middlemen with extended palms.
Consider the role of the City’s airport consultant. The City relies on a paid consultant for expert advice on airport matters. The consultant is also the City’s hound for sniffing out grants. That gets us back to the money, and that is where things quickly move into the shadows. Once an airport project is funded, the consultant is re-hired to perform fee-based engineering design services, and then fee-based construction contract management. The consultant also has a “team” of other service providers. None of this is very transparent, but it is a pretty good gig. The consultant gets paid to give independent professional advice, but its advice is always the same: take the money and pay us more. Nice work if you can get it.
This is the airport consultant that led the City into putting development of an airport industrial park, and its locally renowned “road to no where”, ahead of aviation needs. Local funds that might have been used to maintain runways, taxiways, ramps, & lights are used to match dubious grants. Millions spent, years pass, and the airport industrial park remains empty. An attempt to redeem that blunder may partially explain some of the more recent abortive attempts to develop the east-side of the airport, which some might call throwing good money after bad.
This is the airport consultant that led the City into delisting Runway 13/31 as the airport’s primary runway, even though it is the airport’s single most important runway, favored by both prevailing winds and an instrument approach. Why? The answer was to get a grant to resurface another runway that neither the FAA nor FDOT would fund unless it was listed as a primary runway. No one in the decision chain other than the consultant was capable of such a conniving double-play, never mind how it double-crossed the airport’s future. This could well have been the worst City decision in the history of the airport. It was, however, a decision from which the airport consultant and contractors could profit.
This is the airport consultant that led the City into using a so-called ditch & drainage project to sneak in drainage infrastructure for a new aircraft parking ramp on the east-side of the airport, even though developing an east-side terminal had never been vetted in any airport master planning nor on any actual or proposed Airport Layout Plan.
This is the airport consultant that led the City into the Taxiway A project that took 35% of the north-side aircraft parking ramp, contrary to a 1966 airport master plan that would have built the taxiway further south to preserve the much needed aircraft parking space. Again, it was a decision from which the airport consultant profited. The decision to proceed with that project also brought on the airport litigation in which the City ultimately spent over $3.5 million for damages & attorney fees defending the consultant’s bad advice & the City’s bad decision. Most recently, the same airport consultant proposed relocating Taxiway A as indicated in the 1966 plan in order to replace the aircraft ramp his previous advice destroyed. Had that advice been given 15 years ago, the City would still have its $3.5 million.
One thing that I learned from the Taxiway A debacle is that the worst possible place to be standing is between the airport consultant and the City’s money. Unfortunately, once again our business finds itself in just that spot.
This is the airport consultant who has for the last several years relentlessly promoted a Category 5 Hurricane Emergency Operations Center on the airport because a grant is available. Its location was moved around the airport. It was packaged & re-packaged. Its name was changed to “Welcome Center”. Still, the Airport Advisory Commission would not recommend it, and City Commission would not fund it. That was little more than a speed bump for the consultant whose pitch changed to getting an FBO to fund the local share. Both the renewal of our lease and the launch of a new FBO were tabled, as the two companies were pitted against each other in a “winner take all” bidding where the most money would buy an airport fueling monopoly. The “Welcome Center” project will proceed, not because the City needed it nor wanted it, but because the middlemen found a way to fund it with other people’s money. Money. Money. Money.
More money. The “Welcome Center” became only 1/3 of the project cost by adding a large hangar. In another masterful play, when the project was moved from the east-side of the airport to the north-side to save money on infrastructure, the cost of the project actually increased again. Now, it seems the demolition of our fuel farm, hangar, & terminal will be added because it costs even more money to do that than build on available green grass sites. The destruction of our business is just collateral damage in this middleman feeding frenzy, but most important, those engrafted to the City are assured another bloated, fee-driven project.
City Commissions, City Managers, Airport Managers, and Airport Advisory Commissions come and go. For two decades, however, one airport consultant has dominated every decision on the airport, large and small. If you look long enough you will see its financial interest in every decision it recommends. The fox is in charge of the hen house, but do not blame the fox for the control it was given. As long as the City allows any airport consultant to participate in the airport improvement projects that it recommends & controls, that advice will be tainted by self-interest.
Once you realize it is all about money, you might ask if you are getting your money’s worth. You might ask why the City’s permits any consultant to have such blatant conflicts of interest. You might even ask how one consultant manages to span so many administrations. You might ask about compliance with public bidding and the RFP process for such consulting services & airport projects. You might just follow the money and find the answer to every other airport question that may come to mind. Finally, you might just ask if the City should do things just because they can get the money to do them.
In the end, the answer to the airport questions is money. Money explains tainted advice and bad decisions that always profit someone and that constantly get the City into trouble. Common sense management of the airport will never happen without common sense reform of airport financing.
John McGill
McGill Aviation Corporation
Keoki Gray (@guest_48302)
7 years ago
#48302
I find the timing to be interesting. This week there is a meeting to help decide who the airport consultant will be for the next five years. I know Ms. Morgan questioned how well the city is being served by the current consulting firm and whether another firm might be able to do a better job. I hope Ms. Morgan’s untimely firing does not adversely impact the selection process.
In my experience, Ms. Morgan was studious, dutiful and forthright in the extreme. She was the best hope for our airport in over a decade. Her choice to abide by the laws, guidelines and policies set forth by the Federal and State Governments as well as the airport management community of the State of Florida, and her tireless advocacy for our airport will be sorely missed. Our loss will be someone else’s gain.
Jim Layman (@guest_48311)
7 years ago
#48311
I was sad to learn of the departure of Ms. Morgan. At KFHB she embarked on a steep learning curve but made up for any short comings with a heart of gold. Ms. Morgan established a real open door policy and ongoing dialogue with the tenants.
The airport has never looked better. Ms. Morgan and Bobby set up a maintenance program that complied with FAA guidelines and greatly enhanced the airports overall appearance.
A formal volunteer program was established and a feeling of “ownership” was beginning to appear among the FBO and her tenants. I am afraid that will now disappear and we will once again hide behind closed hangar doors.
The city has lost an employee who in my opinion was open-minded and most of all could be trusted to use good judgment.
It sure sounds like Ms. Morgans Judgement failed her. From the article in the News Leader yesterday. Ms Morgan Lied to her Supervisor City Manager Martin, about her request to travel to a business Convention. Seems Ms. Morgan was more interested in a Hawaii Lay/Lei.?? Than doing Airport Business. Totally inappropriate behavior. Mr. Martin was correct in firing her. She may have been a crackerjack airport Manager. It does not matter.
This is an unfortunate, but totally predictable turn of events for the airport. Stephanie Morgan brought a new level of aviation expertise and professionalism to this airport as well as an outsider’s perspective. I am not sure what “difference of philosophy” has suddenly occurred between her and the City Manager, but I have a good idea. I believe a lot has to do with the City’s relationship with its current airport consultant. I think my Dad’s opinion that was published on this website on November 24, 2015 says it all. I am reposting for those who have not seen it previously.
John McGill says:
NOVEMBER 24, 2015 AT 2:40 PM
Why? A longer list than Lou’s could be made of the airport management blunders on our wonderful public asset, but it would be just as befuddling to try to figure out why the City always seems to stumble on the airport.
I have spent more time than most contemplating the same question because my family’s livelihood is at stake. Then again, the pocketbooks of every local taxpayer are also on the line. We all deserve an answer.
Year after year, millions of dollars flow into airport projects. Since the projects are largely grant funded, they do not get much local scrutiny. The public may not pay a lot of attention, but those in the airport community often question the prioritization & even the wisdom of some projects when so many of the airport’s basic needs starve for attention. The answer is always the same: “We can get a grant. If we do not act now, we will lose the money.” The lure of easy money is the answer. Money drives airport decisions.
“Follow the money.” Remember that saying? Follow the money on the airport, and you will find the answer to the befuddling questions.
A lot of individuals and organizations engrafted to the City make money off airport improvement projects. Those in the decision making chain (City Staff, Airport Advisory Commission, and City Commission) are always won over by the same argument: “We can get a grant. If we do not act now, we will lose the money.” And that argument is made by middlemen with extended palms.
Consider the role of the City’s airport consultant. The City relies on a paid consultant for expert advice on airport matters. The consultant is also the City’s hound for sniffing out grants. That gets us back to the money, and that is where things quickly move into the shadows. Once an airport project is funded, the consultant is re-hired to perform fee-based engineering design services, and then fee-based construction contract management. The consultant also has a “team” of other service providers. None of this is very transparent, but it is a pretty good gig. The consultant gets paid to give independent professional advice, but its advice is always the same: take the money and pay us more. Nice work if you can get it.
This is the airport consultant that led the City into putting development of an airport industrial park, and its locally renowned “road to no where”, ahead of aviation needs. Local funds that might have been used to maintain runways, taxiways, ramps, & lights are used to match dubious grants. Millions spent, years pass, and the airport industrial park remains empty. An attempt to redeem that blunder may partially explain some of the more recent abortive attempts to develop the east-side of the airport, which some might call throwing good money after bad.
This is the airport consultant that led the City into delisting Runway 13/31 as the airport’s primary runway, even though it is the airport’s single most important runway, favored by both prevailing winds and an instrument approach. Why? The answer was to get a grant to resurface another runway that neither the FAA nor FDOT would fund unless it was listed as a primary runway. No one in the decision chain other than the consultant was capable of such a conniving double-play, never mind how it double-crossed the airport’s future. This could well have been the worst City decision in the history of the airport. It was, however, a decision from which the airport consultant and contractors could profit.
This is the airport consultant that led the City into using a so-called ditch & drainage project to sneak in drainage infrastructure for a new aircraft parking ramp on the east-side of the airport, even though developing an east-side terminal had never been vetted in any airport master planning nor on any actual or proposed Airport Layout Plan.
This is the airport consultant that led the City into the Taxiway A project that took 35% of the north-side aircraft parking ramp, contrary to a 1966 airport master plan that would have built the taxiway further south to preserve the much needed aircraft parking space. Again, it was a decision from which the airport consultant profited. The decision to proceed with that project also brought on the airport litigation in which the City ultimately spent over $3.5 million for damages & attorney fees defending the consultant’s bad advice & the City’s bad decision. Most recently, the same airport consultant proposed relocating Taxiway A as indicated in the 1966 plan in order to replace the aircraft ramp his previous advice destroyed. Had that advice been given 15 years ago, the City would still have its $3.5 million.
One thing that I learned from the Taxiway A debacle is that the worst possible place to be standing is between the airport consultant and the City’s money. Unfortunately, once again our business finds itself in just that spot.
This is the airport consultant who has for the last several years relentlessly promoted a Category 5 Hurricane Emergency Operations Center on the airport because a grant is available. Its location was moved around the airport. It was packaged & re-packaged. Its name was changed to “Welcome Center”. Still, the Airport Advisory Commission would not recommend it, and City Commission would not fund it. That was little more than a speed bump for the consultant whose pitch changed to getting an FBO to fund the local share. Both the renewal of our lease and the launch of a new FBO were tabled, as the two companies were pitted against each other in a “winner take all” bidding where the most money would buy an airport fueling monopoly. The “Welcome Center” project will proceed, not because the City needed it nor wanted it, but because the middlemen found a way to fund it with other people’s money. Money. Money. Money.
More money. The “Welcome Center” became only 1/3 of the project cost by adding a large hangar. In another masterful play, when the project was moved from the east-side of the airport to the north-side to save money on infrastructure, the cost of the project actually increased again. Now, it seems the demolition of our fuel farm, hangar, & terminal will be added because it costs even more money to do that than build on available green grass sites. The destruction of our business is just collateral damage in this middleman feeding frenzy, but most important, those engrafted to the City are assured another bloated, fee-driven project.
City Commissions, City Managers, Airport Managers, and Airport Advisory Commissions come and go. For two decades, however, one airport consultant has dominated every decision on the airport, large and small. If you look long enough you will see its financial interest in every decision it recommends. The fox is in charge of the hen house, but do not blame the fox for the control it was given. As long as the City allows any airport consultant to participate in the airport improvement projects that it recommends & controls, that advice will be tainted by self-interest.
Once you realize it is all about money, you might ask if you are getting your money’s worth. You might ask why the City’s permits any consultant to have such blatant conflicts of interest. You might even ask how one consultant manages to span so many administrations. You might ask about compliance with public bidding and the RFP process for such consulting services & airport projects. You might just follow the money and find the answer to every other airport question that may come to mind. Finally, you might just ask if the City should do things just because they can get the money to do them.
In the end, the answer to the airport questions is money. Money explains tainted advice and bad decisions that always profit someone and that constantly get the City into trouble. Common sense management of the airport will never happen without common sense reform of airport financing.
John McGill
McGill Aviation Corporation
I find the timing to be interesting. This week there is a meeting to help decide who the airport consultant will be for the next five years. I know Ms. Morgan questioned how well the city is being served by the current consulting firm and whether another firm might be able to do a better job. I hope Ms. Morgan’s untimely firing does not adversely impact the selection process.
In my experience, Ms. Morgan was studious, dutiful and forthright in the extreme. She was the best hope for our airport in over a decade. Her choice to abide by the laws, guidelines and policies set forth by the Federal and State Governments as well as the airport management community of the State of Florida, and her tireless advocacy for our airport will be sorely missed. Our loss will be someone else’s gain.
I was sad to learn of the departure of Ms. Morgan. At KFHB she embarked on a steep learning curve but made up for any short comings with a heart of gold. Ms. Morgan established a real open door policy and ongoing dialogue with the tenants.
The airport has never looked better. Ms. Morgan and Bobby set up a maintenance program that complied with FAA guidelines and greatly enhanced the airports overall appearance.
A formal volunteer program was established and a feeling of “ownership” was beginning to appear among the FBO and her tenants. I am afraid that will now disappear and we will once again hide behind closed hangar doors.
The city has lost an employee who in my opinion was open-minded and most of all could be trusted to use good judgment.
It sure sounds like Ms. Morgans Judgement failed her. From the article in the News Leader yesterday. Ms Morgan Lied to her Supervisor City Manager Martin, about her request to travel to a business Convention. Seems Ms. Morgan was more interested in a Hawaii Lay/Lei.?? Than doing Airport Business. Totally inappropriate behavior. Mr. Martin was correct in firing her. She may have been a crackerjack airport Manager. It does not matter.