New Haven Independent

Tweed Bailout Flies Into Turbulence

by Leonard J. Honeyman | January 27, 2009 7:49 AM | Permalink | Comments (4)

An aldermanic committee argued for hours over a proposed $160,000 mid-year bailout of Tweed New Haven Airport, then passed it along without a recommendation.

At a more-than-two-hour hearing that sometimes turned a bit testy, The Board of Aldermen’s Finance Committee followed Hill Alderman Jorge Perez’s (at center in photo) suggestion to send the controversial proposal on for a Feb. 9 first reading by the full board and a Feb. 16 vote.

The airport, which reported in September that it faced a $750,000 deficit for the present fiscal year, pared that down to $330,000, city Transportation czar Michael Piscitelli told the committee Monday night. The Tweed New Haven Airport Authority is asking for $160,000 from the city, which would be matched from private sources, he said. The DeStefano administration is pushing the request. The authority would find the remaining $10,000.

The request would transfer the money from an account set up to receive funds generated by so-called bundled billing from the Department of Fire Services.

Bundled billing occurs when a fire department paramedic responds to a medical emergency and then rides in the ambulance with the patient and another paramedic from the private ambulance company, a medically recommended practice. The ambulance company then bills the patient or insurance company for both its services and those of the city paramedic, passing on the city’s share, said Rob Smuts, the city’s chief administrative officer.

That’s the money the city wants to use for the airport.

When the committee was ready to vote on the Tweed transfer, Perez pointed out aldermanic rules require a letter from the mayor and a statement identifying the line item from which the money would come. Because the Tweed transfer request didn’t have the letter and statement, Perez suggested the measure be passed along without recommendation.

That motion passed with two abstentions. Alderman Mordechai Sandman and Alderwoman Ina Silverman abstained because Sandman had requested that two officials of the city Corporation Counsel’s office, who were in the room, be asked about the technicality. Committee Chairman Yusuf Shah refused.

“I thought we should have asked the corp counsel. Then we could have gotten a clarification and gone on,” Sandman said later. He said, however, that since the Tweed measure was moving along to the full board, there was no real problem.

During the hearing itself, committee members shot questions to Piscitelli and Deputy Development Administrator Chrissy Bonanno and airport Executive Director Tim Larson about past mistakes, future plans and the possibility of the city taking over Tweed.

Piscitelli acknowledged past mistakes, which he characterized as trying to do too much too quickly. He said current plans are to identify two or three carriers and some airline hubs such as Atlanta, Charlotte and Chicago that “would get us where the public wants to go.” He said the New York airports and even Westchester County Airport in Harrison, N.Y., have no more gate slots left, so airlines will be looking for places with vacancies.

Tweed has struggled for years to lure, then keep, airlines. Meanwhile, the recession has battered smaller airports across the country.

Perez asked what it would cost for the city to take over the airport or for the commercial side of the airport to close. Piscitelli said the Federal Aviation Administration would not allow the airport to close and the city would lose a minimum of $900,000 a year in revenues from parking and car rental fees if only general aviation was left for the airport. Larson said many of the costs of running the airport, such as clearing snow and runway maintenance, would continue whether commercial airlines use the airport or not.

A number of alders wanted to know how sure Piscitelli was of getting the $160,000 private-money match. The funds have been pledged by the the Regional Leadership Council, Larson has said. Piscitelli said he was counting on it, but could not provide specifics.

The discussion then turned to surrounding towns and what committee members felt is the towns’ responsibility to help fund the airport. The towns and the regional Council of Governments (COG) should do more than pass resolutions, they said.

Larson said later the COG is willing to go to the state to help plead the city’s case for further airport funding. He said $5 million is “holding its place” in projects ready to go before the state Bond Commission and said that bond request should be activated.

City resident Gary Doyens teed off on the Tweed proposal, calling it “a red herring, a crock.”

In an impassioned comment before the committee he repeatedly waved his checkbook, saying he has to write a large check for taxes this week. He said business benefits most from Tweed and should pay the entire deficit.

“I’ve tried for years to fly out of Tweed,” but found it too expensive, he said. Other city departments live within their budgets and so should the airport, he said.

“You don’t see anybody else coming down for more money,” he nearly shouted.

Share this story

Share |

Comments

Posted by: Streever | January 27, 2009 8:38 AM

At least they didn't show up in a private jet ;-)

It sounds like they've really come looking for a responsible request: If the city will lose 900k a year by not supporting them, it seems like a sound request to fulfill--especially if the owners are going to treat us as partners & listen to the sound advice that Bonnano & Piscitelli are offering.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | January 27, 2009 10:15 AM

hmmm here is an idea there are to heads of this eliminate one of them and you will have your money!

Posted by: Gary Doyens | January 27, 2009 5:07 PM

These are some of the rest of my comments and views from last night with some expansion for clarity:

This is the Theater of the Absurd - double bill city taxpayers for a service already covered by our taxes, and give it to the business class for a perk called Tweed. The people they are billing are sick, the infirmed, elderly and indigent who tend to use the ambulance service more than anybody. It is noteworthy, that this account currently contains no cash. Only hopes for cash based on "bundled, read double taxation."

Larson, Piscitelli and the rest of the "experts" made it clear the target customers are business travelers, not the general public. Still, they want to use the illnesses of the general public to pay for a business perk. Was this the plan all along with the layered taxation on ambulance services?

Larson did note they had raised some fees at the airport to close the budget gap - they raised parking fees by a whopping $8 making the new fee $38 a week to park at Tweed. This is the best parking deal in the entire state! By contrast, it costs $8 to park downtown at night. The weekly rate is half of what it costs at Bradley and a third of what it costs in NY.

City staff did meet with the COG and suggested a joint resolution be sent to the state asking it to pick up the full dependency payment. Instead of asking for a resolution, they should have asked each member of the COG to write a check. According the NHBOE, it serves 32 towns and cities - if each entity kicked in just $10,000 - you would have the entire $320,000 or $5K and you would have the $160K. This is what's wrong with people who work in government a long time and the special business interests who use government as a private piggy bank. They're box dwellers who only know how to tap taxpayers. When asked about this, Piscitelli, Chrissy B and the rest looked askance.

I took great exception to the idea that there is a plan for independence and solvency at the airport authority - there is none. The entire budget, current and future, is predicated on 50% coming from a combination of the state and New Haven. Their "plan" such as it is, moves the payment entirely to the state which in its current mess, is unlikely to take the bait. So, all they have is a continued dependency plan called The Time Is Now, and a hope to draw other airlines to Tweed.

Aside from increasing the dependency payment mid-budget year because of Tweed's failure to make users pay the cost, what is most galling, is that much of the meeting was spent spinning a doomsday scenario that without the city's additional $160,000, the airport would fail and its operations, debt and other obligations would fall back to the city. That is a total crock, utter B.S. and beyond highly unlikely. If these special business interests allowed that airport to fail because they didn't want to pay their fair share, it would say a lot more about them, than us. Taxpayers have been subsidizing their businesses for years.

And finally, what's the purpose of the budget process if agencies like Tweed are told to live within its means, fails to do so, and then attacks the sick, old and infirmed to make up the shortfall? The Shubert, the homeless, other programs and people who were cut or eliminated have had to make it with no do-overs.

The Tweed Authority failed in its mission to reign in its budget, or to make up the needed revenues through other means than the pockets of working families in New Haven.
It could have easily done so with user fees applied to each ticket; higher fuel flow charges, much higher parking fees and the like - whatever it took to balance that budget.

At a time when the city is still looking down the barrel of a $6 plus million out of balance budget; at a time of double digit property tax increases, it is beyond the pale to lay additional expense for this perk on the backs of taxpayers. At some point in a budget crisis, you have to say no to additional spending, no to new hires, travel, private cars and private airports. Is that not what the budget process is all about? Take the blinders off and get out of denial.

Tweed Bailout Flies Into Turbulence

Comments

Sections

Neighborhood News

Special Sections

Legal Notices

Some Favorite Sites

Government/ Community Links

Flyerboard

Sponsors

N.H.I. Site Design & Development

NHI Store

News Feed