Disgusting happenings at KMBO

Aviation General Aviation
1

Incredible…

northsidesun.com/view/full_s … ame-locale?

Incredible doesn’t stop at the above…

airnav.com/airport/KMBO/MADISON_AIR_CENTER#c and check out how an airplane arrival at KMBO was treated.

I know a bit more insight then what the A&P article provides (some inaccuracies in the article) and because things are still evolving, legally, I need to “stay under wraps” publicly, but we all need to be aware if this kinda crapola can happen at KMBO, then it can happen at your local airport.

Be aware, be very aware…

2

What he needs is a good lawyer to get creative and force the City to get on his side. When does the lease between the City and the FBO end and how badly does the FBO want to stay and remain on good terms with the City?

If the guy has been there for 50 years he may have rights that pre-date the lease between the City and the FBO. All sorts of ways to get creative. I do this stuff for a living.

3

“Off the record on information that I can’t publicly divulge”, that is exactly what they (Buddy and lawyer) are doing and your first sentence (snipped your second sentence for clarity) isn’t the “barrier”…

“It’s all in the language” as you are alluding above.

4

To be the devil’s advocate, the airport is required to have certain minimum standards for all operations at the airport in their grant assurances. When it comes to aircraft repair, it usually means having X amount of hangar space, and a specific contract with the tenant to allow aircraft maintenance. In most cases at small airports, that is limited to one FBO, who is usually the company that also provides other services. The main reason for such rules is to prevent any shadetree mechanic from setting up shop in a T-hangar and stealing away business from the FBO.

Now all that being said, I don’t know the whole situation at KMBO. What I can say, and have seen happen at many different airports, is that often airports are just getting their ducks in a row with establishing these minimums standards as required by the FAA, and often the good ole boy, been there for half a century, mechanic and general handyman gets the nudge. I’ve seen it happen at several airports over the years, and it is sad, but sometimes the airport is between a rock and a hard place on the matter as well.

5

I have learned this in the past couple of days which I agree with myself. I thought it was to protect the interest of the flying public. Now I am not so sure knowing some of the intimate details (and opinions) I am holding back on.

In KMBO’s case, Buddy’s shop is a published business. The FBO does not have a business so Buddy can’t take any business from something non existent. KMBO has always not allowed other mechanics to come onto the field with their pickups to work on airplanes.

You do touch onto something" and the newspaper article seems to substantiate, that the airport owner wants to get into the A&P shop business and the only way he can get into the business is giving the boot to Buddy Aircraft Services. Only source I have is the article and hangar talk.

Subjectively speaking, I think there is enough work in this airport for two shops, even if they sub specialize (one does King Airs and turbines, the other does small pistons) but I am an outsider looking in in this respect for what this is worth.

6

Like I said, I do not know the story at KMBO. What I was referring to was not the airport operator (In this case the City of Madison) being the mechanic, but allowing an FBO to be established. Now this being a smaller airport, often the airport manager is also the FBO manager, but I don’t know if that is the case at KMBO. Usually the minimum standards for an FBO state leasing a hangar of X size, must provide aircraft repair of a certain level, and fueling services. The reason behind it is to keep someone from coming in and taking the mechanic services (the money maker) and not doing the fuel (typically a break even venture, on a good day). All that being said, I do know of a certain airport about 100 miles to your south that the Airport Comission is also the fuel agent for the airport…and I will not comment on the circumstances that led up to that.

Reading the comments on AirNav, I would be interested to know a little more about the last comment. I take AirNav comments with a grain of salt, because I have read some that I know were placed there maliciously.

7

I will say the lineman told me he was quite embarrassed when he had to go out to the pilot and even more embarrassed when the police showed up.

So, the comment appears to have merit to it based on what I heard (in this case glad I didn’t observe) from the lineman.

8

I also take them with a grain of salt, for precisely the opposite reason, e.g. self-serving comments made by FBO shills.

9

Gawd, until you both brought this up, I was a trusting soul and took them at face value to help me decide where to take my business.

I see both points. :open_mouth:

10

Just an update on what I heard through the maintenance shop.

City Mayor hands are tied, but she has had several talks with the airport manager expressing her discontent.

Meeting next week with airport manager, maintenance shop and public works person to see if a “contract” can be drafted between the airport manager and shop.

Flight school already has something like this in place and from what I understand, the airport manager can put in parameters in the contract that the business may not like (I.E. Flight school is required to have an instructor onsite no matter what the weather is, and open for business hours)

I did put a bug in the shops ear as this clearly looks to me to be conflict of interest if the airport manager can open his own shop. My question to her was when his term is up as manager, can the new manager toss him off the field like being proposed for Buddy. If not, then we need to be sure he can’t write himself a blank check when his own term comes up.

I have sent emails to AOPA and Avweb as well posted in other forums I participate. Any suggestions on who else I can email to bring light to this pitiful situation most appreciated.

11

Final update.

Buddy Aircraft Services stays. His rent (I am sure retaliatory) was doubled and a few “conditions” (most of them were very reasonable) were given for him to remain.

I did get some very good information from AOPA (email below my name including my original contact). We as airport tenents and even the general public have a lot of “rights”.

Airports have an equivalent to FSDO’s to contact for a review process.

There are two types of review, part 13 and part 16. Part 13 is an informal review where there are no deadlines or dates. Part 16 is a formal comprehensive review where EVERYTHING comes under scrutiny. One word of caution given to me by AOPA is be very careful what you ask for under part 16 since you may get dinged on things that you may have wanted overlooked.

Airport manager would really have screwed the pooch if he would have tossed Buddy off the field as he cannot disallow competition per federal guidelines on public airports. Airport manager is in his complete rights to open his own business if he chooses to inspite the appearance of conflict of interest.

Airports from what I understand are funded in two ways. There are federal grants for improvements and then there are surplus monies for improvements. The recent taxiway and runway improvements at KMBO were done using surplus money.

Not sure what direction we will go with regards to a review but I do want to be sure any surplus monies don’t end up as tools in the airport managers proposed shop. (MY perceived conflict of interest)

The more I listen to stories in the happenings around the airport, the more amazed I get… I am probably hearing more of this stuff then I really cared to because I have been quite vocal about my position on the Buddy Aircraft situation. Oh well, the beat goes on for what I think will be the next 2.5 years.

Allen

Dear Allen,

Thank you for contacting the AOPA Pilot Information Center.

Here is the link to the FAA Airport Manual. You will probably want to refer to Chapter 5, 8, and 10 to see if they apply to your situation:
faa.gov/airports/resources/p … ce_5190_6/

Here is the information for the state aviation office:
stateaviation.com/states.asp?state=ms

Here is the contact information for your local Airport District Office:
faa.gov/airports/southern/ab … fices/#jan

You may want to tell Ford to send a report on the situation to asn@aopa.org

Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance.

Thank you,

(Name redacted)
Aviation Technical Specialist
Government Affairs - Pilot Information Center
AOPA
800-USA-AOPA

From: A Lieberman
Subject: Sad state of affairs unfolding at KMBO Madison MS

Please see northsidesun.com/view/full_s … ame-locale

What is happening to the A&P is simply wrong as you will see from my
comment on the above article.

KMBO used to be the envy of all airports when I began flying 10 years
ago. It used to be “standing room only” from the hustle and bustle of
people coming in and out.

Now… the FBO is sterile as your local hospital because of the
mis-management of the airport manager. Folks that flew before my
generation are no longer welcomed. The flight school was removed from
the FBO and hidden between two hangars and the list goes on and on.
See Airnav.com for a recent comment that simply will amaze you on how
some vintage planes were “welcomed” at KMBO

Feel free to contact me if you need more information.

Allen Lieberman
AOPA number ####2865

12

Glad to hear things have worked out somewhat well. Just a couple of things that I want to comment on.

The airport can not disallow competition, however there is room under that same line that would allow a smaller airport to limit itself to one FBO, since there may not be enough business for two.

I am not sure exactly to what you are referring to as airport funding, as there are few different sources. From the federal standpoint, there is the AIP fund, which itself is divided into entitlements and discretionary. Entitlements are for airports with 10,000+ annual enplanements, and the airports receive that funding every year. Discretionary funding is decided on by priority (and a lot of politics). Surprisingly, the FAA oversees the AIP very well, usually following up to make sure money was spent where it was supposed to. The rules are also very specific about what the money can be used for. In our region, we usually get a visit every year.

Next is state funding. Its been a while since I lived in MS, so I am not sure how well the state is funding aviation projects. These funds are completely variable in nature, but have many of the same style rules as federal funding.

The only area I would be concerned with is local funding. Usually the city or authority having ownership of the airport supplies the operational funding, and that can be used or misused as much as anything.

Is the airport manager wanting to open an FBO personally, or wanting the city/authority/airport to actually run the FBO. If it is him personally, I would scream conflict until I was blue in the face. If it is the airport taking over, that unfortunately is becoming common in places. Running an FBO is a break even in a good year type of business for most airports. Times being what they are, very few people are interesting in invested tons of money and time into a business just to try to stay out of the red.

13

It would be his personal A&P shop. From what I gather the airport manager has a 5 year contract with the city to run the airport. I am trying to find out the exact details of his contract. This whole deal smells of conflict of interest in my eyes.

Only thing I can say from hearsay is that his contract (or lease) is renewed every 5 years.

I am kinda out of my league in all this, learning on the fly, but what is the difference between federal grant funding and surplus funding.? This information was provided to me by AOPA. We just had a runway / taxiway refurbishment (can’t even call it repaving) and they said that it had a letter “S” for surplus money from the feds. I (more like likely) may be saying the terminology incorrectly.

In my very limited experience with fed funding in my prior government employement, federal grants are usually monitored down to the umpteenth degree, but surplus money is “discretionary spending” to the receiver of the funds. Funds of this nature when kept below a certain dollar value doesn’t require accounting to the umpteeth degree.

I can see this “descretionary use” of funds magically turning into tools and equipment in the name of “airport improvements” keeping purchase below a certain dollar amount.

Which makes perfect sense, but I wouldn’t think that provision would allow for an existing florishing shop to be kicked of the field??? Just thinking out loud on this from the common sense view. I have no clue on the legal side of this. :slight_smile:

14

I’m not sure where the term surplus funding is coming from, it isn’t something I’ve encountered before. The only S that comes to mind is stimulus funding, which has ten times more strings attached that regular grant funding. Any federal money, at least coming from the FAA, is very tightly regulated and controlled, so I wouldn’t be too concerned for that disappearing. If it does, this manager could be looking at some serious charges.

If the government could just make the rest of its departments funciton like the FAA does, with regard to grant funding and monitoring, our government would be much better off. And just to point out, most other grant sources from the government have a “airports need not apply” clause, since the FAA provides so much support itself. So much so, that airport fire departments usually cannot even apply for fire service grants for equipment, they have rely on FAA funding.

15

I’m not sure where the term surplus funding is coming from, it isn’t something I’ve encountered before. The only S that comes to mind is stimulus funding, which has ten times more strings attached that regular grant funding. Any federal money, at least coming from the FAA, is very tightly regulated and controlled, so I wouldn’t be too concerned for that disappearing. If it does, this manager could be looking at some serious charges.

If the government could just make the rest of its departments funciton like the FAA does, with regard to grant funding and monitoring, our government would be much better off. And just to point out, most other grant sources from the government have a “airports need not apply” clause, since the FAA provides so much support itself. So much so, that airport fire departments usually cannot even apply for fire service grants for equipment, they have rely on FAA funding.

16

Much to my chagrin, I am re-surrecting this thread. Below my name is what I just fired off to AOPA. Phone numbers redacted for obvious reasons.

I know Buddy will be taking action on his part including bringing in the media, but if anybody can suggest anything else that hasn’t been brought out in this thread or for me to post this information on other aviation forums that may be interested, please help!

Pictures speak volumes, below the message are random shots of his shop.

Allen

Chris,

I mean to put Buddy’s phone number in the below message. 1601-xxx-xxxx is his shop number

Thanks!

Chris,

Buddy’s aircraft services got his 30 day vacate notification for “alleged” hangar violations previously agreed upon. No pictures to support what was in the order to vacate letter, but a “he said, she said situation”. In today’s day and age of digital, I can’t imagine why no pictures were provided for the violations allegedly incurred. This action appears to be completely retaliatory in nature…

Attached are some random pictures of his shop ran in a common hangar. As you can see, you could do surgery in this hangar for as well run this shop is.

Is there anything AOPA can do for them including putting this human interest story out on the daily GA happenings sent by email to AOPA members. At minimum, I would think AOPA could get this word out to our members. This is a bad PR situation about to unfold on GA and simply put, shouldn’t happen because of the greed of the airport manager…

What is happening is simply wrong, wrong and more wrong.

The cc email address is the email address for Buddy’s aircraft services. I would really appreciate it if AOPA could contact Buddy directly and give him (or me) any guidance in addition to the part 13 review you provided below

I also left a voice message with Ford and am Ccing this message to him as well.

You can reach me at 601-2xxx-xxxx cell or home number 601-xxx-xxxx if you need any additional information.

Allen







17

Allen, one of the responses to the original North Side Sun article said this,

The airport property was deeded to the city following WW2 under the Federal Surplus Property Act. The Act requires the city to operate an airport on the land or it reverts to Federal Reservation. It would be one of the most difficult airports in the country to close and if they did manage to close it the land could theoretically be developed into anything the Feds want. The FSP Act does not permit any exclusive franchises at the airport except aviation fuel sales. Competition in all other business venues was encouraged in order to promote the growth of the US aviation industry.

.
If this is indeed true have you heard anything further about it? David Sims, any commentary on this?
The Raymond field (KM16, John Bell Williams) has 1,100’ more runway, more hangars but not a lot of available ramp space. Plus, for most of the users of Madison like yourself it is a lot longer drive.
This latest bit with the “violation” and no photographic evidence? Pure organic Moo Poo!
Sure hope that “Buddy’s Shop” gets all the local and distant (GA and AOPA) support they can get. A big dropoff in $$ to the city from one source is pretty obvious.

Please keep up the postings. … perhaps we should sic Damiross on them?

18

The battle was lost… Raymond welcomed Buddy’s shop with open arms.

The airport manager at M16 Michelle is ecstatic on what’s happening at KMBO. She said her fuel sales rocketed over 200 percent with all that is going on. With Buddy moving in, she couldn’t be any happier.

I just came back from Woodbridge airport where I am taking glider lessons and sure enough, just like it was at KMBO 9 years ago when I started flying. Unfortunately, it’s a private airport and unless I get mucho money to buy a lot, can’t base my plane there.

Heck, I’m all for heavy artillery! Bring on Dami :smiley:

19

And while this is happening at KMBO…this just happenned at KHRO.

“FBO closes operation at midnight”…

harrisondailytimes.com/artic … 379512.txt