Jump to content



Photo

Clark County Airport Screws Up Again


  • Please log in to reply
212 replies to this topic

#201 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,993 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 09:55 AM

Can't 'cos no c-j at store this morning.

Did it state how much of that is the average taxpayer's cut?

#202 snowman

snowman

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,276 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 10:42 AM

Seems like if there is a $234 million impact on the local economy, then there should be some money from the people that are actually earning it to use for any expansion.
Then again, there could be some advantage to Clark County taxpayers in the future in reduced taxes if this becomes a bigger impact on the area, so an increase in taxes now to fund it doesn't seem out of the question entirely.

#203 Kevin Vissing

Kevin Vissing

    Councilman

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 679 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 04:52 PM

Can't 'cos no c-j at store this morning.

Did it state how much of that is the average taxpayer's cut?


It's online.

#204 Debbie

Debbie

    Commissioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,434 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 05:45 PM

Can't 'cos no c-j at store this morning.

Did it state how much of that is the average taxpayer's cut?

Kelley here's a link to the c-j article. It's really just a press release about the study. If one wanted to really learn anything, one would need to get ahold of the report/study and look at how the data was collected and compiled, etc.

http://www.courier-j...-economic-study
  • kelley likes this

#205 Curmudgeon

Curmudgeon

    Councilman

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 276 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 09:05 PM

I believe they are an unfair business advantage. They discriminate against existing business.

No they don't. An existing business that wants to make an additional investment in their real estate improvements or equipment (i.e., creating an additional tax assessment) is equally eligible to seek tax abatement as a company seeking to locate here for the first time.

#206 Donna

Donna

    Key Club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,791 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 10:49 PM

No they don't. An existing business that wants to make an additional investment in their real estate improvements or equipment (i.e., creating an additional tax assessment) is equally eligible to seek tax abatement as a company seeking to locate here for the first time.


Like your sign off, much better than out-dated Mitch (will Kentucky ditch?) McConnell out-dated quote!

#207 Kevin Vissing

Kevin Vissing

    Councilman

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 679 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 07:56 AM

The story about the airport is in the evening news today. Some good quotes in there by the new president of the boac.

#208 hurryinhoosier

hurryinhoosier

    Tourist

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 32 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 01:06 PM

I'll be sure to read it.

#209 Orange Guzzi

Orange Guzzi

    BANNED

  • Account Closed
  • PipPipPip
  • 828 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 03:59 PM

Another version of who should pay for someone elses business. Yesterday, the neighbor farmer was working on the fence row behind my house. He was cutting down some trees. I walked to the fence row and told him he was doing a good job. He said he was tired and was going to call R E M C to remove the remaining trees. The power wire are not on his property. He said the easement was on my side of the fence row. He said REMC should come and remove the trees all the way to the ground even though they are 20 or more feet from the power wires. I decided to head back to the house and was saying my good bye when he ask if I would pay for the barbwire acrossed the section of our shared property line. I told him no, I would spend the money to buy charcoal for steak. He was dead serious. His reasoning was I should pay to keep his cows out of my yard. Just like the airport, if someone wants to own something, they should except personal responsibility for it. You can't make the argument any simpler.

#210 Matt

Matt

    Councilman

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 280 posts

Posted 08 December 2012 - 02:07 PM

So now is the time to sell! Hurry and put a bow on the bloated corpse before someone figures out the smell is not the landfill but the huge pile of BS coming from the airport.

Like has been stated before, pay the right person(s) the right amount to put a spin on a report and they can make anything sound like a good deal.

#211 iceman

iceman

    Tourist

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts

Posted 10 December 2012 - 05:38 PM

Clark County airport was built using 95% Federal grant money, 2 ½% State money and 2 ½% Local money. Airport improvements such as resurfacing and runway extensions come from this same money distributions. The Federal grant money is collected from Aircraft owners, by means of Federal Excise taxes on fuel, Charter Federal Excise Taxes and segment fees collected on every flight. State and local monies are made up of sales and property taxes and other forms of taxes. Aircraft owners and Corporation users of the airport also pay these taxes. I am pretty sure there tax contribution grossly outweighs your individual contribution. Sales tax on one gallon of Jet fuel based on $5.00 per gallon is $.35 a gallon; now multiply that by an average Jet fuel order of 500 gallons and you’ll see they contribute $175.00 to the State on an average fueling. Then add the property taxes that they pay on multimillion dollar aircraft. $$$... The property tax money comes back to the County, but the County has not used this money to support the airport. Instead that money has been used for all of the people in Clark County.
The Clark County Airport has not received any matching funds from the County in years. They have been self-sufficient and have covered the County’s obligations to the Federal Government grant assurance agreement.
So you see aircraft owners have paid for the airport. Research the economic impact the airport has on our community and see what Aviation contributes to the local economy.
Those who oppose the Airport, I suggest you put your head between your legs and prepare for a crash landing.

#212 MBHeights1

MBHeights1

    Top Retired Dog

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,311 posts

Posted 10 December 2012 - 06:03 PM

The Clark County Airport has not received any matching funds from the County in years. They have been self-sufficient and have covered the County’s obligations to the Federal Government grant assurance agreement.

So why is the county on the hook for $8000,000 in the latest land deal?

#213 iceman

iceman

    Tourist

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts

Posted 10 December 2012 - 09:44 PM

The comments were made regarding the past Airport expenses and grant obligations. I will agree $800,000.00 is too much for a piece of property that is under water every time there is a heavy rain. Where else has there been an airboat rescue in Clark County? The poor farmer was nicely compensated for his soggy land. Not really sure how all that transpired, seems like Greg Fifer has some idea though.

At some point you have to invest in the future. Would you still be complaining if Boeing had chosen a site on the Airport a few years back? Had the runway have been longer the airport would have been more attractive to them. You have to be ready when opportunity knocks. You can’t expect Companies to wait 10 years for runways to be expanded. You need to have infrastructure in place to lure much needed jobs. Would you complain if you or a family member had gotten a good paying job at Boeing?

If you really want answers, go to the Air Board meetings, with so many new board members there will be a lot of information revisited to bring the new members up to speed.

If the Feds and State knocked on your door and offered you .97 cents for every .03 cents you spent to improve your property value,
would you say no?

Your support and contribution to the future economic growth of the community is needed.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users