Yes, Lancaster resident. Here's an example of an airport near Oswego in 2009.Originally posted by LancasterResident:
The Lancaster Airport receiving about $10M in taxpayer money from the FAA in this way, makes one wonder how many other airports across the country have likewise received large amounts of taxpayer money from the FAA with false and misleading supporting documents? This may be a large national story. Mr. Watson may want to penetrate this issue much deeper….
http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.s...businessm.html
Here's the same airport in 2011
http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.s...on_of_fed.html
Georgia L Schlager
You value it on what it's worth and charge accordingly. Just like home owners are assessed. You know by now it is my opinion our "government" locally/state wise spends too much. Even with taking that into account everyone should pay like everyone else does.
We would end up with spec buildings sitting empty all over our community.. WAIT... we sort of have that now
Buffalo Web Hosting and Graphic Design
www.onlinemedia.net - www.vinyl-graphics.com
Web hosting / Web Design - Signs, Banners, Vehicle Graphics
The answer is no. But I defer to Lee on matters on condo law.
Theoretically, I do know why condos pay less, though. The provision was put in place because of area like NYC, where most condos are apartments in high-rises. As you may have hundreds of apartments in one building, sharing limited frontage, it does make sense that they pay slightly less in taxes.
Unfortunately, that law hasn't been revised, and people living in patio homes throughout the State get to take advantage of it.
Oh, and its therising - not the rising.
The lancaster airport has a Special Use permit, correct?
They are also a non-conforming use, correct?
They received 3 IDAs with NO job creation, correct?
They have received $10,000,000 in fed and state grant money, correct?
They just received a lower property tax assessment in which the rest of the taxpayers have to make up the difference, correct?
If all the above is true, we have an airport with a special use permit and is of non-conforming use who violated the zoning ordinance on more than one occasions without a zoning hearing and this is a PRIVATE COMPANY who received $10,000,000 in taxpayer grant money plus 3 IDAs, plus lower property assessment. Who has more invested in this PRIVATE COMPANY the taxpayers or the owner?
To top it off, they are a designated reliever airport who doesn't meet the FAA guidelines but was grandfathered in based on previous false information regarding their stats, correct?
Georgia L Schlager
Click on title for more info:
Feds keep little-used airports in business
The Williamsburg airport is the result of an obscure federal program that raises billions of dollars a year through taxes on every airplane ticket sold in the United States. The taxes can add up to 15% to the cost of a flight — or about $29 to a $200 round-trip ticket.
Federal lawmakers have used some of the money to build and maintain the world's most expansive and expensive network of airports — 2,834 of them nationwide — with no scheduled passenger flights. Known as general-aviation airports, they operate separately from the 139 well-known commercial airports that handle almost all passenger flights.
In the first full accounting of the 28-year-old Airport Improvement Program, USA TODAY found that Congress has directed $15 billion to general-aviation airports, which typically are tucked on country roads and industrial byways.
Members of Congress say the general-aviation airports can attract development and provide services such as air-medical transport.
The lawmakers also regularly use general-aviation airports to get around their districts and states, sometimes in planes with lobbyists. Members of Congress took 2,154 trips on corporate-owned jets from 2001 to 2006, according to a 2006 study by PoliticalMoneyLine, an independent research group.
#Dems play musical chairs + patronage and nepotism = entitlement !
The map with this article indicates the Lancaster Airport has 30,000 take offs and landings - has recieved 22 grants and $8,736,598 +/- in grants.
#Dems play musical chairs + patronage and nepotism = entitlement !
4248 wrote
The map with this article indicates the Lancaster Airport has 30,000 take offs and landingsOf course that's not possible - today and especially in 2009 when the article was written.Therising wrote:
Is that annually? Doesn't seem possible.
It is Tom Geles and Passero submitting inaccurate information to the media who publish what they are given by so-called experts who know better.
It is no different than the declared 70 aircraft based at the Lancaster Airport when there are only 37. This reliever airport concept was ill-founded, is underutilized (and why the owner is screaming he is making no money and wants his property assessment lowered) and whose final intent is to spend the more than $10 million already spent to bring in some small jets to service moneyed corporate individuals and most likely entitled politicos.
If there are anywhere near 30,000 takeoffs and landings the majority would come from the touch and go practice air flights (two flight schools) and from itinerant aircraft coming in to but some of that cheap fuel that was made possible by the three IDAS - and where there was no job creation.
But hey, we have a country on the verge of bankruptcy and no one seems to give a rat's ass. It's just spend, spend, spend!
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)