Editorial—from the Spencer County Magnet

*******

Folks, Mr. Ronal Cheek has written a superb editorial about their battle with the Spencer County Airport Board.  Kinda makes you feel like you’re in the “twilight zone!”  It’s well worth your time to read………..jpearsonnoa.

Public should beware of airport efforts
Wednesday, February 27, 2008 12:32 PM EST

If you read this, you should be mad enough to kick your dog. First, I want to say that we have good and honorable public servants in our county government but we have a few politicians who are sorry, self serving, power hungry and egotistical. The citizens of Spencer County need to know the truth and we are in search of the truth. In that search we are finding lies, cover ups and deceit.I served in three school systems in Eastern Kentucky for almost a decade. I truly had to fight the devil to give children a better education. The devil is politics, and now when I return home, I am having to fight more demons to protect our land and livelihood.

The airport issue is and has to be one of the saddest political fiascoes in the history of Spencer County. Let us start with the formation of the air board. Our county officials, under the recommendation from our county judge executive, appointed an airport board with three pilots, a retired person from the Federal Aviation Administration and two others. Stacked? I might add that in recent weeks two of the original board have resigned. I understand one said that he could not deal with what was about to happen and the other said he was wrong on this issue.The airport board chairman makes his living in aviation, he has recently purchased approximately 160 acres next to one of the sites and seems intent on shoving this down the throats of our tax payers. I have been told that an airport will cost an estimated $20 (twenty) million dollars with ninety-five (95%) of the costs being paid by the federal government. Is that supposed to make us feel better? Did they forget that we pay federal taxes, too? A year or so ago, federal pork barrel politics “hid” a proposal to build a bridge in Alaska that was to cost tens and tens of millions of dollars. When it became public knowledge that it was only to serve 40 or 50 homes, it was quickly defeated. We have the same issue here in Spencer with the building of a $20,000,000 airport which may only serve a hand full of people and it will be at the tax payers cost.

Twice during the last few weeks, we have had 35 people come to our home to discuss the situation that is threatening us. Many spoke about how we love our country but we could not trust some of our government. In the first paragraph I mentioned the difference in a public servant and a politician. Keep that difference in mind because I want to make it clear that we do have some level-headed people in our county government and I am in no way being critical of all our county officials. But, unfortunately, we have some politicians in our own local county government that have that same thirst for power and control that I have seen before. We also have another evil here in the county and it is the evil of apathy. I, too, have been guilty of apathy, but no more. I, like many others “assumed” we were in good hands but it has become very obvious that bad things happen to good people when they do nothing. Our county has thousands of good people and a few who are self serving. It is time that we all become more actively involved in our community even when things “appear” to be going smoothly.

The airport board hired a company, Entran, to conduct a site selection for the airport at the cost of $152,000. (Again, tax payer’s monies) When my wife asked if both the pros and cons were presented as part of the selection process an Entran person said that they were hired to show why a location is good and why an airport would be a good thing for Spencer County. In other words, we will tell the people who pay us what they want to hear. Needless to say, money talks.

Oldham County and Shelby County wanted no part of this airport when it was presented to them. But, we have learned that Magistrate, Bill Drury is willing and anxious to see this airport in Spencer County. It goes without saying that he sees this as a “political feather in his hat”. I see it as a cost to our county’s tax payers and the people who have supported him for years. He has repeatedly told us what a positive thing an airport can be for the county but based on the research I and any others have done airports such as this are very seldom financially successful and they, more times than not, become a tax burden of the county. Please go to these web sites to see information based on research done in Shelby and Oldham Counties when they were faced with the possibility of an airport. www.nooldhamairport.com and www.more-ky.org You will also find information about what is happening locally with regards to the airport proposal at www.KYfarms.org

Power is an evil use of force and it can be more addictive than drugs. We have a few politicians who want to build a playground for a special interest group at the expense of the tax payers. Our politicians need to find another source for their adrenaline rush.

Do politicians lie? Sure they do. Do public servants lie? No, they do not. My father once told me, “The longer a person talks, the more likely he or she will lie.” He also said, “If a person lies to you, he will lie again, and again.” Through open records and by cross referencing conversations we will find the truth and flush out the politicians. We will separate the good from the bad. We will also ask for resignations..no, we will demand resignations.

I do know that with two openings on the airport board Bill Drury is seeking another person with ties to aviation to fill one of the positions. I thought that the county judge executive makes the recommendation of the person/s to fill the opening so why is one of the magistrates doing this? It appears to me that once again a politician is trying to run things all by himself.

At the airport forum on Febraury 19th it was obvious that ‘the birds of feather were flocking together’. Your politicians, your special interest groups and those that stand to get rich from our hard earned tax dollars were sticking together. All the power players in this issue are not about serving the taxpayers of our county. What we have here is a small group who wants to take care of their own interests. At the forum you could see the smugness, the smirks and the attitudes of those involved. It was as if they were saying, “We will listen to these idiots, then we will do what we please.” My message to them is that you are going to see a rebellion from the people of Spencer County like you have never seen before.

There are e-mails, correspondence, open records and back door politics that are going to crumple the politicians of our county. This communication says, “Tell me what I want to hear, so I can get what I want.” The public servants will continue to serve Spencer County, but the politicians will fall.

I am challenging two things to our judge and county government. 1). Appoint an unbiased person to the open slots on the airport board. We do not need other people who have ties to aviation or who have a personal interest in the process.This will stop the under handed politics of those that are interested in serving themselves and will give our community true and factual information. 2). Let the land owners and taxpaying citizens host a forum that will present the OTHER side of the issue.

Again, I remind you that we have good honorable people serving our county and the process of the truth is going to flush out the rats.

I hope you will call your judge and magistrate and voice your concern of a potential airport and an airport tax. It is easy: No airport = No tax.

Ronald ‘Woodie’ Cheek

Read Beneath the Headlines…

 ********** 

Any news reporter will tell you that the key to a good article is an eye catching headline.  It is designed to get the audience to read further.  However, the fact remains that many will read no further than the headlines.  We have become a nation of “news bytes” and “sound bytes.” 

If you picked up the February 21^st edition of the Oldham Era and read the headline, “All Airport Sites Are Eliminated,” perhaps you now believe the airport initiative is dead.  I regret to tell you that the airport initiative is very much alive.  I attended the same airport board meeting as Oldham Era staff writer, Elizabeth Troutman, and I’d like to offer my comments on what she wrote.  Ms. Troutman’s comments are in bold italics; mine are in normal font:

 All Airport Sites are Eliminated—No airport sites were eliminated.  The airport board simply withdrew their approval of the three sites recommended by the Entran Feasibility Study, pending further study.  When the board concludes that an airport will bring economic prosperity to the county (and they will), then all 17 sites surveyed by Entran will be re-opened for discussion.  This includes the Blakemore, Gathright, and Dawkins, sites.  I personally believe that the airport board will look for sites where landowners want to sell their property for an airport.  Currently, there are at least two sites available right now (I-71, and Eden Park), where property owners are happy to accommodate an airport.  However, you must consider that a downturn in the housing market might convince a property owner to sell his/her land to the first person who makes a reasonable offer. 

If an airport won’t generate revenue, board members say the FAA’s process to determine the possibility of developing an airport is futile—wasting time and grant money.  It is the Airport Board that accepted a $200,000 grant (taxpayer money) from the state of Kentucky Department of Aviation, to do an airport feasibility study.  It is the Airport Board that has spent $70,000 of this grant for Entran’s Feasibility Study.  It is the Airport Board that has needlessly spent money, and no one else.

Mr. Bob Sargis [airport board member] said he believes the airport board whisked ahead by tackling technical questions first, as required by the FAA.  Mr. Sargis is correct in that the board moved too quickly.  However, the FAA does not prohibit an airport board or a fiscal court from doing their homework prior to requesting a feasibility study.  The board should have done all the studies they are now calling for well before spending any grant money.  It’s like having an architect design a house for you before you even determine that you need or even want a new house! 

The board is collecting information on the public’s opinion of the project, which will be presented at a meeting March 6.  In order to conduct a professional opinion poll, one would have to contract an independent body, develop an unbiased set of questions, and then administer the poll.  This would cost several thousand dollars—money the airport board doesn’t have.

If the board members choose to return to the FAA process, they are required to launch a new feasibility study.  This statement is simply not true.  In the February Airport Board Meeting, the board made it very clear that they could only ask for refinements to the current Entran Study, since the board has a $200,000+ contract with Entran.  That money cannot be used to launch another study using another firm.  And, the airport board has no other source of funding a feasibility study.

There are a string of comments offered in Ms Troutman’s article from board members and even the Judge/Executive that appear to blame the current state of affairs on the FAA and the Kentucky Department of Aviation.  This is not true and unfair.  Each of these organizations has a set of rules for determining whether or not an airport should be built, and the Kentucky Revised Statutes clearly outlines the responsibilities of an airport board.  If the airport board and fiscal court didn’t like the rules, then steps should have been taken–prior to asking for the grant money—to resolve the local issues not addressed by state and federal authorities.  And, if the airport board did not wish to act like one, it should have remained as an airport committee.

My point is not to disparage Ms. Troutman’s article, but to inform you that some of her points could mislead the reader into believing that the airport initiative is all but dead.  Certainly, the Era’s choice of headline conveyed just that message.  But, it’s also important not to lay the blame for airport board’s current malaise at the feet of the FAA or the Kentucky Department of Aviation. 

Now, to get out of this jam, the airport board will look for money to do more studies.  And, it appears the Oldham County Economic Development Authority (OCEDA) may be willing to lend it to them.  Where does OCEDA get its funding?  Oldham County taxes–your tax money–of course!  If you don’t think your hard-earned money should go to doing a second economic impact study (the first one was shown during the November 2007 public forum), please contact:   

OCEDA Chairman
Dennis Johnson
Baptist Hospital Northeast
1025 New Moody Lane
LaGrange, KY 40031-9142
(502) 222-5388
djohnson1@BHSI.COM  

Jim Pearson

NOA Executive Director

Money Matters

NOA is commitment to provide you with factual, well documented information that shows why an airport in Oldham County is not a good idea.  A well informed public is the first major step in defeating this airport initiative.  We have a dedicated group of researchers and analysts, with the expertise in aviation, aircraft maintenance, and air traffic control.  We also have research specialists in environmental and real estate issues.   

To provide you with this quality information, we use multiple forms of communication.  While our website is the focal point of our communication network, we also rely on media ads, flyers, and newspaper articles.  Needless to say, this takes money, and we appreciate any donations you can make. 

 Please make checks out to No Oldham Airport.  Donations can be mailed to: 

NOA

P.O. Box 373

Crestwood, KY 40014. 

Every dollar counts and no amount is too small.  Although donations are not tax deductible, your contribution will help us defeat the airport initiative, and keep you from paying more taxes to support general aviation airport.  Thanks so much for your support.  

Jim Pearson

NOA Executive Director

Airport Board Meeting Recap

********** 

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly…by Jim Pearson 

The Good: 

1.  The airport board passed a resolution stating that they would not use the power of Eminent Domain to acquire property from landowners who do not wish to sell.  This was actually a “no brainer” resolution, since a 1986 Kentucky Supreme Court Decision “appears” to have already removed that power from an airport board.

2.  State Department of Aviation Commissioner Steely does not support taking land for general aviation airports by use of Eminent Domain (but he is not part of the Eminent Domain process).  And, he admitted that the state of general aviation is in a decline.

3.  None of the three sites currently identified as possible airport sites have enough landowners who are willing to sell property.  This includes the state of Kentucky, who has property in the Dawkins airport site location.

4.  When you have landowners who won’t sell, and an airport board and state aviation department that do not support the use of Eminent Domain, then there is a deadlocked situation.  Therefore, the airport board passed a resolution that rescinds their support for the Entran Study, which identified the three possible airport locations.

5.  The airport board will not formally address any other sites until they have accomplished a detailed study on the:    

 a. economic impact of an airport

 b. viability of a business plan for the airport

 c. impact of an airport on property values

 d. public’s support for an airport

 e. best methods of communicating the need of an airport

6.  The airport board has no money to do the studies listed above.  The federal grant money can only be used to conduct a feasibility study—which Entran did.  While there is money left over from this study, it can’t be used outside a very strict set of guidelines for airport feasibility studies.  The money could be used for additional analysis of sites already identified by Entran.

 The Bad: 

1.  The airport board had an opportunity to stop the airport initiative today but didn’t take it.  The resolutions passed merely formalize what they had already decided at their December 2007 meeting.

2.  The airport board made it clear that they are willing to revisit any site within the Entran study—including the I-71 site, Blakemore site, Gathright site, and Dawkins site—when they have answers to the study areas listed above.

3.  The airport board intends to seek financial support for accomplishing all of their studies.  They recognize that any analysis accomplished must be seen by the public as unbiased.  They set no timetable for these studies to be accomplished. 

4.  The airport board did acknowledge the I-71 site as a possible airport location, but recognize there are additional costs to build on this site.  Judge Murner referred to this site as a “possible poisoned fruit,” but this is a site where the landowner (Kim Rash) is willing to sell enough property to build an airport.  I would expect that Kim Rash’s property—and perhaps the Eden Parksite—may be reworked by Entran, to show that they could be acceptable alternates.

5.  There are community businessmen & women who support this airport and will no doubt provide money for these studies.  I firmly believe the airport board can find the money to do the studies they want.

6.  The use of Eminent Domain is much more complicated than the airport board understands.  Currently, this power resides in the hands of our fiscal court.  If our fiscal court is given evidence that an airport could bring economic prosperity to Oldham County, then I believe they would consider using it—provided no other site could be found where there was a landowner willing to sell.

 The Ugly: 

After sitting through this two hour meeting, it was very clear that the airport board does not have the expertise to ask the right questions.  The fact that there is minimal aviation experience on the board has created a nearly impossible task for Mr. Westbrook.  So, Mr. Westbrook called for a “do over,” saying that the board needs to take a”time machine journey” [his words] back at least 6 months in order to properly address all the major concerns that have been voiced by the public.  The result is that there is no end in sight to this airport initiative.  Without a timetable for getting answers to the questions they themselves have asked, the airport board has failed to put a merciful end to this airport initiative, and will keep the county unsettled for the foreseeable future.

Tax Loophole Created Just for Airports!

**********

More Tax Increases are Coming Your Way!

Each year, the county sets a tax rate on personal property. When collected, this revenue helps meet the county’s annual budget requirements. To ensure no county government can unreasonably tax its property owners, the State of Kentucky limits the amount of this county tax increase to 4% in any given year. If the county exceeds this 4% compensating tax rate, then the tax levy is subject to voter recall or reconsideration.

However, taxing personal property for the purpose of building and supporting an airport falls outside this limit.  So, the county can levy a separate property tax, just for a general aviation airport.

Here’s the exact Kentucky statute that creates this taxation loophole:

Kentucky Revised Statue, 183.134 Appropriations for airports — Bond issue, election, tax:

(5) Notwithstanding the limitations contained in KRS 132.023, any governmental unit which after March 21, 1968, levies a tax for aviation purposes under this chapter may exclude the tax from consideration in calculating the compensating tax rate as now or subsequently defined in KRS 132.010 or any amendments or other act substituted relating to that section.

Our elected officials must wisely use our tax money to pay for the needs and wants of the county.  When there’s a limited supply of money, not everything can be funded.  Which category does an airport fit into? That, is what you must decide.  As Mark Twain once said,

“The only difference between a tax man and a taxidermist is that the taxidermist leaves the skin.”

You can stop the county tax man from levying taxes to pay for an airport that is not wanted by county residents, and certainly not needed.  Call your Judge/Executive and magistrates.  “JUST SAY NOA.”

Airport Lessons Learned in Shelby County…by Jim Ellis

********** 

The residents of Oldham County are currently considering constructing a general aviation (GA) airport. Shelby County twice considered an airport, in 1998 and in 2005. In 2005, I was a member of the Shelby County Fiscal Court Airport Advisory Committee that reviewed information concerning the process of building and operating a GA airport. Here are some of my personal observations and experiences from that process.

Biggest lesson learned: “Truth-Proof” all relevant claims and statements. Everything must be verified for accuracy. Here are a few examples why:

a) In the early stages of the airport discussion, the Shelby County community was told that there was plenty of money available in the federal airport improvement program and that Shelby County “should get it before someone else did.” But when we contacted the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) Memphis office that is in charge of airport planning in our area, that office said that such money was limited and discretionarily awarded, with GA airports at the bottom of the granting totem pole.

b) Claims were made that a Shelby GA airport would be self-sufficient when a certain number of aircraft were based there and we achieved a certain level of usage of the airport. The Committee received financial and operational information from 13 other Kentucky GA airports. What we found? Regardless of the number of aircraft based at the airports, regardless of the amount of aviation fuel sold and the profit on it, regardless of the number of hangars for rent and the rental amount charged, and regardless of the number of landings and departures, all the airports received supporting subsidies from outside sources. In short, we found that in every case, GA airports don’t fully pay their own way.

c) The Shelby airport was pitched as a tool to recruit new business and industry. But a Chamber of Commerce survey found that a local GA airport might enhance only 34% of surveyed businesses. A later local newspaper article reported even less support for an airport in this economic sector. Additionally, economic development was NOT a criterion for qualifying for the federal airport improvement program.

d) It was stated that airports increased property values around them. But the Committee received two statements from residents who had experienced the opposite. Meanwhile, Kentucky courts have held that an airport is not responsible for decreases in surrounding property values that were caused by the reasonable operations of the airport (Louisville & Jefferson County Air Bd. v Porter).

Another thing we found:  An airport board’s actual control of land use extends beyond its own property boundaries. The scope and power of an airport board is a major thing to consider.

At the end of the 2005 process in Shelby County, the proposed airport was deemed too costly for the county’s taxpayers and not pursued. I hope Oldham County’s deliberation of building and operating an airport will be as thorough as Shelby County’s consideration.

Thank you for your time,

Jim Ellis [signed]

737 Booker Pike

Shelbyville, KY 40065

502-647-2726

jmellis@shelbywireless.net

Homeowner’s Association President Speaks Out

 **********

Viewpoints

The Oldham Era

P.O. Box 5

LaGrange, KY 40031-0005

Jan Jasper

President, Grand Dell Homeowners Association

Crestwood, KY 40014

To the editor:

 

I wish to express my admiration to all who voice their opinions in this venue, particularly regarding the proposed airport.  It is democracy at work. I eagerly read both the pro and con letters to see the argument and the points that are most important to the writer.

 

Opponents seem to worry about increased noise, pollution, a reduction in property values, and higher taxes to pay for an airport that probably has little to do with whether or not any corporation chooses to relocate to Oldham County.  They see the airport being used by those who primarily fly as a hobby.

 

Proponents have accepted the noise and risks associated with general aviation and cannot comprehend how anyone can be concerned with the sound of aircraft overhead or an aircraft accident every once-in-awhile.  After all, we live with trains running down main street LaGrange, and endure countless auto accidents.  So, what difference can a little general aviation airport make?

 

Proponents discount the real fear that landowners have over the use of eminent domain—to take by legal maneuver the very ground they have purchased through years of work.

 

Opponents desperately want to cling to a more rural way of life—and believe others who move here will also enjoy a more pastoral setting in which to raise a family.  They do not believe that every tree must be removed in order to offer all the advantages a metro area can provide.

 

Yes, people move to the county BECAUSE of its pastoral setting, something that seems to have been taken for granted for too long.  Perhaps it’s time to assess newcomers an impact fee, to help fund that careful planning needed to preserve our rural character.  The impact fees would also help alleviate county debt.

Presentation by GRA, Inc., a transportation- economics consulting firm

This presentation was an analysis of the feasibility of funding for, and the prospective viability of, a proposed airport in Shelby County. It was conducted by GRA, Inc., a transportation-economics consulting firm. While the study was conducted for Shelby County, there are remarkable similarities between an Oldham County Airport and a Shelby County Airport. So, NOA believes that the conclusions drawn are equally valid.
One issue that differs is the FAA requirement to locate any new airport at least 30 minutes away from other airports. Shelby County was not able to do this. Oldham County is able to do this only by locating airports in the eastern-most portion of the county. The potential airport locations at Blakemore, Gathright, and I-71 all encroach into neighboring counties.

GRA Presentation for Shelby County

TAXES, TAXES, TAXES

Author’s Note:  This begins a series of articles on the relationship between taxes and airport funding.  My intent is to educate you on how our money is being used to meet an endless stream of aviation funding needs.  Thankfully, most are legitimate needs and will enhance the overall safety and efficiency of our country’s air transportation system.  However, some funding flows to “wants”, which serve a very small portion of our society. 

In 1765, Boston politician, James Otis, coined the phrase, “Taxation without representation is tyranny”.  If Mr. Otis were alive today, he would readily admit that taxation WITH representation ain’t so hot either! 

How does one pay for a $20 million dollar airport, and then sustain it?  The short answer is–taxes, taxes, and more taxes!  Yet, airport proponents are quick to point out that 95% of a $20 million dollar Oldham County Airport will be built with federal dollars—as if the government has the ability to earn money.  So, where did the government get those federal dollars?  Through taxes—and that’s our money!!  

 Airport proponents will quickly point out that airport money provided through the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is different.  It doesn’t come from the “general fund”—where your annual income taxes flow.  Actually, 19% of the FAA’s budget did come from the general fund in 2006.  Each year, Congress determines how much money from the general fund wil go to the FAA’s budget.  When money gets tight, Congress can reduce this extra subisdy.  But, let’s focus on the other 81% of the FAA’s annual budget for now.   

The FAA’s budget is met primarily through a mysterious lock-box, called the “Airport and Airway Trust Fund.”  This trust fund amounted to $11.8 billion dollars in 2006!  The Airport and Airway Trust Fund is used by the FAA to meet all the needs of the aviation community—from Atlanta’s Hartsfield-Jackson Airport, to Stuart Powell Field, in Danville, Kentucky.  It is also used to fund our nation’s Air Traffic Control System.  But, we’ll get back to that later.  Right now, I’m sure you want to know where the FAA got $11.8 billion dollars to put in the Airport and Airway Trust Fund. 

In 2006, nearly 85 % of the $11.8 billion came from taxes levied on individual passengers: the ticket tax, the flight segment tax, and taxes on international arrivals and departures*.  That’s right; every airline ticket you purchase includes a $4.50 tax levied on behalf of the Airport and Airway Trust Fund!  I think that’s fair—users of aviation should help pay for our national air transportation system.  However, I also think we should demand that this money is wisely spent.  And that, my friends takes us back to the state of our declining air traffic control system. 

It is no secret that our nation’s air traffic control system is in desperate need of upgrading.  If you are a frequent flyer, then you have witnessed first-hand the chronic delays on the ground and in the air.  It’s not my intent to list the reasons for these delays, but they are more frequent now than at any other time in airline history.  The FAA is trying to address these issues through the “Next Generation Air Transportation System Integrated National Plan” (NexGen), a program that the FAA estimates will cost taxpayers more than $22 billion dollars!  Rest assured, this estimate is low; it will cost much, much more.  Do you want to guess where the money will come from?   

You’re right! NexGen funding will most likely come from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund.  NexGen, along with critical upgrades to major airport hubs, will put a huge strain on the trust fund’s ability to pay for all these crucial improvements.   

So, what does all this have to do with building a little airport in Oldham County? 

Again, it comes down to priorities.  Where would you like your taxes spent?  An Oldham County Airport—like all airports—will rely on the same trust fund to pay for its construction and upgrades.  It all comes down to whether or not you think we need to spend money on building  another airport that will compete for a piece of the trust fund, or improve upon our current airports and air traffic control system.   

Can’t we do it all?  Yes, we can–by increasing taxes!!  Is that what we want?  I believe Ronald Reagan spoke for most of us when he said,

“We don’t have a trillion-dollar debt because we haven’t taxed enough; we have a trillion-dollar debt because we spend too much.”   

By now, you are questioning whether or not you can really make any difference in the never ending battle against increased taxation.  Unless we are willing at the grassroots level to help curb our local government’s spending habits, then we allow the overall tax burden to grow.  Unless we are willing to raise our voices, then we will give our local representatives the green light to continue raising taxes for projects they want, but do not need.  My friends, it’s time to pick up the telephone and make a few calls.  Otherwise, the old saying will continue to be true: 

“The art of taxation consists in so plucking the goose as to obtain the largest possible amount of feathers with the smallest amount of hissing.” 

Folks, it’s time to start hissing!  Call your Judge/Executive Murner and your magistrate today; tell them you don’t want an airport, and the tax burden it will bring to Oldham County!!

 *Seven percent of trust fund money comes from taxes on all aircraft fuel sales—from passenger air carriers to private aircraft.  In 2006, the tax on general aviation fuel was .19 cents a gallon.  Taxes on cargo amounted to 4% and interest on the trust fund generated 4%. 

(Sources for this article came from Congressional Budget Testimony on the Status of the Airport and Airway Trust Fund, before the Senate Finance Committee, July 12, 2007)