Sunday, June 21, 2015

Complaint alleges Federal Aviation Administration violations at Mount Airy-Surry County Airport (KMWK), Mount Airy, North Carolina

As previously reported, the Mount Airy-Surry County Airport Authority has found itself in litigation with former authority board member Billy Hicks. The meter is still running on attorney’s fees that will eventually be shouldered by the Surry County taxpayer, as the authority works to refute Hicks’ claims. 

The Surry County Board of Commissioners has appropriated $78,999 to cover legal fees associated with the litigation, and the Airport Authority requested an additional $32,220 from the county to cover attorney fees related to the Hicks cases.

Concurrent to his federal court case alleging violations of his constitutional rights, Hicks has also filed a complaint against the airport with the Federal Aviation Administration in early May.

Hicks’ lease for hangar space at the airport was terminated due to a painting incident in which the property of other airport tenants was damaged. In January the District Court granted the authority’s motion for summary ejectment after Hicks refused to vacate his hangar space at the airport.

Hicks lost a subsequent appeal on the summary ejectment ruling. However, the former airport authority board member has filed two actions against the airport authority. One action is a federal court case in which Hicks claims his constitutional rights were violated, and another ongoing complaint was filed with the Federal Aviation Administration.

Since the Mount Airy-Surry County Airport is funded mainly by federal dollars, the airport and its authority must abide by FAA guidelines. Hicks is alleging that the authority violated ten of the FAA’s guidelines.

Many of the alleged violations revolve around the airport’s fixed-base operator (FBO), which was and remains a company run by John Spane known as Ra-Tech. The airport’s FBO is contracted to provide services such as fueling, aircraft maintenance, managing hangars and flight instruction.

One such alleged violation is that airport authority Chairman John Springthorpe interfered with an audit of fuel usage by Ra-Tech at the airport. Hicks states that he called for the audit, which would have covered fuel usage and rent payment, in 2011 after Hicks suspected “excessive fuel use by the FBO had not been properly accounted for by the FBO.”

In short, Hicks claims that Springthorpe interfered with the audit by changing it to an “advisory report.” Hicks also claims that Springthorpe told other board members that Hicks “was not a team player.” In Hicks’ complaint he states that he is unaware of any audit being conducted either while he was on the airport authority or after his resignation from the board.

Hicks’ FAA complaint, like his federal court case, references a 2012 situation regarding Ra-Tech’s flight instruction and the flight instruction provided by local pilot Michael Venable. In a 2012 letter from Ra-Tech’s John Spane to Springthorpe, Spane asks Springthorpe to no longer permit Venable to provide flight instruction at the airport.

Spane’s letter, which Hicks uses as an exhibit in his FAA complaint, states that Venable’s operation “has turned into a competition that we can no longer compete against.” The letter went on to state that Venable was offering a lower fee for instruction to students. Spane blames increased costs due to a requirement that Ra-Tech maintain a full-time office for Ra-Tech’s inability to compete with Venable in the market.

The airport authority ultimately decided that Venable could no longer provide flight instruction because he had not asked for permission to do so from the authority. The authority then made Ra-Tech the sole flight instruction program at the airport, according to Hicks’ complaint.

Hicks also calls to question the bidding procedure for the FBO contract at the airport. In short, Hicks’ complaint alleges that Ra-Tech’s bid was the lowest bid for the contract “only because Ra-Tech’s proposal was missing costs for items the airport authority were already paying for or providing exclusively to Ra-Tech.”

Another violation that Hicks alleges regards the upcoming expansion of the runway at the airport. Hicks claims that the authority received grants for the expansion before acquiring property necessary for the expansion. If true, Hicks states that this would be a violation of an FAA assurance called “good title.”

More alleged violations stem from the authority’s relationship with Pike Electric Corp. and one of the company’s former pilots and airport authority board member, Nolan Kirkman. Hicks alleges that Pike was allowed to use the airport free of charge via a “through the fence” agreement. Hicks also alleges that the runway expansion at the airport will directly benefit board members and companies with whom they are associated.

According to Springthorpe the Mount Airy-Surry County Airport Authority has yet to file its response to Hicks’ FAA complaint. Springthorpe stated that the authority has until Aug. 3 to file the response, which he said will include exhibits proving the false nature of Hicks’ complaint.

Springthorpe said that the allegations in Hicks’ FAA complaint will be “entirely refuted” by the forthcoming response from the airport authority.

Source:  http://www.mtairynews.com

Aircraft owner suing  Mount Airy-Surry County Airport (KMWK) officials

A local pilot and former member of the Mount Airy airport governing board is suing its present members alleging that he wrongfully was forced off the group and ordered to relinquish his hangar space.

Documents filed this month in federal court on behalf of plaintiff William Alfred “Billy” Hicks Jr. say this stemmed from Hicks’ support of an independent flight instructor at the airport who was competing with the pilot-training school based there.


Listed among various allegations in the suit is a claim that one defendant, John Springthorpe III, longtime chairman of the Mount Airy-Surry County Airport Authority, controls that group in “a czar-like fashion” to reward those he favors.


On the other hand, the lawsuit— filed in U.S. District Court in Winston-Salem — alleges that the group has waged a vendetta against Hicks over his support of Michael Venable, the independent flight instructor, who earlier sued over his treatment by airport officials.


Others named as defendants, along with Springthorpe, are fellow members of the authority, Vice Chairman Donald L. Holder, Greg Perkins, Nolan Kirkman, Harold Thomas Taylor, Dr. Thomas Jackson and Victor Zamora.


The 14-page lawsuit alleges that the defendants “have engaged in a pattern of conduct that, at best, reflects arbitrary and oppressive government power without checks or balances on their authority.”


Springthorpe did not respond a voice-mail message left Thursday seeking his reaction to the lawsuit allegations.


Competing Interests


Hicks, a lifelong Surry County resident who owns H & H Auto Sales in Mount Airy and Galax, Va., said Thursday that he began flight lessons in 2008. He later bought two planes that have been hangared at the local airport, a twin-engine Beechcraft and a single-engine Cessna, and is now an instrument-rated general aviation pilot.


He also ascended to a leadership role at Mount Airy-Surry County Airport by being appointed to the airport authority in June 2010.


But the situation began to nosedive when Hicks took a position in favor of Venable, whose instruction of would-be pilots competed with flight instructors employed by the fixed-based operator at the airport, Ra-Tech Aviation.


Based on the court documents and statements from local aviation community members, novice pilots were comfortable with Venable compared to other instructors available because of his “passion,” and in one’s view he is “more friendly and down-to-Earth.”


“He had great customer service.”


However, Venable’s success in attracting students was looked upon in disfavor by the airport leadership due to the lost business, with the controversy said to have developed in April 2012. Venable was instructing 11 regular flight students around that time.


Hicks’ lawsuit refers to a memo by Springthorpe, the authority’s chairman, stating that the airport was not big enough to support competing flight-training operations.


This led to a decision to forbid Venable from providing instruction out of the facility, which Hicks opposed, and Venable’s filing of a lawsuit over his right to compete.


A settlement later was reached in Venable’s case, Hicks said Thursday.


Meanwhile, Hicks’ support of Venable during that process caused problems for him, the lawsuit claims, including being pressured to resign from the airport’s governing board by others.


“They did not like to be challenged on anything,” Hicks said Thursday, mentioning that he also had ruffled feathers by asking that an audit be done to make sure public funds allocated to the airport were being spent properly,


After being “ambushed” by a request to leave the authority, Hicks did so about a year before his four-year term was up and was replaced by another member in February of 2014.


“I went ahead and resigned,” Hicks said Thursday. “I saw no sense in them kicking me off.”


Yet there also was more to the alleged vendetta, with the suit claiming that Hicks’ lease on an hangar was terminated and his name removed from the waiting list for a second hangar. The basis for this was a supposed inspection that uncovered purported safety violations in the hangar leased by Hicks, although court documents point out that other hangars had violations that were not addressed.


“Until (the) plaintiff opposed Chairman John Springthorpe and the other airport authority members, (the) plaintiff experienced no difficulty in the use of his aircraft, use of his hangar or threats of expulsion from the airport authority,” the suit states.


“No hangar tenant had ever been refused a hangar renewal except for non-payment of hangar rent.”


As it stood Thursday, Hicks said he no longer will have a hangar after 10 days.


The lawsuit alleges that the actions by Springthorpe and others have denied Hicks equal protection and due process rights under the Constitution.


“This is a public trust,” the local pilot added Thursday of the airport and how its leadership should serve the flying community and treat everyone equally.


Hicks’ suit seeks an unspecified sum for damages to be determined by a jury and for his hangar lease to be renewed and the lease for the second hangar to be granted, along with other requests to the court.


“I hate this is going on,” Hicks said Thursday regarding the lawsuit, but added that he believed it was needed.


“I’m for what’s right.”


Original article can be found at:     http://www.mtairynews.com

1 comment:

  1. The easy way to solve this problem is to place term limits on the Airport board members. Springthorp a 20 year Board member has been allowed to get two new hangers built just for himself. Kirkman 20 plus year board member and pilot for Pike Electric, weaseled a deal for Pike to get a sweet free through the fence deal. Holder 20 plus years and the rest of the posse agreed to it all. This same bunch have wasted around 250,000 tax money on lawsuits protecting the FBO manager and there vindictive ways! How do the tax payers get relief? The airport expansion will cost millions but lengthening the runway will reduce Springthorps insurance cost for his fancy Jet.....ha ha tax payers.....call your commisioners ..THE NEXT APPOINTMENT FOR SURRY COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY IS JANUARY 2016.I am SURE Victor Zemoia and Thomas Taylor will want to stay on board.

    ReplyDelete