Airport Master Plan 2012 - City of Waterville

As a joint owner the City will receive citizen and user complaints similar to the level that they
would receive as sole owner. One advantage may be the increased pool of resources between all
ownership partners to study issues and recommend solutions.
Sole Ownership/Agency Management
The pro’s of sole ownership/agency management include:
Maintains its status as an eligible sponsor for both FAA AIP and MEDOT grants.
With the agency responsible for the issuance of contracts, the City has less financial
responsibility and may be able to improve the efficiency of the Airport. However, poor agency
decisions can result in poor press for the City.
With the agency having certain powers, fewer decisions reach the City, thereby reducing the dayto-day
work required of the City.
The con’s of sole ownership/agency management include:
Based upon the terms of the codified law that sets up the agency, the City may not retain its
decision making ability, and therefore would be unable to stop any proposed plans that the City
deems objectionable or actions that the City deems as poor judgment from happening.
It will be known that the City maintains its ownership of the Airport and citizens and users who
are not satisfied by the agency will likely complain to the City. Some of these complaints can be
handled through an established protocol between the City and the agency outlining lines of
communication and action by the agency to resolve the issue.
Sole Ownership/Private Management
The pro’s of sole ownership/private management include:
Maintain its status as an eligible sponsor for both FAA AIP and MEDOT grants.
Maintains sole decision making power in the development and operation of the Airport. While
these decisions would need to meet the Grant Assurances made to the FAA and MEDOT, the
City would maintain great latitude as sole owner.
A reduction or altogether elimination in the day-to-day work required of the City.
The con’s of sole ownership/private management include:
The City remains financially responsible for the Airport.
Many private enterprises who manage Airports for municipalities often require multi-year
contracts for their services. Should the City find that the enterprise is not fulfilling its end of the
agreement, is providing a poor service to the citizens and users, or by poor decisions generate
poor press for the City, it may prove difficult and/or costly to end the relationship with the
enterprise.
It will be known that the City maintains its ownership of the Airport and citizens and users who
are not satisfied by the private enterprise will likely complain to the City. Some of these
complaints can be handled through an established protocol between the City and the enterprise
outlining lines of communication and action by the enterprise.
The City of Waterville Maine
Airport Management Structure Assessment – Page 7-20
Airport Solutions Group, LLC & The Louis Berger Group, Inc. December 2011