Tracy Press

The city is looking to sell the New Jerusalem Airport, but the FAA might step in to make closing a deal impossible.

The city of Tracy wants to sell the New Jerusalem Airport, where this Beechcraft Bonanza comes in for a landing. The only snag is that the Federal Aviation Administration might not allow it to happen. Press file photo

On Tuesday night, the City Council extended until Oct. 21 exclusive negotiating rights to homebuilder Richland Planned Communities Inc.

The city hopes to sell the New Jerusalem Airport and pour the money from the sale into the Tracy Municipal Airport, which is more heavily used.

But the FAA’s position remains unchanged, said agency spokesman Ian Gregor. In 2005, the head of its San Francisco district office sent now-interim parks and recreation director Rod Buchanan a letter in 2005 that states "there is not satisfactory justification" to sell the airport, and that the "city has not promoted" the airport’s use and failed to explain why it’s no longer needed. It also says that if the New Jerusalem will remain an airport after the sale, the FAA cannot legally allow it to be sold.

The federal government turned the airport over to the city in the 1940s, as it did hundreds of others declared surplus after World War II, including the Tracy Municipal Airport. But deed restrictions require the city to continue to operate the land as a public airport.

The mission of the FAA is to "keep airports open to maintain access to the national airspace system," says an e-mail Gregor sent.

The spokesman also pointed out that deed restrictions on airports such as New Jerusalem are "very rarely, if ever" removed.

But Buchanan still harbors hopes that the city will be successful in a long process of trying to sell the airport and win permission from the FAA.

"I don’t think they’ve said ‘no,’" Buchanan said.

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (16)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Show/Hide comments

...
written by Malcolm , August 20, 2008

So... the City of Tracy is trying to sell land they don't have full title to? Thought this was interesting from the article:

"The mission of the FAA is to "keep airports open to maintain access to the national airspace system," says an e-mail Gregor sent.

The spokesman also pointed out that deed restrictions on airports such as New Jerusalem are "very rarely, if ever" removed"

We are at war people!

...
written by jon paul , August 20, 2008

Good for the FAA. I hope they don't allow the sale. All we need is more homes on our farm land. Find the money someplace else Tracy...leave New J alone!

...
written by what? , August 20, 2008

The city hall and Buchanan is in clear violation of the Deed restrictions. I would not be surprised if the FAA does not take back the deed!

City hall.. You cant sell FAA land!

...
written by what? , August 20, 2008

Note to the city hall...

This is a deeded AIRPORT! - Not another developer deal with backroom sweetners - Has the deal between Richland been disclosed and public hearings been held?

...
written by fortheunderdog , August 20, 2008

We all know how city hall operates. Backroom dealings and bribery. It appears to me that Buchanan floats in the same dingy as Ives. They're both waiting for an answer from entities that don't have to listen to their rhetoric....Ives waiting for Union Pacific and Buchanan waiting for FAA. This city is taking on the characteristics of a sitcom that won't last. Hopefully, the same is true of Ives.

...
written by what? , August 20, 2008

The city said that the money from the sale would go to the Tracy Airport - Yeah right!

And PIGS FLY!

...
written by Ian Stewart , August 22, 2008

I'd be interested to know when Richland thinks their project would turn a profit. According to Irene Sundberg's assertions, the Alvarez family is willing to postpone development of their land for at least four years, and that's land much closer to Tracy. Even with a "planned community" in place, New J is still pretty far outside of town, and this outfit isn't going to have any better luck attracting employers to their little enclave than the city itself has had. It'd just be another commuter colony without easy access to the resources that the city has to offer.

So, if the land absolutely must be sold, and the city council has some magic plan for getting the FAA to approve the sale... why sell to speculators?

...
written by Dave Hardesty , August 22, 2008

Ian

So, what would you do with the property? Who would you sell it to?

Dave Hardesty

...
written by what? , August 22, 2008

Dave,

The city of Tracy cant sell land that they dont own. It has a very clear deed restriction that by law trumps all of the Buchanan, Ives deal! FAA is very clear about the land!
It is a AIRPORT!

...
written by Dave Hardesty , August 22, 2008

And you know this to be a fact or are you simply repeating something you have heard that you like?

Besides, if you look at the blog you will see I was questioning Ian.

Also, if the City doesn't own the property then why were they worried about re-striping it and keeping tresspassers off the property? If they don't own it it's none of their business.

So you see my friend, there simply has to be more than what is being presented here. If they own it then there must be some way they can get around it and sell it, if not to some other person that wants this boat anchor with all of it's deed restrictions. Either that or just give it back to the Fed. Either way it stops throwing money into a dry hole that isn't being used for what it was intended.

I am wondering, have you personally been to this Airport as you call it? It's a pretty poor excuse for an airport if you ask me and most likely more of a hazard to avation than it is a help.

It would be interesting to see the stats on its actual usage. Had anyone done such a study?

My point is that things change. They certainly have since this deed restriction was put into place. Yes the FAA is probably resistant. They should be. But being resistant to something doesn't mean that it can't be made to happen. Nothing is in concrete.

Dave Hardesty

Dave Hardesty

...
written by what? , August 22, 2008

The city has to maintain the property. They also get funding to do so.

A deed restriction from the FAA in regards to the use of the land is pretty Damn concrete! Where was the lawyers on the city payroll when this scam was hatched?

...
written by Dave Hardesty , August 22, 2008

what?

True, the city maintains the property and gets funding for it. True, there is a deed restriction. I am quite sure the city lawyers studied this or are studying this at present.

What makes you so certain the FAA can't change their mind? Have then never in their history changed their mind? Will they never change their mind in the future?

Why is it that because someone hears the word resistant they automatically think it can never be changed?

If it can never be changed then why even bother to vote? After all, it can never be changed right?

And if it can never be changed then why even bother to argue about it? Let those of us who believe it can be changed live under our delusion and make yourself happier watching us waste our time.

One thing that I have noticed about your posts. You are one of the most negative people I have yet to read here.

I will admit I also have negative feelings about things

...
written by Dave Hardesty , August 22, 2008

I will admit I also have negative feelings about things as well but not apparently to the degree you seem too.

You call me the crypt keeper and an Ives supporter. Perhaps that's true and perhaps it isn't. But if I am those things then it's pretty obvious you are a Celeste supporter, in as much as there is no other choice unless you want incumbent Tolbert as mayor. No change there for you in any case.

But I sense you don't support Tolbert so that leaves Celeste. Question, if she is elected and does not produce the things she apparently is promising, will you be so animatedly against her as you are with Ives and the current Counsel?

It really makes no difference to me but it seems you may be setting yourself up for a bitter disappointment.

Oh, that's right. No one knows what? Just like no one knows Malcolm.

Must be nice to step out boldly and proclaim you know what is going on and do it in secrecy so that if you are wrong you don't have to own up to your mistakes.

Say, you ought to run, you have so many good ideas. Why don't you? But that would mean giving out your identity wouldn't it? Oh well, guess you missed the boat on that one as well.

...
written by Dave Hardesty , August 22, 2008

But seriously, wouldn't it be nice to see someone come along with plans we could all see and comprehend instead of the old "my candidate is better than your candidate" while neither candidate is saying much of anything?

You wonder about Ives and where he stands in all of this. Don't you watch the counsel meetings? It's pretty easy to see where he stands.

You allege he is involved with the developers for his own personal profit. Do you have any proof? Anything that would indicate that he might be doing something like this? Or is it a fabrication of your own mind and just more political mud slinging?

You are long in telling others what can't be done, so why don't you tell us what can be done? What would you do with the NJ airport property? How would you make it better and a benefit to our community?

Yes, it's easy to sit around and complain about everything and everyone else but quite a different thing to come up with ideas and plans that will benefit our community in the future.

Well I need to go. Have fun and I'll try to catch back up on this later today if things work out.

Dave Hardesty

...
written by what? , August 22, 2008

Delusion - That is a great word for city hall and this plan to sell the NJ airport!
Key word here AIRPORT - Not New Home Subdivision!
Yes, I am negative to the idea of another subdivsion 5 miles out of town. Is this the new city limit of Tracy?
Just what we need, more vacant homes to add 5more years of inventory to our housing market. Negative, yes but more a realist!

...
written by fortheunderdog , August 23, 2008

This is an AIRPORT blog! Will those who want to talk about new subdivisions please go to the blog "I wanna build a subdivision, by L. Serpa". The date of that blog is July 32nd.