The New Jersey State Senate recently passed a pro-aviation bill, A2332, by a vote of 39 to 0.  The same bill passed in the Assembly by 76 to 2.  It has been sitting on Governor Whitman’s desk since early in July.  The Governor has 45 working days to sign the bill into law.  With the State Legislature on recess during much of the summer, the “drop dead” date on the bill is mid-September.  At this writing, Governor Whitman had not signed it.

The bill will allow the NJ Department of Transportation to purchase the development rights of privately owned, public use airports.  The bill permits airport owners to cash in on a large part of the equity in their airport property providing that they accept deed restrictions against any further subdivision of the property or conversion to any other use.  The State Legislature saw the merit of small airport preservation and acted accordingly.

Beside the fact that the airports enrolled in the program will remain airports for pilots to use, the bill will have a number of other benefits.  Because an owner will have received a large percentage of the value of his property in the sale of development rights to the State, he or she can then afford to sell the airport to a new owner at a reasonable price.  The sale will not include any of the valuable development rights that normally “run with the land.”  The airport will sell as an airport and nothing more.  A buyer’s appraisal would only be made on the existing or potential “cash flow” of the airport business.  There is hope that a deed restricted airport that is priced reasonably will encourage new entrants into the aviation business.  This will encourage the continued private ownership of our airports.

There is another benefit to consider.  Airport neighbors have a bad habit of failing to understand what aviation is all about.  Our biggest battle is dealing with the opposition’s fear and lack of knowledge.  At present, airport owners know that they need only place a call to a developer to get out of the business.   If estate problems, financial pressures or the howl of the neighbors becomes too much to bear, owners can sell and saddle the host municipality with inappropriate development.

Airport opponents fear this scenario, too, and for good reason.  There is widespread and pointless talk of municipal condemnation of one Jersey airport.  The Township in question would like to have a nice park where the airport is, but the town fathers and mothers are unwilling to pay the airport owners anything near what the property is worth.  Municipal officials have been attempting to solicit money earmarked for open space preservation from the State’s environmental protection authorities to fund their purchase.  However, the principal agency involved will not participate in a hostile condemnation of a public transportation resource.  And the agency knows it will be subject to a punishing lawsuit if any such attempt is made.

However,  if that airport’s development rights are gone and it will always remain an airport, owners and neighbors will have to sit down and work out their problems.  Conversion of the airport to townhouses or big box retail stores will no longer be an option.  Or a threat.  Any discussion of the airport’s “problems” can start with the mutual understanding that it is always going to be there.  This alone will bring everyone to the table with open eyes.  Airport opponents are going to have to understand what an airport is and does.  Much of the emotion will be removed from the discussion.  If a neighbor knows the airport will remain an airport and doesn’t like that fact, he or she can move away.  Some pilot will snap their house up in a heartbeat.

 Much credit for the Legislature’s lopsided vote in favor of the bill is due to its author, Assemblyman Alex DeCroce, Chairman of the N. J. Assembly Transportation Committee.  The measure was one of the strong recommendations of the General Aviation Study Commission which was empowered by Governor Whitman in her first term.  The idea has been kicking around for awhile, but Assemblyman DeCroce had the foresight to put the idea in motion.

Two members of the New Jersey Assembly, Connie Meyers and Leonard Lance, were the sole objectors to the bill.  They represent a central Jersey district which has a very vocal and effective anti-airport constituency.  One of their objections was that there was no provision in the bill for evaluating the airport and its “highest and best” real estate potential.  The bill was purposely vague to encourage airport owners and State representatives to negotiate about relative values in good faith.  With so few qualified airport properties of such different quality and character, a formula could never be devised which would generate an appraisal that was fair to both the property owner and State.  Every airport is different.  Every negotiation will be different.

Soon after the bill was passed, the opposition realized that they had been thoroughly snookered.  Newspaper headlines cried out how the municipalities would lose all their zoning authority over the airports - how the Commissioner of Transportation could turn all the airports into airline hubs - how the hallowed tradition of home rule was being trampled in the dirt.  Soon, even representatives from the Governor’s office were referring to it as the “airport expansion bill”.  One mayor, in a fit of mindless hyperbole, decried how it was the most “communist” idea she had ever heard.  All of this is nonsense, of course, but it sold a lot of newspapers.

In fact the bill does not address the Commissioner of Transportation’s powers.  He has nothing to say about what goes on after the  right to subdivide the airport property is essentially retired. The bill accomplishes exactly the same thing as the State’s farmland preservation bill which has been very successful in preserving thousands of acres of precious farmland.  Planning Boards retain their authority.  Municipal zoning powers will not be affected.  There is no provision in the bill to enable any improvements at the airport.  All the bill accomplishes is to offer a mechanism to preserve airports.  The program is entirely voluntary.  If an airport owner wants to turn his property into townhouses and big box stores, that’s what the neighbors will get.  There is no zoning in the land that cannot be broken with the application of clever lawyers and money.  Most owners have much higher regard for aviation and for their communities than that, however.

The ”home rule” argument doesn’t apply.  The State has already reserved the right to control zoning at the ends of runways.  It is only common sense that you don’t build your house at the end of an active runway.  The law only protects those with no common sense.  Some New Jersey municipalities are in violation of that State law - they have never adopted ordinances that conform to the State’s regulations.   More important is the basic concept of what home rule is about.

 Airports serve regional interests just like roads and ports.  The FAA recognizes this and reserves certain powers to the Federal Government.  If there are Federal AIP dollars invested at an airport, there is very little that the municipality or State, for that matter, can do to control hours of operation or what kind of aircraft can or cannot use a facility.  That’s why 40 foot long trailers can chug along Federally funded interstate highways during rush hour.  They have every right to.  If your aircraft’s published performance fits an airport, you can land there.  The “home boys” really have no argument here although most airport operators do care about the neighborhood and go far out of their way to control or limit flight activity that is inappropriate for the surrounding community.

Odds are that the bill will eventually be signed into law.  The aviation community has been very good about writing the Governor to support the bill.  The knowledge that pilots have been presenting in their arguments is valued highly in contrast with the emotion of a NIMBY whine or the outright nonsense of a misinformed local politico.  Yes there are political considerations in everything the Governor does.  However, she knows what kind of economic contribution that airports make and she is committed to preserving open space.  The great majority of the land at our smaller airports is open space, after all.

There has been some argument against a $5,000,000 funding provision that was included in the bill.  That amount of money might buy the development rights at one smaller airport.  Maybe.  There are perhaps ten threatened airports that could be targeted for development rights acquisition immediately.  If the program is to have any impact whatsoever, the State is going to have to spend much more than that.  There was speculation that funding could come from the Transportation Trust Fund, but even that huge pot of money is over committed to rail, road and transit projects.

With any luck, by the time this article hits the street the Governor will have done the right thing and signed the bill.  But, again, there is politics involved.  To give an example common sense would tell us that there ought to be at least a 50 cent tax increase on the price of auto fuel.  Artificially higher fuel prices means less driving, slower highway speeds, less automotive pollution, less crowding on the roads, decreased consumer demand for stupid Urban Assault Vehicles, and a decrease in the amount of imported oil that the nation purchases.  Further, higher gas prices will be a spur to technical innovation.  All these are good things (unless you like SUVs).  Increased tax revenues means more money for alternative public transportation and funding for research on more efficient transportation technologies.  More good things.  However, your basic voter will scream bloody murder.  That voter defines the politics and politics says it will never happen.   Governor Whitman is a lame duck.  One can only hope. 

Updated 9/30/2000