New Search
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER N0.58-07-10-F <br /> of the <br /> Airport Manager <br /> AM N~,bING SECTIONS 9, 10 AND 15 OF THE AIRPORT FEE <br /> SC E>~.1ULE; RATIFING UNAMENDED FEES; AND REPEALING <br /> AD I1~IISTRATIVE ORDER N0.58-07-07-F. <br /> Th Aik-port Manager of the City of Eugene finds as follows: <br /> A. Authority is granted to the City Manager of the City of Eugene under Sections <br /> 2.440 to 2. 4~ of the Eugene Code, 1971 to set fees and charges for the use of the Eugene <br /> Airport. T e City Manager has further delegated that authority to the Airport Manager under <br /> Airport Ru 8,4.2. <br /> B. ',Pursuant to that delegated authority, on September 1, 2007 I issued <br /> Administra ive Order No. 58-07-10 and notified the Mayor and City Councilors that I intended <br /> to amend Sections 9, 10 and 15 of the Airport Fee Schedule which was adopted by <br /> Administra ive Order No. 58-06-07-F on June 25, 2007 (effective July 1, 2007), as set forth in <br /> the Notice tta~Ched as Exhibit A thereto. <br /> C. j The Notice was also posted at two locations at the Airport and published in the <br /> Register ard, a newspaper of general circulation within the City, on September 1, 2007, <br /> provided t persons who had requested notice, persons who are currently paying such charges, <br /> and was adie available for inspection by interested persons at the offices of the Airport <br /> Manager, 8855 Lockheed Drive, Eugene, Oregon 97402, during normal business hours (8:00 <br /> a.m. to S:0 p.m., Monday through Friday, exclusive of holidays). <br /> D. The Notice provided that written comments would be received for 15 days from <br /> the date o posting and publication. Comments were received from the Transportation Security <br /> Administr tioh (TSA), Emerald City, and Horizon Air, to which I make the following specific <br /> findings: <br /> Tr~nsportaNon Security Administration (TSA): <br /> Co 'ent 1: TSA should be exempt from the fee since they are a partner to the airport <br /> an doh not generate any profits. <br /> Fi di :TSA is a tenant of the airport and a user of the facility. TSA employees are no <br /> dif ere. t than airline employees or concessionaire employees, and the airport could not <br /> jus ify~ exempting TSA employees. Furthermore, other airports that charge employee <br /> par 'ng fees do not exempt TSA employees. No change is being made to the fee <br /> sc ' dule as a result of this comment. <br /> Co ent 2: Representative DeFazio is against charging TSA employees parking fees. <br /> Fi di ' As noted in the response to Comment 1, employee parking fees are a common <br /> ch rg~ at airports as it allows the airport to recover costs associated with maintaining the <br /> parking facilities. Alt tenants who use the facility should share equally in the costs. No <br /> <br /> Administr tive Order <br /> <br />