UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, D.C. Jim DeVries, et a!., ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Complainants,



### v. FAADocl{et No. 16-14-03 City ofSt. Clair, Missouri, Respondent. RESPONDENT'S REBUTTAL TO COMPLAINANT'S REPLY DATED JUNE 27,2014 Respondent, the City ofSt. Clair, Missouri (the "City"), is in receipt ofa document entitled "Reply to the Respondents Answer FAA Docket 16-14-03" ("Complainant's Reply"). Complainant's Reply, received on or about June 27,2014, is unsigned by Complainant, and fails to set forth replies in enumerated paragraphs, making it difficult for the City to respond. However, the City will attempt to rebut Complainant'sReply ofJune 27, 2014 as best as it is able. Page I I. The City admits it charges to the St. Clair Regional Airport ("Airport") Fund five percent (5%) ofthe City's total insurance costs. 2. The City has documented to the best ofits ability the charges for insurance to the Airport Fund, especially when the City's insurance company, MIRMA, by Complainant's own admission, does not breakout Airport coverage as a separate charge. 3. The City denies that it creates a policy ofrevenue diversion by charging the insurance assessments to the Airpot1. 4. The City admits that the insurance assessments should have been charged to the Airport for many years, butwas not done for reasons unknown to the City's present administration.

### Page 2 5. The City believes, and its independent auditors have confirmed, thatthe charging ofaportion ofthe City's insurance assessment to the Airport Fund is aprudent accounting practice. 6. The City has no idea as to how other communities allocate MIRMA costs to their airports. 7. The City admits that the responses ofMatthew Brodersen speak for themselves. Page 3 8. The City again admits that the insurance assessments from MIRMA are not broken out. Page4 9. The City admits that its audited financial records confirm the Airport fund is losing money each year. 10. The City admits in its request to theFAA that the Airport constitutes aburden on the general fund ofthe City and has requested to close the Airport for this and other reasons. 11. The City denies any allegation that it is attempting to "bully" its way through closure process or that it is conducting anything evenremotely referred to as "demolition by neglect and financial ruin." 12. The City denies that it is in violation ofany Federal notices. 13. The City believes that its charges from MIRMA are reasonable. Page 5 14. Complainant's Reply verifies whatthe City set forth in its Answer; that Complainant has had specific knowledge ofthe City's charges for insurance to the AirportFund



### 2

### since 2008 and yet chose not to file this Part 16 Complainantuntil May of2014 ("May 2014 Complaint"). 15. The May 2014 Complaint shouldbe barred by res judicata, 

### laches and collateral estoppel in that Complainant filed aprior Part 16 Complaint withthe Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA") in January of2012 ("January 2012 Complaint"), while clearly having knowledge ofthe insurance allegations set forth in the May 2014 Complaint, and failed to include the insurance charges inthe January 2012 Complaint. 16. Complainant's failure to plead all known complaints in one action has caused duplicative work on behalfofthe City and the FAA in having to deal with and respond to multiple Part 16 complaints. 17. The City states the attachments attached to Complainant's Reply speak for themselves. 18. The fact that a specific cost is not broken out to the City in its insurance assessment from MIRMA does not mean that the City does not incur a cost for insurance attributable to the Airport. 19. The City staffbelieves the allocation offive percent (5%) ofthe City'stotal insurance assessment to the Airport Fund is not unreasonable. 20. Complainant had no legal authority to request an insurance quote onproperty in which he has no ownership interest and to which he is not an official or representative ofthe City. See 

### Page 5. 21. Complainant's insurance coverage quote does not cover general commercial liability. 22. Complainant's insurance coverage quote does not coverworkers' compensation coverage. 

### 323. Complainant's insurance coverage does notcover employee liability and claims. 24. The Director shouldnotbe swayedby this feeble attemptto compare insurance costs where thepolicy quote suggestedby Complainant does not even cover all that is covered by the City's currentpolicy. It is like comparing apples to oranges. WHEREFORE, for the reasons stated inthe City's MotiontoDismiss and Motion for Summary Judgment, the Cityrequests that a ruling be granted infavor ofthe City and that the FAA find that Complainant's delayinbringingthis newPart 16 Complaintis untimely inthat it should have been brought inthe January 2012 Complaint, and even ifnot requiredto be brought inthe January 2012 Complaint, the City's actions in charging five percent (5%) ofits total annual insurance assessmentto the Airport fund is not umeasonable and is based upon appropriate federal regulations, and for such other and further reliefas maybe appropriate. Datedthis 23'd day ofJuly, 2014. Respectfully submitted, ZICK, VOSS, POLITTE & RICHARDSON A Professional Co oration

By: I KurtA. V ..ess, MB 

### 438 WestFront Street P.O. Box 2114 Washington, Missouri 63090 (636) 239-1616 (636) 239-5161 Facsimile kav@zvplaw.com City Attorney for the City ofSt. Clair, Missouri

4CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certifythatonJuly 23,2014, a copy ofthe foregoing document was delivered electronicallyto the Federal Aviation Administration at 9-AWA-AGC-Part-16@faa.gov, and a copy was mailedto Mr. Jim DeVries, Complainant, 501 Ridgefield Drive, Pacific, Missouri 63069.

W

:\Q-R -S-T -U\St.Clair\Airport\T enantComp1 aint\Docket#16-14-03\Re

5