• )

UNITE D STATE S DEPARTMEN T O FTRANSPORHATIO N FEDERA LAVIATIO NADMINISTRATIO N

WASHINGTON , D C AIRPORT/ENVIRONMENTA L LAW , AGC-60 0 Venic e Je t

Center , LL C Complainant , V
. Cit y o f Venice , Florid a Respondent
. FA A Docke t No
. 16-09-0 5

/ COMPLAINAN T VENIC EJE T CENTER
. LLC' S RESPONS ET O Ciy V OFr ^

VENICE' S MOTIO N T O DISMIS S " ^ Complainan t

Venic e Je t

Center , LL C ("th e VJC") , b y an dthroug hth e undersigne d counsel , hereb y files it s Respons e pursuan t t o Title 14 , Cod e o f

Federa l Regulations , Part 16.19(c ) t o th e Responden t City o f Venice' s ("th e City " o r

"Respondent" ) Motio nt o Dismis s ("Motio n t o Dismiss" ) date dFebruary 18 , 2010
. I nsupport thereof , VJ C state s a s follows : I
. Introductio n O nSeptembe r

2 , 2009 , th e City move dt o dismis s thi s proceeding , contendin g th e disput e wa s unripe , tha t th e VJ C lacke dstanding , an dtha t th e claim s wer e insufficientl y pled
. Th e City no w request s th e FA A disregar dtha t motio nand , instead , dismis s thi s proceedin g o n "ground s o f mootness " o nth e basi s tha t th e federa l Receive r

appointe dover th e VJ C sol dit s asset s an dassigne dit s airport leas e agreement s t o Tristat e Aviatio nGrou p o f Florida , LL C ("Tristate")
. Thes e ne w argument s devise db y th e Cit y (an dth e argument s raise dagains t

Tristat e a s an intervenor ) merel y represen t additiona l effort s t o avoi dit s federa l obligation s a s an airport sponsor . Th e motio no f th e City no t

onl y ha s n o meri t

bu t i sadditiona l evidenc e o f th e City' s hardene ddeterminatio nt o avoi dit s responsibility for it s pas t an dcontinuin g willfu l conduc t an dfiiture obligations
. Th e City continue s t o engag e i n a patter n o f discriminatory an danti-competitiv e conduc t t o restric t

aeronautica l service s at

th e airpor t an dth e VJ C continue s t o b e directl y an dsubstantiall y affecte db y th e City' s curren t non-compliance
. Contrary t o th e City' s contentions , th e VJ C ha s interest s an dright s i n thi s proceedin g an dit s claim s are no t moot . Th e City' s clai mtha t th e VJ C n o longer

ha s alegal interes t i n th e outcom e o f

thi s proceedin g i s patentl y fals e and , mor e importantly , inconsisten t

withit s representation s t o th e Court presidin g ove r

th e federal receivership
. II
. Th e VJ C Ha s A Lega l Interes t I nTh e Outcom e O f

Thi s Proceedin g An d It s Claim s Ar e No t

Moo t Th e City argue s tha t

th e VJC' s claim s ar e moo t becaus e i t

sol dit s asset s an d transferre dit s airport

leas e agreement s t o Tristate
. Initially , whethe r th e VJ C sol dit s asset s t o Tristat e ha s n o bearin g o n th e pendenc y o f thi s proceeding
. Th e sal e o f asset s was merel y that , a n asse t

sale
. I t di dnot resul t i nth e liquidation , dissolution , o r closin g o f

th e VJC ; th e entit y remain s activ e an dit s right s a s acompan y remai nintact
. Further , th e City' s assertio ntha t th e assignmen t

o f th e airport

leas e agreemen t diveste dVJ C o f

it s legal interest s i nthi s matte r i s inconsisten t

wit hit s ow nargumen t

that th e VJ C remain s liabl e unde r th e lease
. Specifically , th e City assert s i nit s supportin g memorandu mfiledi n thi s proceedin g tha t th e assignmen t

o f th e VJC' s leas e t o Tristat e "shal l
no t releas e or

reliev e [VJC ] fro man y duty , obligatio no r liability unde r

th e term s an d condition s o f

th e [VJC ] lease. " Likewise , i nit s Respons e t o th e Receiver' s Motio n fo r Approva l o f

th e Sal e o f

th e VJC' s Assets , filedi nth e federal Receivershi p action , th e Cit y argue dth e VJ C shoul dremai n liabl e for it s obligation s unde r

th e lease :"Unde r Florid alaw , alessee' s assignmen t o f aleas e t o athir dparty doe s not reliev e th e lesse e fromit s financial o r othe r obligation s t o th e lessor
. Kornblu mv . Henr y E
. Mangel s Co. , 16 7 So.2 d1 6 (Fla.3 dDC A 1964)
. A s such , VJ C shoul dremai nliabl e for it s obligation s unde r

th e Lease , notwithstandin g th e assignmen t t o Tristate. " (City o f

Venice' s Respons e t o Receiver' s Motion for

Approva l o f

Sal e o f th e Asset s o f

VJC , ^ j 25)
. Th e City' s disingenuou s an dnonsensica l positio nthat VJ C i s liabl e unde r

th e leas e ye t

ha s n o interes t

i n th e leas e o r

th e outcom e o f

thi s proceedin g i s further evidenc e o f

it s unrelentin g willfu l determinatio n t o ignor e it s airport tenant' s propert y right s an dt o avoi dit s ow n responsibilitie s unde r

th e leas e an dpursuan t

t o federal obligations
. Further , ther e i s adeb t

owe db y th e purchase r

o f th e VJC' s asset s an dpaymen t o f tha t deb t wil l depen do n profitability o f th e purchaser' s operation s and , i npart , o nit s ability t o construc t th e hangars
. Accordingly , th e VJ C doe s hav e alega l interes t i nth e outcom e o f

thi s proceeding , apart

fro mit s continuin g obligation s unde r th e airport

lease
. Insum , th e VJ C stil l ha s standin g t o pursu e thi s actio nbecaus e i t remain s a nentity that

i s directl y an d substantiall y affecte db y a n airport sponsor' s allege dnoncompliance
. 1 4 C.F.R
. § 16.23
. Th e City deliberatel y ignore s th e contentiou s disput e tha t continue s betwee nit , th e VJ C an dTristate , an dinstea dcontend s neithe r VJ C no r

Tristat e hav e arip e claim
. A s always , th e City' s tru e desir e i s transparent . Tristat e ha s repeatedl y advise dth e City o f it s ongoin g intentio n t o complet e th e VJC' s developmen t plan
. Th e City woul dlik e nothin g mor e than t o avoi dit s da y o f reckonin g an dcontinu e it s obstructionis t conduc t agains t Tristate
. I f

th e City i s successfu l i nthi s motio ni t wil l continu e t o violat e it s federal obligations
. Th e City ha s mad e every effor t t o obtai nadismissa l i norde r t o avoi darulin g o nth e merit s o f

th e Part 1 6 Complaint , t o avoi daccountability fo r it s actions , an dt o preven t th e hangar s projec t

fro mgoin g forward
. Suc haresul t woul dclearl y allo w th e Cit y t oflagrantly undermin e th e FAA' s goverrmiental mandat e an dshoul dnot b e condone do r permitte db y th e FAA
. Fo r th e foregoin g reasons , th e City' s mos t recen t Motiont o Dismis s shoul dals o b e denied
. CERTIFICAT EO FSERVIC E I hereb y certif

y that I hav e serve dth e foregoin g o nth e followin g person s a t th e followin g addres s b y overnigh t mai l o nFebruary 24 , 2010 : Offic e o f th e Chie f Counse l Jonatha nCros s Attn : FA A Part

1 6 Airport

Proceeding s Manage r Docket , AGC-61 0 Airport s an dEnvironmenta l La w divisio n Roo m92 5 Federa l Aviatio nAdministratio n Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n 80 0 Independenc e Ave. , S.W
. 80 0 Independenc e Ave. , S.W
. Washington , D C 2059 1 Washington , D C 2059 1 Facsimil e (202 ) 267-576 9 Origina l an d3 copie s b y overnigh t 1 Cop y deliver y I hereb y certif

y that I hav e serve dth e foregoin g o nth e followin g person s a t th e followin g addresse s b y E-mai l o n February 24 , 2010 : Raymon dVeatch , Esq
. Airport an dEnvironmenta l La w Divisio n Offic e o f th e Chie f Counse l Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S W Roo m900- E Washington , D.C
. 2059 1 (202 ) 267-319 9 (office ) (202 ) 267-967 6 (direct ) (202 ) 267-576 9 (fax ) raymond
. veatch@faa
. go v Richar dL
. Richards , Esq
. RICHARD S & ASSOCIATE S 23 2 Andalusi aAvenue , Suit e 20 2 Cora l Gables , Florid a3313 4 Telephone : (305 ) 448-222 8 Facsimile : (305 ) 448-222 9Email : rrichards(airichpa.ne t I hereb y fiarthe

r certif y tha t I hav e serve dth e foregoin g o nth e followin g person s at th e followin g addres s b y overnigh t mai l an delectroni c mai l o nFebruary 24 , 2010 : Thoma s R
. Devin e Kapla n Kirsc h& Rockwel l LLP 100 1 Connecticu t

Ave
. NW , Ste
. 80 0 Washington , D C 2003 6 Telephone : (202 ) 955-560 0 Email : tdevine@kaplankirsch.co m I hereb y further

certif y tha t I hav e serve dth e foregoin g o nth e followin g person s a t th e followin g addres s b y Unite dState s mai l o nFebruary 24 , 2010 : Rober t C
. Anderso n Hal l & Anderson , P
. A 131 4 Eas t Venic e Avenue , Suit e E Venice , Florid a3428 5

/GiaAluc aMojf^lo,^ N 03499 7 ( GMorello@wiandlaw.co m NDominiqu e H
. Pearlman , FB N004413 5 DPearlman@wiandlaw.co m WIAN D GUERR A KIN GP.L
. 300 0 Bayport

Drive , Ste
. 60 0 Tampa , F L3360 7 Phone(813)347-510 9 Fa x (813 ) 347-515 9 Attorney s for

th e Complainant , Venic e Je t Center , LL C