This is video from the 2-22-10 Board of Aviation Commissioners meeting. (Part 1.) (Part 2.) (Part 3.)
For further commentary and a link to the information presented in opposition, please visit Brack's blog at...

This is video from the 12-28-09 Board of Aviation Commissioners meeting. (Part 1.) (Part 2.) (Part 3.)

This is the video from the 11-23-09 Board of Aviation Commissioners meeting. (Part 1.) (Part 2.) (Part 3.)

"When a man assumes a public trust, he should consider himself public property," Thomas Jefferson said.

"A little rebellion now and then ... is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government" - Thomas Jefferson (letter to James Madison, 1787).

"Being a modern wimp, I found the first quote above a bit disconcerting. However, the second is the entire and complete antidote to any overweening public servant who thinks the citizens are supposed to just shut up and let their betters decide everything for them. No, no, Pierre. It doesn't work that way in this country."

This is the video from the 10-26-09 Board of Aviation Commissioners meeting.

Parts 1 through 3 are opinion commentary by Jean Johannigman on statements made in the BOAC meeting and by the BOAC in general. (Part 1.) (Part 2.) (Part 3.) (Part 4.) (Part 5.) (Part 6.) (Part 7.) (Part 8.) (Part 9 Final.)

09/28/09 meeting of the Board of Aviation Commissioners (BOAC)

Greensburg Daily News Editorial about the 09/28/09 meeting

Rhetoric Takes Flight At Airport Board Meeting
Published October 05, 2009 12:58 pm

During last Monday's abrasive inquisition by Board of Airport Commissioners Bill Ernstes and Dr. Jon Dooley during the BOAC's public meeting, nothing could have put the icing on the cake more than if Sen. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) had been sitting next to Daily News guest columnist Jean Johannigman in the crowd of public attendees. It would have added the perfect ending to the embarrassing rhetoric and bullying had Sen. Wilson turned to Johannigman and punctuated the evening by shouting his now infamous line in her face.

"You lie!"

Dr. Samuel Johnson - 16th century linguist, author and literary critic - once wrote: "He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man." To further this quote, Johnson simply meant those who forget all civility in the face of the public shed both consequence and conscience, which dictates our social behavior and, for public officials, holds them accountable to the people.

Both Mr. Ernstes and Dr. Dooley are public officials, appointed by the Mayor of our city to conduct business for a specific board for the good of the people. It is good to remember that, gentlemen, before the beast emerges.

What should have been a 15- to 20-minute meeting turned into a shameful scene lasting nearly an hour of "he said, she said" and finger-pointing as the two tried to dispel the "smokescreen" cast by

Johannigman's countless columns on the airport expansion project and explain what they believe to be "facts" into the public realm.

We'll applaud the two commissioners - as the others stayed fairly silent - for finally speaking their minds, adding a counterpoint to Johannigman and enlightening all present with the missing information regarding the debate on the issue.

However, we disagree with the manner in which it was done and the forum where it took place. The Daily News has offered the board and Mayor Herbert the opportunity to offer a rebuttal to Johannigman's columns countless times. So far we have not received any comments or they have refused to clarify themselves on the issues addressed in her columns.

Instead, it was an onslaught on a citizen who had the audacity to speak her mind against public officials funded by our taxpayers in an open meeting, in which she was given little opportunity to defend herself. The degradation included the Daily News as well for printing her columns and other asides about 'why such and such' had never been covered.

Johannigman was approved to author her opinion column due to her position as a community leader and local business person. Johannigman is outspoken, attends all the government meetings and remains a free voice in and for the community. The airport expansion project is close to her heart, with the bulk of her columns about that subject. It is her desire to ensure the community is not hoodwinked by a bunch of airplane enthusiasts.

The Daily News is not saying that is the case. In fact, we don't agree with everything she says on the opinion page, although we can say she is an adept researcher. The Daily News does not necessarily agree with every word printed on the opinion page as we are sure our readers do not. The opinion page exists so you, our readers, can be made aware of both sides of an issue.

It is the spectrum of viewpoints that individuals and a community must consider, allowing a person to use their intelligence and free will to either accept or reject those viewpoints, which help make us well-rounded citizens. That is our freedom as Americans, and one of the many functions of our newspaper.

The issue of whether the airport expansion is good for the community or moreover, is something the community wants, remains to be seen. You can voice your opinion on the Daily News Website, through our opinion poll found at the bottom of the homepage. We hope everyone in the community votes in this poll since it seems only about a few people care about this project. This small group of concerned citizens are fighting over something that could have an impact on all of us.

We encourage Mr. Ernstes, Dr. Dooley, other board members, as well as Mayor Herbert to clarify any misconceptions by responding with either their opinions or simply state the facts and show how and where they can be proven. Don't attack citizens for speaking their mind. Don't become a beast on the taxpayers' dime.

Airport Board is accepting gifts....per the ordinance.


Video Clips from 09/28/09 about people legally able to give gifts...

Shortened commentary from Jean Johannigman

     These video snip its are discussions from the airport board meeting of 9/28/09 about people being legally able to give gifts to the airport board for their use for the community and add stipulations to that gift. Does this give one taxpayer superiority or preference over another? Can this gift us with an airport whether the majority of taxpayers want it or not? Can these gifts obligate taxpayers to operational costs for this airport that we may or may not be able to afford???

Further commentary from Jean Johannigman

I have been doing a bit of research on the airport and the BOAC and in doing so I started reading IC CODE 8-22-2 and Greensburg ordinances DEPT. 33.81 through 33.17. needs updating)

While going through the Greensburg Department of Aviation ordinances I kept seeing a revision reference 2887-4 which was passed on 4-2-09 which I knew was about the time the City Board of Aviation Commissioners was created. Out of curiosity to see what the revision Mayor may not have changed....i went down to City Hall and requested a copy of the revised ordinance.

Upon reading the ordinance 2007-4 it states under section 1 part F the following:
"That the Greensburg Aviation Commission shall have the authority to accept gifts of money or property, and may accept such gifts SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS IMPOSED BY THE DONOR, if the board determines that acceptance of such gifts is in the public interest".
In my personal opinion...I can not believe that anyone would pass an ordinance with the above statement in it. Especially if you consider what conflict some past gifts received by City officials or representatives of the City have caused.

So I have some of the following questions about what this statement in this ordinance could potentially mean to the taxpayers of the City of Greensburg. So here goes...

1.)First of all is this statement in this ordinance legal and allowable by law? I am not a lawyer and am not capable of answering that question_but given again the problems that past "gifts" have caused ...I can not believe that this statement was put in an ordinance form and passed without questioning it. All you need to do is look at the past minutes and you can see this was not questioned.




5.)If the BOAC (board of aviation commissioners) does get the grant of 95% federal and 2 1/2% state grant and then has to come up with the other 2 1/2%...does that mean that users of the airport or other "gifters" can supply that funding and thus obligate the taxpayers of the City of Greensburg (by buying their way into forcing the taxpayers to support this project (if the airport is not self sufficient meaning it would fall back on the taxpayers to support and or make it viable as far as their operations budget) ?

6.)Is this method of "gifting" also a way to circumvent The possibility of the taxpayers having a referendum On this issue? A referendum where the taxpayers could have a say in IF they want an expanded airport and WHERE they might want that expanded airport?

7.)"and may accept such gifts SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS IMPOSED BY THE DONOR"...what is this telling the taxpayers? Is this telling us that if you have a project that you would like to see happen and you have enough money to "gift" that you can tell City government how you want it done and the rest of the taxpayers have nothing to say about it? Nothing that is unless it can not support itself and then we the taxpayers ...will we then be called upon to show our financial backing? Yes) I realize the board can turn any offer down. But if same said board really wants that project to happen ...would you turn down the bird in your hand?

Couple all of the above questions with the fact again that two and perhaps as many as three of the five member board of aviation are not taxpayers in the City of Greensburg but are authorized to spend the City BOAC budget and act on behalf of the City BOAC.

I will simply end by asking once again.....How can this be?

Will we have a chance to approve this project before land is taken?

In one section of the ALP, it states there will be "public meetings" as part of FAA procedure. This page of the ALP "seems" to state that the BOAC has already performed the necessary requirements for public meetings. This is simply an item that we need to clarified with the BOAC.

"It is not the function of our Government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the Government from falling into error."
Justice Robert Houghwout

Marc Haston - - 812.593.1492 - © - All rights reserved.