An airship company is suing the Navy for $65 million stemming from the 2013 roof collapse of a Navy blimp hangar in Tustin California – MCAS Tustin – that destroyed an experimental airship

Tustin, California –

An airship company is suing the Navy for $65 million stemming from the 2013 roof collapse of a Navy blimp hangar in Tustin that destroyed an experimental airship.

In a complaint filed Monday in federal district court, Aeros Aeronautical Systems claims the Navy knew 16 years before the incident that the roof of the massive wooden structure was unstable.

“They had not done anything done about it,” James Gallagher, a Los Angeles attorney representing Aeros, said Wednesday.

The Navy and the Department of Justice, representing the Navy in the lawsuit, didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Aeros leased a third of the 1,000-foot hangar in 2009. With funding from the Department of Defense and NASA, Aeros crews spent the next few years developing Aeroscraft. The rigid airship drew headlines for its buoyancy technology, which allowed the 266-foot ship to land just about anywhere, plus its potential for carrying heavier cargo than any plane or helicopter.

In early October 2013, Aeros officials say a piece of wood fell from the World War II-era hangar and engineers were called to assess the structure. A week later, a 25-foot chunk of the roof fell 17 stories, with some debris puncturing the aircraft.

At the time, officials said the cause of the collapse was unknown. The Aeros lawsuit alleges delayed maintenance was to blame.

The Navy built the hangar and a twin structure to the south in 1942 to store planes and blimps during World War II. Helicopters were also kept there during the Korean and Vietnam wars.

The Tustin Marine Corps Air Station was shuttered in 1999, with most of the land transferred to Tustin. But the Navy hung onto the hangars, with plans to eventually hand the north one off to Orange County and the south one to Tustin.

Through public records requests, Gallagher said his team learned the Navy paid a structural engineering firm to assess the roof of the hangar in 1997.

“They had come back with a report that said there was a certain area of roof that was in need of critical repair,” Gallagher said, recommending repairs be made within two years. In 2013, Graham said, “That is the precise part of the roof that collapsed.”

The Navy blocked access to the hangar for eight months, Gallagher said, fearful more of the roof might come tumbling down. When Aeros was allowed back inside, the company declared Aeroscraft a total loss.

Aeros filed a claim for damages, but the Navy denied the claim in December. No reason was given, Gallagher said.

“For the past 17 months, we have attempted to address damages arising from a clear dereliction of duty as quietly as possible,” Aeros CEO Igo Pasternak said in a statement. “However, the Navy’s unwillingness to resolve the issue in a timely manner is now delaying a long-sought airlift capability that holds promise to solve complex logistics problems, save significant taxpayer money and save lives following natural disasters.”

The lawsuit asks for at least $65 million in property damages, plus a portion of a $3 billion financing campaign Aeros claims was derailed by the roof collapse. Aeros says it hoped to fund a fleet of cargo-carrying airships to help with military, commercial and humanitarian efforts.

https://www.ocregister.com/articles/navy-653939-aeros-roof.html

Contact the writer: 714-796-7963 or [email protected]

Metrolink’s annual ridership continues to drop – “Now it takes a little more time to get to work, he says, but it’s cheaper than the train”

Sean Robb of Valencia regularly took Metrolink to and from work in Glendale until the trains increasingly fell behind schedule. It became so bad, Robb called the line “Metro-Late.” He now drives to the office.

Levi Gelineau, an insurance salesman, used to ride the line from Simi Valley to Burbank. When fares rose, he bought a Toyota Prius. Now it takes a little more time to get to work, he says, but it’s cheaper than the train.

They are not the only ones who have stopped taking Metrolink.

Once hailed as the fastest-growing commuter line in the nation, the railroad has seen its annual ridership drop by almost 595,000 passengers since 2008, with resulting losses in revenue. That and other factors have left the agency squeezed between trimming service or boosting fares, either of which could prompt more defections.
Trends in Metrolink’s ridership

Officials of the six-county system — covering a region of more than 20 million people — mostly blame the downturn on the worst recession since World War II, which decimated the region’s workforce.

They also note that downtown Los Angeles — the predominant destination for Metrolink commuters — is undergoing a residential renaissance but has faded as an employment center.

“Ridership should be growing given the size of the area Metrolink serves,” said Richard Katz, a former state legislator and longtime board member for the railroad. “Though we have been attracting riders, we’ve had a hard time holding on to them.”

The decline is occurring even though Metrolink has hired experienced marketing professionals, courted employers and tapped into Facebook and Twitter to reach tech-savvy millennials.

Express service, new lines and specialty trains to ball games, rock concerts and the beach have been added. Safety has improved since the deadly Chatsworth crash in 2008, and equipping rail cars with WiFi is planned.
lRelated Downtown L.A. streetcar line cost estimate is shaved by $55 million

But Metrolink officials, transportation experts and commuters say those measures are working against factors that have steadily chipped away at the railroad’s ridership.

During the recession, the unemployment rate was 8% to 13% across the region and the number of annual boardings dropped from a peak of almost 12.33 million in 2008 to 11.14 million in 2011.

Until that time, Metrolink enjoyed steady growth. By the line’s 10th anniversary in 2002, it had exceeded its ridership goals with almost 8.95 million yearly boardings. The system also had expanded from 112 miles of track in three counties to 512 miles in six counties: Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego and Ventura.

“The recession is a big part of the decline in ridership,” said Robert Turnauckas, chief of marketing and communications at Metrolink. “It’s been hard to recover from something so impactful.”

By 2013 — after then-Chief Executive John Fenton put more emphasis on customer service and building ridership — annual boardings had recovered to almost 12.07 million.

Since then, ridership — contrary to projections — has dropped to 11.74 million. The dip, along with rising costs for fuel, operations and safety projects, prompted the railroad to trim service this year and seek more money from the five county transportation agencies that help fund the line.

Further challenging the recovery, Metrolink officials say, are shifting patterns of job growth across the region.

Studies indicate that the size of the workforce in the core of Los Angeles has stagnated somewhat in the last 20 years while the number of residents has tripled. At the same time, employment has risen in Orange County, the South Bay and on the Westside.

But only Orange County is served by Metrolink, and many new downtown L.A. residents tend to work closer to home and don’t need the rail service.

“The job growth is not that high in downtown Los Angeles,” said Brian Taylor, a professor of urban planning at UCLA. Metrolink’s “ridership is very sensitive to economic change and employment shifts.”

Metrolink officials say the railroad also has been stung by a reduction in the amount of fares that can be deducted from federal taxes and by recent declines in gasoline prices that have encouraged more driving.

Some transportation experts contend that the railroad might be bumping up against the limits of its market — a still-car-dependent region with multiple job centers.

“Transit, especially rail transit, competes poorly in modern, relatively dispersed environments,” said Peter Gordon, professor emeritus of urban and regional economics at USC. “Rail transit best serves areas with dominant downtowns.”
Ridership should be growing given the size of the area Metrolink serves. Though we have been attracting riders, we’ve had a hard time holding on to them. – Richard Katz, a former state legislator and longtime Metrolink board member

New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Washington, D.C., and Boston have dominant cores and strong rail traditions. All have commuter trains that carry hundreds of thousands of passengers a day.

Some Southern California commuters say they like riding Metrolink, but the system needs more midday and late-night service. Others have found that express buses can be faster and cheaper. Also figuring into the loss of riders are poorly synchronized train and bus connections.

For almost two years, David Clubb relied on Metrolink to get to his office in Burbank. In the morning, he took a bus to the line’s Simi Valley station, and he did the reverse in the evening.

The bus connection was good going to work, he said, but the return by train was often late.

“There was less than a five-minute window to catch the bus” on the way home, Clubb said. “If you missed it, the wait was 40 to 45 minutes for the next one. Rather than continue to lose time, I was willing to spend $30,000 on a car.”

Although local transportation agencies periodically adjust their bus schedules to match Metrolink’s, the lack of connectivity remains a serious problem, according to Bart Reed, director of the Transit Coalition, a nonprofit organization that supports public transportation.

Some of the most convenient bus and rail connections can be found in Orange County, where the local transportation agency has put a priority on coordinating timetables.

Metrolink officials say they are addressing the synchronization issue and working on other strategies to attract and keep riders, such as the planned Perris Valley Line in Riverside County.

Rail officials cite the creation of a $10 weekend pass that has become popular in the Inland Empire. They say their program for school field trips and partnership with the FlyAway Bus service to Los Angeles International Airport have also generated tens of thousands of boardings.

Michael DePallo, Metrolink’s chief executive, says the effort is paying off. Preliminary figures for July and August show an uptick in riders of about 1.7% compared with the same period last year.

Railroad officials expect more boardings as the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority expands light rail and subway service to the Westside, which will provide commuters better access to job centers and popular destinations there.

To enhance regional travel, work is underway to build run-through tracks at Los Angeles’ Union Station that will allow Metrolink trains to either make shorter stops or pass through the terminal without stopping.
lRelated Downtown L.A. streetcar line cost estimate is shaved by $55 million

The railroad is now preparing a long-range strategic plan that will evaluate ways to build ridership, including the possibility of reducing fares, an idea supported by Art Leahy, the chief executive of the MTA, which helps fund Metrolink.

As the line weighs its options, Hasan Ikhrata, executive director of the Southern California Assn. of Governments, a regional planning agency, is optimistic. He predicts that ridership will grow as the economy improves, fuel costs rise, major transit projects are finished and car-averse millennials enter the workforce.

“The downward trend is not going to continue,” Ikhrata said.

https://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-metrolink-riders-20140908-story.html#page=1

[email protected]

Participation Certificates – Bonds – and the “Shadow Banking” System – Hocus-Pocus Financing – Demystified.

The shadow banking system is a term for the collection of non-bank financial intermediaries that provide services similar to traditional commercial banks. Former Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke provided a definition in April 2012: “Shadow banking, as usually defined, comprises a diverse set of institutions and markets that, collectively, carry out traditional banking functions–but do so outside, or in ways only loosely linked to, the traditional system of regulated depository institutions. Examples of important components of the shadow banking system include securitization vehicles, asset-backed commercial paper (ABCP) conduits, money market mutual funds, markets for repurchase agreements (repos), investment banks, and mortgage companies.” Shadow banking has grown in importance to rival traditional depository banking and was a primary factor in the subprime mortgage crisis of 2007-2008 and global recession that followed.[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_banking_system

A Participation Certificate (PC) (also known as a Certificate of Participation) is a financial instrument, a form of financing, used by municipal or government entities which allows an individual to buy a share of the lease revenue of an agreement made by these entities. It is different from a bond issued by these agencies since participation certificates are secured by lease revenues. Municipal and government entities use this instrument to circumvent restrictions that might exist on the amount of debt in other forms they are able to take on.

Participation certificates are a new form of credit instrument whereby banks can raise funds from other banks and other central bank approved financial institutions to ease liquidity. In this case banks have the option to share their credit asset(s) with other banks by issuing participation certificates. With this participation approach, banks and financial institutions come together either on risk sharing or non-risk sharing basis. While providing short term funds, participation certificates can also be used to reduce risk. The rate at which these certificates can be issued will be negotiable depending on the interest rate scenario.

On June 14, 2013, the city of Detroit announced, as a policy move to preserve cash during its financial crisis, that it would not be making payments [1] on a certificates of participation it had issued.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participation_certificate

At its meeting on October 19, the Tustin City Council approved selling bonds in an amount not to exceed $45 million dollars to complete financing Tustin Ranch Road from Walnut Avenue south to Warner Avenue.

The bonds will have no financial impact on the City’s budget, as all
payments of principal and interest will be paid solely from revenues generated by development at Tustin Legacy. The bonds will also be used to fund other major infrastructure projects at Tustin Legacy.

Funds to complete the road will come from a variety of funding sources,
including these bond proceeds and funds from the City of Irvine allocated to mitigate traffic impacts from its adjacent development, the Irvine Business Complex. No monies from the general fund will be used.

https://www.tustinca.org/departments/citymanager/releases/releases/182.pdf

To provide for business start-up opportunities and expansion of existing businesses, the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency provides access to a variety of financing programs authorized by either the federal or state government, as well as programs provided by other private, public and non-profit agencies. The Agency also provides technical assistance, educational support and other similar needs of a non-financial nature to the business community. A brief summary of the possible assistance and incentive programs that can be made available are as follows:
Zoning incentives to encourage economic development through:

Floor area ratio bonuses
Allowance for mixed use projects
Combining of public and private uses
Planned Unit Developments
Density bonuses
Assistance in land assembly:
Land banking
Eminent domain
Land swaps
Land write downs
Assistance with construction of infrastructure improvements.
Provision of technical assistance.
Provision of developer unique financing opportunities, consisting of:
Tax Increment Financing
20% Housing Set-Aside Funds
Special Purpose Financing Districts
1911, 1913, 1915 Acts
Mello Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982
Landscape and Lighting District of 1972
Revenue bonds
Lease Revenue bonds
Tax Allocation bonds
Lease Purchase financing
Industrial Development bonds
Certificates of Participation
Mortgage Revenue Bonds
Loans and Advances
Leases
Land Disposition Proceeds
Rental Payments
Participation in future cash flows

https://www.tustinca.org/departments/redev/busassist.html

Certificates of Participation (COPs). A form of lease revenue bond that permits the investor to participate in a stream of lease payments, installment payments or loan payments relating to the acquisition or construction of specific equipment, land or facilities. In theory the certificate holder could foreclose on the equipment or facility financed in the event of default, but so far no investor has ended up owning a piece of a school house or a storm drainage system. A very popular financing device in California since Proposition 13 because COP issuance does not require voter approval. COPs are not viewed legally as “debt” because payment is tied to an annual appropriation by the government body. As a result, COPs are seen by investors as providing weaker security and often carry ratings that are a notch or two below an agency’s general obligation rating.

https://www.emuni.com/glossary.php

Hangar Fire - "Without Litigation" - City of Tustin Already On the Hook for $90 Million in Clean-Up Costs - "Not Including the Actual Hangar Property" - and Heading for a Billion Dollars - Developers Likely Not Off the Hook Either - Property Value Assessments Undergoing Official Review - Ask Yourself - Would You Buy or Rent at the Tustin Legacy - Remember there's "Another" Hangar Too
Addicted? 1-800-662-HELP
URGENT REMINDER - if You're on Southern California Edison's - "Time to Fuck You" - "Electricity Rate Plan" - "Opt Out Now" - Call Today or Visit the Website - 1-800-810-2369