The attorney representing us had suggested that we reach out to the Airport Administration directly to discuss our lease overpayments with the Airport Director. We followed this advice by sending two emails and leaving two voicemails over the course of a week. Unfortunately, we received a response from our attorney that came from the outside counsel hired by the Airport Director instead saying, 

"Our client has received numerous emails and voicemails from the Andrews about the hangars. This is to request that all communication from your clients related in any way whatsoever to the WW2 hangar, WW2 hangar lease, T hangars E-9 and R-2, and FWF’s planes and personal property, come through you to our office. The Andrews should make no further attempts to communicate with the Airport or City staff on the foregoing issues, be it in person, email, telephone, voicemail, or Airport meetings, including the Ask the Airport zoom meeting. Please let your client know that my client will not be responding to the emails and voicemail. I will be responding to the requests received, namely the request to continue leasing the T hangars, directly to you."

As we reviewed the email, a couple of questions arose: how can a civil service employee prohibit citizens from accessing public services, and how can a civil service employee decline a reasonable request from a citizen while on the job at a public facility?

Legal fees add up quickly, and the Airport Director is trying to escalate the situation at every turn unnecessarily. It is especially critical since public funds cover all the Airport Director's legal costs, and this approach will not only leave a Veterans' Nonprofit Homeless but bankrupt as well.

Our requests are straightforward and reasonable: we would like our WWII hangar lease terms to be honored, access to the hangar that we are paying rent for, and the over-payment of our rent to be applied to the hangars we were moved to for the storm damage repairs. 

Please Continue To Share And Post Our Petition.