IBJNews

Airport CEO spent $37K on travel in first year

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

The CEO of the Indianapolis Airport Authority, criticized for his spending while head of the airport system in Jacksonville, Fla., spent $36,693 on travel and lodging during his first year on the job here.

The most costly trip was $6,025 to attend the Airports Council International conference last year in Kuala Lampur, Malaysia, according to records obtained Tuesday from the Indianapolis Airport Authority.

John Clark, who started work at Indianapolis in April 2009, is being investigated by Florida State Attorney Angela Corey. Last month she issued subpoenas to the Jacksonville Aviation Authority, seeking calendars, time sheets and leave records for Clark dating to January 2006.

Corey, who has refused to elaborate on the nature of her inquiry, also issued a subpoena to the Indianapolis Airport Authority seeking information about Clark's travel to Indianapolis for job interviews early last year.

Clark worked for the Jacksonville authority for 14 years, winning praise for making improvements to that city’s airport system even as he alienated others, including airport police, during contract negotiations. In recent years Jacksonville’s alternative newspaper, Folio Weekly, carried accounts alleging lavish travel spending.

Indianapolis Airport Authority board members have stood by Clark. They said they thoroughly vetted their star candidate and that previous media reports were inaccurate.

One airport official has asserted that Clark is the target of a “hatchet job” by Florida investigators backed by the Jacksonville airport’s police union.

While at Jacksonville, Clark also was chairman of the North American arm of Airports Council International.

In Indianapolis, Clark made 23 trips between April 22, 2009, and April 1 of this year. His first trip is recorded as a meeting with U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, in Washington, D.C., at a cost of $1,234.

Last June, Clark attended the Airports Council International summer meeting in Manchester, England. The $5,412 cost of the eight-day conference was split between air fare and lodging.

Clark said in a statement Tuesday that his involvement in ACI leadership roles was disclosed to the IAA board “and was acceptable to the board.”

“I believe my affiliation with ACI brings considerable value to IAA in that I am actively involved in discussions regarding national aviation and airport policies. These discussions include congressional testimonies, framing position reports, and representing the interest of [Indianapolis International] in context of policy," he said. "My role as a leader in the airport industry brings credibility to the activities IAA is implementing.”

A month earlier, Clark hosted a gathering for airline executives from Delta Air Lines and Southwest Airlines at Augusta National Golf Club, in Georgia, costing the airport authority $3,041, according to his expense records.

Besides meeting with airline executives, Clark also had with him Mark Miles, president of the Central Indiana Corporate Partnership. The retreat was “for the purpose of fostering current and future business opportunities for IAA,” said the travel records, citing the potential for “air trade development” and “non aeronautical commercial development.”

In February of this year, Clark expensed $1,305 for lodging to “attend Super Bowl with Airline Representative” in Miami.  Clark covered his own plane fare, according to airport records.

Neither Clark nor airport officials could immediately be reached for comment.

Although a municipal agency, the Indianapolis Airport Authority is not supported directly by tax dollars. With the exception of taxpayer-funded grants from the Federal Aviation Administration for airfield projects, the authority gets the bulk of its revenue from airline rent and landing fees. Other large sources of revenue are parking and rent from food and beverage vendors.

But costs have become an issue for the authority. Revenues were forecast last year to come in 15 percent below projections, amid the recession. The airport also is in the midst of negotiations with cost-conscious airlines on a new airport-use agreement.

It was not immediately clear how Clark’s travel expenses compare with his predecessors. Among the airport CEO’s roles is to foster new business opportunities for the airport and to land additional air service.

Clark earns a base salary of $270,000.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • nothing to see; move along
    so the guy responsible for transportation does a lot of traveling and has lots of meeting with regulators and the airlines that use his airport. I have no way of knowing which trips were appropriate and which were not but I expect lots of travel for this job.
  • not an opinion
    This is reporting, not an opinion or editorial...They reported the facts (although they should have found what his predecessors spent on trips annually).

    The informed us the some Weekly paper in Jack. accused him of lavish spending. They also reported that airport officals believe he is the target of a â??hatchet jobâ?? by Florida investigators backed by the Jacksonville airportâ??s police union.

    I hope their next article relies on in-house research...compare his current spending to other airport executives (of comparable size) or compare it to his predecessors.
  • Time To Guy
    I can't believe people on here are actually making excuses for John Clark's behavior.

    He was days within being booted out of the Jacksonville Airport for his lavish lifestyle lived at taxpayer expense. When a council member tried to request documentation regarding what Clark was doing, Clark tried to charge him tens of thousands of dollars before he would provide the documents. The guy is corrupt...and he thinks he is at a place right now where people won't ask tough questions about what he is doing with public money. Guess he didn't count on the IBJ.
  • Re:
    In repsponse to the first post that said the article didn't say the guys name other than Clark, try reading the 3rd paragraph:

    "John Clark, who started work at Indianapolis in April 2009, is being investigated by Florida State Attorney Angela Corey. Last month she issued subpoenas to the Jacksonville Aviation Authority, seeking calendars, time sheets and leave records for Clark dating to January 2006."

    I think the article is about a guy that went hog wild spending at his previous job was hired here. His spending does directly affect everyone that flys in and out of IAA. His costs have to be covered by the rents and takeoff/landing fees paid by the airlines which are passed on to consumers. I don't really understand what all you posters are complaining about, this is the Indianapolis Business Journal, this is a business related article.
  • Nice Going...
    Solid reporting, you never even mentioned his first name. You identified the only subject this story is about as Clark. Solid job IBJ!
  • No accusation
    I don't think anywhere in the IBJ article are that steadfastly accusing or blaming this individual for his work here. I think they are showing the examples of trips, and why the costs are associated with his job. Straight facts. They reason they are mentioning this is to a) back him up in showing that no wrong-doing has ocurred in his first year here b)following up on a story that they originally wrote about based on an investigation in another State. They aren't pointing figures, just showing that since he has been here. Looks like no wrong-doing has ocurred.
  • This story is absurd
    What is this story about? That a CEO of a major airport traveled for his job and the company paid for it? That's groundbreaking. It's not like he was flying hookers in from vegas and writing it off. Better stick to Durham news, IBJ. I hear he sold a carpet and sofa on craigslist.
  • Fishing
    So, basically IBJ is fishing for a story here, no?

    Let me get this straight: the trips he took were either for a field-related organization for which he was once the North American chairman and spending time with airline reps (which the article later states is part of his job).

    The article then goes on to mention that his salary and expenses are not provided by taxpayers and that the author does not know how Mr. Clark's predecessors compare by stating, "It was not immediately clear how Clark�s travel expenses compare with his predecessors."

    I thought the IBJ was an objective business publication. This feels like one of those 'investigative reports' to which the local television news stations have stooped.

    Nothing like stirring up a little unwarranted controversy.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. liek the rest of America

  2. These quaint,obsessed musings by the stalkers are certainly entertaining, but I'm trying to figure out what, if anything, all the yelping below has to do with Zak Brown.

  3. It's evident that Moffett was pushing the right buttons and corporate America is now trying to squash him. He just wanted to withdraw the free pilot services provided to the company by the pilots to try and put some pressure on a company that has not been interested in negotiating a contract in over 5 years. The company does not provide a contract because not having one has saved them a bundle of money. Shame on any Republic pilots not standing behind their union leader just because things are getting tough, can you not see such strategic moves by the company as putting the last union president in a corporate position and into THEIR pocket. Do you really believe the last union president is so appalled at the attempts by Moffett, do you not remember his oppositions to the company? We stood behind him. It has been proven over and over again for thousands of years without fail, a man cannot serve two masters. Anyone that believes people vote contrary to their paycheck and livelihood deserve to be taken advantage of, the recent statements by the former union president are laughable as he denounces the current union president from his new corporate position. Have you ever seen a drafted sports player score points for his previous team, it cannot be done, he is not on the pilots side anymore, he gets his money a different way now than you and I do, and he should not be allowed to remain on the seniority list. A drafted player brings strength, credibility, tactical knowledge, and a strategic advantage to his NEW team, he would not be drafted or paid were it otherwise. We are all forced to choose only one side to play for and support, not doing so has many references in life such as insider trading and shaving points, all illegal for good reason. This basic fact is why corporate moguls, scientist, and engineers all sign non-discloser agreements and non-compete clauses, as protection in case they are lured into switching sides as our former union president has done. No NFL coach ever drafted a player so that both teams could benefit and better understand each other, they are recruited to win the game against that former team, period. Likewise the company does not recruit the former union president by accident or mutual understanding, its strategy. Don't confuse playing the game with good sportsman-like conduct in support of common business and prosperity goals, with the requirement to only play for one side. Good men we all love and favor fall subject to this manipulation, often without their knowledge, and it is not a betrayal of their friendship to oppose them when they switch sides. If we did not love and trust them, they would not have been chosen and lured to the other side in the first place. The deception by the drafted player is not made at a conscious level, it's just human nature and it's all about money and power which corrupts our ability to be objective and loyal to two masters. This is why our court system created the defense attorney, and why our military created counter intelligence. Its strategy and its propaganda, and it works, and that's why the "powers to be" manipulate the chess pieces by sometimes changing their colors. Some players know they are being manipulated when their color is changed, but it brings them more money and power so they do not care. The rest have good intentions but do not even realize they are being manipulated. This tactic is also known by another name, Divide and Conquer. In battle sending an imperfect message with an imperfect team is obviously not ideal, but it's still being sent by YOUR team, your union leader, a leader that has common goals and common rewards with you, they are the best, because we have elected them to do a job for us. If you are not backing Moffett but believing the spin by those that have recently switched sides, you are taking food out of your own mouth. Showing unity and backing an imperfect situation still results in taking just as much ground, it's about unity and bargaining power. It's not necessary to wait around for that perfect attack because it will never come, the company will spin and attempt to destroy anyone that gets in their way. Ultimately it's not about any specific attack anyway, ASAP or whatever it makes no difference, it is and always has been only about power. If this company cared about safety it would not build pairings with 8 hour overnights, come on, are you that naive? Besides, do you really think Hoffa cares, no, he got a call from corporate America and was squeezed into denouncing Moffett. If he didn't they would spin the safety card against him and the Teamsters National with implication for truckers, future contracts, insurance rates etc...saying something like the Teamsters use safety as a bargaining chip, blah blah blah... Do you really think any pilot is going to do something unsafe for the contract, absolutely not, the only ones threatening safety here is the company with reduced rest, fatigue, and poverty. Do you not find it odd that Hoffa and the Teamsters are opposing a Teamster president publicly? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and work with one of their own? Why did they not sit down and help him strategize, correct any mistakes, and charge ahead? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and leverage a contract for all those pilots that have been paying Teamster dues, isn't that why we have all been paying Teamster dues in the first place? I sure haven't been paying dues so that the Teamsters National could come along and write this kind of an article undercutting our union leader and our unity. Whose side is the Teamsters National really on, it's obviously not the Republic pilots side.

  4. No matter what Moffatt does the company is going to spin it like he is the terrorist and brainwash people like you into believing it, wake up, back your players that are trying to change things for you and your livelihood. Where has Hoffa been for the last 6 years, except collecting our dues. Seriously, do you really think an FO going for upgrade, signed off by a checkairman ready for the upgrade, who then fails, is not even capable of returning as a First Officer.

  5. whoa!

ADVERTISEMENT