Leasing Dispute at Ridgeland Airport Puts Hangar Owners' Investments in Jeopardy

Jan. 4—A yearslong leasing dispute at the Ridgeland-Claude Dean Airport in Jasper County has left pilots and hangar owners frustrated, claiming they are being forced to abandon or demolish their investments. At the heart of the conflict is a clash between federal compliance rules and the airport's efforts to enforce updated lease agreements — changes that hangar owners say are unnecessary and unfair.

As Jasper County continues to grow — experiencing an estimated population increase of nearly 20% since 2020 and about 31% since 2014 — its general aviation airport has gained increased attention. The airport, which serves private aviation but no major commercial traffic, has been a federally obligated airport for about a decade. This airport designation means it must comply with conditions set by the Federal Aviation Administration.

This shift is part of the county's attempt to modernize operations, according to Danny Lucas, Ridgeland-Claude Dean's airport manager and the county's director of development services.

However, long-standing tenants — pilots and hangar owners who have built or purchased private hangars on county-owned land — argue that the changes have upended a system that worked well for decades.

The roots of the dispute

Since the airport's establishment in 1938, hangar owners have leased the airport's land under relatively informal agreements. These leases allowed private individuals to build and maintain hangars while paying the county's aeronautics commission for the land underneath them.

A 1993 lease allowed tenants to rent a parcel of land from the commission for $150-$200 per year with the option to renew after 10 years, while explicitly granting ownership of any hangars or other improvements built on the property. The lease also allowed owners to remove their hangars within 60 days of expiration or negotiate an extension, but prohibited subleasing without the commission's approval.

This arrangement worked for years, but complications arose when hangar owners sold their structures. Lucas, who became the airport manager in 2020, said that new buyers often failed to secure a lease with the county for the land beneath their newly purchased hangars. This left them with few options: give up the hangar to the airport, move the hangar or enter legal limbo.

"The FAA says you can't continue to provide someone with a vested right on your property because that will prevent the airport from redeveloping the property to whatever purpose the airport wants to develop the property for," Lucas said.

Airport operators must maintain control over airport property to comply with federal obligations, according to the FAA's national policy. Leases that grant long-term tenant control or restrict the operator's ability to manage the airport are discouraged. For example, leases exceeding 50 years or lacking subordination clauses — those that prioritize federal compliance over tenant agreements — are flagged as potential violations.

Lucas cited these federal requirements as the driving force behind the county's push to maintain the airport's leasing practices when hangar owners sign new contracts. However, many hangar owners view the county's actions as an attempt to seize their investments and force them into unfavorable agreements. They argue that the changes are not motivated by compliance but by an effort to gain control of valuable property and impose stricter terms on tenants.

Hangar owners push back

Hangar owners argue that the changes feel less like modernization and more like an attempt to push them out. Many claim the county has refused to renew leases, process rent payments or provide clear communication, leaving them with few options but to abandon or demolish their hangars — some of which cost as much as $300,000 to build.

Richard Dean, a former airport manager and current member of the airport commission, said the county is trying to make the airport hangars unsellable. Comparing a 2023 lease to a 2018 lease — one of the last signed before Lucas took over — Dean pointed out that the 2018 lease offered a 20-year term with options for multiple five-year renewals. In contrast, the 2023 lease offers only a five-year term, with no renewal options. This short-term lease has left hangar owners with a difficult decision at the end of the term: either give the hangar to the county or demolish it at their own expense.

Dean emphasized that the issue is not just the loss of investment. He argued that these short-term leases diminish the market value of the hangars. Without the security of a long-term lease, potential buyers are discouraged from investing, knowing they could lose the hangar after only a few years. This is part of the county's strategy, Dean said.

Another key point of contention is the interpretation of FAA guidelines. The county insists that the FAA mandates a reversionary clause in leases, which would allow the county to reclaim the hangars after the lease expires, he said. Dean strongly disagrees with this interpretation, citing an FAA ruling from Alamogordo, New Mexico, which he believes shows that the FAA does not require such a clause unless the county chooses to implement it.

Other airports have long-term leases of 25 to 35 years and are routinely offered to new businesses and hangar owners, he said. In Ridgeland, however, existing hangar owners are limited to five-year terms, making their investments less appealing to potential buyers and complicating efforts to secure financing through banks, he added.

The airport's response

Lucas defends the airport's actions, saying the changes are necessary to bring the airport into compliance with FAA regulations. He acknowledges the challenges posed by the dual ownership system — where the county owns the land but not the hangars — and argues that standardized leases will create consistency moving forward. The county also maintains that FAA compliance is essential for securing federal grants, which are critical for maintaining and improving the airport.

Lucas explained that the FAA stipulates that leases should not restrict the operator's control over the airport. Long-term leases, such as the previous 30-year agreements, could limit the county's ability to make decisions about future development. The new leases will protect the county's federal obligations and improve operation, he added.

The airport operator contends that while hangar ownership can be transferred, the land it sits on cannot be part of the sale without a lease being signed by the new owner.

Legal actions and continuing disputes

The dispute has taken a legal turn, with hangar owners and the airport manager planning to battle it out in court. Some hangar owners accuse the county of acting in bad faith by refusing to accept rent payments and failing to negotiate fairly. Lucas explained the airport won't accept payments from hangar owners who do not have a proper lease, as doing so undermines compliance efforts.

In September 2023, hangar owner Cameron Heddings filed a complaint against the county, claiming the county failed to honor an agreement for a 20-year ground lease on a hangar he purchased at the airport, according to court documents. Heddings alleges that he relied on a letter from the county, dated November 20, 2020, which promised to offer him a 20-year lease. After purchasing the hangar from private owner Mark Adam Berry in April 2021 for $85,000, Heddings requested that the county fulfill the terms of the agreement, but the lease has not been provided.

___

(c)2025 The Island Packet (Hilton Head, S.C.)

Visit The Island Packet (Hilton Head, S.C.) at www.islandpacket.com

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.