There's this famous scene in King Kong where Kong, frustrated in the big city, climbs atop a skyscraper with a screaming woman in his hand. That's pretty much the scene today in downtown St. Petersburg, with the city's dominant daily newspaper as the 800-pound gorilla and the tiny Albert Whitted Municipal Airport as its captive. News reports in the St. Petersburg Times have touted development options, while the editorial page has called for the airport's closure. The gorilla's assault, at least according to airport supporters, has been relentless.

The inky onslaught continued Aug. 9, when Times reporter Bryan Gilmer called the public's — and the city's — attention to the fact that Bay Air Flying Service, a private company leasing land at Albert Whitted Municipal Airport, does not make its customer records public.

The Times alleges that knowing the names and addresses of the people or corporations that rent hangar spaces at Bay Air is essential to estimating the economic impact of Albert Whitted Municipal Airport, whose future City Hall has questioned.

Ron Barton, St. Petersburg's director of economic development and property management, proposed that the airport land be developed into an 82-acre urban neighborhood surrounded by a 40-acre waterfront park. Turning the public land over to private developers would require a referendum, which the Times has advocated, but the Federal Aviation Administration has informed St. Petersburg leaders that it will not let the city out of its current 20-year commitment.

City leaders tell Weekly Planet that the Times does not set the agenda at City Hall. But evidence suggests that the newspaper at least influences it.

After Gilmer's article publicized the fact that Bay Air's customer records are private, the Times penned an Aug. 11 editorial headlined "What's that smell?" — no joke — that maligned City Council member Bill Foster for his assertion that Bay Air's records were not relevant to public debate.

The Times compared Foster's position on Whitted and Bay Air to the smell emanating from Albert Whitted Water Reclamation Facility, a sewage plant adjacent to the airport.

"I would expect nothing less from the Times' editorial board," Foster commented to the Planet.

At first, the Bay Air records request appeared to be just a temporary stink. Bay Air owner Ron Methot told the Planet Aug. 20 that he wouldn't back down. The Times published a number of letters dubbing the "What's that smell?" editorial a new low for "Florida's Best Newspaper," including one from Bay Air attorney Brian P. Deeb:

"What Bay Air will not provide, which is irrelevant to any economic evaluation, is the names and addresses of its customers," Deeb wrote. "No one seems interested in obtaining these names except the St. Petersburg Times, apparently for the sole purpose of bolstering its target list in its never-ending campaign to shut down one of the city's greatest assets."

On Aug. 22, the records issue appeared to be grounded. Deeb was flying high. "The information that the Times is requesting … is not public record," he told the Planet. That day, Times attorney Penelope Bryan couldn't confirm whether the newspaper would take Bay Air to court.

Then everything changed. On Aug. 24, the Times patted itself on the back, reporting that Baker "requested the name and home city of each hangar renter, an overview of Bay Air's financial figures and a breakdown of what sorts of planes fly into Whitted from other cities."

But that isn't entirely true. "If you read something in the Times, you have to call and verify," said Methot.

According to Methot, Mayor Rick Baker met with the Bay Air owner and asked him to help pull the Times off his back. Methot offered to put together an economic impact analysis including the customer information of those who volunteered it after the Times put up a stink. The report, which Methot will submit in September, will not be comprehensive.

Baker did not return calls from the Planet.

"The Times would have you think there's going to be a great deal of information," Methot said, "… but we're going to lend credibility to what we've been saying all along — that the airport has an extremely great economic impact on the city."

This ink spat is just the Times' most recent battle in its long-running war to shut down Albert Whitted Municipal Airport. Asked why the Times has taken such a pointed stance against Whitted Airport, Philip Gailey, the editor of editorials, said the newspaper just wants to promote honest discourse.

"Before the city invests more money in the airport, we ought to have at least a public debate on the best use of that property," said Gailey. He said he thinks the editorial stance dates back to when Nelson Poynter was publisher. He died in 1978.

"What we have tried to do is open a serious debate," said Gailey.

Among the most recent arguments the Times has made is that St. Petersburg should charge nonresidents additional fees to use the airport. "Are the airport tenants all city residents?" the Times asked in an unsigned editorial on Aug. 11. "If not, do the nonresidents pay a higher price for the privilege of housing their airplanes or businesses at tax-supported Albert Whitted?"

But that argument doesn't stand up to examination. The airport receives city, state and federal money. FAA grant assurances require that use and rental fees be nondiscriminatory, according to Kathleen Bergen, the FAA's regional spokeswoman in Atlanta.

"They're just simpletons when it comes to understanding what's going on down here," Methot said of the Times.

But when you're an 800-pound gorilla, roaring and jumping up and down outside City Hall, it doesn't really matter how simple you are.

For more information about the Albert Whitted Municipal Airport debate, see "Airport Insecurity" at www.weeklyplanet.com/2002-05-22/cover.html.

Contact Staff Writer Trevor Aaronson at 813-248-8888, ext. 134, or trevor.aaronson@weeklyplanet.com.

This article appears in Sep 11-17, 2002.