BY DAN HILDEBRAN
A dispute between the Keystone Heights Airport and the Florida International Rally and Motorsports Park reached a new stage in June when new attorneys for the racetrack demanded that the airport pay for a track reconfiguration. The airport responded by threatening to evict its longtime tenant if it did not move part of the track out of a runway protection zone.
According to airport officials, the dispute began after the Federal Aviation Administration discovered, in February 2024, that the airport was not charging the FIRM fair market value for its ground lease. The federal agency also claimed the airport failed to apply for a land use change that would’ve allowed the racetrack to occupy the western part of the airfield, even though it was not an aeronautical concern.
Most critically, the FAA said that part of the racetrack intruded into the runway protection zone of runway 11/29.
The triangular-shaped former Keystone Army Airfield has two active landing strips. Runway 11/29 runs along the airport’s northern boundary adjacent to Camp Blanding. Runway 5/23 is parallel to Airport Road. A third runway, parallel to State Road 100, is no longer active and is occupied by the motorsports park.
Corrective action plan
In April 2025, the FAA approved a correction action plan with the airport authority, outlining the airport’s steps to resolve all three issues.
Part of that plan included reconfiguring the track out of the protection zone by June 25.
During a May 6 airport board meeting, the board’s attorney, Jim Taylor, told the panel he did not believe the airport was responsible for paying for track reconfigurations.
The board responded by asking Taylor to get a second legal opinion. The Keystone Heights-based attorney turned to board-certified aviation lawyer Edward Booth, who agreed with Taylor’s assessment.
Booth focused his opinion on his assertion that when the FIRM’s predecessor, the European Rally and Performance Driving School, built the track in 2006, it not only encroached on the runway protection zone but also exceeded the limits of its leasehold, effectively trespassing on airport property. Booth also said the school failed to get permission from the airport before constructing the track.
Track owners demand money
On June 6, lawyers for the track wrote to the airport board, demanding that the airport pay for the track changes.
“The record is clear,” wrote attorneys for the FIRM,
“• KAA (Keystone Airport Authority) approved construction of the racetrack as early as 2006;
- KAA retained knowledge of the (runway protection zone) conflict since at least 2014, yet failed to act;
- KAA’s public comments on May 6, 2025, confirmed it now seeks to shift blame to FIRM despite having full oversight and zoning responsibility.”
The FIRM also filed a complaint with the FAA, alleging that despite its many good-faith efforts to resolve the encroachment on the runway protection zone, the airport refused to engage racetrack management and referred all inquiries to its attorney.
Track owners also blamed the airport for failing to apply to the FFA for the land use change from aeronautical to non-aeronautical.
Airport threatens lease termination
The airport board responded to the FIRM’s demand to cover the track reconfiguration costs by instructing Taylor to write to the FIRM’s lawyers. Taylor’s letter denied any legal responsibility for the expenses and informed the track owners that if the FIRM failed to remove the part of the track in the protection zone, the airport might terminate the FIRM’s lease.
