Kalispell city officials continued discussing the future of the airport at an informational presentation Monday night, though it shed little light on which direction the council intends to head on the controversial issue. City Manager Jane Howington led the meeting, giving answers to the majority of questions posed by citizens at a public “scoping session” Nov. 30.
These public meetings represent an effort on the part of Howington and new Mayor Tammi Fisher to engage with the public on what has grown into the most “hot-button” issue currently facing Kalispell: Whether to improve and possibly expand the city airport over the opposition of many west side residents who are concerned a busier airport could lessen safety and increase noise.
The questions and answers contained in the 43-page handout (available on the city’s Web site) ranged from the tangible to the intangible. A question on what the city has spent on airport-related studies and land acquisitions since 1999 reveals a total of $3.5 million – funded by federal and state grants, tax increment finance funds and a 2005 urban renewal bond.
Other questions, like one on whether airport improvements would decrease Kalispell’s “charm factor,” could not be objectively answered by city staff, Howington said.
Still other questions would require an outside engineer to answer, like determining what the cost to the city would be if the airport closed. In that case, the city would have to pay out on hangar leases and leases with the Hilton Garden Inn and Red Eagle Aviation. The city also owes nearly $1.5 million on the 2005 bond, and would lose its eligibility for federal reimbursement on the improvements it has already made. The cost of environmental remediation for the airport’s filling station is also unknown.
All of which demonstrates the city faces significant obstacles in both moving forward with any airport improvements or moving backward. Councilman Bob Hafferman said he would table any motion to hire an engineering firm to answer outstanding questions from the public and begin work on an environmental assessment for proposed airport improvements.
“How will the environmental assessment fund be financed? I can find nothing in our budget that has a line item for an environmental assessment,” Hafferman said. “I have no idea what it’s going to cost … we’ve spent $495,000 on consultants at the airport and we’re at square one.”
Hafferman added that any amendment to the city budget to pay for an environmental assessment would require another public hearing.
Other roadblocks to the airport updates persist. Tim Weiss, whose family owns land adjacent to the airport the city would have to acquire in order to realign the runway, said he wasn’t interested.
“This is a big chunk of our property that they’re trying to take and we are not interested in selling,” Weiss told the council. “So they will have to use condemnation.”
Howington said earlier in the meeting that the council, “has historically not been supportive of condemnation.”
Nor has the issue of the airspace conflict with radio towers for the currently shuttered KGEZ station been resolved. The station property is now in the hands of a bankruptcy trustee.
Many of those present urged council members to put the question of whether to improve the city airport to a vote on the November ballot. Others, including those in the aviation community, said the city would be remiss in not accepting the roughly $14 million in federal funds available for a large-scale infrastructure project that could generate economic activity in the Flathead.
“I understand that this money is not stimulus money but money allocated for small airports,” Winifred Storli said. “At this time while this valley is suffering so much, we need work.”
Council members will discuss what they should do next regarding the city airport at a Feb. 8 work session.