CCMinutes - 01/21/04 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Poling echoed Ms. Solomon's comments. He related that he had read the responses and none had indicated any enthusiasm for the idea. Ms. Bettman agreed that the airport was functioning in the present. She recommended that the council look to the future and ask how the airport would be maintained. She noted that the council had just voted to spend the entire balance of the Air Service Development Fund. She asserted that, without the fund, the airport had no resources to increase its air services. She commented that Linn and Benton Counties had seemed interested in pursuing the discussion on the formation of an air district. She opined that the future success of the airport was dependent on such a change. Mr. Taylor asked if this was a strategic time to hold this conversation. He commented that the City did not have the attention of other counties because of State and their own fiscal challenges. Mr. Meisner commented that two years ago the City Council had ~weaned" the airport from property tax revenue to pay for airport bonds. He added that he found the letters to be positive in tone on the topic of joint governance. Ms. Nathanson asked if there had been any sentiment expressed among various directors of chambers of commerce and tourism bureaus toward a more regional form of airport governance. Mr. Noble related that he had met with the chamber directors and economic development staff from regional communities for the specific purpose of determining what areas the various municipalities could collaborate on. He reported it was not as great an issue for the outlying communities as optimizing air service for the citizens of those communities. He added that those communities all had interests in their own airports, though not all of them had commercial air service and none of them were interested in sharing governance of their airports. Ms. Nathanson surmised that what was being suggested was that the other partners would ultimately prefer to foster airports within their own jurisdictions rather than to partner with Eugene. She suggested that ways to involve outlying communities in a more meaningful way, such as an airport advisory committee, be explored. Mr. Noble responded that, currently, two members of the Airport Advisory Committee were residents of Lane County and that the airport did work closely with the Visitors' Bureau of the County. Mr. Noble reiterated that the airport had ~a lot on its plate." He felt that changing the governance of the airport would open a plethora of issues such as who would be taxed and whether they were willing. Ms. Nathanson concurred, adding that the City Council had a full slate as well. She averred that, were she to prioritize, she would not choose to start work on a shift in airport governance at this time. Mr. Pap~ asserted there were positive reasons for looking at this change. He felt the change would create a separate board completely focused on the functions and operation of the airport. Mr. Pap~ commented that he did not think the City would ~just hand over" its assets, but rather that it would get fair market value for it in one way or another. In response to a question from Mr. Pap~, Mr. Noble said that the last time there had been a operational deficit that had required General Fund moneys preceded the time he was manager of the airport. He noted that the general obligation bond passed in 1989 represented the last time the airport had any reliance on property tax moneys, adding that any deficit that sought aid from the General Fund had been prior to that, MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 21, 2004 Page 3 Work Session