Airport decision: Let's all vote on it

A divided Kalispell City Council punted on deciding a course of action for the city’s airport Monday, moving to put it on a general election ballot for voters to figure out this November.

The nearly three-hour meeting left the airport’s future as uncertain as ever. It also set up what’s bound to be a hot and heated campaign issue.

A motion to put the issue on the ballot passed 5-4. It was originated by Bob Hafferman and supported by Phil Guiffrida III, Tim Kluesner, Wayne Saverud and Mayor Tammi Fisher.

“I believe the owners of this airport should have a say in how they want it run,” Hafferman said. “We’ve got a council that is divided on this issue and I don’t see any give or take. The only way is to put it to a vote of the people.”

An earlier motion by Kluesner to rehabilitate the airport in its existing footprint with money from the airport tax increment finance district failed 5-4, also supported by Hafferman, Guiffrida and Fisher.

Saverud was the swing vote in both motions.

He was stuck between four council members who support an expansion and upgrade to B-II design standards with federal Airport Improvement Program funds and four adamantly opposed to that.

Saverud’s reason for supporting the ballot initiative: “I can be sarcastic and say I would like everyone to have the privilege of scouring these reports and trying to figure out what’s the best way to go ... It’s not an easy black-and-white situation, there are many shades of gray. This way we can make everyone unhappy.”

Ballot language will be ironed out at a June 18 meeting.

Language proposed by Hafferman would focus on whether voters want to proceed with the expansion and upgrade to B-II standards or rehabilitate the airport in its existing footprint with money from a tax increment finance district that sunsets in 2020.

FISHER DEFENDED the meeting’s outcome.

“I tried to make my decision and that motion failed. The next best motion was to send it to the voters and that passed,” she said.

The meeting left some council members feeling it was orchestrated for just that outcome.

Atkinson said he raised his hand to make a motion to proceed with the B-II upgrade after Kluesner’s motion failed. Fisher instead called on Hafferman.

“If I would have gotten the floor we’d have voted on that and my guess is it would have passed,” Atkinson said.

“There were a lot of people playing their cards. And it came down to the fact that the mayor had the floor and was able to orchestrate the way things were going to go.”

Fisher said Hafferman’s hand was the first she saw.

“If a teacher asks a question and five students raise their hands the teacher has discretion who to call on. For any of the proponent side to cry foul is a fallacy,” she said. “Notably, the motion they want passed is going forward to the voters. Had the motion to send it to the voters failed, my guess is their motion would have passed.”

FISHER WAS AMONG the most outspoken critics of the proposed B-II upgrade and how the airport has been handled going back to 1979. She rattled off a list of unmet goals to improve the facility.

She and Kluesner also questioned how interest earnings from the tax increment finance district have been plugged into council-approved airport enterprise fund budgets to put it in the black for at least the last seven years.

At one point, Saverud moved to table the decision for a month.

“I would have to say I can’t listen as fast as you can talk,” he said to the mayor. “I know you have prepared remarks there and done a lot of work. I think it would be wise for us to have some time to mull those over.”

The motion died for lack of a second among City Council members who had decided to hash out a path forward on the fly without holding a work session to share their views beforehand.

CHARLIE HARBALL, city attorney and interim city manager, said he’s OK with the issue going to a vote because of the amount of public interest in it.

“In the long run, I think it might be healthier to vote on it as a community,” Harball said. “As you can see, the issue has become very polarizing for council. That’s not healthy. It seems to have gone past civil dialogue and hard feelings.”

It will be a complex issue for voters to work through, with master plans and studies that stretch back for decades. But the question can be boiled down into simple terms.

“Do we upgrade with FAA funds or not?” Harball asked. “Let’s vote and then we can all go forward with what the public decided. And move on. In that sense, it probably was a healthy result.”

Reporter Tom Lotshaw may be reached at 758-4483 or by email at tlotshaw@dailyinterlake.com.