Kalispell Council discusses airport options

The Kalispell City Council took another crack Monday at the future of the Kalispell City Airport: whether to fund it, close it or attempt to reopen negotiations with the Federal Aviation Administration.

Along with highlighting potential projects in the South Kalispell Urban Renewal Plan, Wayne Freeman of CTA Architects Engineers was at the workshop to answer questions from the City Council.

The three most feasible options for the airport each present a financial loss to the city to move forward.

Under the first option — to fund the airport from the general fund — the airport would continue to operate in the red for the foreseeable future. A CTA survey last year showed that more Kalispell residents were in favor of keeping the airport in place rather than phasing it out (the second option).

Council member Chad Graham asked if the survey provided information to those surveyed that the city operates at a loss by financing the airport with the general fund.

“Not that I know of,” Freeman said.

Maintaining the airport through city funds would become a nearly $1 million expense over the first five years, with an additional $300,000 cost each year after that. The maintenance and upgrades are not eligible for tax increment financing.

Council member Tim Kluesner asked about the methodology behind the survey, noting he had spoken with a south Kalispell business owner who said he hadn’t been included in the survey. Freeman said the outreach program included mailers, a door-to-door campaign, workshops and an online approach to bringing information to south Kalispell residents and business owners.

Kluesner also asked if the public workshops had been well attended and if Freeman believed pilots had made up a significant amount of the audiences.

“We did have a lot of pilots, business owners, folks from the neighborhood and folks who were nowhere near here,” Freeman responded. “We did a considerable amount of public outreach and our workshops were well-attended.”

The third option, requesting funding from the FAA, would mean the city would have to reopen negotiations with the federal agency to see about a possible scaled-back version of what the city had requested and then rejected in 2013. That year, Kalispell residents voted down a referendum to expand the airport to meet FAA standards and qualify for federal funding.

Longtime airport opponent Scott Davis of Kalispell said Monday that people who are against the airport might not have participated in the CTA survey process because they believed the issue had already been decided in 2013.

“The vast amount of people I know that don’t want the airport any more or didn’t want it expanded said, ‘We already voted it down, why would we go?’” Davis said as he picked up one of the picket signs from the 2013 referendum vote. “I just want to say that if it does come up again, there is a sleeping giant out there.”

Freeman said approaching the FAA to request funding is now in the city’s hands, but might not be a feasible approach.

“Option three is, do you have the political clout to go back and go after the funding?” Freeman said. “Unless the city is willing to go back to this and has the legal ability to go back to this after the voters voted it down, it’s a nonstarter with FAA.”

The city Planning Board will hold a public hearing on the South Kalispell Urban Renewal Plan on March 8 at City Hall. The plan is still available online at www.southkalispellurbanrenewal.com.

Tonight is the Ward 4 Town Hall meeting with council members Phil Guiffrida and Tim Kluesner. The Ward 3 Town Hall meeting will take place March 2 in council chambers.

Reporter Seaborn Larson may be reached at 758-4441 or by email at slarson@dailyinterlake.com.