 record before I actually keep going. We have started. All right. Well, good evening, everyone, and welcome to our February 10th airport advisory board board meeting. Very nice to see you all. Michelle, glad to have you back with us. Can we ask you to start with calling the roll, please? You bet. Chairman Earl. Here. Vice Chair Jordan. Here. Board Member Bliss. Here. Board Member Dean. Here. Board Member Robison. Here. Board Member Salam, Salmatasian. Sorry, Talis. Yeah, just say Talis. That's cool. Nice all day. I was like, I'm going to say it right. Don't worry about it. Yeah, I guess I'm here. Thank you. You have a quorum. Thank you, Michelle. First on our agenda is our public invited to be heard. I don't believe we have anyone on the meeting right now. I'll just make sure. And seeing no one there, we'll move right along then to approving our minutes. We have minutes from both December 9th and our January 13th meetings. Does anyone have any revisions to the minutes before we make a motion? Mr. Robison. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It was from the last meeting, so January meeting. Let's see. Page four, lines 36 through 38, has to do with the land for any extension of the runway to the west. Now, I could be remembering wrong, but what I understood was not that there's not enough land there, but the city hasn't made any overtures to the current owners to let them know that we're interested or made any progress in that direction. Is that what you guys recall? I think what I had said, Russell, was that on the existing airport land, there's not enough extension. It would be required acquisition. That's consistent with what you just said. OK, well, I would request a clarification there, because it's a minor point, really. But I think that's fundamental to one of the things that the airport is trying to do, which is extend the runway. Russell, just then the amendment would be there's not enough, online 37, not enough land within the current airport boundaries. Without an acquisition, yeah. But can I add something to that? Is that mean we can't do a 1,000 foot extension? Well, so Steve, I'm going to ask to just hold that and for a second and just have a minute approval. Sorry. But I'm still going to stop it. Were there any other amendments? I got one more. I got one more for you, Mr. Chairman. Page six, lines 27, 28. Again, my understanding was that we don't really need to change the gate code, but the minutes read as if that's kind of something we're trying to do. That's just do you want to clarify? I mean, that's something that I do intend to do once I've gotten a complete communication list so that I can communicate with everyone. You are going to change the gate code at that point? At that point, yes. OK, I misunderstood then. So thank you. Does anyone else have any revisions to either set of minutes? OK, I have one for the January 13th minutes on page 5, line 29. It just has my first name instead of the last name for the vote. I would then entertain a motion without any other discussion to approve the minutes with the two amendments. I move that we approve the minutes as amended. Can you guys do them one at a time? One set of times. That way then we can make sure everybody agrees. Absolutely. So Russell, do you want to maybe propose just the December 9th minutes? Yeah, I move that we approve the December 9th minutes. Is there a second? I'll second that. Move and second in any further discussion. All those in favor of approving the December 9th minutes, raise your hand, please. No one opposed. Thank you all. And then can Russell or whoever would like to a second motion for the January 13th minutes. I move that we approve the January 13th minutes as amended. And I'll second that as well. OK. All right. Thank you both again. Any other discussion? All those in favor, if you want to raise your hand. And none opposed. Thank you guys. Minutes approved with amendments. Can we move on then to our old business financial update? Jeff, I don't know if you have something for us tonight on this. With Joni out this week, I've been unable to. I don't have personal access into our financial system, so I have to work through her for that. And you got an update. We will look for an update the next month. And then we have our standing item of our airport needs recommendations to council. I don't have anything in particular here. I think there's kind of two things we could discuss if we want to. One would be some of the topics Melinda proposed last month for potential things for people to be interested in. And Steve, I think it would be a great opportunity for you to ask your 1,000 foot runway extension question as well, since we're here. So either way, first, or Steve, go ahead. I'll go first. I was just thinking about it. I mean, if we can't do 1,000 feet, is there any restriction on shortening the extension, say 500 feet? Any extension of that runway is going to be a plus, especially on those hot days and summer. And I don't disagree with that statement. And I will verify the answer. But my understanding is that with the current FAA requirements, ensuring that all safety areas remain on airport property, that that does not allow an extension of the current runway of any length. But I'll be happy to verify with our planning engineering team on that specific question. But Jeff, just to be clear, the runway extension could still happen if the city acquires the land to support it. Yes. Yes, I took Steve's question as the land sits today. Is there any room for runway extension? There's always room for extension when you acquire more land. Yeah, that was my question. With the existing land that we control, can we shorten the runway length extension and still have enough room? Well, we take it out to wherever the safety area has to be and then calculate how much the runway can be extension. Right. And I'll check and verify that. I believe that the safety areas of the existing runway do not sit within airport property as it stands. Oh, really? Yeah. That's true. I just looked at that again. It's supposed to be 1,000 feet. And we only have about 800 feet to the fence. So we're 200 feet into property that we don't control? Right. And that historically was very normal where it was. It was not a previous requirement of FAA to have those safety areas. But what happened over time is that when you don't control that land, then people will do what they want, whether it's with trees or otherwise. And so it became more of an issue to spend money on managing things off-airport than an airport having full control of that weapon. So that's sort of what drove the change in FAA policy. I did not know that. Thank you. Mr. Selma, Tina. Hi. And I'm not proposing this. I'm just purely educational for my purposes. Would this be something that if the landowner didn't want to sell it, could we eminent domain it? I am not an eminent domain expert. But my understanding is that airport sponsors, typically cities or counties, do have the ability for the public benefit to eminent domain land. Whether or not this specific one falls within the criteria, I can't answer that. But I do know that that has been used in the past. I think that thanks, Steve, for bringing that up. I think it is just a good clarification coming out of those minutes. Vice Chair Jordan, do you and suggested last month a series of items, probably 10 or 11 or 12, that we may want to focus on and how one or two of us each assigned to some of those? I don't know if anyone had a chance to think through those. If you want to kind of maybe walk through those one more time, I thought it was a really good list. OK. To see how we might want to focus on those going forward as it fits into our core role of recommendations to council going forward. Yeah. Thank you. To the extension discussion, I know that this has been an agenda item since I joined the board in January of 2016. And it was scheduled. It was on the books. It felt like it was really far away. Then it got moved up a couple of years, and then it kind of got pushed off. And I couldn't swear to anything in court at this point. But at one point, that soccer field on the west side with the farm was they had been spoken to and they were open to selling that land to the airport for the purpose of extension. We were still it was so far out financially with the FAA and grants and things like that. And so the purchase of the land and then the all the studies and things that had to happen, those had to happen first, as I recall, prairie dogs and prebel mice and things like that. And then then we had to begin the process really close with what was the viability, which then would lead to could we make an offer on it, which would lead to have the money and then will the FAA back us on the extension. So it seems like they just happen at other airports. We go fly and discover new paint jobs and do asphalt. But it is quite a process since we don't own that land. But at one point, there were talks and the land owner was open to selling. But that was probably three or four years ago, I would guess at least. And so I don't know if that condition still exists or if that land sold. And then I don't know how many of you saw that there's a is it mulching facility that they're going to put in, you know, the county is next to us to the north. And if you ever go get trees, you go way back to the back. And they're going to put in a chicken facility back there. And there's been some discussion with people who live on St. Brain Road about the noise. And that's a city development that's going to happen. It'll be over again to the north and west end of. I feel like my sneeze of the of the airport for us. Excuse me. I'm so sorry. And the. But again, that soccer field is really the issue. And I've always watched that soccer field closely, especially in the summer, it makes me very nervous to come in over that with all the little kids there. So some of the so the runway extension would be, we could all become experts in our area. If that's an area that you wanted to take on, as an area of interest would be to kind of monitor that, ask questions, find out. So the runway extension would be one. The grants are always a question, just how we can liaise on those. Those are pretty much in the ballpark of the city, but just, you know, following through and helping out with the airport manager with getting data or whatever else has to be done. Those are the kind of things I used to ask David, if there was any way I could help him as a, just a civilian and somebody on the airport, could I help him administratively with anything like that? Rules and rights compliance, FBO kind of eyes on the airport. We have the squawk list through Lopa that they were like six months ago or there was a lot of chatter with it. And they were keeping the spreadsheet of issues around the airport that I think most of them have been addressed now, but we could bring that in at the board to watch a squawk list and be sure that we're aiding and enabling the improvements around the airport because some of them, you know, the pilots do. I did see the Bazi on the other night. So that was awesome. And so the squawk list, the public restrooms on the south side, for those based on the south side that have a vested interest, the airport development in general, we've had different members come and speak to us about their ideas for development and kind of be that liaison, that person that keeps the air to the ground on that. And then airport development with LDAP, you know, promoting us with the city, being that liaison to be sure that we're showing up in the important areas, the city that we feel we get left out of and stepped over by DIA typically. A lot of things refer to DIA as being the closest airport when we have one right there. The airport expo and air show, which has been in my basket for quite a long time. And I'll just go ahead and say, while I'm saying that, that we had decided on a 2023 show prior to Mr. Slater's passing. And so I don't know that we'll try to pursue 2023 with a new airport manager coming on. That was the, I thought we'd be well underway at this point working on it and we've had setbacks of all kinds. So that's something to consider, but that does require a very knowledgeable team to pull that off. And then finally, I think, oh, the electric charging stations, which plays into the advanced long lot 2.0 and the climate action. So attending those meetings, listening in on what's the discussion, brainstorming how the airport can be a part of that and be at the, we'd love to be at the lead, not 20 years behind all that. We'd like to be up at the front and perhaps even breaking ground in aviation and in the city for working with the city and not being an outlier or a stagial component, but actually being on the front of it. So charging stations, it's easy to say, not easy to implement. We discussed that airport last month, that aircraft, that's still, there's still a lot of questions about what they're gonna need, you know, what's a quick charge look like, things like that. So again, just becoming subject matter experts in a specific area that you're interested in and could report back to the board or be available to be called, either providing reporting proactively after attending a meeting or learning something new and then being able to be called on to gather information as it comes before us so we can present to council. Linda, thank you. And I'll just add, all of that is within the context of providing recommendations to council on future action and our duty of kind of just promoting your awareness utilization and development of the airport. I have two hands raised. So I'm gonna go council member Martin first and see where up there first. Yeah. Thank you. I just had a couple of corrections on Melinda's first item. The wood shipping facility is not a city facility. We probably wouldn't have that. It's County, isn't it? It's a County facility. I'm looking into it because I've heard from constituents who are unhappy. And the other important point is that it's got a three-year renewable cycle. So if it does go in, it goes in for three years and not forever. So in terms of the availability of the site and it's definitely parallel to the runways. It's not gonna like come around over to that property. If you go to runways, it's definitely parallel. And then it's chippers. I don't know. I doubt it's gonna be a height, any kind of an issue for us. But I did see the conversation was about the noise from it and the trucks coming in and out that the neighbors on St. Brand are worried about it. And they, you know, I think only one person said, you know, we've already got enough to deal with with the airport. But that is the quiet area right there. We've cut our engine and we're coming in the land. So it's quieter. But just to say that that is happening beside us into the North and West. And that last I, I'd spent a little bit since I've flown, but I think we've still got a soccer field. I think that's still an active soccer field at the end of 1-1 departing to the West. So, and that's obviously the land that we'd be considering. The thousand foot to my memory as well would take us past 75th. It would actually, we can't actually do a thousand feet even from the end of our runway out because we've been hit the road. So we do have to look at something a little under that anyway. And that's all, I've all just in my memory from when this has been brought up in the past. And then to Marsha to the initiatives with the city, you know, that's definitely, we definitely want to be involved. And then with promotion by the city to new businesses and businesses looking to relocate families, whoever it is, yeah. It was kind of tied in with the arts long-run initiative for performing arts center. We kind of showed up on the radar there. It did require longer runways. So there's a lot of history in those discussions, but we're still at the end of the day sitting here talking about length and not having the land. So it's frustrating for us to never feel like we can get just a square one and either, you know, push it along enough to get shot down completely. So be it at least we'd understand, but that's a function of the airport and the FAA and a lot of other bodies. So. Talis, do you want to go ahead? Yeah, super quick. Just to add on to what Ms. Jordan was talking about about opportunities. I'm on the Innovate Lungwap board. So what we're going to be working on is advanced manufacturing. And anyone who has an idea or wants to participate or would like to talk to me about ideas that we can incorporate this, I believe it was called LASP, which is a big giant facility that they're trying to raise money for. So plenty of opportunity. Please reach out if you want to chat. I'll have you talk to you about it and learn from your perspectives. Great, thank you. Russell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just wanted to quickly say I just measured when Melinda was talking about the distance to 75th and it's 2,200 feet ish. So we do have room for 1,000, plus 1,000 of safety area. Okay. I'm glad I wasn't the only one on Google Maps looking at. So maybe it was if we were looking at longer. Yeah, maybe we were thinking 10,000. I don't know. There was definitely a discussion of do we go, can we put the road underneath us to go over, do it Chicago Styler, whatever reports those are, where they go under. And it's been a long time. Yeah, there's been so much discussion and so little movement, so. Well, so to keep us moving on this for tonight. I mean, I wrote down I think six of those that at least in my mind are kind of the more important ones, though certainly it's not up to me if anyone disagrees with me, but I'm curious if there's kind of two people for each of these who wants to be involved and kind of take this on. So when we incorporate board reports, we're able to bring back updates and kind of have that person be the subject matter expert to inform the rest of us. So the ones I wrote down and Melinda, I'm adding one to your list for, I think some of that needs to happen in the next month. I've got the air show in the expo. I've got electric charging. I've got the runway extension. I've got kind of, I guess, broad promotion, partnership, longer development. Talis, I'm taking your innovation. And then we need to talk about an annual report. Oh my gosh, yes, you are right. Did I miss one that someone thinks maybe you should be focused on kind of as well right off the bat here. Thanks for catching the annual report. I usually try to help on that to get stories from the airport and get some of the community input. Mr. Bliss. You need to unmute it. Please do mute it. You're still muted, I mean, yourself, Steve. Sorry, I got muted and I didn't even know it. The FBO, is that something we should be looking into? In what context? In just having an FBO at the airport. I mean, why we don't have one and how we get one and do we have to advertise, do we have to go to people? That's one. And number two is the bathrooms on the south side. Is that one of the things that Melinda brought up? Mm-hmm. Yeah. Okay. I'll take on that project. How's that? All right, Steve, I'm writing it down for restrooms. Anyone else want to be on the restroom? Okay, I'm only doing that because I spend most of my time down on the south side. And it's crazy that if I have to use a bathroom, I have to leave the airport or to go around to the north side. The party, the Port-A-Potty, sometimes there's multiple people going there. Can't even imagine. I have stopped in Cheyenne though to go to the bathroom before I came home. So that's maybe want to think about that. That's probably a good idea. I always forget that part. That's right, you know? Find your favorite bathroom someplace else. I'm going to run down this list then and see if any of these, anyone really wants to volunteer for some of these. So Expo and Airshow, huge topic. Yeah, it's all be off the board by the time we're doing that. But I think that's fine. We had other, you know, we've got a lot of people on that. So even when you're off the board, we still need you. Thank you. Thank you. There's another board member want to kind of be involved in that with Melinda since we can only have two board members. Malcolm, thank you. Absolutely. Electric charging. Anyone have a particular interest there? And I had broadly infrastructure, all the rest of that, just really trying to understand how that plays in here. Talis. I'm curious about that one as well, especially for the financial implications. So I will put me there, seeing no one else. Runway extension. Russell. No one else, I mean, I'll help too. Russell and Talis. Broad promotion, partnership, Longmont Development. Don't everyone at once here. Get ready. Talis has in-roads, it sounds like. Yeah, I'm already kind of doing that. Talis. And I'll join you on that one. Talis, for if you. Yeah, they're great. Thank you. Yeah. Can I lump, Steve, you brought up FBO. Can I lump that in with just development broadly? Yes, for kind of services and who anyone have a particular interest in development, FBO services. I'll put myself on there if anyone wants to join me. Are you putting that in? I wrote down from when Melinda was talking that SquawkQuest was one of them. Is that kind of what you're getting at there? I am not actually. I was thinking more broader. What we were talking about, God, when was that, July or August with how we, you know, what's that future hangar development look like? What's kind of the next steps of development on the airport? Okay. That's what my head was. Gotcha. Well, I'll volunteer myself for SquawkQuest when it comes up. Okay. And to SquawkQuest, I see, I also had a note about the airport security, just lights and kind of, you know, check in the airport. When we're in the area, I've done it before where I've just, you know, been coming home late and go just take a drive through and loop around or I'll see somebody on the ramp, just headlights and stuff and just cruise over and just be another presence there, another set of headlights just to make them nervous if they're not, they're up to no good. I think we need advisory board magnets for our cars though, because people are always staring at me while I'm driving around the airport. Just wear your dark glasses, have your head set on, have your wired mic. I'll give you a set of flashing lights for us. There you go. That'd be great. Thank you. All right. So I've got Russell and SquawkList. I'm gonna put security kind of together with that house. Yeah. No, not security, but development. Because I think development is going with the other stuff that I'm already doing too with economic development. Yep. You and I have got development. All right. Last, I've got an annual report. Melinda, I know you've been involved. I would like to work on kind of refreshing this based on the comments that you got from council last year. And has a special interest in being involved here. And I do recall those comments that we do it more like a corporate, for new people on the board, it was more just a historic view, a look back, and nothing really forward and not kind of taking a profit and loss approach to it. I can assist with that. That's my background. Okay, okay. I do forecasting for startups to get their capital. So that's exactly what I do. Okay, that'd be great. And just to get some of the lies on it too, yeah. We can't have all three of us do that. Oh, you're right. We can't have three or more of us together for open meetings. Oh, I can just say it as needed. Or if you guys need me to add in just for the finance part, we will pull you in. And then one of us will pull you in. Okay. Okay. Yeah. Linda, do I recall it correctly that when we got those comments, you asked, do they expect the same profit and loss report from the golf courses and things like that? Right. Discussion, yes. That what you said? All right. Yeah. Yeah, I did kind of have a beef about that, didn't I? I do remember that. Yeah. And, but it does make sense. And it is wise, especially if we want to position ourselves to be promoted by the city and and be attractive to developers that we do have a more professional report that shows our vision and mission for the airport. So, and I think we're ready for that. But yeah, if we definitely did get hacked about our report that we don't even prepare. That was the other problem for new board members. We don't prepare the report. It was prepared. And then we just had a chance to review it and look at look for mistakes, which there usually weren't any. And so this will be an opportunity and it's not due. It doesn't get presented, I think until. Well, so I'm not going to get ahead of myself in our current model. We're already two weeks late. Are we? Okay, okay. We'll talk about that, but we're going to give ourselves a little bit more time to do that. We'll just blame COVID. That's it. I looked back at our history last year. We approved it in March, but we didn't actually take it to council until May. That's what I was thinking. I was thinking May to June because budgets are in June. So we're going to give ourselves a little bit more, more leeway for that, but I'll leave that for probably next month when we can actually come back and talk. Okay. Does anyone else have any other comments? I've got a good list here. I appreciate everyone stepping up and volunteering for a few of these. I think this will continue to define what this actually looks like in practice as we do some of these reports, but I love how we're all getting involved. So before we move on, anyone else? Are you going to post these to finalize lists of everything? And with? Yes. Yeah, it'll be in the minutes and then, yeah. And then. I'll make, I'll work with Jeff or Michelle to get one of them to send it out to all of us from the discussion here. So we don't have to wait for the minutes. That's good. And then if anybody thinks of anything else, that was just based on our conversations and the things that we continuously are taking a look at and discussing and just gives us a chance to get a little more instead of all of us having 12 things on our mind that we can just have four or five and kind of dig a little deeper and report back or bring up new things or at least be intelligent to engage in conversation. We had a really good presentation last year about development on the board, but the ideas were so new, including like a park, something that I certainly had never thought of and had no, was so surprised by it, I didn't have any way to respond to it or, it was just a great idea, but that was as far as it went. So just to have a better grip on what is feasible, what's not and kind of be the voice. And I will thank you everyone for that. I think that was, I'm excited for where we go with it. I'm gonna move us on then to our new business. We've got an airport hiring, airport manager hiring update. Phil or Jeff, I don't know who it is, but Phil, do you mind just introducing yourself first? Yeah, I thought this might be a good place to introduce myself. My name is Phil Greenwald. I'm the transportation planning manager. With the city, I work for Joni Marsh and she's not here today, obviously, but I will be taking over the supervisory duties of the new airport manager when he or she comes on board. So just wanted to give you that heads up and you'll probably say a lot more of me as we try to assist the new person in taking this board or being the liaison for this board. So I've been working for the city for 22 years, been in transportation for my whole career, basically. And so they thought that it was probably a good point to try to move the airport into a transportation realm. And I think that's a great idea because we really are gonna start working about or talking about how we make a better team with that airport manager, being part of the transportation group rather than being kind of its own appendage that maybe didn't get all the love that they needed in the past. And you probably saw that firsthand. And so we're trying to bring the airport and the airport manager into being more consistent, more communication with the city. And Jeff's been great. I have to, you know this better than I do, but I've been working with him just a short time and realize what a great asset he's been and how grateful we all are that he was able to give us the support his time and we'll be very sad to see him go, but he's gonna leave us in really good hands because he's been part of the hiring team that we've been looking for for this new manager. So I'll just let you know that we had 19 qualified applicants that came to us as far as their applications meeting all the standards that the city puts forward. From that 19, we found nine folks that really met kind of that minimum threshold, that minimum standard that I think we were looking for as an airport manager. From that five people accepted our interview invitation. So we were able to last week put together some interviews of five people. And then from there, we have three finalists that we'd like to introduce to you quite frankly and we're trying to set that up right now. We're waiting for Joni to come back to kind of finalize things, but what we'd like to do is interview them from our team, from our city team and then have them kind of make the rounds as far as maybe a meet and greet with this airport advisory board. And I know Harold wants to meet them and then obviously, Marcia, as the airport council member liaison, we would hope that you two would be included in those meet and greets. So Councilman Martin, we'd want you to be part of that if you have time. So we may do a bigger thing. We may, but this is kind of our first blush at what's going on. So very good to meet you all. I really appreciate the time tonight. I wish I could have been here last month, but unfortunately I had to be kind of in charge of the vacation to Hawaii. So we finally got our vacation in from 2020. So I apologize for that, but I was having too much of a fun time. But with that, is there any questions that I can help answer? What's the timeframe for the three finalists in the meet and greet, just to get an idea and would they do it like evening, weekend, daytime? We're looking at the end of the week on the 21st, a week of the 21st or the beginning of the week, the 28th. So we do have kind of some flexibility I think we all wanted it to move a little faster, but with people, we're trying to align everybody here. So that's been a bit of a task. So we think the 21st and the week of the 28th will be one of those. And we'll let you know as soon as we know and as soon as we have some organization around that. Perfect. Thank you. Did you have anything? Oh, go ahead. One thing I just wanted to add on the three finalists without disclosing who they are is that the advantage for coordination of the future meet and greets and interviews is that two are within the front range area as long as it's free or not. Thank you very much. Any other questions I can help answer or relate to Joni? Well, thank you for your time tonight. I appreciate your question. Yeah, I was glad. So I'm sorry, I'm still learning so much about this and I apologize for any ignorant statements. But when I got the tour of the Greeley Airport, I met the Greeley manager. They were saying that they were more of an autonomous airport rather than a centralized city airport. By you making it closer to the city transportation organization, are you saying that you're gonna try to bring the airport more within the city? And does that follow the overall trend of municipal airports nationwide or is the trend to be more autonomous? Yeah, I don't have any idea on what happens kind of nationwide and what the different values are. I think it varies by city and jurisdiction and where those airports are located. We just feel like the airport's been kind of out there without being part of the city team and we really value that idea of a city team. You'll know that since Jeff has taken over, we've incorporated public works, natural resources, their ability to really keep the runways plowed when during our storm events. And that was something that may have been missing a little bit before and also keeping all of our lights on the field, working well and doing that. So just incorporating that, just a little element of teamwork has really gone a long ways, we think, as far as making the airport more of a part of the city. Wouldn't the FBO supposed to do that? Like, isn't the FBO supposed to do those things like the lights and the lights and FBOs have to just keep the lights on? Yup. Typically be the airport sponsor in this case is the city. And I know, Jeff, you're gonna talk through a little bit of those responsibilities. One thing to house, I just wanna add because I learned this last week and don't quote me on the exact numbers but 74 airports I think within the state of Colorado, 70 of them are city airports or something around that number. It's nearly all the airports in the state. Russell, do you wanna go ahead? Thank you. I just wanted to respond to Talis a little bit. Since he's new, I would say that for many years most people who have been associated with the airport and the airport board have been asking the city to take a bigger role and help out and not treat it as an enterprise fund orphan child that like Phil said, it needs more love and I'm glad to hear someone from the city say that. And I feel like a lot of our usual commentators at the meetings like Don and those people will be feeling the same way about it. So I think it's a great thing that we're hearing this kind of talk from the city. And I'll just add on is that I have felt the love and if I hadn't, I honestly could not have done the job. The amount of work that needs to be accomplished both physical work, fixing lights, runway inspection, snow plowing, you name it, invoicing could not have been done by one person. And so the advantage of being at the city or county gives the full breadth and depth of those human and financial and equipment resources that can be brought to the table. And it is fairly common. And then I'll just add on to just for education is that the FBO is responsible for the products and services that they offer at the airport. They are not the airport manager, they do not manage the airfield. They do not inspect the airfield, maintain the airfield that is responsibility of the city. Council Member Berger. Thank you. Actually what Jeff just said prompted a question and then I wanted to clarify for Russell what Phil said, there is management reorganization going on inside the city. And I think what Phil you are talking about is having the new airport manager work more closely with the rest of the transportation department working for you as opposed to the airport manager was traditionally kind of the island and didn't have a team to work with and didn't have a team to fall back on for things like transit to and from the airport, for example. But in terms of the financial economic structure of the airport, which is that it's a Colorado enterprise and that it uses the city shared services model, those things have been ongoing for a long time and it's not my understanding that a change in that is contemplated, is that correct? Yeah, the overall organization not change but I think Jeff said it well and you did too is that the idea is to provide more support for this person and for this airport and for this facility. It's time that we work it into and give it more support, more resources that the city has available. So exactly what you said. I will thank you, Phil, for the hiring update. Steve, sorry, go ahead. Along with the hiring of the manager, Phil, are you also going to be hiring an assistant? Jeff, maybe you can answer that but it's not really an assistant but it is an extra person to help. Yeah, my understanding is that it was approved in the last budget for a hiring of an operations person. That person would be more dedicated to the airport around snow removal, around airport inspection, airport maintenance, runway taxiway light repairs. It would be a shared position. So the airport would be paying for half of the person. The public works department would be paying for half of the person. So that person will work in coordination between both the airport manager and the public works office. And they'll be located just on the other side of the street, basically, of the airport. So they're right across the street from you. Are we going to wait for the new manager to get sold in and his job before we do this? They have already maybe incorrect on this and talking with Matt McKenzie, which is responsible for recruiting for that person because they've been working on recruiting new public works people but have had a very difficult time finding viable candidates. I'm not a hundred percent sure if that position has already been posted but it certainly has not yet been finished. That's my understanding as well. Thanks, Jeff. I'll move us on from hiring. I will just say I'm communicated to Joni and Harold that we are, I will call a special meeting whenever it's appropriate to have that meet and greet that we're eager to provide our input on that candidate and they were consistently been really on board with making sure that we have a voice in there with the reminder that the decision-making will rest with them. So I'll just have that disclaimer. Jeff, you had offered to do a little presentation on some of the sponsor responsibilities and I think that would be really helpful. So I'll turn it forward to you for a little bit. Thank you very much. Sharing screen will work here. Everyone see okay? Yes, we can. Perfect. So I'll try to keep this as short as possible. It's probably gonna be about 20 minutes and I'm not gonna cover every item on this slide. I am happy to share this slide deck. This is an excerpt, so myself and our firm has been keeping a class for about 25 years with the American Association of Airport Executives to see their logo down on the bottom right and part of the class that we teach is on airport sponsor assurances to ensure airport managers understand their obligations as an airport sponsor to the FAA. These airport sponsor assurances accompany the receipt of grant monies from the FAA through the Airport Improvement Program. There are 39 of them that cover a broad range of topics. A large number of the assurances are very specific to what an airport sponsor must do during a project that they are being funded. Some of the assurances have to do with ongoing obligations and responsibilities in the way the airport is managed and operated. And they do this to ensure that these public use airports and I like to call them federally obligated public use airports are developed, operated and maintained in a safe, secure, efficient, compatible and compliant manner. That's the intent of the airport sponsor assurances. I mentioned there's 39 of them. I will, along with sending out this slide deck to you, I will also send you the 39 assurances if you're so inclined to read each one of them. If it's worthwhile just familiarizing yourself with them, I'm gonna focus on about five of them that are probably most important from the aspect of ongoing management and operation of an airport. These are the assurances that when a complaint is filed with the FAA accusing an airport of being a non-compliance or if the FAA threw an inspection on their own without a complaint, these are the areas that airport sponsors more commonly than not find themselves in violation or alleged violation. Assurance five is about preserving rights and powers. And really the objective here is that the FAA does not want the airport sponsor. And when I say airport sponsor, I'm referring to the city in this situation. But they do not want the airport sponsor to do something that would deprive them of the rights and powers that the FAA wants to ensure that they maintain so that they can one, maintain compliance with the assurances and two, operate the airport in a safe, secure and efficient manner. And the airport sponsor can give their rights away with in agreements, including lease agreements, operating agreements, permits and just actions that they take can also deprive themselves of rights and powers. And one of the things that the assurance requires is that if the airport sponsor ever finds themselves where they have lost their rights and powers, they must act promptly to acquire, extinguish or modify that so that they bring those back into the fold. And by the way, because I've got the PowerPoint up I don't see anyone's faces or hands. So if there is a question, I'm happy to pause. Just to speak up and I'll be happy to address that. One of the keys is obviously the safe and serviceful condition of the airport. This is a responsibility that the airport has under assurance five and making sure that they maintain the airport in that safe and serviceful condition. You see the word minimum standards in here I'll talk about minimum standards later from the commercial aeronautical activity, but the minimum standards within this assurance is the standards that the FAA sets up for the operation and maintenance of an airport. And those are the minimum standards that are being referred to in this insurance. Assurance 22 is about economic non-discrimination. It's a terrible title because one of the tests that I always ask airport manager, they say, can you discriminate? Most people don't raise their hand. They don't think they can discriminate, but you can. What the words actually say in this assurance is that the airport must be available on reasonable terms without unjust discrimination. So there are all different types of forms of just discrimination. For example, some airport may have a different type of fuel, flowage, feed or jet fuel than they do for Avgans. That is discrimination, but it's just. They may charge a higher rent for a boardwalk than for North Carolina. That is discrimination, but it is just discrimination. They may charge a different rent for commercial businesses than non-commercial businesses, also just discrimination. So airports may discriminate, they just may not adjustly discriminate. And the other important aspect too of this assurance and a few others is that you'll notice here that it says to all types, kinds and classes of aeronautical use. So the focus of the FAA is about aeronautical use of the airport. Any non-aeronautical use has to receive approval from the FAA to release land for non-aeronautical use. But an airport sponsor may unjustly discriminate against non-aeronautical use of an airport because their focus is aeronautical use. They may deny use of an airport for non-aeronautical use because their requirement is to make it available for aeronautical use. Yes, Talis. So if I got approached by an aerospace company, it's not aeronautical or would it be? And like, I need to learn or need to speak with someone about this process because part of my master plan is to use the airport for a lot of things in R&D and stuff. So there is a specific definition of aeronautical and the short definition of that is that it is directly related to the use of the airport by aircraft, maintaining aircraft, servicing aircraft, storing aircraft. It's about the aircraft's use. It's about things that are gonna use the runways. Would a drone be an aircraft? A drone is an aircraft, yeah. Is it, is like a space shuttle or rover an aircraft? Like would that be considered an aircraft? If it's using the runway. But drones aren't using the runway, they just go straight up. Well, if they use the airport infrastructure. So if they get plugged into a charger or is that? If they are using the airport, I mean, if they're flying in and out of the airport, then that would be deemed aeronautical use. If they're flying in and out of the airport. An interesting delineation between aeronautical. So you would think that aircraft manufacturing is an aeronautical use. It is not. And so Gulfstream Aerospace in Savannah, Georgia, a lot of their manufacturing is off airport. And the FAA sort of draws the line on aircraft manufacturing saying, well, you don't need the airport to manufacture that aircraft. Do you need the airport for when you deliver that airplane? So when that airplane is completed and it goes across the delivery line, then it becomes aeronautical. And so their delivery center is on airport, their aircraft manufacturing is off airport. So FAA is very sensitive to making sure that land that on an airport that could be used for aeronautical activity is reserved for aeronautical activity. It doesn't mean that they won't approve the release of it, but the airport sponsor has to demonstrate that that land will not need to be utilized for aeronautical use for an extremely long time. And then at the point that it does need to be used for aeronautical use, it can be clawed back for that use. Historically, I'll add, we had a tell us there was a wedding venue that wanted to lease the far end of the runways on the west side and conduct weddings. Strange idea. And pretty quickly shot down because for my high skydiving, they lease the drop zone and that's a public process. And so this wedding venue that's actually just north of the railroad tracks came in and was trying to lease the space to hold weddings on the far west end of the airport. And it didn't happen. So I think the applications that are airport, I know the solar panels have been a question that are way down also at the far west end. And, but I think that's pretty much it for the things that are airport that have come up in the past, that it's all, but that you're preserving it. It's not necessarily, it's booked and committed, but it's being preserved. Yeah, that's a fair description. So should I just like take that out of my mind? Is it like a very difficult process where like we should, like if we're building new, like for example that whole side of the airport that has no hangers and it's just, you know, a field, if we wanted to build something on there it would have to be aeronautical related basically. It would be, yes. Thank you. So one of the other requirements of Assurance 22 is ensuring that similar commercial aeronautical activity businesses are charged the same rates, fees and rentals for the use of similar land and improvements. And that is really the nuances of this. It was that very rarely do you find a business using the same or similar land or facilities or providing the same or similar services. So an aircraft maintenance company is not similar to a flight trading company. A aircraft storage company is not the same as an FBO. And so an airport can have different rates and fees and they can have different uses of land and improvements. Too often people interpret this, they see all these words same and think that they have to treat everyone the same and that's not all of the case. Each commercial activity also needs to be provided without unjust discrimination. So some of these assurance flow through to the providers of services. And the airport sponsor is obligated to place certain provisions within the operators lease agreement to ensure that they're providing their services on a reasonable and not unjust discriminatory basis to the airport users. The assurance also gives the ability for the sponsor to establish reasonable rules and regulations. And I'll also add in the word minimum standards here which falls under that context of rules and regulations that have to be met by all users of the airport. Again, focused on safety and efficiency but also minimum standards brings in that minimum threshold to engage in a commercial aeronautical activity at the airport. The airport does have the right to make decisions on what is safe and they may prohibit unsafe activities at an airport, but ultimately the FAA is the final arbiter of that decision. They determine what is safe and not safe at a federally obligated public use airport. One of the things is in Assurance 22 is that the sponsor may engage in competitive commercial aeronautical activities but certainly not required in the FAA even states that private enterprise in most situations is best position to provide the commercial aeronautical activities at the airport. But if an airport sponsor wishes to compete they have to compete following the same rules and minimum standards. The airport sponsor cannot prevent non-commercial self-service activities so an aircraft owner can maintain their own aircraft with their own employees and their own equipment. They can't use a contract entity or individual. They can't use someone else's hanger and someone else's equipment. They have to do it themselves. One of the keys is exclusivity. They cannot grant exclusivity for use of the airport. This is primarily focused around commercial aeronautical activities. The act of exclusivity is about debarring others. It's really not about if there's one. It's just about if you are preventing others from doing it that are willing to meet your rules and regulations and your minimum standards. This is one of the tools the FAA uses to ensure broad use of a federally obligated airport. The interesting thing that a lot of people don't know and understand because they think that an airport with only one FBO is potentially violating this exclusive rule but more than 90% of airports with a 3,000 foot paved runway or more have only one or zero FBOs. A very small percentage of airports across the country have two or more FBOs. And I define an FBO as an entity that at a minimum is selling fuel. We call an aircraft maintenance company or a flight training company, a SASO, a specialized aviation service operator. Also under Assurance 23 and exclusive rights, they talk about the different mechanisms that exclusive right can be conferred. I've seen it written in the lease agreement. You will be the only FBO on the airport. That's a clear violation of Assurance 23. If the airport sponsor sets the minimum standards at too high of a level, that's raising the bar to an unreasonable level that can be interpreted as granting an exclusive right as well. I think I already talked about why the FAA doesn't want exclusive rights. The only time that an exclusive right actually can be granted on the airport is the airport sponsor itself can exercise what's called a proprietary exclusive right. So they can choose to be the sole provider of a certain commercial aeronautical activity and deny others from competing with them. There are actually over 1200 airport sponsors that do act as their own FBO. Sometimes those are in scenarios where the airport can economically support private enterprise or investment. And it just is out of necessity that the airport sponsor provides those services. We're gonna hit every single slide here. Assurance 24, there is an expectation of the FAA to have a rental and fee structure that makes the airport as self-sustainable as possible. And the key extra words here is under the circumstances that exist at that particular airport. The FAA is not naive. They understand that a lot of airports, especially general aviation airports, are not able to be self-sustaining and many times requires the support of the airport sponsor whether that be the city or the county or including the FAA that provides AIP funds. But they want you to strive towards that goal of self-sustainability, which means rents and fees should regularly be reviewed, kept either at market or kept at a cost recovery basis to move that pendulum towards self-sustaining. That's the real quick one. Again, there's 39 of these. A lot of these have to do with what they have to do during a project, an AIP project. The other question that lots of times get asked is how long is an airport obligated to these assurances? And that's sort of a moving goalpost because this is the last time I'll share here. One, every time an airport receives an AIP grant, then the clock starts over again. And depending upon the type of grant, dictates the length of the obligations under the assurances. And there are a few assurances that once you've accepted that they go into perpetuity. But the key ones typically are 25 years to the life, excuse me, the useful life of the AIP project, however that money is being spent. Those are sort of the two bookends. Happy to answer any questions. Again, I know this is a fairly high level. I spent a day and a half on this topic in my class. Definitely appreciate you condensing it down to not a day and a half for us. Anyone have questions for Jeff? I'm gonna assume that's just because you covered it all, Jeff. I learned a few things. You covered it on your board on one of the two. No, I learned a few things. I usually think about some of those in the context of commercial service airport. So it's interesting to kind of hear the way you apply them to GA airport. Probably at one point I didn't state, and I'll just add this real quick. Why do we wanna stay compliant with these airport sponsor assurances because we want the AIP money? If you aren't compliant with the assurances or if we're found in non-compliance, the two threats that the FAA has over an airport sponsor is one, ending access to AIP grants or the other worst case scenario, which has only been triggered one or two times in my memory is where you need to pay back all the money we've paid you. So we don't want either one of those scenarios. I don't see any other questions. So again, Jeff, thank you very much. Michelle, you have the next item here. Talk about a pre-interview plan. Yes, I do. So City Council has directed the city clerk staff to bring back a new procedure for board and commission interviews. So what we've done is we've met with all the boards, liaisons, the staff liaisons. We've discussed the idea to get gotten their feedback to input on how this would work best. Most of the board liaisons were generally enthusiastic about the change and being more involved in recruitment. So the timeline that we're looking at is, so I just gotta move this over here. There we go. We're taking this to council on Tuesday night for their blessing. So it'll go to the city session on the 15th. It'll start with the spring recruitment process, which is good to start in March and vet out some things. So what we're looking at is opening board recruitment on March 14th. We'll open it for six weeks, ending it on April 22nd. And then I will compile all of the applications, vet them, make sure that they're all registered voters, or legal, or city residents, excuse me. And then we'll set board interviews. We send those to a nominating committee, I guess is what we would call it. So we'd have two board members from the board and the board liaison who would interview these folks. And basically you're gonna ask pretty much the same questions that council asked you when you interviewed, you'll send those recommendations back to me and then we will then in turn give those recommendations to council so that they will interview those folks and then appoint. So basically what we're doing is getting the boards more involved in the recruitment process and getting the best people on the boards at this point. So that is the pre-interview process in a nutshell. So if you have any questions, let me know. Anyone have any questions? So Michelle, I mean, pending council's approval, we would then have a couple of us involved in that process and I assume that at a future meeting we would decide who those are, correct? You could, you could. We, when we talked about it with the other board member or board liaisons, most of them said, you know, the chairperson and one other person keeping it to two so that we don't have to have a special meetings and then with board liaison. You would have one month in order to do those interviews. So for spring, for instance, the board interviews be May 1st through May 31st and then we would need those recommendations back to me by June 1st of who you would want council to then interview. And then they would, I would set up those interviews and then they go to council for appointment. Got it, thank you. Jeff, did you have something there? I was just wanting, we skipped over my report manager report and so just want to circle back and not skip that. I am sorry, Jeff, you checked it off the monitor. I'm out there, don't worry. I will come back to you, Malia. For Michelle on the, the recruitment. So is that to fill, it doesn't sound like it works with filling empty board seats by June, by June or is it? No, it actually does. So boards are twice a year, once in the spring and once at the end of the year. And so since we have a vacancy I would go, we would put that vacancy in for this year. Good, okay. Fantastic. Yeah, Michelle, I'm not sure I caught does the advisory board narrow down the number of applicants so that the council does. They would actually, so if there's one applicant or one vacant position, they would nominate one, just the one for one. Okay. So if there's four vacancies, there would be four applicants. Okay, so the council no longer has a choice at all or the council can send back a person if they don't find them qualified. Correct. And like I said, this is more of the council so we can discuss that on Tuesday night as well. A little more detail if you want. Okay, thanks. So we just wanted to make sure that like, for March, you guys are ready to, you have a nominating board, who's somebody who you want to interview, all the applicants. And then when it comes down to May, when it comes in May, you hold, you can either hold your meeting, your board meeting that night for that month, you know, and do applicant interviews or you can do it separately, you know, whatever you want to do. Okay. Ross. Thank you. I guess I thought I understood until you responded to council member Barton and now I'm confused. If there are four applicants for one board seat, what happens? You would just get, so if there's four applicants for one seat, you would nominate one person. If there's four seats, four applicants, you would nominate four people. So however many number of applicants vacancies you have, you would nominate that many people for appointment. So let's say we have four people interested and then, you know, we whittle it down to one, we send them over to council and council says, you know, no, this guy's no good. What happens then? Then we go back and start from scratch. The next opening window or the same window? They'd have to be the next opening window, which would be the end of the year. I guess I would, I find this puzzling myself to whittle it down like that and then have the chance of, you know. And like I said, we're just taking it to council Tuesday night. Can we do like at first and second alternate? Like just, like they're taking it to council Tuesday night and so they can figure out all that. That's it's council's direction. So it's up to council to what they want to do. I'm only just bringing it to you so that you are aware, you know, coming up in the next couple of months that you will need to do interviews and nominate somebody. So I just don't want to blindside anybody with, oh yeah, by the way, now you've got to, you know, do this too. So. Russell, do you have a follow-up? I think I would move that we recommend to council for their consideration on Tuesday that the idea be changed to a ranking system if there are multiple candidates and set up just only sending them the number of board seats available. So when you- Oh, can I, I'm going to just point of order and guess on that and whatever I can do with my work tools. I don't think we have any ability as an advisory board within the airport to make that recommendation. I think if you would like to make that recommendation, do it as a citizen to your council reps. And one thing I did forget to say is that when you get the, so there's a rubric that we use, that we've given to council that has a bunch of questions on it and basically you score your applicants. And so to you, we've offered board liaisons to use that. Now, again, you know, you can score everybody and then if you have more than one then you can recommend those to council, but it's not just going to be like, oh yeah, he's good or, you know, he's my friend or something like that. They want to keep it pretty, you know, political, not political, pretty plutonic and just even. So just throw that out there. Thank you, Michelle, for bringing it up and keeping us informed. Absolutely. Yeah, it's a positive improvement because we have felt like why we weren't a part of the process to look at the candidates. Sometimes there aren't very many. Sometimes there's, I think there were 12 when I got my seat, it was a huge field. And so it's really good that the board can actually interview and narrow some things down to get removed detractors. We've had detractors to the report that have applied in the past. And then it's not really based on aviation experience. We find that that isn't necessarily the most important. We've had members with real estate experience, other, you know, development, other aspects. So this is good. This is something I think we've asked for in the past or asked for that ability. So this is good. But it does sound like it needs a little refinement. Yeah, and like I said, we'll let council refine. They'll tell us what they want and then we'll bring it back. So. Nice, nice. Thank you. And I can email you all on Wednesday morning. And like, you know, kind of what was decided and go from there. Is that a working session or will that be televised? It's they're all televised. It's a public session. Okay. And it's next Tuesday. Tuesday that activity. Okay. Thank you, Michelle. Thank you. Yep. I don't know if anyone else hears. I have weird feedback at least from my what I'm talking and I apologize for that. It's better now. It was just for a minute, but it's better. I don't know how to fix it or what I did to make it worse. So I apologize. And I really apologize for skipping you, Jeff. I keep in track. I'm making tick marks often. I got too excited and tick two off. So I'll try to thank you for updates. Thank you. So as Melinda had reported about three weeks ago, our Vassie was brought back into service. That as I think I may have reported it is owned and operated by the FAA. Different airports have different scenarios, but when I got onto the airport, no one was really for sure. And so I did hunt it down and figured out that it was the FAA. I had the extra benefit since we just got done managing the Boulder Municipal Airport and my employee that got hired up there. I was just mentioning to him about our Vassie and he said, Hey, I'm pretty sure I've got a Vassie sitting in our storage shed. So they went and looked and they did. And so the FAA went and grabbed that and brought it over here to Longmont and got it installed. So that's up and running. Hopefully no one wipes it out, which brings me to my second topic. We did have an aircraft accident at the airport yesterday. Fortunately, it was as far as I know, not serious. Unfortunately, no one has formally reported it to me. It was not on the airport yesterday. One of the city ops people had come across it as the airplane was being lifted by a large forklift. It was landing on runway 29. I do not know what happened, but I believe from what I have speculated and observed that there may have been a landing gear collapse on it. We have cameras that face the runway and believe it or not, as I was watching it from my home to try to figure out what happened, the first camera you can see the plane landing, then there's a little gap in the two cameras. And then all of a sudden, the plane is careening off the runway. And so I was like, well, what happened in between there? But I'm hopeful that no one was injured. No one, it didn't get reported. Obviously, if there is an aircraft accident with an injury, you're supposed to report it to NTSB, supposed to leave the aircraft where it is. None of that happened. So I'm assuming that it was, other than looking bad, wasn't bad. They did take out one runway like. I did, I don't have a specific answer, but from the last meeting, there was a question about restrooms on the south side. I did do just some preliminary discussions within the city. The department that builds a majority of the restrooms around the city is parks and recreation, because they build those restrooms at parks. And so they do this quite often. I was quite shocked at the potential cost of a restroom facility, depending upon the design and stuff anywhere from $150 to $300,000. Easy. Yeah, I was shocked. And I'm not advocating that we spend that kind of money, but I'm not going to stop either. So as part of the south side utility projects we are working on, including a tee where a restroom facility could be teed in to the utility line project. And again, I did very preliminary discussions with Park and Rec and they connected me to the company that they use, most of all. So I'm trying to gain more insight to, okay, what do you get for that and how can you pair that cost down? I will or the next manager will report more. On February 1st, the state aeronautics board did approve our grant for $54,000 for pavement marking improvements, basically repainting runway taxiway lines at the airport. I did have our P&E firm do some preliminary budgeting to do everything that needs to be done is about $85,000. So we still are a little short of what we need. However, as I believe I mentioned in our last airport advisory board meeting, we are going to be, excuse me, we are going to be receiving some additional funds through the infrastructure funding mechanism that it will open up about $295,000 for the airport. And we will be able to tap into that, my understanding. I'm actually going to attend a webinar next week with the FAA where they're going to describe the process and what is eligible for use, I mean that, but my preliminary discussions is that we should be able to bring in that extra 30,000 into this project so we can do everything at once. We continue, as any airport does, getting complaints about noise. And as I try to educate people that call that the city does not control the airspace, that the FAA reserves all jurisdiction to controlling airspace. So if they have issues of low flying airplane, which that's probably half the discussion, that they should contact the FAA directly on that. I do try to embrace the concept that whether or not we have control of the airspace, we do wanna be a good neighbor. If they're able to provide me more information about when, where in the airplane, I even point them to the app called FlightAware where you can identify tail numbers and height of aircraft flying. More information they can give me, the better I can reach out to the aircraft if it was even flying out of Longmont, just to encourage them to be a good neighbor. One this weekend called, he's in the apartment complex. I still don't know my roads very well, but the road that parallels Target, basically on the base turn to 2-9, there's an apartment complex there. And I get, there's about three residents there that call me regularly. And there was one plane that, and I went on to FlightAware to look because he said, it's going over my house again. They did 20 touch and goes that day. And I'm a pilot, I get it. We do our training, but we need to be cognizant that 20 times over one house in the same plane with the same hinge noises can be annoying. So it's just a battle that's an ongoing battle and trying to balance the needs of the community and the needs of the airport users and we all try to be good neighbors. I've been that person, but I do, I'm Greeley. So you get on a roll and you just, you're in the zone and you just got to keep doing it. But I go to Greeley to do it. There you go. Steve, did you have something? Yes, Jeff, regarding security and changing the codes for the gates and all that. What do we do about the gate that's continuously open when the skydiving operation is going on? Yeah, no, it's something that needs to be addressed. And I'm also hoping that with the extra infrastructure fund monies that we can not only finish the fencing on the airport, especially on the north side where you can literally drive onto the airport off of St. Brain Road, but also that gate which is not an automatic gate, it's a manual gate that they prop open. And so I'd like to get it to be an automatic gate that they can control with, whether that we put a speaker there so that they can control the access versus just blocking it open. But granted, we have some security holes in our airport that really do need to be addressed before we change the code. Good, thank you. Anyone else have any other questions for Jeff? Maybe I'll just draw one more out and I'll look for criticism if I'm wrong. But my friend, I'm not a stakeholder. I don't own an airplane, I don't own a hangar. So I'm not considered a stakeholder. And all of the HOAs on the airport, they send out letters to their members and all of that. My friend sends those to me, which I understand we shouldn't get those. But I know that you Jeff have sent letters out to stakeholders a couple of times and I've gotten those letters through my friend. And I'm just wondering if we on the board should get those letters as well. Absolutely. And I'll consider that my bad. Harris and I were talking about that earlier when we were doing the agenda setup. And I realized that I didn't have all of the board members in my, I have 275 in my email master list. And so I've added today, all of the board members, there's actually gonna be one going out tomorrow and we'll make sure that you all are included. And so yeah, stakeholders are beyond aircraft owners, operators, lessees, it's anyone that wants to know what's going on at the airport. There's no reason people don't have access to that. Oh, well, thank you for that. I know that's more out of our purview. It's more day to day stuff, but it just keeps us in the loop. Absolutely. Yeah. Okay, thank you. Yep, Mr. Robinson. Thank you. Jeff, are you sure that you don't wanna sell your consulting business and just stay on as the airport manager? Because that would make me happy. All in favor. Hi, what's the old adage? I don't think you can afford me. I would have seen the salary. But thank you for the sentiment. I do appreciate it. Anyone else? Not at their rest. We've tried a couple of times. I think we'll just keep coming out of this. Yeah. We've got a last final public invited to be heard. Unless I'm missing something, Michelle, I don't think anyone's joined us from the public. No, there has been nobody asked to come on. All right, thank you. So then I'll move us on to board council and staff comments. I'll start with the board. I've got a couple of items for me, but I'll entertain anyone who wants to go first on this one. All right, you want to just keep hearing me talk. So first topic bylaws, we talked through these last month. I will own the fact that they're not on the agenda this month because I went on vacation before I got them to the city man city attorney's office and we couldn't meet the five day turnaround time to get it in front of all of you before voting. I had a discussion with the city attorneys on this week is running together, but I think it was Tuesday to talk through those. We uncovered the annual report that we hadn't caught before that says we delivered in February. We're going to adjust that to give ourselves some more time. We are going to incorporate most of the changes we talked about as well as part of the meeting. There's two things I want to flag and you will see this next month on the agenda and you can choose to accept them or vote them down. One is instead of having the language be that the chair sets the agenda, it will be that the chair coordinates on the agenda with the city, with the airport manager. Since I've been informed that we can't direct city staff to take action, including setting an agenda. So we will coordinate with them instead of directing them and two, Bill had a phenomenal suggestion for our stand or just general agenda. And I can't remember the word the proceedings I think is in the bylaws. What we have now with old business and new business, the suggestion is to clarify it as informational items such as just presentation today and action items where we actually need to take a vote to recommend. And so it keeps us very clear on what the purpose of the item is. It's honestly the old business, new business seems to blend together in these discussions anyway. So you'll see those in the bylaws along with the handful of the other changes we discussed and a handful of just grammar cleanups. Russell was especially helpful in flagging some of those just really awkward sentences that have been in there for a few years, but we're making make logical sense now. The other topic I just wanted to bring up and Jeff hinted at this in his update, but as part of my day job, I was at the Colorado Airport Operators Association meeting in Denver last week, where they had the Colorado Aeronautics Board to approve our grant. We also had one other call out from the CDOT Aeronautics Head who mentioned specifically that they are really trying to re-engage post COVID and get back out to airports. And one of the things they really enjoyed was airport expos and called out Longmont as a particular favorite of their team and something that they always appreciated being a part of. So I just wanted to kind of make it known that those of you who've worked on in the past years, it was appreciated, it was called out specifically at the meeting. And just more broadly, the CDOT team is really trying to push, being more engaged, there's a ton of funding coming down. Really wanna make sure that we're using it the right way. So for the next airport manager, there is an engaged group at the state level that is looking for local airports to be plugged in with them. So. Can I add to that that the airport directories that they produce, they produce the map and then the spiral. For the last three years, I've flown down to pick those up and it's really fun to do it. So we picked them up for other airports while we were there and you fly in and you taxi in between the hangar row and they bring them out to you and you're right next to the state patrols division, the aeronautic activity. And so it's kind of a running joke for me because I have a little problem with speed. Usually you know all those people. And so, but you just taxi right up and then like Sean Sutterberg will come out and they'll bring out the cases. And so I've done for three years, gone down and picked them up, brought them back to Longmont, Boulder, like Erie is some of the smaller airports around us. And so if you have that opportunity or feel like going down to get a directory, you can taxi right on up to the door and let them know you're coming and they'll take your picture and make a big deal about it and take you on a tour of the facility and treat you like a VIP. So they've always been very welcoming and very engaged and Sean does all the photography that we see, he does most of the photography, I think that we see on the covers and they appreciate getting to see the people that are out in the field. So I encourage you to, they're down at Colorado spaceport. So you just get cleared and taxi over there and you can have a fun little adventure and excuse that you don't have to go find food, you can go find directories. Excellent, thank you Melinda for adding on to that. Those are my comments. Does anyone else think of anything you wanted to talk about while I was droning on? Council Member Martin, do you have anything for us this evening? Not really very much. Have been talking about sustainability issues that we might be adding to the airport improvement plan, but I haven't had my meeting with Jeff yet. So I think I'll save those for next time because I don't wanna speak out of school. How are you feeling, Jeff? I'm good, thank you. For those that don't know, I came down with COVID the other day of the year, so I was not up here last week because of that and just turn the corner probably on Monday or Tuesday of this week, but thank you Marcia. And I'll follow up with an email to you. We'll get our meeting rescheduled. Good, all right, I look forward to it. Thank you. Thank you Council Member Martin. Blast, I've got city staff comments. Jeff, Phil, anything else that we haven't covered already? Nope, I'm good. Just thank you again for letting me kind of sneak in here and listen in, appreciate it. We're glad to have you. All right, I don't think I've double marked anything. I think we've actually hit the adjourn section of the agenda. So everyone, thanks for a good discussion tonight. Appreciate it and I hope everyone has a good evening. We'll call the meeting adjourned. Thank you. Good night, thank you. Thank you.