 Yeah, all right. Well, good evening everyone. Welcome to our October 10th 2022 airport advisory board meeting I hope the volume is better this month Wonderful. Let us know if it isn't We'll kick off with a roll call please And you just might want to note Kayla if you just want to introduce yourself as Thank you Phil This is Kayla and she's gonna fill in for our board secretary for a while today and maybe more And also just for the record so Phil Greenwald transportation planning manager staff and then Marsha Martin council member Martin is here also So just to fill that in will be good. Thank you Phil Thank you First up on our agenda is our public invited to be heard. I have two people who signed up on the sheet You're welcome to come now. You're welcome to come at the end Or both if you'd really like to First on our list is Al Manley. I was going to order on the sign-up sheet, but I You know if you guys want to mix it up, that's fine with me So if you can Start your comments name and address, please You've got five minutes. Hi, Al Manley 940 range of view lane long month I'm here representing myself and also some members of the Lopa Association out at the airport Long-line operators and pilots Association With the advisory board packet that came out this afternoon or when I received it The new was that the new lease that was in there one will be adopted. So can I remind you the comments have to be addressed to the board? We can't do a Q&A for the city's service office. I'm a newbie at this. No, it's okay It's really frustrating that we can't but we can't one will the advisory board or the advisory board When will the new lease be adopted anybody answer that? Okay, okay, no questions. Okay Well, anyway, the concerns that were that I received were really two items number one 20-year leases are not really acceptable Because most banks will not finance hangar builds or developments with leases that are less than 30 years That's that's number one. I mean this was not just from one person number two The city should not have first-right or refurbish first right of purchase for hangar value is what two parties agree to Sometimes it's difficult to get appraisals on hangars for multiple reasons No recent hangar sales for one market conditions such as rapid devaluations and Currency of currency slash inflation hangar shortages and individual desires So these are two big hitters that were on the lease People are very concerned about these It's very important. Thank you Thank you very much for the comments Next on a list I have Steve shook if you'd like to Again start with name and address and you have five minutes. Thanks again. I'm Steve shook 2020 to Braver in court here in Longmont. I Have submitted my application to join the board I just wanted to introduce myself and give you a little bit of background I've come from Monterey, California Where I've been involved with the Monterey Airport District for over 30 years. I Have a 42 unit hangar development That I currently manage and built Excuse me, I've built many projects of the Monterey Airport and have consulted with the previous management on leases and not only my own but To advise the management on Certain issues with leases so I have that experience that I could bring to the board along with the construction That I've done. I'm a retired general contractor developer and I also own my hangar at the airport, which I have the current lease on and I'm retired and have the time to Help out if I can Thank you. Oh one last thing. I wanted to mention In regards to the lease Ali is correct on the 30 year also he's He didn't mention if a person is going to sell a Hangar that has under a 30 year. He can't do a 1031 exchange so that's one issue and Which is an important issue when you're talking about hundreds of thousands of dollars So just wanted to throw that out at you anyway. Thank you Thank you very much Those are the only two that were on the sign-up sheet. Would anyone else like to come up and speak? Come on up, please Thank you very much. My name is David Paul P. A. U. L. A My address is 3,500 Berkeley Avenue Boulder, Colorado and I've been using your fine airport for Decade maybe a little more. I've got a hanger here now and I got a draft copy of your lease at four tonight and Cancelled everything else that I had on my agenda for this evening and came down here so hi and I have a few comments about the hanger lease and I'm going to address them by The paragraph number in the draft copy. Okay So 2.1 My hangar is a condominium hanger, which I can't remove under this clause it's part of the structure of the whole building and my lease Includes my half of the ramp. So if I had to remove the whole thing I'd have to remove the concrete in the ramp to the midline of the ramp So it's a 72 foot ramp. I'd be taking out 36 feet of it This would have an impact on the aircraft on the hangers directly across from me and On the north side of me, which is the end of the ramp area So that would be kind of an impact also the cost of the demolition and We're to put it in all that If the city is buying my hanger under paragraph 2.2 There's got to be a time limit or my purchaser would walk away leaving me at the city's mercy 3.1 The initial rent under this lease shall not be greater than the rent. I'm currently paying. It's not arbitrary 3.3 This is very open-ended and says that I need to pay the same fees and assessments as commercial operators I'm just an old retired guy. I use my hanger for my personal non-commercial use so there needs to be a little bit more thought that goes into this because What you'd assess to a commercial operator isn't necessarily applicable to somebody like me 4.3 I need the ability to hire any maintenance person. I can't be limited by this clause Some maintenance requires special capabilities and tools Like the biannual pedostatic test that I'm required to do by the FAA I don't have the capability. There's none on the airport, but there are a couple of Itinerant people who come by they're qualified to do this and they come out to my hanger Spend an hour we chat they do the job and this and then they leave and They may or may not be associated with your airport. They may not have signed in Section for paragraph 4.5 Some amateur built aircraft may be assembled at the hangar per FAA guidelines They're not actually airplanes until they're registered and before receiving their N number This could all happen. So it might not be possible for every owner to comply with this particular requirement It's not an unreasonable requirement. It's just it doesn't cover every Situation that could actually occur since I'm building an airplane myself. I'm kind of sensitive to this one 5.1 etc. It's kind of long This permits the city to add various new requirements to my hangar without recourse for example, you might say that I have to have a loft or a bathroom or I don't know hot and cold running water. I don't know Maybe I have to have a bar. God knows 5.1.7 in this paragraph Says that I need to come up with a major portion of that money up front the renovation money Give it to the city as a bond and doesn't commit the city to return it to me after completion So that's that's wrong. You can't just take my money and Say, okay. Thank you. I understand the temptation 5.2 this doesn't limit any new utilities that the city might require me to connect to for example right now I'm not connected to the Very fine internet capability. What is it next light? I don't have that. I don't have running water. I don't have a Bathroom. It's just a hangar. I store my airplane there and you guys could rationally say well you should connect to this well why and This would require me to do it. So this is kind of a problem and 7.1 on signage I own my hangar and if I agree to this that means that I've surrendered any first amendment rights I might have for example, there might be your five minutes are expired. Oh Okay, real quick though. I know you're welcome to come back at the end and have another five minutes. Thanks. Thank you for the comments Would anyone else like to come on up run Crenzel one two one nine north 61st, Longmont, Colorado I'm gonna change the tone a little I Haven't been at these meetings for a long time and they didn't exist for a while I was at the last one and they were we get so entangled in all this stuff that has nothing to do with aviation electrification and plumbing and leases and We should sit back and think about this. What is an airport? What is an airport? It's a runway It's a place where planes take off and land everything that happens after that is because of the runway and we have probably one of the worst runways To do everything. We're talking about in the state of Colorado Nothing that you that that is being discussed and leases and and electrification and sewers and FBOs and new FBO buildings are all strangled because we have a terrible runway This has been addressed for at least 15 years I think maybe more It's very obvious that an FBO cannot survive at the Longmont Airport if you don't if a small FBO does not have The revenue of jet fuel just isn't possible General aviation has changed a lot in the in the last few years We have an enormous amount of home-built small airplanes at the Longmont Airport now They're not economic Contributors to the airport. You need planes that need maintenance. You need planes that bring people in and take people away The Longmont Airport and I think it's by design on the city spark It isn't really you don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out if you have a shitty runway You're not going to get many planes in there The opportunity has come before to expand the runway. It should be the only discussion at all By the city and the airport advisory board if they really are dedicated to make the Longmont Airport a significant and important economic contributor to the city of Longmont if you look at every Surrounding town and I'm not we all know the definitive parameters of the Longmont Airport all That has ever been suggested is it will allow safely and effectively Small jets and personal jets to come in or turboprops to come in fuel and take off with fuel That is the only way an FBO can survive and It can survive that way because it will attract airplanes on the airport to build hangars that require maintenance That need services. There's absolutely no reason to build an FBO at the Longmont Airport Because there's no reason for general commercial aviation Private aviation to come in the Longmont they can't fuel there's no services and The runway is totally inappropriate So it's just that you know, it's just a different way of looking at the whole Goal over the next few years if the goal is not to do this Which it has been for years and years The Decision is made All of this advisory board meaning is a really a waste of time The people will have their leases that are here and the airport will not change at all for the next 50 years Thanks. Thank you Would anyone else like to speak Come on down I see two more and if you can show Howard Morgan live at 1932 Amethyst in Longmont Former chairman of this body President of the hangar owners association, which is Longmont owners and pile association My first comment is that we're supposed to get this. I really desired to get this Notification of the meeting days before the meeting. I got it at three o'clock this afternoon Unfortunately one of our members found it in the city Website so it needs to be sent out We've asked for it before it hasn't gone out needs to go out to everybody on the airport at least Five days before the meeting so we know what we're talking about Number two like I said, I've only had a couple hours to look at this thing and this lease Aggravates a hell out of me. I'll tell you we LPA people have worked hard with this Population to get 30 year leases and we did on the last Election get the city charter changed To where everybody in the city can get a 30-year lease Now the airport is coming up with a 20-year lease the problem with a 20-year lease is It kills any investment in the airport because people can't borrow money on a 20-year lease on lease Property on lease land. So you've killed any investment Which has been killed for years anyhow? on airport so and we've already seen some 30-year leases with 30-year extensions which We hear a rumor that There's a 50-year limit, which is untrue. I've talked to the regional manager of FAA in Seattle talked to the AOPA also talked to the manager over to Greeley Greeley has a 30-year lease with a 30-year extension also in this lease read real quick a buyout provision Which I don't understand and I have serious doubts about where that's going. I Can't see the city buying hangers and then competing with the investors on the airport and The investors on the airport are the hangar owners and their people are rent hangers And if the hangars would go away and the investors would go away this airport would die a sudden death because we The hangar owners support this airport with our Somewhere around a half-minute leave. I could tell you half million dollars a year and And frankly the city teaches teeth Treats us like crap as being one of the biggest investors in an area Another point what you may not know is the recent impact statement economic impact statement Gives the airport a number of sixty point zero four million dollars sixty four four zero four million dollars and a city won't put a nickel in this airport if you go to Any or any city with a hundred thousand population and compared to this Airport you'll find that this airport is Bad, it's one of the worst in the country We need a third year lease so we can get some investment We need the city to put some money into this to make it a real airport We have jet traffic in here almost every day now and Other high-end airplanes. They're not coming here for lunch They're coming here to do business and I can tell you as a former corporate pilot people in that position look at the airport and and Relay that to the the whole city management and We don't look very good we got a terrible FBO the city needs to build one and Get somebody to operate it and start making this airport Do something it needs a longer runway which we've About 2012 we did a master plan and one of the things on that plan was 1,000 extra feet of runway not extra actually just a thousand feet wouldn't be extra and So far we've gotten nowhere on that. So I would like to see some aggressive Action on the city's part to make this airport a real airport and I'd also like to see this lease thing Thank you. Five minutes are expired and I get a 30-year lease. Thanks. Thank you David shank Box 464 Longmont I have a thing that I would like to hand out to all of the members of the advisory board if you could do that, please There's questions here. This was written by Keith Griffith one of the more intelligent people on the airport Very good questions in addition to those questions, which I think we should all deserve answers to tonight during the discussion of the lease I would like to know what other Departments within the city has restricted the lease to 20 years. It just seems like there's absolutely no Reason whatsoever for that. Please. I've handed out all these questions I'd like to see them all discussed I know that I could ask these questions, but none of you would answer them. So please discuss them during your discussion tonight Thank you very much Would anyone else like to speak Seeing no one here will move on to approval of September 2022 minutes. I Know at least I have some revisions as does Melinda. Would anyone like to start off? comments on this vice chair Jordan On six information items the item one or I the lease term update It says leave I stated that going forward all new leases will be 30 years with the renewal option of another 20 years Not to exceed a maximum of 50. I heard 2020 at that point and then in looking at the lease document. I see in the draft 2020 Do you remember saying that I think what was said last time is ice We were talking about what theoretically could be acceptable At that time we had made any determinations on what they would be But after bouncing that off the FAA, I think that was used as an example of something that would legally be acceptable So do you are you okay with six? item number one Lease terms update because it's a statement Let me see if I can get my document here and then the while you look at that on She said page two information items lease term update and then on the screen now And then on page three Just my name is with an A and then it's it's right every place else just in the two motions so six one So and it's leave I stated that Here we go. Here we go Six one oops Now that I think what was stated was that they could be 30 years with their new options So that would we were talking about what would be acceptable that would not exceed. Yeah, that makes logical that would not exceed the 50 years Does anyone else have anything it only gives me a number here Mr. Robinson. Thank you. Just a minor thing see page two At the top with the bullet points. It's talking about the FA inspections and it just says we'll be conducted week of September So I don't remember what was said, but I figured we should oh fill that in somehow Can't recall the top of my head what week that was we can certainly look up that date Just for accuracy of the minutes In December that would be logical. That's a good point bill. We could be a week in September It was a week in September in September works for me in September. Okay Anyone else All right, then I've got two here on the top of page three This is a continuation of action item 71 we selected board member for the RFP for engineer It shows motion carried six oh the motion should have carried five oh and I abstained on page four last sentence before Adjournment It currently says Levi Brown airport manager stated that they are not allowed to build another FBO per grant assurance guidelines Where the credit should have said You stated they are not allowed to prohibit building another FBO per grant assurance guidelines correct kind of an important All right, so I've got then Or changes week in September Lisa's could be 30 years The motion vice chair Jordan's name spelling Prohibit in the FBO. What did I miss? We good Would anyone like to make a motion to Accept the minutes as amended per this discussion mr. Robison and move that we approve the minutes as amended Is there a second? Go ahead Steve. I second Moved and seconded any further discussion We're done with minutes All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you All right Updates from the airport manager. All right updates. All right. Just a few items this month for quick updates on One I'll go ahead and start with was because it ties into one of my items here was the we did have the FA Come out and do their inspection the airport. It was a much delayed inspection the pandemic kind of pushed them back quite a ways For the most part, they're very happy very happy with the state of the surfaces the general condition of the airport Some very positive Comments are mowing which fortunately we've just gotten a new mowing contractor a week or two before they'd gotten there All excellent. They did have take issue. However with the prairie dogs on the airfield They are invading the runway safety area on the field We received a letter from the FAA stating that they would like all prairie dogs removed from the airport premises Moving forward with that. We've reached out to the city's wildlife control unit we're Currently in the middle of setting some meetings up with some private contractors We're probably going to do a push. Of course, we're going to follow County and Boulder guidelines for mitigation But we'll probably be doing a significant push on prairie dog mitigation Which is is great for me because I'm sure that'll be a little bit more effective than me out there with my little smoke canisters So that'll be a good positive thing moving forward for safety at the airport a Second big update that I have for the airport is the Southwest sewer project is About as of this morning two weeks From them turning dirt over on that Contracts have been signed pre-meetings have all been conducted Contractors confirmed this morning have put in all orders for the supplies. They need manholes have already been produced They're starting to look at bringing stuff to the job site and stage So things are moving forward quickly on that Front also, I guess another little quick thing I can put into here that I forgot to put on my list that we just did the other day was currently Starting around of new CIP stuff with C dot and FAA Moving forward with what we're going to want to do for projects in the future Honestly right now that all the stuff that's kind of on The short-term lists and stuff like that is stuff that's already come before this board So no huge changes moving forward with that While I fence pavement rehabilitation stuff like that at the moment and that is what I got for airport updates They wouldn't have any questions for Levi before we move into information items Vice chair Jordan Do you anticipate any impact with the sewer project on airport activity? There will be minimal impact I'm actually very pleased with the How little it sounds like it's going to be as the sewer project comes across to the south end of the airport there They will temporarily have to shut down the two taxi lanes that go into that south part of the airport But the contractors are very positive. They can move as quickly as possible They're only going to close one down at a time right and they're going essentially Dig lay pipe and it covers they go so it's not like they're going to be good big a giant trench and Then come back and put all the pipe in so before they've even started digging further down the line They'll have the taxi lanes up and running again. I pretty much take whatever time it takes the concrete to cure to get those clothes down So no closures, you don't anticipate any closures now not anticipate not really Kind of depending I guess on the size of your aircraft you might be able to maneuver it around on that south to get out either taxi lane But very minimal on closure time down there The other question was we used to get the budget in our packet and then When David passed away a lot of you know, we were struggling to get things done as it was We haven't been getting a budget again. Can we move back into getting a budget? I guess we can certainly get in the all I'll look into that kind of you know Basically is usually been a part of our packet. I'll ask about that and kind of see what the city's kind of vision of what the board is I know David took the report that he received and he reworked it into a format for us I think the the city format was not very digestible and So he Did rework it and so that effort With you know everything that was happening that fell to the to the wayside. So I'll put that on my my check-in to list Yep Thank You Melinda Talas Yeah, thanks, Levi. I appreciate the update from the FAA I Would like to get a little bit more Information on the surfaces as several of the members including mr. Morgan pointed out that there's some issues with the runway so Given that the FAA doesn't have any issues with our services or surfaces was your expert analysis of what the surfaces of our runways and Taxiways and so on surfaces are excellent and that was also echoed in the FAA report There are some panels on the ramp that are cracked and slated for being repaired As an airport, we're actually fairly fortunate. We have a very nice concrete long-life runway It's a nice one. I think most of the comments before we're kind of directed towards the length of the runway as far as the quality of The surface as opposed to the actual surface itself the surface itself is in very nice shape Mr. Bliss, I think I forgot what I was gonna ask How long is the sewer project going to last if I recall correctly the The contractors have up to 70 days to do it, but even in pre-meetings They kind of shook their head and say that it's we do not want to be here that long They didn't tell me how long it would be but I Think they're trying to push through and just you know less than a month Hopefully a few weeks they are very motivated to finish it quickly, but again, I'm not sure so They're going to take it to a spot at the midfield They're taking it about to where the wind tea and then what happens from there That's kind of the extent of the project. So it's about getting the infrastructure in there. So we can't tap into it in the future What infrastructure are you talking about the sewer? I know but you said What's gonna happen from there? Is that gonna be up to the individual hangar owner? To run the sewer to the hangar or what what's gonna happen moving? That's the extent of the scope of this project as it exists today hmm One other thing we'll get together personally with this, but You don't have my email because I'm getting Everything that you write to the hangar owners my friend who's a hangar owner sends it to me So I'm not getting it. I don't know Exactly why you you don't have my email. So we'll get together after absolutely and lastly I just want to say I Agree with just about everything the audience said tonight Okay, councilmember Martin Please have to oh you did I think I did I'm figuring out the touchscreen, but I thought I got thank you Forgive me for I'm not sure if I'm in order at this point But it's kind of an urgent question. I was on the airport advisory board in 2018 and 19 as well and at that time everybody took the comprehensive plans plan for extending the runway as A goal and then you know for I was away not on this board for a while and when I came back There was I think some confusion has has either the FAA rules or Boulder County's land ownership changed such as to make the runway extension infeasible because I I'm Confessed that I'm confused about that but that was my understanding was that we can't extend the runway now So I can answer a little bit to that It is true a few years back the FAA changed the rules on runway safety areas which required the acquisition of more land So if we did want to extend the runway we would have to acquire land that land had to be to the west of the airport So not completely undoable There was a second part of your question was the first part of it. I'm sorry I'm sorry. Oh, thank you Yeah, that was essentially it was that the land because I thought there was more to it than that Which is that that the? Ownership status of the land itself has also changed which would make it difficult for us to acquire it and that's something that that Phil may know more about because You wish you did yeah because you know, we've We've approached Boulder County about several land uses on that, you know, west of the airport Parcel and they have really not been very eager to negotiate with us on any of that land use and of course That's that's always going to be an obstacle and moving forward with the airport We can always have the discussion about potentially extending the runway It's going to take a commitment on everyone's part if we want to do that the city is going to have to be on board The landowners are going to have to be on board and most importantly the FAA is going to have to be on board To my understanding that was a major hang-up Previous administrations or managers kind of ran into roadblocks with that so new discussions would have to be had and new bridges built And then selling that idea moving forward. Yeah, well, so the reason for me asking the question is that I just wanted to eliminate the confusion things have changed it is less feasible than it was before and There are there are new roadblocks there. There are challenges for sure. Thank you But I would just say the current master plan still calls for it and that has not changed either That's true Mr. Robinson Thank you. I just wanted to add on to what councilmember Martin was saying everything You guys said was correct and I looked into it a little bit because this is one of my Subprojects as an advisory board member So not only is there a county land but because of the angle of the runway there are two Individual farmhouses that would be impacted plus one commercial company the NAR company So there's four different parcels that we would have to acquire In order to even extend the runway one foot Yeah, most of it we have to acquire some of it if there was minimal intrusion onto the properties We could get easements on potentially But that's there's gonna be one that is not gonna be an easement. Yeah, but yes They're personally I think we're on the we know what that one is that that one would definitely have to be acquired Yeah, so yeah, that's where we are Anything else? I'm sorry, mr. Bliss. Yeah, I just wanted to ask you you said if we even extended one foot we have to encroach land that we don't I'm just gonna say that the microphone because of the changes in the even your requirements Even if we oh, we are now. Okay. I didn't know that we're yeah We were we're operating good because we got in before the change rules But if we did any changes, we would have to acquire more land for sure. Yeah If anything else on your update, that's what I had on my notes. So let's move on to information items then Okay presentations for a B discussions So this is just kind of continuing it on and trying to keep open the dialogue of you know Moving forward with new discussion items. So presentations to include for the Discussions one thing that I would just like to bring out was maybe next meeting We could just have a discussion about the sustainability Of the airport and how we would like to move forward with that just have a discussion on it So that's my information item for that Any anyone have any comments on things they'd like to see? Agreement disagreement I believe I all right Um Vice Chair Jordan So when we bring up a topic, then how do we how does that get legs? So we say it but then are you would you present or do we need to? So I think a nice one for this one next time maybe next next month on information items We have a another little you know points as you know Additional items for discussion and on behind that also sustainability and then we also have Informations so I'll kind of talk about the things that happen start an open dialogue and we get input back from the board too And then maybe that gets moved on to action items in the next meeting or something Would there be anybody from the city that an expert subject matter expert that could come in and Speak to us. I can't think of any restrictions to that if we wish to do that We had talked about bringing in guest speakers for you So we were gonna look into the guest speaker piece of that too and we'll have we have city people who are part of the Sustainability Program and part of their they have an actual department. So that would be folks We might want to bring in as well and have that discussion with you perfect. Thank you Leave I would ask as part of that This was gonna be one of my comments later, but bring it up now There is the draft sustainability resolution I'd like to have that be part of the discussion as well And that was kind of my concept is that be a good point in the meeting to kind of bring that out perfect yep You also mentioned CIP as something that's starting up Mm-hmm at the appropriate point I'd like that to be one of the items that comes back as well We will in fact, I'll put them my notes for the next meeting to yeah And that doesn't necessarily need to be next meeting depending on where we are in the development But at the appropriate point it would be good to bring it back anyone else on the Topic of the runway extension has there been any sort of financial analysis on the increase in revenues from Fuel verse the costs and when the break-even point would be To my knowledge, it hasn't been any detailed Announcing beyond what was kind of touch base in the master plan if you've been through that document It is true and it's point to talk about in the master plan increasing runway length would Potentially allow It would allow Small jet aircraft was still in the category of operating in our airport to come in and be able to land and Take off without necessarily restriction as a former Charter pilot myself I can say that is a draw for an airport certainly If I know that I can go from point A to point B without having to make a stop point C I'm more likely to choose one airport over another So that's the benefit of a length To quantify it. We would have to have more research done as far as dollars and cents That's what I'm asking and I think that counts as sustainability at least financial sustainability of the airport So I think that should also be covered Thank you Thank you. I have a question for the board if We were going to arrange presentations by either the sustainability staff or by an outside expert What kind of length of presentation are you thinking about because? some Exactly there are people who would give you an hour, and I don't think you want that Okay, so could I Heard a five minutes that may have been slightly ingest I mean, I'm I'm not even I'm thinking 15 I like you and I yeah, I mean, I think it depends on the topic It depends on you know if we have a ton of action items But yeah, oh, yeah sustainability in particular. Yeah 15 minutes plus some Q&A Absolutely Q&A and I would probably put public comment in as part of that as well So that we actually get direct feedback on that topic Okay, we've done with some of the some discussions as well. Love it. Thank you That's simply my opinion though. So if anyone has their own, please chime in it seems logical to me All right Anything else on presentations for discussions move on then engineering consultant update Phil Good evening members of the airport advisory. My name is Phil Greenwald transportation planning manager with the city Just a quick update. We are still working with our purchasing group To make sure that we get the RFQ out now. We're gonna do a request for qualifications Instead of a strict strict proposal So we're hoping that goes a little quicker But we still need your help and we do have the more the board member who volunteered so we'll have that We'll get that Information out to you once we know where we are with the purchasing department for us So it is taking a little longer than we had hoped. I'll be honest with you and we are working to Make sure we get that out very soon. We need to have it done quickly for C dot rigs So we are working diligently to get that done, but it is hung up right now in our purchasing group Thanks Thank you. My mic from mr. Robeson. Thank you Phil I'm not that familiar with RFQs and RFPs But I do know an engineering firm that's interested in submitting a bid Do they need to do anything before those come out or they just wait for them to come out? Oh Board member Robeson we asked that they wait for the RFQ to be released And then that we have a bit there's a bid process. It's very formalized. So we need to make sure they follow all those Pieces we can talk to them until the RFQ goes out and then we can't we have to stop talking to them Once that hits the street. So that'll be the formal piece of that That'll be pretty evident once we know that we'll Make sure we get that information out to the board So you know what time it is what timing that is as well Anyone else? Well, let's move on to the to airport leases. I know I know this is one We actually all want to talk about all right good. All right, so I think attached to all your package should be a draft example of that lease I would like point out is just a draft that is not a final Form of that lease necessarily So I'd like to just discuss a couple items in here The first one is that turn which is section 2.1 Which you can see these should be if it's the same as mine highlighted in red on that Coming back to the discussion and then back and forth what occurred between the city's attorney's office and advisors we talked to We definitely we can't do 30 years with 30 your option to renew. So that's out. So The term of the lease really could can be left to be negotiable between each lease I'm kind of proposing moving forward with it. We do make that initial a 30 year It's just for the convenience of people and getting loans and stuff like that As far as what we would want to do For an optional renewal. I would certainly pass that back potentially for comment to To the board and stuff like that too if there wanted to be some discussion About what we could do for renewal, but I am suggesting that moving forward that we do change the base Rate term to 30 years moving forward Can we start with that since I know there's a lot on term and kind of move section by section Okay Russell I see you're in there. Do you want to talk about term? Okay Mr. Robeson then thank you If you're really committed to saying we can't do 30 plus 30 I would move that we just recommend we do 30 plus 20 that would be Hopefully acceptable to everybody in the audience as a 30 year lease No I'm seeing some nods and some I mean it's a 30 year lease. So That I think that's what everybody's going for. Is there any reason to consider anything else? We've heard tons of comments that say we want 30 Russell did you have enough I heard Move in your was that an official verb that you were making a motion Sure, I moved that the board recommend that we do a 30 year with a With a 20 year option to renew would anyone like to second that I know there's discussion I'll let you discuss, but I would like to second it first Are you seconding see I either need a second on the motion and we can discuss it. You'll second All right I see a lot of people in queue. I'm sorry guys Um Talis you're up first Steve. I will get to you. I promise So we're discussing the motion, which is the recommendation 30 plus 20 I'm doing my best Talis go ahead You know, I I really respect mr. Morgan's experience having been on this board and he seems to have done some research Uh, leave. I have you spoken to the people that mr. Morgan has and he's he's very confident that the 30 plus 30 is doable I'm not an expert not a lawyer But have you had discussions with him to see his point of view? Yes, I actually also queried the f a directly and said If I were to offer a 30-year lease with 30 the option to review I asked them directly would you consider that a violation of grant assurances and they told me Very to the point. Yes, we would consider that a violation of your grant assurances That's from mr. Mike Mott's at the federal aviation administration. He's the individual who oversees our grant assurances council member martin um Again always just for information but Since you have a contact with mr. Mott's first, I would like to know who the city attorney is that helped with this lease That would be christopher robbie Christopher robbie. Okay Because there might be a way Out of that, especially if other airports are doing 30 plus 30 And that is that you inspect the property that is at the time of renewal you expect the property and That is that is on the least parcel And if it can be certified to have a useful life of 30 more years Then you might be able to give a 30-year renewal, but otherwise the Hangar owner would have to settle for a 20-year renewal um, and I don't know whether that's been tried or not, but uh, I would like to see it tried if it's not because I was a big proponent of 30-year leases and I really hate to see that go away Council member martin, I just want to state that Our attorney's office as well as our city manager's office is recommended strongly that we not do a 30-30 Not do the 60 full lease. So That's what's come back to us as far as recommendations from both our city attorney's office and our city manager's office So that's why we're moving forward with what we're saying with the 30 plus 20 Okay, just for information. Why did you go back to 20 on the initial because I mean we do need investment in the Airport, but we we're not going back to 20 on the initial. Oh, but it's in the it's in the draft It's just uh, this is just a draft. So that's why at this first point I wanted to mention that we haven't said it yet. So it hadn't been changed yet Okay, yeah So that's what I'm recommending 30 years and then the term to be up for discussion So This was the the draft in the form that we got it straight back from the city's attorney's office and that hadn't been addressed yet I'll second that one the attorney Council member martin anything else mr. Bliss I just wanted to ask what's the 50 year restriction. What is that? So I don't understand that so I think most of us are familiar with the concept of grand assurances are so Prior to receiving federal funded. We have to make assurances. We have to make promises to the PFA that there are certain things we won't do Um, so as one of the corrections we made in our minutes, we won't restrict Competition on the airfield and we can't stop someone from building a new feo Yeah, we can't say no, you can't build enough you hear one of the other ones We can't do is dispose of land on the airfield. So the fa has come out in official letters of recommendation From the people who decide whether we violate grants or not and said that if you lease A piece of land For more than 50 years we consider you're essentially losing so much control of it That it's like you're getting rid of it is essentially what they say So form, uh, you know financial standpoint 30 years is is plenty to amortize your investment that you put into a piece of land So they see that kind of as the starting point And we're allowed to offer up to 50 years. Um moving forward. I would strongly recommend that we just don't Default a 50 year lease. That's still incredibly generous I've never been at an airport before that offers full 50 year leases starting right off the bat Um, I certainly agree that starting with a 30 year lease makes a lot of logical sense and particularly now that the city allows it Because that allows you to get loans that allows you to put infrastructure That allows you to make a paperwork way easier when you're trying to invest in the airport Thank you Steve at the um, a little danger here. I went googling this afternoon and found the fa airport compliance manual Section 12 that is on review of aeronautical lease agreements. I'm just going to read this section on term Because I think it goes directly into this Does the term exceeded a period of years that is reasonably necessary to amortize Attendance investment does a lease provide for multiple options to the term with no increased compensation to the sponsor Most tenant ground leases of 30 to 35 years are sufficient to retire The tenants initial financing and provide a reasonable return for the tenants development of major facilities Leases that exceed 50 years may be considered a disposal of the property in that term of the lease I'm sorry May be considered a disposal of the property in that the term of the lease Will likely exceed the useful life of the structure as a correction on the property FAA offices should not consent to propose lease terms that exceed 50 years I'm I'm all for 30 as our starting point. I don't even want to really have the debate on 20 versus 30 on that point But the that's where the 50 at least seems pretty clear to me as a non-attorney Anyone else on term at least steve go ahead. Sorry and then blend. I'll get you so If you have a 30 year lease now, that's You're not proposing to change that you just mean that that 30 year lease when it's over it'll revert to a 20 year So where we're at right now Is in the delicate position with the FAA where there have been some 30 year leases with the or to your options to renew done on the airfield and they are not happy but we're in a position where Management has changed and they're not necessarily motivated to come here with all of their lawyers and start going after us right now So that's kind of where this discussion started I a finger wag and say you can't do that So I am the moment more than happy to kind of not poke them and make them angry So that they do come out here and poke it leases that we have set up in that manner and just move forward with their guidance Vice chair jordan I was going to ask if the city would provide justification for their Being against the 30 30, but it sounds like that's mute And then just to clarify that 20 year leases are still available. So if the hangar is older I could take a 20 year lease Oh, I'm recommending a 30 year lease for that initially. So is 20 still an option Or uh, you mean existing one of the older hangars that's so if someone just wanted to do a 20 year lease, you mean Yeah, absolutely. I want to do a 20. I'm recommending a 30 year Lease as kind of a starting point But as I kind of mentioned at the beginning it's like it's all negotiable So if I mean I've got leases on the airport. We've done them for five years. I just did one for a year A little while ago. So it's all negotiable just because yeah, yeah the argument that at 50 years the Whatever structure was on it would have timed out Doesn't hold true at our airport. We've got structures older than that And then I I managed an airport that got hit by a tornado. So everything on the airport was new now We're getting into Interesting discussions of evaluation of buildings and what is the life of a building and stuff like that? So it's making the assumption that you're talking about the original building And we do have quite a few of those that are still standing. So and then catastrophe where things have been replaced And the 29th year of a lease and suddenly you've got a whole new building. Thanks to a tornado. So Few exceptions there but as long as We have the 30-year option because we did fight hard to get that passed as a city And I'm with marshawn that one and there's very there's a very logical argument for that and I mean I can't think of any reason for us not to do it. Okay. Thank you Any other comments on term here before we move on to another section I Think we so I'll just make one kind of point of order for for all of us. This is an information item tonight We're not voting to recommend these changes. We're not voting it forward I would encourage anyone who's listening to this Who disagrees with what we're talking about tonight? to Make that note at the last public invite to be heard and kind of bring those comments forward presumably next meeting or the meeting after we will vote on Advising council to adopt this as a new format. Um, so there is still more opportunity to continue commenting on this Mr. Robeson I Are you are you reminding me that you still have your motion on the floor that we haven't voted on? Please go ahead Thank you, mr. Chairman I just realized it's in the same paragraph It says the lessee shall have the option to negotiate with the city for renewal Is that what you meant to say? I mean to me it should be the lessee shall have the option to renew the lease So that's the standard lease terminology that came back from legal So I haven't I'd have to dive a little bit deeper into that For comment, I suppose they always have the option to negotiate with the city, right? No reason to put that in writing Again, it was standard contract stuff that I assume the city put in there for a reason to me that's Worthless to have in there. So I would have a conversation about that I mean at the end of a 30-year lease If there's no option for renewal you would have to negotiate a new lease, correct? Yeah, okay So how is that different from having the option to negotiate for renewal of the lease? I again, I'd have to get into the details of the legal reason why this is put this way But I assume it has been put here due to experience of past leasing Russell, I think that's a good catch though because it makes this a 30-year lease hard stop as opposed to a 30 plus 20 Why I would I would love to hear more about that Yeah Palace Yeah, just to add on If they're renegotiating wouldn't that be a new lease and then that's going around the whole Issue with 50 years because then you could do 30 and 30 than 30 than 30 right Yeah, man, I don't think there's anything that stops you from doing, you know 100 years those leases as long as it's separate leases. Yeah, I mean the FA guidance you can do that It just can't be one long lease. Exactly. Methuselah could rent this, you know Over and over and over and over again as long as they're renegotiated for each term And then again, you know any comments you have anything that you'd like to change in here This is straight from the city's attorney's office. So, you know We're taking comments and we can certainly ask them how they'd like to proceed forward if they're doing things for a certain reason Um, I'm going to bring us back to the motion that's on the floor Which is to recommend To leave I that we do 30 plus 20 30 year term 20 year option any other further comments on that All those in favor of making that recommendation to the airport manager say hi Hi Any opposed you have a recommendation Move on from term to whatever the next one was that I interrupted you on Right. So the next major item we have for discussion here is the addition or the the changing of 2.2 Which is essentially modifying a little bit of the city's first right of refusal. So The way that the leases have existed in the past At the end of a contract the city essentially has the Uh opportunity to purchase a piece of land. So at the end of a of a lease The city has the opportunity to come in and say, okay, you know, we want this chunk of land. We've got this plan We've got that plan. Um, we would like to develop this area for this or that Um, the reality of the situation is very rarely do leases actually come to full term usually what happens is 15 20 years into a lease lease gets sold and new lease is generated Uh in 15 20 years into that lease lease gets sold new lease is generated. So in the past there has never been really An opportunity to have any control of the land at the airport once it's put out for that initial development Most airports solve this by putting in a reversionary clause I don't necessarily think that's the best idea for us at this moment um, I really kind of like the fact that Um, when you come to this airport, that's not Uh just expected about most airports certainly on the front range. That's expected Um, you're gonna have this chunk of land, you know, if you build an fbo you got it for 50 years 50 years You know the the city takes it. Um, I think it's Not something we necessarily want to do right now just as to have a little bit of uh Something that we can hold out there to developers and stuff like that and people who want to you know, invest into the airport If you bring all this money at the airport at the end of your lease, um, Essentially is evaluated and you get the value for what you're building is So I think that's something that we can maintain. That's my personal opinion. Um, to just kind of draw in some some More investment at the airport one thing that would be very nice is if the city did have the option To if they really wanted to do something to be able to control some land So another way of potentially solving that is to kind of increase our first right of refusal options So this doesn't necessarily force You know someone to give up their land or something like that But what it says is if you're selling your hangar the city gets the option to buy that hangar So if we've got you know Hangar, you know 99 who's was built on the field in 1941 Which is right where we want a brand new fbo and it's being sold next month The city has the option to come in and say no, we would like to buy that instead because we have this plan Now having said all of this there is no grand plan For the city to necessarily develop anything on the airport. This is looking Way down the road So this is just a provision and I'm hoping in leases moving forward That should a Very strong need come up with the city or the airport community to Change direction one way or the other. There's at least something In writing that would potentially allow the city to do that And not just kind of be stuck in this perpetual loop of Little hangars being built and nothing kind of ever changing potentially or no power to Change it on the airfield Mr. Robeson thank you Where to begin um To even talk about reversion as something That is not appropriate at this time Leaving it open for a future time I think is completely at odds with what everyone wants who uses the airport everyone in this audience Would be aghast if that ever came to fruition And so you're saying it's not that bad But here we are giving first try to refusal not just at the end of the lease but anytime you want to sell your hangar This is not as bad But it is uh It is inhibiting investment If you don't if the city does not want a bunch of little hangars They've had ample opportunity to put money up and develop their own buildings and everything This is something that is going to really turn people away from coming to this airport from building hangars from being at the airport And if you really insist on it 30 days is absurd imagine you have something to sell And you have a buyer that says i'm ready. I have the money here it is And you say well, we have to wait a month for the city to decide. I mean that's glacial. Are you kidding me? And again, this isn't something that there's plans to do This is kind of an option to give the city Some kind of leeway if they have plans or desires to do something on the airport to actually do it because right now We have essentially no way of doing anything on the airport Once a hangar has been built on a piece of land. There's lots of land in the future. There's lots of land That's not covered by little hangars. Um, that's true. Um, how much longer is it going to be that way? I'm thinking 100 years down the road here. Yeah, there'll be a new lease written before that time I would say everything in blue in here nice color to make it appear not as imposing I mean, we have records of on the airport of essentially There's parcels that have never come to full term because they've been sold over and over and over So there's properties that on the airport that have been out of the airport's hands for Since the airport existed. That's what the city has wanted this whole time When we whenever we said hey city, why not would you be interested in coming in and operating some hangars? I'll cost money up front That's what they've been For 10 20 years. That's the way we've been operating yeah So are you saying that You know, just maybe they might go in a totally different direction and start spending huge amounts of money on the airport I'm not sure but we don't have any plans at the moment too, but You never know to add a first try to refusal at every sale is going in the opposite direction of what we have been doing for 15 years That's my main point. Thank you council member martin um, thank you just Before there is a recommendation made which is going to be next time I would think that what needs to be done is we need to say what language the city charter requires Because there may be some reversion clause In the charter and I don't I truly don't recall what the final language was But we we do have to make sure And as as leave I said lots of airports have these but the Other the comforting thing is remember that this is the chartered lease terms for all city land Not just for hangers city doesn't want to get a bunch of little hangers um, but the city really really wants to be able to buy back infill properties And develop them you know, so There are there are other motivations for Um for those terms than hangers and they're not necessarily directed at the airport, which you know I'm just saying it may may make you feel better But before make before passing a recommendation on this, let's be sure we have the charter language in front of us Mr. Bliss Leave I just want to get Very clear on this you're not talking about somebody somebody who's leases up after 30 years that the city has the right to Step in and take over that hangar if they want to renew their lease You're only talking about somebody who wants to sell their Their hangar and then the city has first right of refusal. Is that correct? so first right of refusal and again, there's There's no spots on the airport that have been identified As we would the city would have wanted to purchase Um, so there's no plans using it. It's just first right of fusel is just you're selling your hangar to someone else and you just notify the city And the city has the option if they want to to say something and say we would like to purchase that hangar Okay, so you're not talking about some imminent domain No policy and again, they they would have to buy the hangar from you So you would still be selling it Theoretically and again, I'm not a lawyer. You'd be selling it for I think the term is used to bona fide offer so you could The hangar owner gets gets an estimate And the city gets an estimate and then you negotiate a price. Yeah, I read that in your thing I just wanted to make sure that you're not talking about Once your your 30 year lease is over and you want to renew for 20 The city's not going to step in by your Oh, no, not this again. This is just I think no, it's not going to this isn't going to cue off every time that occurs Okay, it's just a provisionary again. If you're selling it to someone else before the lease expires Then the city has the the potential to add at the current lease the city already has the option to purchase at the end of the lease um, and it goes into the language of you know, you know Figuring out the quotes, you know Purchasing it and or requiring the original tenant to tear down yada yada yada all that That's standard stuff, but yeah, okay If I just want to be clear, um, Steve, because I think there's two different sections here. Okay, we're talking about 2 2 Where yes, there are no estimates We're not averaging. Yeah, this is the bona fide offer. You have an offer from someone You're telling the city. I want to sell this. Yeah, and the city says sell it to me instead Yeah, so I at that price that you already agreed upon. I did query the is the really unofficial reading Yeah, I did query the city's attorney's office about that and the what was the term again? Yeah The bona fide offer so I'm not sure of the legalities that are kind of the surround that Um, perhaps we should have the city's attorney's office here this evening so they could just describe that in more detail But to my understanding is essentially an offer Yeah, that's that's a good idea. We could potentially I'll put that on my notes for action items So this questions can be asked of the city attorney at that point If I start Jordan um to that discussion Um with hanger shortages You could see somebody come in with a Exorbitant offer to make a purchase In order to secure a hanger and so if I'm willing to offer A million dollars for a hanger for my serious And then it comes to the city, but it's not bona fide. Yeah, what happens in I'm that's question one I'm uh, probably less than qualified. I would ask the city attorney really wanted that corner piece and that million is crazy But I really need a place to put my brand new plane So that's the first question second one is um, it does say when the police he desires to sell a sign Or otherwise transfer and we have a lot of families on the airport with generational Units where the father's passed on or the the older aviator has passed on to the younger aviator um, I think it's always been guys though and So in a case like that that's saying that if dad wants to transfer to a child It falls into this trap So that's my concern and then number three is the 30 day. Is there any way to reduce that time period to three days? um Something to keep the deal moving give the city their chance and keep the deal moving that where the city would already have A threshold of what they would consider That would already be predetermined. So you would just go and look and say yeah No, we're not going to pay a million dollars for a hanger So that that process could be sped up if that language stays in but my concerns are that it says even to transfer Um, we'll take anything into consideration Okay palace, please Well, I completely agree With the vice chair statements. I think that it should definitely be reduced to at least, you know a week Additionally, if I have an entity that owns the Asset and I want to reincorporate that entity or want to liquidate that through a mna activity That could really hurt my business if the city comes in and swoops in if I'm halfway through an mna If my company's getting acquired or whether I'm just reincorporating into a new entity. So um Yeah, there is some verbiage that we should make sure that it is actually a third party sale that this applies to not just the transfer Uh within you know an entity with within a shell company or something like that, right? I take some comfort because I don't think the city can do anything in 30 days Even if we wanted to look look at our discussions, but That's that's just me Not that i'm advocating to change it just i'm taking comfort in that um Leave my next topic. All right, so next topic that was So that's the real the main points that I have at least honestly, that's kind of the only things that have been touched in there no Everything else is from previous leases so we had Specific comments from the public earlier on a number of different sections I wrote notes down in a number of these I thought I thought they were reasonable comments I'd love to you know as we're taking them back to the attorneys to bring those into the discussion If anyone wants to raise any of those publicly right now Board members that you'd like to talk through them if there is discussion I thought they were pretty reasonable and pretty Easy to interpret for you guys to take it back Vice chair Jordan Hold on a sec. Go ahead I also took note of the item So I think if we just can get it on the record for the item numbers that were questioned 3.1 was about initial rent that it was not an arbitrary Um, and I don't know enough about the topics to discuss them that just would ask that this be Evaluated 3.1 3.3. That was the discussion about fees That individuals are going to face the same sorts of fees as commercial operators 4.3 limited by clauses Um, and that was oh that was the um having services done on the field by an outside party On the pedo tube 4.3 experimental aircraft And the the language concerning when an aircraft Becomes legitimate. That was 4.5 4.5. Sorry 4.5. Uh, 5.1 That was something without oh that was having to do Meet new requirements without recourse if they were directed they had to add Facilities bathrooms lofts running water 5.1.7 That was the requirement to provide half of the money upfront for renovation With no commitment to return that money And that definitely jumped out at me as well 5.2 utilities That they might we might be required to connect to utilities was the the uh concern and then 7.1 signage And that was a first amendment concern on signage Those are the ones I had as well. Um, is there any other ones that anyone else would like to raise here? I would Encourage anyone who has other comments in the public We have a public invited to be heard at the end. Please bring it up. You you know, we're not voting on this tonight It's not too late. Um, I would encourage you to also email them to levi. So he has them in writing So you're not relying on at least in my case poor handwriting writing down your comments and trying to interpret them And that way we have all of them. Um, levi would ask that you send those onto the board as well Um, but the appropriate way to contact us is through levi. So I would encourage you guys to do that as well Please Any um, go ahead. Are you good? Yeah, no, I'll add um on 15.1 and 2 About assignments and subletting Because that does happen quite a bit Especially with um aircraft partnerships as partners come and go Out of the partnership and become a tenant through the investment in an aircraft And that's old language. It's been in there, but I definitely Question that 17.2.3 That the city may also at its sole option repossess the premises expel the lisi And remove the lisi's improvements all without liability for trespass or for damage um, I would I Do rent at the airport, but I have never seen the lease and um, that's That's a pretty strong statement um And then 21.2 under miscellaneous You're leasing the premises in in as in condition Um, no warranties That the city is under no obligation to maintain the airport in a particular location or condition um, yet Everything in here tells us what we have to do and I just really didn't see what the city Was doing in exchange for the business of the lease 21.11 the lease shall extend to and be binding upon the air's successors and assigners So I think that means legally if you've got a will or something that's designating that so that was I noted that because I do we do have generational Pilots on the field So the thing I got out of it was there were a whole lot of demands and I just as a renter didn't see Um, the upside on what the city is offering in exchange for my commitment my 30 years my rent on time My fees and penalties if I do anything wrong And there's it's pretty silent to what my rights are As a tenant Thank you guys chair jordan um, leave I would suggest at this point we You guys take those back with the attorneys Bring them back And incorporate other feedback as we may receive either later tonight or after tonight. Okay Um The interest of time i'm going to move us on to action items first one is Our rates and fees update All right rates and fees hopefully this will be a shorter one because nothing has changed since the last time the board made a recommendation so some of you may recall prior to David unfortunately passing away. Um, these came in front of the board And recommendation was made Um in the interim I've done some research Research proved that we didn't necessarily need to increase our rates and charges at the airport as we were on Car with most of the other airports in the region And so we were competitive There was some initial attempts to amend the Rates and charges to include The ability for the city to do in-kind agreements um An alternate course Was chosen in order to fill the need that we were going to put that in the rates and charges So for simplicity's sake that was removed And what we returned with was exactly the same document that came before the board About a year ago. I think So the changes that have been made here the ones and just to review what was put in front of the board before um A small Edition was made. Um, and there's two options here. I should mention On both option one and option two a small Uh Change was made um on the lease rate for land to construct improvements and for aeronautical and non-anarchanautical essentially just saying that um, the lease will be This price per square foot or whatever the current uh lease rate is So that's just to kind of Surpass a little accounting headache where Let's say, you know, you start a lease In two years you sell it in the meantime consumer price index has gone up um Three percent and the lease is adjusted slightly up. So if you take the old lease kind of Uh, line by line theoretically applying the new lease you would have to go back to the old rate And this just says if you're buying a lease from someone else you buy it at the rate that they're paying for Essentially, it just makes that a little cleaner in our rates and charges um The second thing that was changed and the rates and charges and this is where it's alters from Um option one to option two was the annual permit fees. Um These were created mostly well for for anyone's use at the airport But the kind of the driving factor behind this was for the skydiving operations Uh, they are by far the ones on the airport that use this The most Really what this does it doesn't increase the rates. It actually It gives a little bit of incentive for um Doing longer term as you can see it's broken down here monthly weekly daily right now. It's essentially just daily um, so what they've done here is they've put a little bit more um into Kind of incentivizing Someone who would be doing these leases to do it in a longer term and rather a shorter one The two options vary only on What that discount is Um, I know that there was a recommendation made by the board last time on One of these documents and whatever you guys recommend this time, of course, just let us know for that too I'll before I open up for discussion Um, the recommendation last time I went back and found the letter I wrote that never got sent. This was july 16th 21 Dated we recommended option two of the permit fee um part of the logic was um Quote my own words recommendation is based on our belief that the reduced rate provides incentive for users to purchase longer term permits up front which Reduces administrative burden for the city It's a calculated to be attractive for the airport's most frequent permit users The revenue impact to the airport is unlikely to be significantly positive or negative, but the administrative benefit is meaningful That was at least my summary of what we ended up last time. I'll open the floor though um for anyone who wants to Discuss these and ultimately which one we'd like to recommend Don't I'll jump at once Vice chair jordan I still agree with that that it became administratively overbearing. Uh, so I move that we still recommend option two There's a motion. Is there a second Mr. Bliss, I second that Thank you moved and seconded. Would anyone like to discuss the motion that's on the floor We discussed it enough back in the 21 Press like see your hand near the thing. Are you going to? All right, well then seeing no comments, um, all those in favor of recommending option two say I I Any opposed motion carries Action item number two select two board members for Board member selection committee that pretty straightforward. We're going to be selecting some new members So we were hoping to find a couple of volunteers who might want to kind of sit and evaluate on that um I have both steve and I are up Terms are up as is melinda, but you can't reapply melinda Um, would anyone like to volunteer for this? I am not going to volunteer You can do what you'd like to steve and we can vote on it Would anyone like to volunteer to do that vice chair jordan for the record? I will volunteer since my term is I'm coming up on the limits. I'm done Okay, mr. Bliss anyone else Would anyone anyone have an issue with that? I think we probably need a motion Would anyone like to make the motion for both steve and melinda? Talas I motion that steve and melinda are our representatives for selecting new board members I'll second that um Further discussion. I mean, I think you can second it um Any discussion all those in favor? I any of host? Thank you both for volunteering. I hope the questions are easy this year Um finalize airshow date Yeah, and just as simple as I know we had a rather robust discussion last month about that and um, I know Research was done and I thought we just put it out there. Why don't we just go ahead and you know as a good first step pick a good date and just kind of Bounce it around and pick a big time to it on calendar excellent Um, mr. Robison Thank you, mr. Chairman. Um, so tom larkin and bob freeman Said their best weekends are the 16th or the 23rd september September 16th september 23rd 2023 correct correct. Okay, this seems like either of those is equally acceptable 16th or the 23rd Saturday, I'm sure Uh, I'll look up the So everybody check their calendar for vacations or anything like that Vice-chair jordan go ahead. Um That is good because uh, I just went to the color of springs airshow and it was a couple weekends ago and um, They indicated they probably are and that's probably it for them. They're not probably going to do another one. Really? So, um those performers would be available and one performer from freeman Performed down there, but I don't our objective has always been not to be competing with another one in the area So we can see what happens, but they they definitely didn't think they could do another one They had no provisions for 2023. So uh boulder. We used to alternate with boulder. So we were on the evens they were on the odds I think and so we could potentially end up on that schedule in the future With color of springs, but right now. I think that was the only one we saw a potential conflict And they indicated they may not do anymore. So they definitely have done nothing to plan for 2023. So I think those dates should be good So I would note at uh, september 16th is russia shana So there would probably be a bias toward september 23rd to avoid a holiday Um Does anyone have any comments concerns about the 23rd? Are you good? Sounds good to me. Would anyone like to make a motion to recommend september 23rd 2023? Vice chair jordan, I recommend Then we Start planning on an air show at long months vans brand airport for september 23rd 2023 And we will need volunteers yes Mr. Robison second Moved in second at any further discussion All those in favor Hi Any opposed Motion carries. Thank you Congrats. We have a date We're on to our final public invited to be heard Who wants to kick us off? Whoever's first down I have Same rules applies at the beginning start with your name and address, please and uh, I'll have a five minute time We're going and we'll turn on the microphone. Thank you Don dolcey 335 pratt street lung It sounds very similar to what I've been through Six in my six-year term on the board When I first got on the board, I've I volunteered to work on the rules and regulations And it only took five years to get them to approved And they went back and forth many many times to the lawyer and basically what happened was That There were changes made that were contributed to one person who focused their efforts on bringing all those Comments into the document and I was the one that collected all that and so I'm going to recommend that somebody May be the person other than Levi That would collect all the input from everybody on the airport. That's willing to provide it And incorporate it into the document so that it can come back and be distributed to everyone And then go back to the lawyers to fight with them They typically Were only focused as as I can see from the discussion on the city The document that is the old lease was very biased In favor of the city and not not in favor in any way to the tenants on the airport Which is really strange to me because the city of Longmont seems to be one that's Very open and caring about the residents of the city And they try to do everything they can to be fair to the citizenry But this document as you already have expressed and seen Is very biased It's all one-sided There was an attempt that and I worked with a person who wanted to sell their hangar And they they wanted to put a lease in place that was less biased And we worked on that quite a bit and it went nowhere the city wouldn't even You know entertain the discussion with them so My recommendation is to bring this back for discussion a number of times and have one person Would be the focal point for collecting all that data and putting it into a word document that It it moves forward with red lines So that it can go back and forth to the lawyer. Hopefully it'll be done in less than five years Thanks I appreciate your optimism Um, who would like to come next? Howard Morgan. I was still Howard Morgan. Uh since the last hour Hey on the uh subject of leases The city has already put out some 30 year leases with a 30 year extension This 50 year thing is is a suggestion. I've talked to the f.a. which I told you about And I'll give you the reference to that I've talked to the a opa the opa said There's all kinds of leases all over this country And nobody has ever been turned down for a grant because of a hanger lease The f.a. man in Seattle said that we don't even get involved in hanger leases The Greeley managers said The f.a. doesn't bother them. They do whatever they want. They've got a 30 year lease Extended to 30 years not going to be here in 60 years And none of these other people are but we have we have errors And there's 300 people over 300 owners on the airport that may have various reasons for having a longer lease And that's why I'd like to campaign for a 30 year lease with a 30 year extension, which we already have The talk of reversion clause is scary because If you were to have that every year that your lease goes by your property becomes less valuable Nobody in their right mind would buy a house with a reversion class. So at the end of their 30 year mortgage The mortgage company says well, we'll take your house, but you can rent it back from us. We don't do any maintenance on it and It's all yours for for a monthly rent Nobody's going to do that and nobody's going to do a hanger like that in your right mind might be somebody So I would discourage that vehemently you only have to look at Boulder to see what's happened with their reversion clause They got hangers that you'd have to be desperate to put a hanger put an airplane in Number two the Condition of the airport I don't know if any of you are in have skin in the game have done any flying around the country, but These people back here and myself had done extensive travel around the country in some foreign countries and uh I can tell you that there's many towns many towns out there with Population of 10,000 or less that have gorgeous facilities really nice where people want to come back and I can tell you as a the former corporate guy that The crews are not in favor of coming here. There's no courtesy car. There's no place to rest. There's no nothing and So they're coming here because they have to and I'm sure the business people in the back Are not impressed with the city because the airport reflects on the The whole city it really does Then I had a Boss that was a big finance guy went to an airport that was like long on he said we're not coming back here We're just not going back here. So it's it makes a difference so On the runway extension I was chairman for the master plan and we expanded extensive hours my team and I and the Consultant we had j aviation On the runway extension. We did several different studies on length came up with a thousand feet as the most practical and It can be done I see some of the comments here like it's impossible. It ain't impossible Impossible it may take a little longer, but it can be done You have to buy a property and we know who owns the property off the runway and that was still there when we did the study and The reason for a longer runway is that these people are coming in here in business airplanes can't buy fuel To the extent that they'd like to because the length of the runway There's a Limit to what they can carry depending on temperature moisture and length of the runway so a longer runway we've got an FBO a more A positive income because they can sell more fuel Plus it's a safety factor so If anybody wants my references, I'd be glad to give them to you and Three references as you can call and Ask them about what I just told you and you'll find out that The 50 year thing is a suggestion. It's not a law not a rule not a regulation It's a suggestion. Thank you. You're thanks right at five minutes anyone else tonight David shank box four six four long month um In hearing about the prairie dog situation I happen to have a small farm And and I can tell you a little bit about prairie dogs Prairie dogs are really smart um But one of the things that's one of the things that they appear to do that I've witnessed on my farm Is they'll send out a scout. We had well over 300 prairie dogs when I bought the place We managed to get rid of them And over the years we've been there for 42 years They will send somebody over to see whether this is a nice place to live And if you take care of that one prairie dog, you won't have any trouble for the next year or two And the long mind airport at one time probably had a thousand prairie dogs um Rose I can't tell you rose's last name tried to trap them Was somewhat successful Eventually the fAA got on their case the prairie dogs were pretty much eliminated And and the problem is We don't watch them weekly They will show up and if you get rid of them within a day or two None of them will come they won't go back and tell the rest of them Hey, here's a good home So let's let's be proactive On this and work on it every week every day And and people at the airport are more than willing to report a prairie dog when they see him If you get rid of him quick You've solved your problem. Thank you Thank you Hi, Steve Schuch 2022 Brayburn court Longmont Uh first off, I don't think the first right or refusal is a good idea Number one if I wanted to sell it to a friend of mine I'm stuck That's not fair. That's You know, we buy these hangers in good faith That the city is going to treat us right But a lot of the the things on the lease You know, I think they're more directed at larger airports Longmont is a small airport. I came from Monterey. You have TSA FAA everybody's involved in your business along with the management I've had meetings with TSA You know my hangar complex, you know, I'm in an AOA area And I've you know, like I said, I've built on non AOA and AOA You know first right or refusal It just takes all your control away. Why be there? I mean I'll rent a hangar. I'm not going to invest hundreds of thousands of dollars and then be dictated by the airport management or the city of Longmont So I would strongly consider all of those things because you know, I've seen a lot of airports really Fall in dish repair and you know Longmont, let's face it I mean, it's an eyesore I bought it because I live a mile down the street but You know, it is absolutely an eyesore I know Levi's you know been directed to you know, clean it up But you know all the asphalt there there's weeds growing out of almost every asphalt crack It's just an ugly mess So I would really consider a lot of these upgrades you're talking about you know I think you need to address Before you start charging everybody, you know, which you know lease reversions and and buybacks and all that stuff. I mean We're living in the slums to be honest with you. So anyway, my opinion. Thanks. Thank you Here I am again Dave Paul 3500 Berkeley Avenue Boulder, Colorado And I've got a hangar out at Longmont and I was going to go Add one more comment on the lease. It's paragraph 9.1 and it says that I've For things like insurance and stuff. I've got 10 days to give you the data Make that 30 days. We're dealing with a third party If if you insist on 10 days, it's probably not going to happen And Ms. Jordan, I want to thank you for your good note taking And thank everybody else and the airport manager for serving Appreciate the time And here's the coffee. Thank you very much Seeing anybody else, but I really don't want to cut anyone off. Have I missed anybody? Okay Seeing nobody else will close the final public invited to be heard and we've got board council and staff comments starting with board members Mr Robison Thank you Leave that I didn't mean to put you in the hot seat I realized you're in between the lawyers and us, but I do think it would be a good idea to get them here If they're if it took five years, I mean, let's get them here and try to do it faster than that in person Yeah, that's on the notes for next When we actually have an action item on it I'd be curious to meet these people. I mean, these are the same lawyers that are telling us We can't have a direct question and answer with the members of the public So I'm real curious to see what they look like in person I've been on a team's call with them and it's not the same, but Um, I think to that point leave. I would certainly I'm not convinced. We'll be at the point for an action item next month. Okay Maybe we get this resolved really quickly It's sent around and you know, we don't get other comments, but I'm just not anticipating that's likely So my guess is we're going to be an informational item again next month Um, and I would still encourage you to have the city attorneys here at that point not just when it's an action item. Okay Bear anyone else We talked out Um city council representative council member martin Thank you, mr. Chair. Um, just a few more informational things um First amendment rights Are are not universal, you know if like the owner of a newspaper gets to Um decide what you publish in his newspaper Facebook gets to decide what you publish in facebook the Um city regulates signage inside the city. So, um You know unless it's objectionable I'm not sure that that there'd be a problem with putting signage on a hanger But there are uh, it is something that is is governed by city code. So Yeah, and it's it's not it's not a first amendment issue um Let's see what was I had to more um Oh a suggestion that we have a copy of the of the lease that's being used now Um, because it does seem like a lot of stuff's gotten You know has has crept in but it may be that nobody just has looked at it in 20 years or however long it's been At their lease. So let's let's get a copy of the of the of the current lease And maybe get it out to people so that we can do some comparison um, and and then uh, the final thing about about attorneys Is that is their job? It and mostly can they consider it their only job, which I don't actually agree with and I harangue them at every opportunity But it's their job to to protect the city from liability So they're gonna do this. It doesn't mean they're bad people. It just means they're lawyers And you know at least some of the time there's a distinction So I just wanted everybody to know that but I'm I am you know, really glad to see robust meaningful discussion on this and I Really look forward to robust meaningful discussion on um On electrification. There are two things one is the state of the Sustainable aviation industry that needs to be you know, everybody that isn't following it with bated breath Probably needs to know because it is a real point of investment for the city that would be a way to get uh You know more nice things for the airport um And uh, then the other thing is that they're We need somebody we're you know, we're we're in the process of doing Code updates to for sustainable electrification for the whole city And so everybody's going to need to be informed About what that is going to do because you know, if your hanger is old you probably can't put a solar panel on it for example um But uh, you can build a hanger so that you can and and they're You know, there are code issues like that that we'll need to be aware of so when planning the agenda, I think Those things both need to be in there thank you Leva, did you want to respond to any of those and I think I agree with all of that You just certainly will take that into consideration. We will talk that more about that when it comes up And I would also second the appreciation for Really good feedback and discussion tonight Um, I feel like we often have these meetings and there is no public comment And to go into a lease document like this literally section by section with meaningful substantive comments was I think really informative for all of us And appreciate everybody who commented on them and trust that you will keep coming with the comments particularly when it comes back Next month and there are other things in there. We don't we don't like or There are things that didn't change. So just want to say thank you for all for that Um, mr. Do you have something else? Yeah, council member martin go ahead. Sorry. I knew I had one more thing I always also want to express my appreciation for the two of you who are now termed out because you've both done really brilliant jobs Uh in my experience and I I hope everybody Everybody appreciates all of that work Mr. I'm sorry steve. I Turned you off. Can you hit the button again and I'll turn you back on I'm sorry Go ahead. I hit the wrong button. Uh, just a couple of comments. The first one is Next meeting I'd like to see some more justification for this Right at first for a fusel on the lease I just don't get that one at all and I agree with the comments from the gallery and secondly, I want to say that I did some contracting when I was in LA airline pilot, but I had a second job and You don't put the first floor on a house until you build the foundation And here at longmont airport. We haven't done that I agree with the Comments from the gallery here the airport is in terrible shape And we need to put it in good shape before we start looking at advancing into the new generation of aviation with sustainable fuel, you know saf And a lack of electrification Got to get a fbo. We got to upgrade the fuel pit And until we do that Um, the airport We're not attracting the the type of people we need at the airport That's it. Thank you, mr. Bliss um Staff comments leave I fill I think I'm good at the moment I have a couple comments just based on some of the earlier comments from from folks um First of all the budget being in the packet That was something that I believe was addressed when joni marsh was Running kind of running the airport board in the interim with jeff coler Oh colman, sorry, excuse me And so I I need to go back and look at what what was happening there But I thought that that had been agreed to not be part of the packet But we can talk about how that gets back in the packet So I'll chat with her about that, but I thought that had been decided so my confusion there wasn't my understanding at least bill Okay, um Yeah, it we we had a kind of different format for a little bit it fell off We were kind of okay with the temporarily falling off. Okay. Um, I certainly didn't understand it to be permanent Great, that's good to understand and I wanted to personally apologize for the agenda is not getting out to folks We don't know who they go out to we assume they go out to all of you, of course We're not sure where they go as far as going to the airport board, but we did have that out on monday I believe by noon So we do try to give you as much time as You know that four or five days. I really try to get it out before the weekend so you have the weekend to look at it as well, but the current the current standard practice had always been get at the week of The meeting and so we have folks who are still doing that level of of getting the agendas out So my apologies to everyone in the audience. We did not receive notification that that Packet was out there. We'll make sure In our next round that we get it to the folks who need to see it. So thank you very much Um, ask you about that. So when we were um online And our meetings were online We had a specific instruction that we could not forward the packet to anybody And that was because the invite had to go out for the public and It was not okay for us. So we were told we could not forward it. Can we forward now that we're back in person? My suggestion would be to there's a link to the All the all the agendas that are out there for the city So my my recommendation we could send that link to anybody who wants it and they can find the airport board in that list of It's it's you know, it's it's based by the date So you'll you might see a council packet in there and you guys also run on the same week as my transportation advisory board So and we're looking for members of that too. If anybody is interested But so so there's a lot of competing packets, but obviously on that week, you'll see the airport board right there for thursday Thank you I think you can forward it too if you want. I mean if you get it That we came in through one gaze everybody else came through another Yeah, okay. Thank you Thank you phil for bringing that up and kind of proactively taking care of it Um last call for anyone else All right, we'll call this this meeting adjourned then. Thank you everybody. Have a good evening