[0:08] Hey, you probably seem like Doug drives. [laughter]

[0:12] » All right, we've exited executive session and we'll resume normal session.

[0:17] Amy, over to you, please.

[0:24] Resolution

[0:30] approving the payment of invoices for the Madison County Auditor.

[0:33] » So moved. >> Second.

[0:35] » First and a second. Any other discussion?

[0:39] Hearing none. Roll call, please. >> Mr. Shay,

[0:42] » yes. >> Dr. Sme, yes.

[0:43] » Mr. Wallace, >> yes.

[0:45] » A resolution increasing appropriations to the courthouse courthouse health

[0:49] insurance expense line in the amount of $23,000.

[0:52] Second. Second. the first and a second. Any discussion?

[0:58] There none. Roll call, please. >> Mr. Sh.

[1:01] » Yes. >> Question.

[1:05] » A resolution approving the AP Ohio annual aggravator registration

[1:09] application and giving Rob the authority to sign that.

[1:13] » So move. >> Second.

[1:15] » The first and a second. Any other discussion?

[1:19] » None. Republics. >> Mr. Sh.

[1:21] » Yes. >> Dr. Sne. Yes. Mr. WS. Yes.

[1:25] » Resolution approving the Spalding's epoxy floor coding code for the Mass

[1:29] County Planning and Zoning Office. >> So moved. Second.

[1:32] » First and a second. Any discussion? >> Hearing none. Roll call, please.

[1:38] » Mr. Sher, >> yes.

[1:39] » Dr. Sme, >> yes.

[1:40] » Mr. Wallace. >> Yes.

[1:42] » A resolution approving an increase in appropriations for vehicle acquisition.

[1:49] » [clears throat] [laughter]

[1:51] » Second and a second. Any other discussion?

[1:57] » Hearing none. Roll call, please. >> Mr. S.

[1:59] » Yes. Dr. >> Yes. Mr. Wallace.

[2:01] » Yes. >> Resolution approving the bid award for

[2:04] the Lewis Road over Springport Bridge project. Some

[2:10] move. >> Second.

[2:12] » First and a second. Any other discussion?

[2:15] Hearing none. Roll call, please. >> Mr. Sha,

[2:19] » yes. >> Dr. Sme,

[2:20] » yes. >> Mr. Wallace,

[2:21] » yes. >> A resolution approving travel for

[2:23] Madison County Board of Elections. >> So moved. Second. The

[2:28] » first in a second. Any other discussion? >> Hearing none. Roll call, please.

[2:33] » Mr. Sh. >> Yes.

[2:35] » Dr. Z. >> Yes.

[2:36] » Mr. Walls. >> Yes.

[2:37] » A resolution approving budget revisions to the Mass County Family and Children

[2:41] First Council and Department of Family and Children.

[2:43] » So moved. Second. First and the second and then the discussion

[2:50] hearing. None for 12 minutes. >> Mr.

[2:53] » Yes. >> Dr.

[2:54] » Yes. >> Yes.

[2:59] » Thank you.

[3:13] » Let's just check. >> Yeah. I don't know if that one

[3:51] what they look like. It's interesting how

[3:55] we can come on except period of time

[4:04] that stress [clears throat]

[4:08] that happen.

[4:24] I always program because you're locked in.

[4:30] There's nothing

[4:34] right,

[4:56] » right? >> Hey, there's one table,

[4:58] right? You're

[5:16] [clears throat]

[5:21] [clears throat]

[5:28] choosing

[5:34] watch a lot of football this weekend. Oh yeah,

[5:40] Wednesday

[5:48] Christmas.

[6:21] Gentlemen, gentlemen up front, would you be so kind as to vacate for those

[6:25] gentlemen? >> Oh, I see.

[6:29] » Not both of them. I guess one of you

[6:36] » could you move please >> being

[6:57] thank you for coming in. Sure appreciate it. Thank you. Thanks for having us.

[7:07] Jason is the expert on FAA funding. So we'll gohead and make your presentation.

[7:12] » Yeah. Very good. Yeah. What's happening? >> Yeah. I think it's been it's been three

[7:15] or four years since I came here at the airport before. Uh at that time we were

[7:19] asking for the grant match for an FA funded project to completely reconstruct

[7:23] a parallel taxi way. That project's obviously done and complete. Uh since

[7:27] then the airport's done a couple other projects. We just finished last week uh

[7:31] repaving all the aircraft parking areas, the apron that was done with the ODOT

[7:34] aviation fund. So that's done. Um with that tax project, we also did all the

[7:39] tax lighting. So it's essentially a new airport as far as the runway, the taxi

[7:44] way, the paving, the lighting, all that that work is done. Um also earlier in

[7:49] the spring, we finished the paving using FAA funds for the next 10 unit T hanger.

[7:55] That's the picture there on the handout. So, the paving is done, ready to go to

[7:59] build the next building that will house 10 aircraft. That's what we're here to

[8:04] talk about today. Uh the design for that is underway. That's also funded by FA

[8:09] grant for the design. Uh that grant came about two months ago. So, we're off off

[8:14] to working on that. Uh and we'll be ready to bid it when funding is

[8:17] available. And that's really what we want to talk about today. Um, so last

[8:22] time we were here, we were asking for that the grant match for a project that

[8:25] did not directly return revenue. It was a construction capital project, uh, a

[8:31] pavement, but what we're talking about today is a a building project that will

[8:34] will bring revenue to the airport, obvious to the county. Uh, so 10un

[8:40] hanger, similar to the other 10 unit T hangers that are out there. Now, um,

[8:44] just kind of go through this handout high level here. you know, estimated

[8:48] construction cost about 925,000 uh based on a project that we did a

[8:53] couple months ago with Neil Armstrong Airport.

[8:56] A reminder, the FA grant program as we go into fiscal year 27,

[9:01] we anticipate 90% FAA, 5% state, no Aviation, and then 5% local. Uh so based

[9:08] on that estimated cost, obviously we've not bid it yet. uh we expect a local

[9:13] share of around 46,250 but again depending how the bids come

[9:16] in. Uh so the amount of money that the airport has available uh at the end of

[9:22] this month fiscal year 27 that starts October 1st uh they had their last year

[9:27] of infrastructure build funds that was a 5-year uh program that ends at the end

[9:33] of the month. So they'll have $137,000 available uh left in that program

[9:39] federal share which with the state local matches with about 152,000

[9:44] and then their FA entitlement funds that's the 150,000 per year that the

[9:49] airport has for capital projects those have been rolled uh a little over two

[9:54] years you can see there's 419 603 fed that becomes 466 approximately

[10:01] so the bottom line after October 1st First, the airport will have

[10:04] approximately $618,000 of grant funds with the state and local

[10:09] matches available for the construction of the 10 unit T hanger.

[10:15] So, obviously that's a little less than anticipated cost. The next next line

[10:19] there shows that about 306,000. Again, based on estimates, uh we won't

[10:25] have the bids until until next year, next spring. Um, so that's that's where

[10:31] we're at financially with this project. And then kind of to summarize the last

[10:35] sentence there, you know, without additional funding, the airport's going

[10:38] to have to roll funds at least one or two more years uh into the future to be

[10:43] able to have the total the total package available.

[10:47] Um, so what we're proposing or asking is if it would be a

[10:52] potential to uh secure a loan uh to be able to build this project sooner and

[10:57] then pay it back with 28 and 29 grant funds. Um, what that would do is allow

[11:04] to be completed two year approximately two years earlier. Um, so on the second

[11:08] page kind of there in the middle just kind of throwing some numbers at it. You

[11:12] know, if we assume an occupancy of June 1st 28th,

[11:17] knowing that they won't get the FA grants until late 27, typically we see

[11:20] grants in July, August. So, by the time we got the building

[11:25] built with approximately 9 month lead time currently on building packages that

[11:30] we're seeing, I've assumed an occupancy of 6128.

[11:34] I've been told the rent will be projected to be 250 a month, 10 units.

[11:39] So, ignore our fuel sales. Let's say it's full. I know there's some

[11:42] assumptions there, but 2500 a month. So over that 24 months of being able to to

[11:48] build it early if [clears throat] if funding's available, approximately

[11:52] 60,000 again ignoring fuel sales, which is actually more than the total local

[11:58] share required of 5% for the construction project.

[12:03] Uh so what we're what we're saying there is that hopefully in that two years,

[12:06] we'll be able to move quicker to construction. we could essentially pay

[12:10] back uh in that two years both the loan and the local share to where moving

[12:16] forward uh be 100% revenue or profit for the rent on the building. Uh and again

[12:23] important to keep keep in mind that's an estimate. So

[12:26] kind of went through just the summary now. Um you know we're able to obtain

[12:30] loan commitment of a little over $300,000 again depending how the bids

[12:34] come in. uh the the goal will be able to pay it back in 24 to 30 months with the

[12:39] two 28 29 grants and then also in the revenue generated over that two years of

[12:46] earlier construction be able to also pay back at least or more than the local

[12:51] share of the entire project that point making at no cost to the county and then

[12:56] increased revenue thereafter. So that's kind of the high level summary of

[13:01] of where we're at. As of today, we're on hold on construction because of that

[13:06] shortfall. Just looking for a way to be able to expedite construction to have it

[13:10] available to tenants to to move in and pay rent and buy fuel sales. And if

[13:17] we're not able to move forward, uh we'll just have to roll funds at least one

[13:20] year, maybe two, and then construct construct in the future. So, just wanted

[13:25] to come in and talk about that. See if you had any questions or ideas on how we

[13:29] could potentially expedite this construction.

[13:32] um and then pay back. >> Are those uh 282.9

[13:37] grants guaranteed? >> That's a great question. Uh they it

[13:43] depends on if Congress changes something. In my career, which is

[13:47] getting pretty long, it's it's been there every year, but I can't say it's

[13:52] guaranteed. Um got entitlement funds. It's been $150,000 federal uh for more

[14:00] than 15 years. There's been no changes to the program. I would not anticipate

[14:04] it changing, but again, if Congress were to change something, that could change.

[14:09] » Is there a big need for the 10 extra room?

[14:13] » They fill up pretty quickly. We had 10 new hangers. They would rent out almost

[14:19] immediately. And the pilots who would go in there typically spend more on fuel

[14:24] than they spend on rent. So, you get not only the rent, but also the fuel sales.

[14:28] So, it's a good one. And I've ignored the fuel sales. You know, it varies what

[14:33] the profit would be. It's kind of hard to come up with a number, but that's a

[14:37] good point that not only is it the rent, it's the fuel sales. And it also looks

[14:41] good for the FA. You have additional based aircraft. That's something that

[14:45] they look at when they determine where funding goes is how many aircraft are at

[14:48] your airport. So, if we wanted to expand the runway in the future, make it longer

[14:52] so to accommodate more commercial traffic. In fact, we would have a lot of

[14:56] activity there. now looks good to be a for future planning purposes.

[15:02] » That's the biggest question I get is, you know,

[15:05] » if I and I don't know anything about planes or aviation, but you know, for

[15:09] bigger planes to land in that area, >> right?

[15:13] » Right. Yeah. Eventually, it would be nice to add another,000 ft to the runway

[15:17] because it could have >> Wasn't there a problem with the

[15:19] buildings being too close to the runway that's there now? Uh well the the

[15:24] terminal is a little close to them. We may still be able to expand the runway

[15:30] terminal where it is or they may pay the SA may offer to relocate the terminal at

[15:34] some point. They've done that with some airports.

[15:37] So that's a possibility too. >> So there is an avenue without building a

[15:42] whole new runway, >> right?

[15:44] » Yes. >> Yeah, for sure. Um now you're currently

[15:47] at 4,000 ft. uh it can accommodate small corporate aircraft, corporate jets, u

[15:53] but really anything on the larger side would prefer 5,000 ft. It's kind of a

[15:58] magic number in aviation. Yeah, cuz when I when I was I asked that

[16:03] question years ago, they somebody said, "Well, we'd have to build a new runway."

[16:09] And that's not the case is what you're saying.

[16:12] » Yeah. The current airport layout plan, which is a guiding document into the

[16:16] future, does not show any shift or relocation of the runway.

[16:22] » That's good to know. >> Can you put larger planes down like just

[16:26] the weather has to be exactly perfect to land on that 4,000 something?

[16:29] » The weight, the fuel load, the temperature, all that dry.

[16:33] » So, you can technically you can do it now, but

[16:36] » you could got to be perfect. >> I've seen large golf string juice 4,000

[16:40] ft. So it it can be done under the right conditions,

[16:44] » which I remember. [laughter] >> I've seen it done. So there was at least

[16:49] one day it was okay. >> Yeah,

[16:52] » and they they really want to get in there, of course. But

[16:55] » um >> I don't have a problem with uh doing

[16:59] this because I think the value we're going to get we're going to get paid

[17:02] back hopefully. >> Yeah. So that's what I was going to ask

[17:05] um on the payback. So, are you envisioning a loan from the county

[17:11] through the treasur's office with a with interest or are you looking more for

[17:18] just the county to pay for it and then when the grant comes in be reimbured?

[17:22] » The second one sounds better. >> I like the first one better.

[17:26] » Two two things on. So, the FA won't pay for interest. So, they he would only get

[17:31] back whatever the construction belongs to. So, however that would work out

[17:34] internally on interest, I'm not sure. The other thing I didn't hit on is with

[17:39] the grant for construction likely not being issued until July, August of 27.

[17:46] And with that, right now, we're looking at 9 month lead time on these creep

[17:49] steel buildings. Uh the vast majority of the cost would not be incurred till

[17:54] calendar year 28. So, that helps from some sort of budgetary. I know a lot of

[17:59] times uh with these projects that cross fiscal years

[18:05] um the agencies are able to kind of split that from a budgetary standpoint

[18:09] say okay well I'll get this much this year we know the majority is going to be

[18:13] in the next year but we want to grab some and then have the back fill on the

[18:16] back end. So if that helps, uh the vast majority of this construction cost would

[18:20] occur in calendar year 28 just due to timing of the FA grant coming late 27

[18:27] and then that approximate 9 months to get the building. Like I said, all the

[18:31] paving, the grading, drainage is all done. We basically have a rectangle of

[18:35] dirt that we're ready to build this building inside the pavement, make the

[18:39] connections, and be ready to go. So, >> so reimbursement to the general fund is

[18:45] the preferred route >> and and with the timing by the time we

[18:49] incur construction cost in 28 this fiscal year 28 grant that we show as the

[18:54] first payback variable may be available to where from a cash flow standpoint

[19:00] it's not 306,000. It may be closer to the 140 because you may capture that

[19:05] about the same time you owe the contractor the money. Uh so if that

[19:10] helps as well, um the payback time may be closer to 12 or 14 months between

[19:17] getting the 28 grant and then the 29 is the final payback and we can apply for

[19:22] that 29 the day the first day of fiscal year 29. That likely won't come until

[19:27] later in fiscal year 29th, but can definitely expedite the

[19:32] applications. Then we'll be at the mercy dev bay to get the grants

[19:36] » and the local share amount the 46,250 that will be returned as well. You

[19:41] anticipate that being returned? >> The way the way that it's kind of

[19:44] spelled out here is that's essentially returned in the revenue from occupancy

[19:50] and if if it were to be fully occupied we would have that paid back in less

[19:54] than two years. Yeah, that paid point for the county

[19:58] » that point it would be all direct revenue or profit for the

[20:03] [clears throat] rest of the duration of the building.

[20:07] » Is the 250 monthly rent is that comparable to other facilities? I mean

[20:13] given the cost of the aircraft I mean it sounds slow to you know

[20:18] » it does. Now I believe your others are 225 or 250 235 ones. So then we were

[20:24] projecting by the time we got to this beef bill, it would likely be escalated

[20:28] to 250 is where that number came from. >> We do periodically compare the rents to

[20:34] other comparable airports and we're usually right in the reasonable zone.

[20:38] where they you know being it's bigger in a big city

[20:42] like Columbus or something like that or also the size of the hanger the large

[20:45] box hangers will typically be several hundred a month but for the small tea

[20:50] hangers that that's reasonable based on what we're seeing at other airports

[20:56] but that I guess to probably take what you're thinking further without the epic

[21:00] grant program there's no way to cash this this structure it just doesn't work

[21:05] even a 40-year payback >> but when you can it, you know, with the

[21:09] 95 and five, you spend $1 locally, you get 19 back from FA State, then it

[21:15] actually can can make sense financially. But to just go build it with 100% local

[21:20] funds, you can't charge enough rent to to make it work, unfortunately.

[21:25] » But it sounds like the demand is there. So, what what would they go if

[21:29] » and I think you guys are in a good spot to be able to pull base aircraft out of

[21:33] Columbus because it could be slightly cheaper and less congestion for pilots.

[21:39] Um, I mean, you guys are so close that I can definitely see pulling some based

[21:44] aircraft from the Columbus area out this way. And that's part of the business

[21:50] model for the smaller county airports is that by offering fuel and hangers

[21:55] somewhat more reasonably than they would be in an urban environment. We do get

[22:00] some tracker in those places that our pilots can fly out from Columbus to fill

[22:04] their tanks here. uh they wouldn't do that if we charge as much as they did

[22:08] for Columbus or something like that. It's the same way to Angus. We're a

[22:12] little bit more reasonable than they would be in Columbus or Cincinnati. And

[22:16] that's why we get some of that traffic. Not all of the planes that are based

[22:20] here are necessarily county residents. Some of those are people who live in

[22:24] dorms, but it's worthwhile for them to fly out here for more affordable gas and

[22:30] hanger storage. >> Are you guys full now?

[22:33] I think we're full except for maybe just a couple of the older structures that

[22:37] don't have doors on. Those aren't as popular. So, just about everything else

[22:41] is where you usually when an opening comes

[22:46] up, it usually gets stored pretty quickly.

[22:52] » Very good. >> I have no issues.

[22:58] » Very good. We get our own barbecue restaurant. [clears throat]

[23:02] » That' be nice. >> Any questions on this project or

[23:07] anything we've been doing the last few years or anything I can answer while I'm

[23:10] here? >> I don't think I have any questions.

[23:14] Okay. Appreciate you gentlemen coming in.

[23:16] » Thank you. >> Thank you. Appreciate your time. Thank

[23:18] you.

[23:36] Right. Anybody anything for open session?

[23:40] » Something. >> Oh, sure.

[23:42] » Uh, so last Thursday was our farmland preservation plan kickoff meeting and it

[23:46] was well attended. I thought it went very well. I just want to give some of

[23:51] the highlights from it. Uh Amanda took great notes at the bottom, but basically

[23:57] what I kind of liked about it was uh communities that participate in the

[24:01] planning are more likely to achieve the results they want to see. And I really

[24:06] like that message to the group. Um the consultant asked, you know, what are

[24:12] some of the questions you're getting from your constituents?

[24:16] And you know some example questions are the rate of growth from plain city and

[24:20] can schools have the capacity to handle this growth. What does water and sewer

[24:27] expansion mean to the county? Um transmission lines a little bit

[24:32] discussion on that. Sometimes residents gets letters before the council of

[24:35] trustees do and then just discussing how can we as a county township get this

[24:41] information so we can help residents understand when they get these letters.

[24:46] um and this kind of general discuss I think

[24:50] you can understand one thing I wanted you had that other section and one

[24:55] comment that was made is we want to make sure we don't exclude most of the

[24:59] population and I'm like well if I were to read this in the minutes what does

[25:02] that mean exclude most of the population and the conversation was talking about

[25:08] this as a quality of life issue because not everybody has a farmland or lives on

[25:13] a farm or involved with farming but with people are affected by this plan because

[25:18] of quality of life. So, one thing we think about going forward is making sure

[25:23] we don't unintentionally disengage people because we call it a

[25:27] farmland preservation plan process. Um, so I can kind of talk about quality of

[25:33] life and then the metrics for measuring success was an interesting discussion

[25:37] because it's like how do we know if we're going in the direction that we

[25:40] want to go. So like one example was our um GBP [clears throat]

[25:44] for agriculture which is an economic term that I don't really know about but

[25:49] and economic vitality and our a retailers and seed dealers things like

[25:55] that the industries that support agriculture are they thriving are they

[25:58] doing well? So just kind of discussing what will a successful plan look like

[26:03] and how do we measure that in five years. So it's a really good uh engaged

[26:08] discussion. The consultant kind of said to me afterwards like, "Huh, this is the

[26:12] kind of group that does want to work on some issues. I can kind of coach you

[26:16] about how to do some sub meetings to kind of get to anything deeper." Um, so

[26:21] they're very pleased with the engagement that happened. I know a couple of you

[26:26] were there. You have anything you want to add to that? But that's just the high

[26:29] level kick up. >> Well, that that pretty well recaps it. I

[26:35] thought it went well. It was good to see as you said a number of people from the

[26:37] community, different backgrounds, different industries there to engage in

[26:42] the process. No, I thought the first meeting went very well

[26:47] than you thought.

[26:53] [laughter]

[26:56] » Yeah, appreciate that. Anything else, folks?

[26:59] » Oh, this Thursday is our customer appreciation day after water county

[27:03] engineers building. It does call for rain right now, but I think that's only

[27:07] in the morning. So, please come out in the afternoon and six o'cst.

[27:14] [clears throat]

[27:24] We [clears throat] can't do that. >> All right. Very good,

[27:28] » ladies. Gentlemen, anything else?

[27:33] » Second. Meeting adjourns.

Board of Commissioners Meeting 9/8/2026 (Part 2)

Transcript