[0:00] ever relinquished its duties with the

[0:02] FAA. I've been involved in all of the

[0:05] high-end stuff, capital

[0:07] um investment, CIP stuff, um all of our

[0:12] um work with our consultant and all that

[0:15] stuff. We pretty much had the FBO doing

[0:17] daily maintenance and daily management

[0:18] of the on-site stuff of the airport.

[0:21] Um, under this new proposal, the city

[0:23] would hire a part-time airport employee

[0:27] to be on-site at the airport and um and do airport management, maintenance,

[0:35] the day-to-day stuff, do notems to the

[0:37] FAA and so forth.

[0:41] Um,

[0:43] it says that the employee reports to the

[0:45] city first and foremost.

[0:48] Um while that employee may also provide

[0:50] services to the FBO as a separate job

[0:52] subject to the city's secondary employee

[0:54] policy, the city's interests always take

[0:57] priority. City will continue to seek

[0:59] grants and funding opportunities to

[1:01] provide airport infrastructure does not

[1:03] but does not guarantee specific

[1:04] improvements or expenditures.

[1:06] So long story short,

[1:10] what the concept is is that pretty much

[1:13] before with the FBO, we said here's the

[1:15] hanger. You can have the main hanger for

[1:17] free. The city will pay all the

[1:19] utilities. Here's this house. We'll

[1:22] provide that for free and the city will

[1:23] pay all utilities in exchange for being

[1:26] the FBO and doing the daily maintenance

[1:28] and management and all that stuff. Under

[1:30] the new agreement, the city will hire an

[1:32] employee.

[1:34] We will pay that employee an hourly

[1:36] basis. They will be accountable to the

[1:40] city like any other department head and

[1:43] work for the city.

[1:45] We will then turn around and um make

[1:49] that house available at a

[1:52] slightly below market price in exchange

[1:54] for them living there and providing the

[1:56] on-site security that the airport needs.

[1:59] So, we'll give them a deal on rent. Say

[2:02] the going rate, we haven't looked at the

[2:03] going rate and square footage and all

[2:04] that, but let's say the going rate is

[2:06] 1,800 bucks. Maybe we'll make it

[2:08] available for 1,400 bucks, which they

[2:11] will pay the city. So, they'll pay city

[2:14] rent for the house at a good rate and

[2:16] we'll turn around and pay them an hourly

[2:18] rate when they do work for the city, but

[2:20] they'll have to keep a time card and

[2:21] report to me and so forth. Um, if the

[2:25] FBO wants to hire them

[2:28] to do FBO duties,

[2:31] they're welcome to do so, but their

[2:34] priority their prior their employment

[2:36] will be to the city first. And if

[2:39] there's a conflict of interest or if

[2:40] anything like that, we would treat it

[2:42] the same way we do any secondary

[2:43] employment, right? Um

[2:47] the FBO

[2:49] then will operate as an independent

[2:52] for-profit business. We will give them

[2:54] an exclusive FBO agreement, meaning

[2:56] they're the only one that operates as an

[2:58] FBO there during the contract term.

[3:02] They'll provide aeronautical and related

[3:04] services of a typical typical of rural

[3:06] general aviation airports. They will pay

[3:09] all utilities for the hangar and pilots

[3:13] lounge. They will carry insurance

[3:16] aviation industry standard levels for

[3:18] their own business and they will operate

[3:20] full compliance with FA rules and city

[3:22] airport standards. The FBO does not

[3:24] operate the airport, does not control

[3:26] the fuel system and does not have

[3:27] authority to bind the city.

[3:30] We will lease them the main hanger for

[3:34] $0 rent,

[3:37] but they will pay utilities.

[3:40] The rent the rent concession is

[3:42] intentional and is meant to reduce the

[3:44] operating costs at a rural airport for

[3:46] them, increase the likelihood of

[3:48] long-term FBO success, impro improve

[3:51] airport services, activity, and

[3:53] sustainability.

[3:55] The hanger may only be used for approved

[3:57] FBO related purposes. um and they can't

[4:00] subleasase the the the hanger. So, the

[4:03] idea is we don't have enough um we don't

[4:07] have enough business for them to be

[4:09] successful as an FBO of a larger

[4:12] airport. So, we want them to be

[4:14] successful. That's why we're willing to

[4:16] give them free rent. Um but um and we

[4:20] want to encourage them to do whatever

[4:22] they can to be successful whether it be

[4:25] repair aircraft repair um any services

[4:28] that they can make money at. Um the guys

[4:30] that we awarded this to ultimately have

[4:32] a lot of ideas that they they want to take on

[4:37] to to be more successful. And this is

[4:41] what this next section is about. The

[4:43] agreement encourages the FBO to propose

[4:46] new ideas to increase airport activities

[4:48] such as flight instruction, aviation

[4:50] events or flyins, food service or

[4:52] touring related activities, antellay

[4:55] rentals, or aviation supported

[4:57] businesses. All activities require city

[5:00] approval. City may deny proposals that

[5:03] would create unreasonable traffic,

[5:05] safety concerns, infrastructure strain,

[5:07] or negative other negative impacts

[5:09] inconsistent with a community's

[5:10] character or airport vision. The FBO may

[5:14] also express interest in developing

[5:15] additional hangers on city-owned land,

[5:17] investing in airport improvements, or

[5:20] purchasing adjacent proper private

[5:22] property. All of these all of those

[5:24] opportunities are not pre-approved and

[5:27] would require separate written

[5:28] agreement. So, if they want to do a

[5:29] hanger project with the city, they're

[5:31] going to have to have a se a separate

[5:33] agreement. We didn't want to define that

[5:34] in their FBO agreement. These guys have

[5:37] talked about maybe wanting to build a

[5:40] restaurant or put some money in to make

[5:43] a really nice pilot's lounge or

[5:45] something like that. Basically, if they

[5:47] want to come to the city and invest some

[5:49] capital to do something like that, we're

[5:51] going to have a separate agreement for

[5:52] that. We just didn't want to have it

[5:54] open-ended or just automatically

[5:56] approved. So, um we just basically tell

[6:00] them we we we're here. We're partners.

[6:03] We want to encourage them to do things

[6:04] to be successful, but we're going to do

[6:06] separate agreements on anything that's

[6:07] going to require commitment or long-term

[6:11] commitments or anything like that.

[6:14] Um, the city and the FBO agree to work

[6:16] together in good faith if such

[6:18] opportunities arise. FAA compliance. Any

[6:21] action that the FBO by the FBO that

[6:23] jeopardizes FA FAA grant assurance or

[6:25] airport compliance is a material breach.

[6:28] FAA related violations require immediate

[6:30] correction. Failure to cure may result

[6:32] in immediate termination. This was

[6:34] pretty strong in the agreement. Um term

[6:37] and termination. This one is kind of

[6:39] interesting. I I originally wrote it up

[6:40] as a five-year term and that we could

[6:43] renew upon mutual agreement. Um their

[6:46] only reservation is if they invest some

[6:49] serious capital into something, they may

[6:51] want to have a longer term agreement for

[6:53] something like that. But again, that's

[6:55] going to be separately negotiated if

[6:56] that if and when that comes.

[6:59] In the meantime, any either party may

[7:01] terminate for material breach after a

[7:04] notice and cure period have passed and

[7:06] by mutual written agreement.

[7:09] So, um this agreement is designed to

[7:11] support a strong and stable FBO,

[7:13] encourage smart growth and innovation,

[7:15] protect the city's regulatory role in

[7:17] public investment, and create a

[7:18] long-term cooperative relationship that

[7:20] helps the city airport thrive. That is

[7:23] the summary of the agreement um and

[7:26] captures the whole the whole thing

[7:28] without going into all 20 pages.

[7:33] Wondering what the airport board

[7:35] thoughts are

[7:38] on kind of the concept of having an

[7:40] employee

[7:42] part-time employee

[7:44] versus having the FBO take management

[7:48] role. I agree.

[7:56] Yeah, the city needs to be in control.

[8:00] >> Yeah, our existing agreement, we pretty

[8:02] much kind of said, "Take this thing and

[8:07] manage it for us and we don't want to

[8:08] hear about it,"

[8:11] which is probably not wise.

[8:18] » Yeah.

[8:21] So, that'll be between the city and the

[8:23] employee,

[8:25] but I I need to talk with um I need to

[8:29] talk with our city attorney and with HR.

[8:31] I thought about saying here, we'll just

[8:33] give you the house and that's that's

[8:36] your your salary and this is what's

[8:38] expected. I don't know if that's

[8:41] something we can do for federal, you

[8:44] know,

[8:47] payment law and all that stuff. Besides,

[8:49] One thing I hate about it is people tend

[8:51] to um forget that thing they get for

[8:55] free and start to resent the thing that

[8:57] they have to pay for. Um and they, you

[9:00] know, it's it's the whole potatoes and

[9:03] gravy thing. Um

[9:06] if we give somebody a house and say

[9:09] that's your payment, that's not

[9:10] something they see every month. They

[9:12] then say, "Man, I do all this work for

[9:14] the city for nothing." They don't see

[9:16] the payment coming in. So, I like the

[9:18] idea of paying them a wage and actually

[9:21] getting a time card and having that

[9:23] direct accountability as to what they're

[9:25] doing with their time. Hey, you know,

[9:27] it's it's that time of year again. It's

[9:29] time for us to do weeds. It's that time

[9:31] of year again. It's time to do hanger

[9:32] inspections. It's that time of year

[9:33] again. It's time to you know, yeah, when

[9:35] you're doing snow at three in the

[9:36] morning, you're getting paid for it. You you don't you don't hate it as bad.

[9:41] And if we give them a house to live in

[9:42] at a red reduced rate because we we want

[9:47] to we want them to live there and

[9:48] provide that security

[9:51] for the airport. That's why they get a

[9:53] reduced rate, but then they're paying

[9:55] the city for the house. We're getting

[9:57] some revenue that comes in from that

[9:58] which helps fund the salary of them

[10:02] doing what they're doing. So in other

[10:03] words, we could give it to them for free

[10:04] and expect that or we can trade each

[10:06] other checks and everybody's aware of

[10:09] all the the accountability of money that

[10:11] goes back and forth. It's just a better

[10:12] way of doing it. It's a little bit more

[10:13] transparent in my mind. So, that's way and I think it'll I think

[10:17] it's a hard time to say I mean, it's a

[10:19] harder thing to say we have an employee

[10:21] that we don't pay anything but we give

[10:23] them a house. How does that work on

[10:26] taxes? How does that work on I don't

[10:28] know. It just gets weird. Seems a little

[10:30] easier to exchange checks.

[10:34] But that ultimately won't be a anything

[10:38] about that in the FBO contract because

[10:40] the FBO is blind to our agreement with

[10:43] our employee. The only thing they care

[10:45] about is if they want to hire that same

[10:48] employee to say do mechanic stuff or

[10:52] something like that, then they got to

[10:53] pay they got to pay them and they're in

[10:55] a second position to the city when it

[10:57] comes to their their duties. Yeah. Their

[11:01] priorities are that their first priority

[11:03] just like any If Cali wanted to have a

[11:05] side job running um as a realtor, I

[11:10] would say, "Okay, Cali, it just can't

[11:12] interfere with your main job." And we

[11:14] would have that conversation. So

[11:15] similar. And if she and if I granted

[11:17] that to Cali to go do that and then it

[11:19] started to become a problem, I'd say,

[11:21] "Okay, Cali, you can't do that anymore.

[11:23] You got to choose." Right? That's the

[11:25] secondary employment thing that the city

[11:26] goes through. It would be the same thing

[11:28] with this. And the FBO is comfortable

[11:30] with that. And they're like, "But we

[11:31] could pay him a different wage if we if

[11:33] the person that that you hired want

[11:36] could do a mechanical or something like

[11:37] that, I'm like, absolutely pay them

[11:38] whatever you want. Um, which again, why

[11:41] it's important for us to pay them for

[11:43] what they're doing. Um, so that they

[11:44] don't just look at the FB at the FBO as

[11:48] their only source of income and they

[11:49] kind of forget the fact they're getting

[11:50] a free house, right?

[12:03] Yeah.

[12:07] » So, one of the things that I've had a

[12:09] little stress about as we've talked

[12:11] about this for the past few months is

[12:13] can we find somebody that would that

[12:15] would agree to do this job? And I think

[12:17] we can. Right now, when we put out a

[12:19] position, we just put out a part-time

[12:21] wreck assist assistant making not a lot

[12:24] of hourly rate and we got we got a lot

[12:28] of of candidates, good quality

[12:30] candidates. Um the city manager position

[12:32] of Enoch, they just got 34 candidates

[12:34] for that. Um I think it's a sign the

[12:37] economy is starting to turn a little bit

[12:38] when we put a government job out there

[12:40] and we get a lot of applicants. Um, the

[12:43] FBO specifically has somebody in mind

[12:46] that they would like us to consider that

[12:49] also does um that is a an airport that

[12:52] is a a mechanic.

[12:55] I've said, "Yeah, we'll interview them

[12:56] and if if they would work for us, then

[12:58] we'll hire them, but they have to work

[13:00] for us first." And I made that very

[13:01] clear. So, from the FBO's perspective,

[13:05] they don't have all the headache of the

[13:06] airport management that they have to

[13:08] they can just work. They can just do

[13:10] what they do as the FBO. Um, we left

[13:12] fuel completely out of it as we have to

[13:14] because we have a third party that does

[13:16] fuel. The one thing we have discussed is

[13:18] potentially um bringing that back under

[13:21] the city umbrella and I need to have a

[13:23] conversation with our fuel third party

[13:26] and see if um if they're making a go of

[13:28] it. Um I don't believe they're doing all

[13:31] of the daily stuff that they're required

[13:32] to do. So, I have some concerns there.

[13:35] And I really think that if we bring that

[13:38] back under the city umbrella and manage

[13:40] that, we may have to put a little bit of

[13:41] money into the system. But if these guys

[13:44] do what they're talking about doing, um,

[13:47] I really hope we can get some more fuel

[13:49] sales going out there and help to fund

[13:50] the airport. Right now, I think we're

[13:53] probably scraping the bottom of the

[13:54] barrel and we're probably offering

[13:55] bottom of the barrel

[13:57] product.

[14:00] Self fueling. I've heard concerns about

[14:03] whether it's accurate. I don't know how

[14:05] well they're doing the daily testing.

[14:10] I don't know. But um if these guys can

[14:14] be successful and can have some more um

[14:18] generate some more um traffic with

[14:20] things they're doing and I keep trying

[14:23] to woo SU to um maybe base a couple of

[14:27] planes out of here or helicopters and

[14:29] maybe buy some fuel. Um, you know, I

[14:33] think it'd be a it would be a worthwhile

[14:36] conversation to have with our fuel guy,

[14:39] but the FBO has no interest in taking

[14:41] over fuel.

[14:43] Their their biggest concern is there's

[14:46] not enough gallons to be sold to offset

[14:48] their liability

[14:51] of taking over the fuel. They're really

[14:53] worried about the liability of the fuel

[14:58] and the city's going to face the same

[15:00] problems. take over the city.

[15:02] >> Yes, I think we're already exposed to

[15:04] the liability as we sit right now. My

[15:08] thought is I think so. I need to check

[15:10] with our insurance company, but I'm

[15:12] pretty Well, I tell you this, if if

[15:15] somebody gets water in their engine and

[15:17] it stalls and they crash, you know, the

[15:19] city is going to be named on that

[15:21] lawsuit whether or not we have a third

[15:23] party fuel person or not. They're going

[15:24] to name all the people they can to

[15:26] chase. Um, so I don't know exactly how

[15:30] much liability we're exposed to

[15:33] as by design or not. I need to talk with

[15:35] our insurance company, but um, my

[15:38] thought is is we're probably at the

[15:41] bottom of what any fuel sales we could

[15:43] get. We're probably worst case scenario

[15:45] right now. If we can improve the

[15:48] situation and at least offset our

[15:53] investment and actually provide just I'm

[15:57] worried that the product that we're

[15:58] offering out there is subpar

[16:01] which is going to continue to hurt the

[16:02] airport. That's my my ultimate.

[16:04] >> Now we had we had to name the city as an

[16:08] additional shirt on our insurance.

[16:11] >> Yeah.

[16:11] >> Is that the way it is with Dave?

[16:14] >> I'm sure it is but I don't know. I mean,

[16:17] I'm I'm assuming so because usually in

[16:20] anything like that, we'll name each

[16:21] other as additional insured, but we

[16:24] would make him have his own policy and

[16:26] name us as an additional insured and he

[16:28] would probably do the same. So, I don't

[16:31] know. Fuel is a is a totally separate

[16:33] conversation, but one that we're going

[16:35] to have. Um, as it sits right now, if

[16:37] Dave Hston

[16:39] just continues to operate it for the

[16:42] next five years, then he owns everything

[16:44] out there.

[16:46] We've basically given him everything.

[16:50] That's the way the agreement reads.

[16:52] >> Didn't he have to buy some of that stuff

[16:54] originally?

[16:56] >> He just had to operate it for 10 years.

[16:58] >> Oh, I thought he had to buy a bunch of

[17:00] the equipment.

[17:03] >> I can't find any evidence of that.

[17:06] But he hasn't put any investment into

[17:08] it. And I don't think he's doing daily

[17:10] tests. And when we had our last audit

[17:13] from the FAA, there was

[17:15] several things that needed work and some

[17:18] of it fairly expensive. The containment

[17:21] um fence is wouldn't contain a gallon of

[17:24] fuel that that block wall that's all

[17:26] cracked up and everything. Um he needed

[17:29] to upgrade the signage. Um again, I've

[17:32] heard report reports that the the

[17:34] gallons that you get isn't exactly

[17:36] right. I don't think there's anything um

[17:40] shady going on. I just think it's not

[17:41] that accurate. Um

[17:50] Yeah.

[17:52] >> Yeah. And I don't know if that's a

[17:54] communications issue. I don't know what

[17:55] sort of I don't know. Does he have

[17:58] Wi-Fi? I don't know what system it is

[18:00] and how it's reporting. And there's way too much um too many

[18:04] unknowns there. It's kind of been my

[18:07] whole issue with the airport for a long

[18:08] time. It's very opaque to us as the city

[18:11] to to step in and manage. So, I don't

[18:14] know. We'll continue to look at the

[18:15] fuel, but but these guys at the FBO

[18:17] actually don't want anything to do with

[18:18] it. And so whether we do something with

[18:21] fuel or not ourselves is yet to be

[18:23] determined, but

[18:28] yeah.

[18:30] So anyways, that's that's the FBO um

[18:32] agreement. Um they are going to be here

[18:35] on site. Uh Mick has been working well

[18:38] with with us in the transition. Um the

[18:41] new guys are going to be here on site.

[18:44] um in a week,

[18:47] little more than a week to do a walk

[18:49] through um check everything out and

[18:52] they've just been gearing up and moving

[18:54] forward planning on everything. Um we're

[18:57] not really offering a lot of traditional

[18:59] FBO services as of day as as of right

[19:01] now. So I don't think we really um have

[19:04] anywhere to go but up

[19:07] and so

[19:07] >> what's the name of the operation that's

[19:09] coming in? Um, I don't know that they

[19:11] were they were going to form an LLC.

[19:13] They haven't given me the name of their

[19:14] LC yet. We just know the three

[19:17] principles that will be owners of it.

[19:19] And we those are the guys that we've

[19:21] been negotiating and talking with from

[19:22] the start. So, they will have to get

[19:24] their LC

[19:26] complete and so they can um sign the

[19:28] agreement. Um, I'm going to present the

[19:31] same thing to the city council this

[19:32] Thursday and um I'd like to get it kind

[19:36] of wrapped up. I I have sent the copy of

[19:37] the contract to them that has all this

[19:40] stuff in here like like it was presented

[19:42] and um and it's consistent with all the

[19:44] discussions that we've had. We had a few

[19:47] ideas that we had to work through some

[19:50] concerns and friction and I think we've

[19:52] got to a good point. I don't expect them

[19:53] to push back on really any of this

[19:56] stuff. I think we've kind of figured out

[19:58] something that will work for them and

[19:59] us. But it's possible that they may say

[20:01] they want a 10 year or not a fiveyear

[20:04] and

[20:05] I I doubt we'll see that, but if they

[20:07] did, then we'll let the council, you

[20:09] know,

[20:12] debate and and do what we want to do.

[20:14] But the goal is is that January 23rd,

[20:17] they take over and I think we're on

[20:19] track for that. So, worst case scenario,

[20:23] the city steps in temporarily.

[20:29] So, um you you may see a job

[20:32] listing go out um in the next day or so

[20:36] for airport manager, part-time airport

[20:39] manager. That will be the city

[20:42] officially listing this position so we

[20:44] can um look at candidates. Um

[20:50] and uh but that doesn't don't let that

[20:54] confuse you. That's the not anything to

[20:55] do with really the FBO.

[21:01] Any insight on the transition? any any

[21:04] pitfalls to avoid you guys know of?

[21:08] >> Well, I can't can't think of anything

[21:10] specific, but I'm gonna throw myself

[21:13] out. If they have any questions, I sure

[21:16] appreciate them coming to me and asking.

[21:18] >> Do you want to be on the hiring

[21:19] committee?

[21:21] >> No, not really.

[21:23] >> Dave Cowan, do you want to be on the

[21:24] hiring committee?

[21:26] >> I I don't. We'd love to have somebody

[21:28] that's been there and done that.

[21:30] >> But, you know, 30 some odd years of

[21:32] running that out there, we figured out a

[21:33] few things to do.

[21:34] >> Absolutely. And I will definitely tell

[21:36] them,

[21:39] in fact, I I I I talked with Gangas and

[21:43] I said, "You you need to get to know our

[21:44] airport board members. We're going to be

[21:47] working together." And these guys used

[21:49] to run that airport out there and they

[21:51] know a lot. So,

[22:04] Gangus is. Yeah, he's he's building his

[22:07] own home and he has some extra acreage

[22:10] besides his house that he's thinking

[22:13] about doing stuff, wondering about doing

[22:14] stuff.

[22:22] » Yeah.

[22:24] They've really gotten excited about

[22:26] hanger development and I think what we want to do in fact it's not as a

[22:30] specific item on here but I will I just

[22:33] pointed out Genghask really wants to

[22:36] create a a hanger list a priority list

[22:39] so people can say I want a hanger I want

[22:41] a hanger and that list will be official

[22:43] it'll be we can we have a thing on the

[22:45] website so people can if they can throw

[22:47] their name out there for a hanger we can

[22:49] actually judge how much demand is out

[22:51] there. Um they wanted an exclusive on

[22:55] hanger development on the airport and I

[22:57] told him no. I thought the whole thing

[23:00] was going to unravel over that. Like why

[23:02] would we give you an exclusive to

[23:03] develop hangers on the airport? We have

[23:06] tons of acreage out there. Just being

[23:08] the FBO doesn't why would we give you an

[23:10] exclusive, right? And they said, "Well,

[23:12] that's probably a deal breaker because

[23:13] we want to be able to if if we do stuff

[23:16] to make this airport great, we we want

[23:19] to be able to have some opportunity

[23:22] develop hangers and and lease them. And

[23:24] I'm like, that's fine. You're not going

[23:26] to have an exclusive for the entire

[23:27] airport. So, we need to come up with a

[23:30] good way to what we may do is is let

[23:33] them say, okay, we want to have

[23:36] maybe a a section of hangers that that

[23:39] they have the ability they can put their

[23:41] name on to develop those hangers in that

[23:43] spot because we have that we have the plan that shows several rows,

[23:47] several taxi ways that go up in there.

[23:50] So, we may say fine, if you guys want to

[23:52] do um if you want to write your name

[23:55] down and reserve those and figure out

[23:57] how to fund it and do those fine, but

[23:59] we're not going to give you the whole

[24:00] airport. The that other group that we

[24:02] talked about, they're the ones that have

[24:04] they have now executed the purchase of

[24:06] that property that we were doing, the

[24:07] through the fence agreement, the what we

[24:10] call the Idaho group, which are actually

[24:11] from Spanish Fork. They are they're

[24:14] really excited and want to still move

[24:15] forward and do something with a hanger

[24:17] development as well. And so I wanted to

[24:20] do something that didn't pit them

[24:21] against each other, didn't put the city

[24:24] in some sort of a, you know, between a

[24:26] rock and a tight spot. But, um, the more

[24:28] the marrier if we can. By the way, we

[24:30] have officially applied for the grant to

[24:33] put the utilities and fix the road. That

[24:36] was officially filed Christmas Eve, 400

[24:38] p.m. Christmas Eve. We finally got it

[24:40] in. We did get we found out that we got

[24:42] the award from the state. We got

[24:44] $600,000 from the state and we have

[24:47] about six million that we're waiting on

[24:48] from the federal government to do that

[24:50] grant. It was a pain. Even after we

[24:54] thought it was done, took four months to

[24:56] get it fully applied for, but the grant

[24:59] looks really, really, really good. So

[25:01] hopefully if that goes off we'll have a

[25:03] new road power underground power

[25:06] underground water all the way out not

[25:08] only to the airport but around the

[25:10] hangers and on out to Goodfellow which

[25:12] will be which will allow us to be able

[25:14] to expand hangers out there because then

[25:16] all they have to do is just come off

[25:18] that road with water power and and a

[25:21] gate. Right. So, um, I'm really excited

[25:25] about that because we could say we could

[25:26] put them in blocks, A block, B block, C

[25:29] block, and we could say, okay, if you

[25:32] want to do a whole project, then fine,

[25:34] you can reserve a block and and if you

[25:38] want to do a whole project, and we have

[25:39] some sort of criteria for them to

[25:40] reserve that many, some sort of an

[25:42] agreement or they pay a certain amount

[25:44] to the city to for it to be reserved.

[25:48] And then we're also want a list of of

[25:52] people, individual

[25:54] potential hanger owners that want to

[25:56] sign up and it'll be first in priority

[25:58] and we'll get that list and and so we

[26:01] just kind of need to figure out the

[26:02] mechanism of all that. But these guys

[26:04] really want to uh insist on us having

[26:07] that and and so do I. And I want that to

[26:09] be um really transparent. I know that

[26:12] I've heard a lot of people got burned

[26:13] because they thought they were on a

[26:15] priority list and when it came right

[26:16] down to brass tax, they weren't and they

[26:19] were pretty frustrated with the city

[26:21] that did that to them. So, anyways,

[26:24] I'm excited. I think we're I think we're good. We're going to transition to

[26:29] a new chapter. Um Mick and group have um

[26:33] maintained the the runway and the

[26:37] prairie dogs and the um snow removal.

[26:41] They've done the best they could with

[26:42] city equipment. Um it is one of our

[26:45] items that we get new equipment there.

[26:48] Um but they've done a pretty good job.

[26:50] They their their business didn't take

[26:52] off and run like I think they had hoped.

[26:54] I think if everything had gone the way

[26:56] that the city's plan was with with

[26:58] Mick's group, um I think that they would

[27:02] have been more successful and and of

[27:04] course it didn't end up that way. So,

[27:06] we'll see if these guys can make a

[27:08] better go of it.

[27:19] » Yeah. Unless somebody's got anything

[27:20] else on that, I'm ready to talk about

[27:23] the next one.

[27:36] What are we waiting on a motion or what?

[27:38] >> No, nothing to do.

[27:39] >> We don't need a motion, do we?

[27:41] >> Number

[27:44] four. Number four.

[27:47] >> Okay. You ready for me to go to four?

[27:48] >> Yes.

[27:50] >> Oh, sorry. Five.

[27:51] >> Five. Yeah. Five.

[27:53] >> Okay. So these five and six go hand in

[27:56] hand. Um are capital projects for the

[28:00] fiscal year 26.

[28:02] Um

[28:04] this is this is right off of that the

[28:07] state uh with state UD do um we they

[28:10] have their system called blackat. Now

[28:12] this is what we have approved with the

[28:15] FAA for capital projects.

[28:18] The pavement preservation apron and

[28:20] taxiways is ongoing. It's open right

[28:23] now. Um

[28:26] I haven't has anybody seen if have they

[28:28] gone out and been doing crack seal?

[28:30] >> No.

[28:31] >> Because they're going to do that during

[28:33] the cold part of the winter.

[28:35] >> But I haven't heard that they've come

[28:37] yet.

[28:37] >> I haven't seen anybody out there. So,

[28:40] they're doing the crack seal in the cold

[28:42] part of the winter and then in the

[28:43] spring between now and June they'll come

[28:46] in and I think they awarded it to

[28:50] um we awarded it to

[28:54] oh the asphalt

[28:56] company

[28:58] not um

[29:01] straight straight stripe. What's that

[29:03] called?

[29:03] >> Straight stripe.

[29:05] >> I think they awarded it to straight

[29:07] stripe. they'll come in and do the the

[29:10] fog coat and restripe everything.

[29:13] Um, and that's ongoing and will be done

[29:17] by the end of June. That was a UD do

[29:21] specific grant. FAA didn't have any

[29:23] involvement in that. Um, 211,000 was the

[29:26] estimate and the and the bidding came in

[29:28] at total of 214,000.

[29:32] And then the next two items on the

[29:35] system, you'll notice that we have the

[29:37] AWAS in 2026

[29:40] and snow removal equipment in 2027. So,

[29:43] as I was working with um Lochner, our

[29:47] consultant.

[29:49] So, I'm just going to mesh five and six

[29:51] together because the six is discussion

[29:53] on RFP for our airport consultant. Um,

[29:58] when we last had our CIP meeting with

[30:00] the FAA and UD do aeronautics,

[30:04] um, they had the snow removal equipment

[30:06] ahead of AWAS.

[30:09] And, um, I told them, "No, let's let's

[30:12] reverse those. Let's get the AWAS first

[30:14] and the snow removal equip equipment

[30:16] second." And um I said, "Yeah, we need

[30:20] new snow removal equipment, but

[30:21] depending on who does what, especially

[30:23] with the new FBO, the city may take over

[30:26] maintenance and we may we may not

[30:29] prioritize snow removal equipment this

[30:31] year. We'll maybe do it next year." And

[30:33] everybody agrees that we need an AWAS

[30:35] sooner rather than later. Um, it is one

[30:39] of the things specifically that our new

[30:40] FBO really is interested in and I think

[30:43] that having accurate and up-to-date w

[30:45] weather is is a is a huge priority. As

[30:47] long as we can remove snow, I think we

[30:49] can buy another year with that. So, I

[30:52] kind of insisted on that and they they

[30:55] sure enough they re they rearranged it

[30:57] and approved it. Well, when it came time

[30:59] to start doing the all of the back-end

[31:02] work on it, our existing um consultant

[31:07] said, "Okay, we got a problem."

[31:10] When we did our five-year CIP, when we

[31:14] awarded them as the consultant to do our

[31:16] CIP projects,

[31:19] the AWAS was outside of that five-year

[31:22] window, but the snow removal equipment

[31:25] was within it. because we gave them a

[31:29] five-year agreement

[31:31] and at that time one was in and the

[31:34] other was out. So, they can't legally

[31:39] help us do the AWAS now.

[31:42] So, we have one of a couple of options.

[31:45] We can wait and do it next year and do

[31:47] the snow removal equipment this year or

[31:51] we have to put out to bid our consultant

[31:54] CIP stuff um I think in June anyways

[32:00] for the following fiscal years. Well, we

[32:04] can we can do that now and then have and

[32:08] include all the things within the next

[32:10] five years on our list and um and then

[32:13] we can start on the AWAS now. We just

[32:16] have to put it out to bid for the for

[32:19] the airport consultant now. So I guess

[32:21] my question to you guys is do you agree

[32:24] with me that the priority is AWAS over

[32:27] snow removal equipment?

[32:31] And if so, let's do the RFP

[32:34] six months early.

[32:38] » Is the snow removal equipment available

[32:40] from the city when it's needed?

[32:42] >> Yeah, that's what they're using right

[32:43] now is a is a city snowplow. We just

[32:46] dedicate one for them.

[32:49] I don't even know if we're going to get

[32:50] snow.

[32:53] >> What's the downside to doing the bid six

[32:55] months early?

[32:57] >> No downside.

[32:59] I think when I ask them, they're a

[33:00] little nervous that we may not award

[33:02] that to them. Um, and I obviously I

[33:05] can't promise that we are going to award

[33:06] it to them. Um, Jud with Armstrong and

[33:10] now Lochner have been they've been

[33:12] really good. They've been one of the few

[33:13] things that has

[33:15] preserved my insanity my um in the three

[33:19] and a half years that I've been here. Um

[33:21] they have been absolutely stellar, but

[33:24] that doesn't mean they're you're

[33:25] guaranteed to get the award. We're going

[33:27] to put it out to bid six months one way

[33:29] or the other. So, they don't have

[33:31] anything to be afraid of. If they've if

[33:33] they earn the the award for the next

[33:35] one, fine. If they don't, then they're

[33:38] going to what? Miss out on

[33:42] starting the process for snow removal

[33:44] equipment. So, I it is what it is. Um

[33:46] there's no reason to not award it or not

[33:48] start the process earlier and and and at

[33:51] least that would allow us to move

[33:52] forward with the AWS.

[33:55] >> And Armstrong has been good to the city

[33:57] for a long time.

[33:59] >> Yeah.

[34:01] I've been a little nervous. They

[34:02] promoted Jud to basically be the boss.

[34:07] And I was really concerned that our

[34:09] level of service potentially could fall

[34:11] off because because you know how it is

[34:14] in business, it really is about the

[34:16] people. You have a good company and you

[34:18] have a bad service rep. Um, and Jud

[34:22] promised me from the start of him being

[34:24] promoted, he's now over like I can't

[34:26] like three states. Um he promised me

[34:29] that service would not fall off and that

[34:31] he would still be very very very very

[34:33] involved in Perowan airport and his

[34:35] promise has been true. I sent an email

[34:37] this morning to him and Connor and

[34:40] Thorston and Jud replied five minutes

[34:43] later. Boom boom boom boom here's the

[34:44] answers to all your questions. That's Jud. his his level of service is

[34:48] great and there's never been a question

[34:50] of whose side they're on and and they

[34:52] give us

[34:54] especially when we're battling the FAA.

[34:56] They are they are just I wish all

[35:00] consultants and engineers that we deal

[35:01] with were that good. I'm not I'm just up

[35:03] here like raving about them, but that's

[35:05] just the the honest facts of things. So,

[35:09] but I'm sure there's capable people out

[35:10] there.

[35:13] So, in other words, here's the capital

[35:15] projects. Um, really the only ones that

[35:18] really matter is um the AWA snow removal

[35:21] equipment because of what I discussed.

[35:23] The other um big thing that is out there

[35:26] is um

[35:28] the the perimeter fencing. Um, just to

[35:32] be very careful in a public meeting, but

[35:34] to give you a little bit of a heads up,

[35:36] you remember when we had last year when

[35:39] we updated the the CIP list, the FAA

[35:45] started insisting that we do a new

[35:46] prairie dog fence. And I was like, "What

[35:48] about a deer fence?" Remember that

[35:49] conversation? They said, "Pause this

[35:52] conversation. We'll meet again in a in a

[35:54] couple of months." They never came back

[35:56] to us ever. An entire year went by and

[36:00] this last I think it was November when

[36:02] we do our meetings with all of them and

[36:06] um I thought what are they going to do

[36:07] now? Are they because they never

[36:09] responded they I don't know if they

[36:11] didn't have the funding if the politics

[36:13] got weird for them or what but they

[36:15] never brought it up at our last meeting.

[36:19] They adopted this just as it sits and

[36:23] they never brought up the perimeter

[36:24] fencing which is slated for 2028.

[36:30] So,

[36:32] I think that they don't have the funding

[36:34] to force us to build a prairie dog fence

[36:36] for millions and pay for it right now. I

[36:38] think if they did, they would because

[36:40] they wanted to bump that to the top of

[36:42] the list and bump everything down.

[36:44] That's what they wanted to do. And my

[36:46] only thing was fine, if you're going to

[36:48] make us build a new prairie dog fence,

[36:51] make the fence go both ways and let's

[36:52] keep the deer herd that actually is a

[36:54] threat to human life off the runway. And

[36:57] they couldn't argue with that logic, but

[36:59] I think the the funding and not only the

[37:01] funding, but the design is just not

[37:02] there. So luckily they they didn't they

[37:05] didn't mention a peep about it and

[37:06] therefore we can move on with the

[37:08] priorities that we have. So that's the

[37:10] whole deal on the capital projects.

[37:19] and frankly

[37:21] RFP. Well,

[37:24] since we're talking about both of them

[37:25] at once, do you guys have any

[37:27] preference? Are you okay if we put it

[37:28] out for RFP on the airport consultants?

[37:32] >> No, we're good with it. Okay, we'll uh

[37:35] we'll keep the airport board in the loop

[37:37] on that and um

[37:41] probably what we'll do is we'll put it

[37:42] out and then when we get the we get the

[37:46] um different proposals that come in,

[37:49] we'll summarize them all and um

[37:53] if it works within the timing of the

[37:55] next airport board, we'll uh we'll bring

[37:57] them to you guys and get your input. If

[38:00] we need to move quicker, maybe we'll

[38:01] have a special airport board meeting. I

[38:03] don't know if there's a if we do that,

[38:05] we would just do it in lie of the next

[38:07] month. And um but I because we're going

[38:10] to want to probably move on that as

[38:11] quick as possible, especially so they

[38:12] can get designing and and get the AWAS.

[38:17] You never know with the federal

[38:19] government when they'll shut down or

[38:20] what. So that could potentially and in

[38:23] January that's a high likelihood again.

[38:25] So that could interrupt our our stuff.

[38:31] So that's it, chair. That's what I have.

[38:41] » Nope.

[38:47] » Did anyone answer if they thought the

[38:49] snow removal or the AWAS was higher

[38:50] priority? I didn't hear if anyone had

[38:52] input on that.

[38:53] >> Did we answer that question?

[38:55] >> Yeah.

[39:00] Okay. I just didn't hear the answer.

[39:09] » Okay. Thank you.

[39:10] >> Do Do we have a lot of demand and call

[39:12] for AWAS? People pilots really want it

[39:16] that use our airport.

[39:18] >> I'm not a pilot. So,

[39:20] >> I see shaking heads out here.

[39:22] >> There's one right there that says

[39:25] [laughter]

[39:26] Isn't that higher priority than using an

[39:28] old snowplow versus new snowplow? That

[39:30] was what I thought.

[39:32] >> Long as the snow's off the runway. Yeah,

[39:34] the sauce is really beneficial.

[39:36] >> Yeah.

[39:38] Yep.

[39:41] Um other thing in staff comments. Um are

[39:44] you guys did did they did somebody come

[39:46] out and fix the gate that was broke?

[39:48] >> No, not yet. Um Mick's dad asked me

[39:51] about it and I said Mick is the one that

[39:53] hired the company last time. Um they

[39:56] need to warranty it and so got them the

[39:58] vendor name and he was going to call

[40:00] them and have them warranty it.

[40:03] But I hadn't heard if it got fixed or

[40:04] not because I'm kind of out of that that

[40:06] loop.

[40:07] >> It's still open. That's all as far as I

[40:09] know.

[40:10] >> I don't slow down there.

[40:15] » Second gate. Well, we'll get that fixed

[40:19] one way or the other. So,

[40:21] >> it was working for a while

[40:23] >> for quite a while,

[40:25] but then then for some reason it it

[40:27] would go closed, then it would open up

[40:30] and it go closed and it opened up and I

[40:32] tried to reset it several times and

[40:35] couldn't get it to work right. So,

[40:38] >> did

[40:38] >> sometimes you got to get out of the car

[40:40] and wipe the

[40:41] >> Oh, the sensors

[40:42] >> reflector off if it won't work. So,

[40:46] >> so I like it open.

[40:48] >> So, is the um is the system that we have

[40:52] because I I have not gone out and looked

[40:54] at it since they fixed it. Did they

[40:56] install new equipment?

[40:58] >> They did. They changed they changed uh

[41:02] Oh, it used to have a a loop in the

[41:04] ground.

[41:04] >> Uhhuh.

[41:05] >> And now they change it to an infrared.

[41:07] >> Okay.

[41:08] >> Like the main gate is

[41:09] >> Yeah.

[41:13] Well, we got to fix it. I know everybody

[41:14] loves when it's open, but

[41:18] we'll get her fixed. It's all I have

[41:28] for public. We are

[41:35] » Hello, Matt Jacus, owner. Hangarate

[41:36] Hanger Charlie. I'm very excited about

[41:38] AWS. Uh right now I've got a system at

[41:41] my home that I can access through my

[41:42] phone in the air to get weather. So it's

[41:45] Do you know which version it is?

[41:48] There's AWS one, two, and three. Well,

[41:50] all I know is that they have an

[41:53] estimated cost because we haven't got to

[41:55] the design portion yet, but they they

[41:58] came up with that number somehow. So

[42:00] whoever came up with that number,

[42:01] probably Armstrong, Lochner, they would

[42:04] know what they were planning on. But my

[42:05] guess is the latest version.

[42:08] >> Yes, because some have different, you

[42:10] know, wind and temperature wind

[42:11] temperature clouds, wind temperature

[42:13] clouds, visibility that it depends on

[42:15] how sophisticated you want to get, you

[42:17] know, could drive up that number. Um,

[42:20] secondly, it's been a long time since

[42:22] I've had employees, and I'm just trying

[42:24] to wrap my head around the the part-time

[42:26] employee. Do you envision this employee

[42:29] kind of like being on call for when you

[42:32] need something done? Is

[42:35] I I guess I'm I don't remember employee

[42:38] law too well and I'm I'm just going to

[42:40] say I really don't know the ability to

[42:43] call a part-timer but be on call all the

[42:47] time is kind of confusing me. I just was

[42:50] >> so from from the from our perspective,

[42:53] we have a few part-time employees that have a variable schedule and our

[42:59] big constraint is is they can't work

[43:01] more than 25 hours a week and actually

[43:04] the federal law says 29. At that point,

[43:07] we have to consider them full-time and

[43:08] offer them benefits and the whole deal.

[43:11] >> But they're still on call 247.

[43:13] >> Yeah. Okay. So we will we will hire them

[43:16] on the basis of

[43:18] >> if it's very if it's a very unique job

[43:22] you're going to be on call at all times

[43:24] and we'll we'll arrange for them to have

[43:26] backup through another city employee

[43:29] probably through public works in case

[43:31] they're going to leave and go on

[43:32] vacation or something like that right

[43:35] and um we'll have somebody cross trainin

[43:37] to do that and then we'll say yeah

[43:39] you're going to be variable schedule

[43:40] they may make one work one hour one week

[43:44] and 30 hours the next week as long as

[43:46] they on average keep their keep their

[43:49] hours under 25. They get 26 27 hours.

[43:52] Cali gets nervous and tells me, Dan,

[43:55] they just went over 25 hours and I'm

[43:57] like, I know we got to come to to watch

[43:58] their hours next time. But that's the

[44:00] arrangement.

[44:01] >> Okay. Um suppose the city hires someone

[44:04] who lives local um not a requirement to

[44:07] live in that house. What would be the

[44:10] plan for that property if that becomes

[44:13] the case?

[44:14] >> So that that the property is actually

[44:18] there's no dedicated property for the

[44:19] house. The house just sits on the

[44:21] airport property.

[44:23] >> We want to get somebody living in there

[44:25] that will agree to do provide airport

[44:27] security.

[44:28] >> I see.

[44:28] >> One way or the other. So, um, down in

[44:31] Canab, it's which is a county airport,

[44:34] they actually have a

[44:37] sheriff's deputy that lives in the house

[44:40] and it's part of his pay package, but he

[44:43] also has to provide security for the

[44:45] airport and it's one of it's part of his

[44:47] incentive package. So if if we hire an

[44:50] employee and they do not want the house,

[44:53] we're then going to look to find

[44:54] somebody else who in an agreement for

[44:56] reduced rent will keep an eye on the

[44:58] airport. Basically, all they'd have to

[45:00] do is literally keep an eye on it and if

[45:02] there's a problem, call somebody

[45:04] >> if it's not the employee that lives

[45:06] there.

[45:07] >> Very excited about the crack seal in the

[45:09] taxi way as well.

[45:10] >> Yeah, Dave and I have been out in front

[45:12] of our house with blowtorrch. So, thank

[45:15] you.

[45:24] No, just if you know somebody when we

[45:26] post that job

[45:30] >> ultimately I'd like somebody that has a

[45:31] CDL that is very handy

[45:36] knows like has a brain. [laughter]

[45:40] Um,

[45:44] there's probably a few aeronautical

[45:46] pilot type people. There's probably a

[45:48] few, um, I don't know.

[45:52] And they, again, the FBO does have

[45:54] somebody in mind. I want to interview

[45:56] them, but I don't want to hire them just

[45:57] because they're good at wrenching on a

[45:59] helicopter. They need to be able to run

[46:02] a snow plow without running the blade

[46:04] down in three passes up and down the

[46:08] airport. So, they got to be able to do

[46:11] some technical stuff. They got to put up

[46:14] with me and Cali.

[46:20] » Yes.

[46:34] » I would make that motion

[46:36] >> and I second it.

[46:43] All

[46:44] >> right.

[47:04] » That's that spreadsheet. No.

Airport Board 1-5-2026

Agenda

Transcript