Agenda - Council - 10/08/1985 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I ! I i I I I i I I I ! ! I I Further Discussion: (km~issior~r Seibert referred to citizen concern regarding this C~T~i~ion bein9 p~esupposed; this OmT~'i~ion ha~. to vote for what is best for the o0m~u~tty. Oommissior~r Seibert stated that this (tm~lsSion be99ed non- aviation type ~ersons to serve on it in order ~o avoid being biased; ~ pilots are on the (lm~ission because of their aviation expertise. (lm~issio~r' Seibert stated that because he was a former MO at Gateway, people assume that he is all for the a/rport but he did approach it with an oen mind. Ckm~issiormr Seibert stated that it is ~%fort~%ate that people don't attend the Airport meetings because in not doing Bo the~y only obtain a ~all segment of information. (l~missioner Seibert referred to the written (x~ments and their referenoes to airport expansion or ~elo~ment; it is not an expansion, an tmpr~ent and it must be determined whether or not that imlxov~ent will help the __~m_ unity eoono~ically. (k~missioner ~eibert stated that this Go,reunify is at a point where it will be taxed heavily for it's ~enities or it will have to dra~ in industrial tax base to support the (xa~munity. (kml~iSsioner Seibert stated that City Op~mcil wants a r~tion fr(~ this Om~ission regarding whether or not ~pgrading the airport is an eoon~mically be~eficial way to attract industrial tax base. __P~,m_ issioner Erickson disagreed with the term 'stopped' in the motion because it is too final; the existing Gateway site is bounded on 3 sides by industrial and transporation and on side by residential; this is an ideal situation and the study effort should not be abando~ at this e~me. __om,missioner Donovan stated that the motion's direction to stop efforts ~til the residents d~onstrate interest is enoouraging the shouting match. G~issioner $ieber stated that his words to stop efforts ~til there is significant interested c]~m~%strated by the residents was an attempt to stop the issue fr(~ being resurrected behind closed doors or in m~oke-filled ro(~$ -- which happens in P~sey. (k~missioner Stauffer stated that he vieds the ~otion as cutting the issue off rather than extending the shouting match. Motion failed for lack of a second. Motion by (~in~an Ippel to reoc~mer~ that City Oouncil endorse the Airport Master Plan, s-~it it to the reviewing agencies and future studies would evolve fr~ that endorsed Airport Master Plan. Further Discussion: Mr. Otto stated that the City cannot develop an airport in any way, shape or form until the City is offered a grant and the offer is aocepted; anyth~ up to that point, the city Can back out. (k~missioner Stauffer stated that a rec~tion should we well-thought out and supported by doc%m~entation. (k~missi~r Sieber stated that this (k~mission has 18 man- years involved in studying this airport issue; this __~_ ission ~hould know by n~ whether or not it is worth continuing with the Master Plan study. Gommissioner Erickson agreed with fk~missior~r Stauffer. (k~missioner Sieber stated that the suppor~ng doc~m~entation can be found in this (ka~mission's meeting minutes; no matter what this Oommission r~, hope that Council would call for a joint ~mccting to ask questions and get ansders. (X~missi~r Larsen seconded the motion to recommend Council endorse the Airport Master Plan. Motion by Gu~issio~er Sieber to amend the motion to include language that explicitly states that this motion is not a reoc~mendation to lxooeed or not ~epte~ber 3, 1985 ~age 6 of ?