Laserfiche WebLink
I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Airports the size of Gateway generally are not totally self sustaining ~nd it <br />would not be viable to float a revenue bond for the develou,ent of it. G.O. <br />bonds do prcwide the lowest opst of financing for public facilities and it is <br />typically the method that is pursued. If a city kn~s tbs airport dvelo~ment <br />is o~ming, it can avoid a large bond issue by beginning to acc~nulate cash <br />to be used towards the development. The City o~uld create a tax increment <br />district and use the tax increment dollars gained fr~m that district to psy for <br />airport development oosts. <br /> <br />Economic I~pa_ cts - There are direct benefits to a oc~munity fr~ an airport <br />construction program; a good portion of the develou~ent costs will be spent in <br />the local area. Georgtown University did a study which states that every $1.00 <br />spent on develo~ent generates $2.80 worth of economic activity. The longer <br />term benefit to airport develoi~ent is that it will attract more and more <br />business uses. A forecast by the General Aviation Manufacturers Associate <br />states that the average itinerant spends $50 to $70 per day in the area; a <br />conservative forecast was done on Ramsey using a $35/day figure; based on that <br />figure and the cyclic multiplier effect, by 1990 an indirect benefit of <br />$460,000 is forecasted for the community and the c(m~unity's share of <br />develolm~nt costs, in the first place, was $500,000. An airport is considered <br />another type of utility that a (x~munity has to offer and Gateway would be <br />geared towards attracting ~m%ll business, sales reps and light manufacturing. <br /> <br />County (lm~issioner Haas inquired if aoguisition ~oes to oourt, would it be a <br />condemnation process. <br /> <br />Mr. Otto replied that it would be a condemnation process if it goes to court, <br />but it would be fair market value or relocation. <br /> <br />County Co~missioner Haas inquired as to who will make the decision regarding <br />tax dollars being used to relocate Cry. Road ~116. <br /> <br />Mr. Otto replied that State funds come through the Minnesota Department of <br />Transportation, Division of Aeronautices; those funds are user generated funds. <br />Ten percent of the cost would be the City's share and 90% of the cost would be <br />covered by Airport Improvement Funds. ~e Metropolitan Airport (k~m~ission has <br />notin9 to do with the relocation of Cry. Rd. ~116. <br /> <br />(~airman Ippel stated that s~me of the Airport Om~ission member and City <br />Council toured airport facilities in the surrounding metro area. <br /> <br />(k~issioner Stauffer stated that the airport facilities that would be most <br />like what is being considered in Ramsey are Air Lake and Princeton; the <br />businesses locating near these airports are the type of businesses desired in <br />Ramsey -- light manufacturing, sales reps and business sales, etc. <br /> <br />Omm~issioner Erickson stated that Air Lake is definitely what he would like to <br />see Gateway become and that he sees the Ming factor to making improvements at <br />Gateway being the desire for additional ta~ base. <br /> <br />G~m~issioner Siebert stated that he was impressed with the economic impact of <br />inoomin9 businesses at facilities like Princeton and Air Lake. <br /> May ~, 1985 <br /> Page 3 of 8 <br /> <br /> <br />