Airport Economic Development Advisory Board - Regular Meeting

Thanks, Bob. Too much stuff on the table.

Yeah. Okay. Today is Thursday, June 18th, 2026, calling to order the Erie Airport Economic Development Advisory Board monthly meeting. Roll call. Kevin Kane. I know he's not coming. Emmett Dowling. Here. Michael Bowden. Here. Jennifer Webb. Paul Hufftailing, Beer, Wild Martin, Steve Tobin.

Yeah.

Thank you. Approval of French. Thank you, Steve. Thank you. Did I miss anything in the onboarding activities a week or two ago that I need to catch up on? I'm not aware of any, but we'll cover that. Are there any different? They're still here? Yeah. All right. Everybody has a copy of the agenda? Yes. Any comments, concerns, suggestions? I do have one or two, but anybody else? Okay. First one is B, election of officers. I'm going to do that last, if nobody minds. And then with respect to item F, where it references airport HOA representation, I'd like to change that to airport resident representation. I've been told that there actually is not an HOA at the airport. It doesn't exist. It's actually incorrect. That's incorrect.

All right.

All right. We'll get to that. Anybody has any objection, I'd like to change it to airport resident representation. Thank you. No objections? No. OK. You'll make those changes? Yep. OK. Motion to approve the minutes as they exist with those changes. Minutes or agenda? Sorry, agendas. Thank you. Motion to approve. Second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Okay, thanks. Previous meeting minutes, I think there's one from April. Yes. Everybody has a copy of that? Any comments, concerns? Motion to approve. So moved. Second. Second. All in favor? I opposed.

Great.

OK, public comment. So at this juncture, any one of you all here to make a public comment, stand up, say your name. We have three minutes at that point.

So they can move on to the next person.

Once we're done, then we're done with public comment. In this particular meeting, I know a lot of you are here, and one of you is going to come up and participate in a later part of the meeting. That person would be able to have discussions as an invited guest at this meeting with the board. After your public comment, None of you are allowed to participate in the discussion, okay? You get your three minutes. We have to have you say what you need to say, and then we'll move to the next person.

Is that why they took away the... You know, they took away their papers, so we don't know what's going on at the meeting.

I'm not sure. Which paper?

Well, when they passed... It's a subset.

I just want to make sure that last meeting there was a person here who made public comments and then sort of engaged with us during our discussion.

I kind of caught hell for that because we're not allowed to do it.

I just want to make sure we all understand the rules and after the public comment the person will be invited to participate in the discussion as part of that part of the agenda but after that there will be no other discussions that's why I kind of apologize I kind of shut it off when you said no that's not true okay in terms of the HOA and engage like that All right, are we good?

Are you saying after public comments, we have to leave?

No, no, absolutely not. You can stay for the entire meeting as long as you want. If you want to get up to any, you can do that too. You just can't engage with the board. Okay? All right. Tell the rules. That's right. It's not my rules. It's just the rules we have to follow.

It makes us feel like we can't comment on anything that we don't know what your guidelines are. discuss. If we don't have an idea of what are we talking about today, then...

I understand that. Here's the published agenda. Yeah. You can hand that out. Some of you already have some. If you want to look at it, more than welcome to. This is the standard format for a town meeting.

What he is going to present and pass out, I have no idea. I haven't seen it. Yeah. Yeah.

And you will forever be able to comment.

But I'm supposed to comment on it before I even know what's going to be the meetings about.

There is an agenda. The agenda shows what we're going to speak about. You can comment on whatever you want, but we, as the board, have to stick to the agenda and what's on the agenda. I would say if a gentleman makes a presentation, And you want to make a comment at that point. Technically, you'd have to wait for the next meeting and come in. Public meeting is the next meeting.

Unless they're a part of the HOA.

If they're part of the... Once we get to the discussion that you are going to present, you will be the only one allowed to engage with the board.

We were in the understanding that it was the HOA that was presenting to the board today.

A representative of... the residents of the airport.

So you're not saying the word HOA, which is incorrect.

If you get your opportunity to come up here and have the conversation, we will address that if need be.

It's not if need be. It needs to be. So let's just start there. So here's a certificate of fact from the state of Colorado.

I'm sorry. We cannot do it that way, OK?

Hold on a second. You've already changed the name of what's published? It said HOA. It needs to stay as HOA. It does not. It does. And the state of Colorado says...

I got to cut you off, okay? I have to stick to the rules. Right now, we're on public comment. I'm going to invite and I'll start with you. We're going to go down the line. If you want to make a public comment, you will have three minutes and you can say whatever it is that you wish. When we're done, we're going to go back to the agenda and we're going to go through the agenda. At the point in time in which we get to the part of the agenda where you, as an invited guest, are going to sit down and have a conversation with the board, feel free to bring that up. I'll bring it up then. But you cannot bring it up now. Are we good?

Well, I don't know what's being discussed at the board meeting, so it's hard to comment on it. I understand Braun Mishker put out or sent a paper to people to the board, and he's going to be out of town, and he had a lot of questions in that. I wonder if you're going to address some of those questions in his his statement in there. I can't answer you.

Why? Because all you can do is make a comment and say what you need, and you have three minutes to do so.

Well, this is the way we control people. I feel that way. You can't comment on... You can say that. Yeah, and that's what I feel. I get you. It's... Yeah, it's go on there. But one thing I'll say is I feel if they do fees, they should be tied to the tie-down fees because I could go get a tie-down fee and I could taxi anywhere in the airport. And actually, I could fly in from anywhere and taxi anywhere I want in the airport and not have an issue with it. But I don't think the fees should be more than what the tie-down fees are. And that's just one of my feelings on that. Another, you know, because it's just, we're not commercial properties. We're just individual properties that have a thing. You don't go to a park and charge a fee for the homeowners around it because they're going into the park. It's not fair to the homeowner around there because people from all over can go there and they don't pay a fee and we don't charge a fee. We don't charge a fee to the dog park. We don't charge a fee to the ball fields or nothing. It does cost the taxpayers and it's in our taxes to pay for those fees or pay for those facilities that And that's okay. But I think the airport should be treated in a similar way. I feel it's just one of the things of our community. We purchased the airport, the city did, at a bargain. They get a lot of federal funds to cover it. And it's... If the fixed base operations aren't making enough money to cover the difference, our taxes is because we pay more taxes there. And I noticed in a thing they said 250,000 value extra because we were at the airport. Well, we pay on that 250,000 our taxes that goes to the city to cover that. And It's just not fair, I don't think, to charge a fee on it if he ain't going to start in another municipality. I don't know. Okay. But I'm done.

I need to cut you off. Yeah. Just for the record, because it's being recorded, just say what your name is.

Oh, yeah. Oh, it's Stan Orzaniak. I'm a 4325. Thank you. Appreciate it. Next. Anybody?

My comments are incorporated with Johan. So I'll pass. Sorry.

Sorry. I've got some comments I'd like to make. I'm Larry Earnshaw. I reside at 170 Sesame Drive. OK. While I support the airport's goal of self-sufficiency, provided it looks at both sides of the balance sheet, cost is one trend. I mean cost. Look at efficiencies. Look at different ways of doing things. Don't just arbitrarily. have a fee or a tax to fix a cost problem. Look at both sides. One side fits all. Pricing model is inequitable. It's uneconomically sound. And it potentially conflicts with federal guidelines regarding fair and reasonable rates. Distinction in economic value and use revenues versus recreation. A commercial lease is an income-producing asset. Businesses utilize the airport to generate billable hours, sell parts, provide services. Conversely, residential hangar, that's a cost center. It's used solely for the storage of personal property. Changing a resident commercial rate for non-commercial ignores the fundamental economics. and reality that businesses' users derive significantly higher financial value from the same squirt. FAA compliance fair and reasonable rate standards. Under the grant assurances, the airport is required to make its facilities available on a fair and reasonable term without unjust discrimination. I guess I've got more, but I'm going to pause with that. My main point, though, is I understand you're trying to make the airport self-sufficient, but you need to look at both sides of the balance sheet. Costs, efficiencies, way to cut costs, as well as ways to increase revenue. And the best opportunity for increasing revenue There's a lot of people out there on waiting lists to have hangers. You've got the land. You build the hangers. Use that room. That's it.

I'm Byron Goswick. I live at 150 Beachport. My understanding for a fee to be a legal fee, there's a number of requirements, and I would like to address two of them. Number one, the municipality government agency that is charging that fee, that purpose of that fee has to be recouping their costs for providing that fee. The city is not providing any kind of service for the easements. The city doesn't maintain them. They didn't create them. I've lived there over 30 years, and I've never seen anybody from the city doing anything on the easements. So the city's not got any cost associated with those easements, but yet they want to charge me money because that easement, I have access to that easement. I don't have an airplane. I never have had an airplane. I never will have an airplane. The second item that is important required to be a legal fee is the person paying the fee, which would be me, has to be arriving some benefit from that fee. And since I don't have an airplane and I do not use the easements, there's no benefit to me. So the city's got no cost, which gives them no right to charge a fee, and I would be reaping no benefits from those fees. So I think it's totally an illegal fee for what's being proposed. And I believe that same methodology would apply to the fee that you're wanting to add on to a building that has an airport in it or airplane in it. That airplane is personal property. The city is not incurring any more cost on that building because there's an airplane in it versus if there was a bunch of motorcycles in it or a bunch of collector cars or anything else. The city is not incurring any additional cost because that building has an airplane in it. And that's my speech.

Thank you. My name is Dan Clegg. I live on 245 Cessna. I also have a commercial property on Airport Drive. I feel to start with the way this began is to say that we don't have an HOA. I was elected my third term by the majority of a quorum of the neighborhood. We're recognized by the state of Colorado as an HOA. We're on the Erie website as an HOA. So to start off this by saying that, you know, recognize it is wrong. The third thing is to represent everybody by going to the town and making a proposal without looking at all of the consequences of what that means to everybody, which means you say you've lost this much money and you throw a number up in the air and say, this is how we get it from this many people. It's not a good accounting way of accomplishing anything. You need to represent why you've lost the money, where the money that is coming to you is going, And look at all of the stuff that goes on at the airport, not just let's just pick out the neighborhood and pull from them. That is not fair. It's not right. And I'm sure they will have a lot of legal challenges. That's my opinion.

Tim Dernick, I live at 3040 Cherokee Court in the airport. I wanted to also state that the HOA is recognized HOA from the city of Denver, state of Colorado, and the town of Erie. We have elections. We have annual meetings. We have a board that is seated and meets regularly once a month. We're an HOA. That out of the way, I wanted to say, I'm pretty sure we're going to get into it later. The original recommendations that went out to the town council at the last town council meeting where this came up, were rife with some real interesting legal challenges. There was some, there's a lot of legal stuff. And I don't know if everybody who made the, at that time, whether that was presented to all the people here on the board. I think since that time, a lot of those have come to light. A lot of the white papers have come out. A lot of the comments and things that hopefully the board is aware of now. So to not re-examine those recommendations now in the light of hopefully what is new information to the airport board, if they made the same recommendations with the knowledge that we now have, there's some interesting issues with that. This is reaching all the way back. This is a tiered structure. I'm sure we'll get into it, but all the way back to the deeded easements that came with the original land on the air park. All the access to the Arrow Park is in the deeds, in the deeded easements. That's the first layer. Second layer goes back to the 1987 agreement. The 1987 agreement has been ignored, and there's been some legal precedent, but it's based on knowledge. So from what I understand, we have two years from when we're aware of that, that the 505, Article 505 that came into the town of Erie has presented uh if we ignore that for over two years that that becomes a statute of limitations but up until that time the 1987 agreement is still valid for anyone in the airport to join so that's the second legal issue that we have to do the 505 issue that is currently being um not enforced which is another which is another interesting problem but the the 505 that is on the books is sets up a certain fee structure and that fee structure is a lot. The FAA would say that the fee structure that we're currently has been proposed is wildly in excess of the other one. So it's a, it's a big jump again, all these things come up, but it's that three minutes. Anybody else want to speak?

I yield my time. Can I yield it? Thank you.

Sure. He is yielding it to whom?

You've got as much time as you want. I'll just say that I've been an Air Force resident since 2009. We have not owned a plane, nor do we own a hangar. We are, however, on a taxiway easement. And right now you'd have problems taxing a tractor on it because it's overgrown. People have used it for landscaping and such. But we have a neighbor who is looking at essentially freeing it and putting it in as an easement. Now the way it's structured now or the proposal could put us at odds with this neighbor. Because if right now, so you couldn't say that I could ever get a plane up my yard. Technically, am I on an easement? Yes. But when he builds it, do I start paying $600 a year because I now am on a taxiway? And God is in the details. And when my husband and I moved there, this was going to be our forever home. Unfortunately, he died. the lady next door to me, who's also on the same easement, husband just died just last year. So you're making it more difficult for widows who are trying to stay in their homes by taxing them for nothing, nothing that they've ever used. And having served with really well upstate Colorado economic development for several years, This is as lazy way to raise money as you can get. I mean, it wasn't anything innovative about it. There wasn't anything. Essentially, it wasn't economic development. It's just, let's raise the rent. And when you're raising it on widows that never used that service, that gets to be pretty nasty. So I just think this really needs, this recommendation was ill-conceived and really didn't look at all that's going on in the air park. And I like it. Send it.

Okay, I just want to make clear. Yohan, if you want to speak as part of this, you get your own three minutes, even though you're going to have a chance to do this. Don't think that we're shutting you out of this.

No, I don't take it that way at all.

But if you want to speak, go ahead and you'll get your three minutes now.

Well, I'll use my time then to address the HOA issue. So the first question, would you remind me? First question you'll hear when I do have my time and we can interact is, where is your information that says we're not? Because here's a state of Colorado statement saying we are in good graces with the state as far as being an HOA. On the HOA website, right down here, the last one. We're Erie, we're in good graces with the town of Erie. So wherever you're getting the information from, I'd get a different source. It's wildly inaccurate. Full disclosure, in the past, we have had issues, probably because we charge 25 bucks a year Maybe if you want to pay it in dues as an HLA, none of us are paid. We don't have staff to deal with paperwork. And so in years past, we have less because that is not the case today. So I will be addressing everybody as the chosen representative for the Erie Air Park HOA board. That's who I am. That's who I'm going to represent.

Is that right? I'm done. Oh, okay. Thank you.

Is there anyone else?

Once. I'm doing twice.

Okay. Moving forward appropriately, we have an agenda which would bring us to other subject matters before we got to you and the discussion. How does everybody feel about jumping to that now on the agenda? It kind of makes sense that we would move into There's an item F, presentation. If everybody on the board is good with that, I would suggest that that's what we do. Are we good? Please join us at the table here. I'd like to say a couple of things. Now, as we get started, it appears as though I've been misinformed. It doesn't matter who informed me. That's not relevant. However, apparently, Johan, you have a document We'll enter it into the records. That's what I'm going to suggest. Let's enter it, put it in as a document for the meeting as part of the minutes. And if you don't mind, Johan, we'll make a copy of that and include that. Or if you have a copy, we'll take it.

I got the internet. You can have that.

Okay. We can include this as part of our meeting documents. And I appreciate clarification. If I misspoke, I apologize. I would also add, for some of y'all's comments, we are an advisory board. We don't have access to an attorney or any legal advice. we've been debating this and discussing this for now over six, nine months. It's not something we took lightly. It's something we took very seriously. I will tell you without a doubt that we were very clear and expressed in very clear language to town staff that these legal questions need to be addressed. And the town needs to address them. And it's my understanding the town is addressing them. We would have addressed them initially or proactively if we could, but we couldn't. We don't have legal counsel. The town has legal counsel. Okay. It's not that we didn't want to. It's also my understanding that the town is already in the act of doing that and has engaged with – maybe you should just give us an update as to what's going on at this point.

Sure. Yeah, like Paul mentioned, in February, the advisory board made a recommendation to town council for – a recommended fee structure that this body had reviewed previously. So over the course of a few months, this body had reviewed potential fee structure recommendations for through the fence fees, license fees, tie down fees, ground lease fees, et cetera. And this body, this advisory board in- Yes, sure. So all I was saying is that over the course of six months, this advisory board had been preparing a recommendation of how a potential fee structure could look like to reduce the subsidy from the town's general fund to support the area. That's required by the town's code of ordinances. The original ordinance that created the airport fund requires the fund to be self-balancing and that revenues meet expenses. And so the town council previously last year had given this body, the advisory board, the direction to pursue a recommendation. The advisory board approved a recommendation by this body to the town council. And in February, both the chair and vice chair presented to the council what that recommendation was. It was an overall fee structure with example fees included, fee amounts included for how changes to the fees could reduce the subsidy from the general fund. The council at that time reviewed the proposal, the recommendation, and did support the overall structure. I think the mayor had said, you know, this might not be how it eventually ends up, but that the council was supportive of the structure for how these proposed changes could help reduce the subsidy from the general fund. Paul mentioned that the advisory board does not have access to legal staff or financial staff. That is ultimately the direction of town council. In February, the town council after that presentation from the advisory board did provide to town staff that direction to do additional due diligence, financial legal review to investigate if this proposed recommendation from the advisory board has merit and should move forward. That was back in February. the provided us with that direction. Since then, for the last four months or so, staff has been working with specific legal counsel on reviewing the legality of the promotes recommendation from the advisory board. Been working with financial partners as well to do all of that further research as directed by town council. To Paul's point, this advisory board is purely that, a board that makes advisory recommendations to council. This body did make that recommendation to council and council then acted on. So currently staff is acting following that direction that we received from council in February. Does that answer the question, Paul? It does.

Does that answer or help everybody? The other thing I will add, thank you for coming. It's helpful to get your input. I would highly, highly recommend and invite you all when it gets to that point, because it will get to that point where the council We'll start addressing this publicly. You all will get the same opportunity to speak in front of the council because they're the ones that are going to make any of these decisions. Do not let that opportunity pass by. I highly recommend that you all do it. That's your right and your privilege and you should avail yourself of that when you get an opportunity.

At this point, we did our job and

Please, please come back to the council and speak in front of them.

I'd like to add one more thing. This advisory board operates completely transparently. Every one of these meetings is open to the public. Every one of them is recorded. Those recordings are on line. Anybody in the air park could easily have audited all the discussion that went into drafting those advisory boards for the last six months. There is nothing done behind closed doors. It's all public record. So... Okay.

Yeah. Perfect. Anybody else? Brandon's letter. That's probably a good idea. Do you have it?

I did have it up here.

Okay. I don't need to read it, but if you would, so you have it on the computer there. Brandon Bell is the liaison on the council to the airport board. He could not make it. He had a last minute job obligation. And he sent a email to the board and asked that we read it. Chair Hoeftaling and board members, I will be unable to attend tonight's meeting due to a work commitment. It, however, want to give a perspective on the airport HOA presentation since I will not be in attendance. I appreciate representatives of the air park HOA representing to the AEDAB on concerns regarding the fee structures. However, the vote that occurred for the fee structure that was presented to council is simply a recommendation that eventually will have to be presented as an actionable item to the council. We are a long way from that occurring. Staff is well aware of the issues surrounding the deed and fee structures. The town has hired an airport attorney working in conjunction with our regular attorneys to review those issues before any fee structure is voted on by council. I do not believe there is any further action that needs to be taken by the AEDAB, but I will also defer to Julia and Lockie on their thoughts as well. Brandon Bell. Okay. Any other board members that want to say anything at this point?

You have the floor. Should I pull that up?

Yeah, do I need to? You might have to.

Sometimes it's the old IT 101. Unplug and replug. Let's try that.

We got an error here on the screen, Julian. How do you connect? I just joined the Zoom meeting.

Are you able to join the Zoom meeting? Let's try the plug first.

Or Windows P. This says content not supported on the screen.

That might be a security setting for the meetings. We might need to use the Zoom wish. Or if you want to send me that, there is public Wi-Fi if you need it, but that might be easier as if we show it from our screens instead of you joining the Zoom.

Okay, so yeah, there's a line to get it.

And then if you just email me the PowerPoint, we can pull it up from here.

In the interest of time, I don't want to cut you short. I'm not going to cut you short. You're part of this in terms of this discussion. Is there anything you want to put in or say at this juncture while we wait for him or you just want to wait?

I want to make sure that the emails that we're receiving and support are also included as we look at this presentation.

Included as part of the discussion or as part of the agenda.

I just want to make sure everyone has an opportunity to read them. We had a lot of input from community. And I just want to make sure that that input is also taken into account when I asked for this.

Okay. One of the items was the white paper. Right.

That's not what I'm referring to.

I understand that. But one of the items was the white paper, and that's been included. And just for the benefit of everybody else, that's part of Julian. That's what is available. Mm-hmm.

uh what is the process in terms of what she's saying with respect to emails that a board member has received that were forwarded i mean this this entity as a majority of you all can decide if you want to enter something into your official public record and kind of approve something as part of your minutes you all can choose to do that as a majority

And then last meeting, we chose not to submit the emails that had come in to the packet and the record and what have you. But we can change our mind and do that. But that's why they are not on record in the packet right now because we chose not to.

So question at this point, I know you forwarded an email today from a gentleman whose name I cannot remember. Okay. And then Braun Mincher sent an email to all of us, including council and I believe some of the staff. Are those the specific emails or are there others?

Those are the ones. I should have forwarded all of them to the board just so that all of you are aware of community input.

Okay.

because this food community input on the fee structure like that should be included in this discussion as these people could.

Okay, so my question for everybody is, has everybody read the email that Jennifer forwarded to the entire board today?

I have. So we had the one that you forwarded to the board. There's been a number of H-O-A emails. Are you referring to those emails also?

The ones that specifically are to the board.

There was one that I saw to the board, and that was from Jerry.

That have been to me, and then I forward it to everyone else so that everyone else has opportunities. One with the community input.

Okay, so the one today from Jerry.

Gerald.

Yeah, right. So that one was there. Are there others?

There's another one, and I don't have the name.

I will do it.

I'm sure. Braun, everybody saw it. Yeah, we all saw it.

Those are the only two I've received.

Okay. All right. All of that.

Just got it.

Okay. That's the. The interest of making sure all of those. Can't really have them as part of this discussion right now, but I want to make sure that they are provided to all of the board members, the council, everything. Okay. Okay. I would suggest that you make sure that those were forwarded to us. And if there's no objection, I would include those comments and emails as part of this discussion. I don't know how many there are. There's roughly a half dozen. A half dozen is nothing. Yeah, that's no big deal. All right. So if that's what we're talking about, then I would suggest that that's what we do. And without any objection, we'll go ahead and do that.

Good.

Okay.

What are we doing? Almost there. Okay.

Other things at this point?

Stretch it. Okay.

Okay.

Okay. I personally only received one message from Jennifer Webb that had an pasted or was kind of forwarding Gerald Kainer's other ones.

Understood. You'll deal with that. You'll make sure that we get whatever it is that may or may not have made it to us. That's fine. We're good. Say everybody read it. I didn't read all of bronze.

Skimmed it. It was lengthy. It's well written. He spent a lot of time doing it.

Good for him. That's great. All right. Are we good? All right. Almost there. There we go.

I used to do this for a living. It's been a while. I've run a lot of nonprofits and I must say that what I heard, I was just terribly disappointed in the fact that there was a, a blurt, a jump to rush something to be recommended. And the excuse of, we don't need to look at legal stuff because we don't have an attorney here is I expect better from you guys. I really do. So you'll hear there's some emotion in here because this is emotional for the people at the air park. This isn't a job for us. The time that I've spent, it's not my job to, I shouldn't have to do this. You guys should be able to do your efforts and not rile up the neighborhood and you'll get a taste of that coming. I've delved into more documents than, I'm just shocked at how much I've buried myself into this recently. So the stuff that I'm coming up with, I didn't make it up. What I'm doing is I'm going to primary sources and I'm saying, here are the facts. Because what I came away with from the recommendations was exactly the opposite. So I've got a two-parter here to give you a presentation in the old school PowerPoint method. There's the justifications. You'll see four major irrefutable reasons why you need to resend everything that was recommended. And start from scratch. And then as a supplement is a four page hundred and some odd questionnaire. It's not questionnaire. It's questions with comments and sources address each of these things that you have presented to us. Plus some things that the airport manager should know who I understand. comes in and offers information if he's available. And the very last slide is about me. So if you want to shoot the messenger, then you've got an email address to do that with at the end. So here's the agenda. At the end of the dark blue lines, one, two, three, four, Look for those because they're the ones that are going to say this page alone is reason to rescind. And I know from my years of playing with the nonprofits and in the corporate world, you get a room full of people together. Somebody makes a decision. It's extremely hard to undo that decision. I get it, but... And frankly, you'll look really silly if you continue and you'll waste a lot of people's time, especially staff and attorneys. So again, look at my sources, look at our sources. This isn't just my work. Folks on the HOA have done a tremendous job helping me out. And we've got a number of neighbors that have given me some fantastic perspectives as well. And you'll see that. If not in the PowerPoint, you'll see it in the spreadsheet. We don't have time to go through everything. I don't want to be here all night. Neither do you. But I want to make sure that you get where we're coming from. So there's a lag. So the first thing is, you're the Economic Development Board. I've read your birth document. And to even address this issue, you're not the right people to do that. You're not the right board. It's not in your mission to do it. And yet you took it up. So if the mission is to find $250,000, anybody can do that in a really simple way. And, and we've, I didn't even have to be in the room, just reading all the documents. We can, we can see exactly how it happened. um so to us there is absolutely nothing presented the warrants and increase in the through the fence fee nothing um The core issues are threefold. The first one is there's a deficit, and that's due to two things. It's either because of the airport manager not knowing how to manage or the town, its staff, or whoever you want to count in town, or both. And it's typically both. But if we just leave that aside for a second, or to end cap it, it has nothing to do with you guys. And it shouldn't. And it certainly doesn't have anything to do with the Erie Air Park. But now, but now, now we're we're trying to help. The biggest issue here is the counting issues. It's income and expenses. And I'll get into the details because this is the executive summary. None of that happened. Your solution, and this is the harshest slide, is you basically manufactured more money. That's how we're going to solve the problem. We're going to manufacture more money. It's feckless. It's arbitrarily done. It's unsupported by the FAA guidelines. I've read them all. It's unjustified, erroneous money grab. It's arbitrary rate setting. And then you're delving into private property and you want to piss people off. That's going to happen. When I say severe litigation risk, it happened before in 2013, 2012, 2011, and the writing is on the wall. So note that none of those three things has anything to do with raising through the fence fee because it's too soon to even figure out if you need to raise them. So today the HOA board categorically opposes all fee structure recommendations, period. It's just resend. And then we'd be, I don't know about using the word happy, but we have skills. You should ask us for help. Because right now, you're not showing that you have skills to do the job. So in January, Lyle came to my house. where we were holding an official HOA board meeting. And he presented what he intimated was something that wasn't quite ready, but getting close. So we asked him a lot of questions. None were answered. Definitions were asked for. None provided. Concerns were offered up, none provided, no addressing of the concerns. Legal issues immediately popped up. We can recognize them. We don't need to be attorneys to recognize legal issues. And the excuse was, well, that's not our concern.

We're asking, where's the- Can I respond at some point? Sure, absolutely. Okay. I did come to your house to address the board, and I set that up through the board president at the time. I came as a neighbor to inform the board that this group was looking at how to address a funding shortage at the airport. I did not come as an official member of the airport economic development board. I came as your neighbor. Correct. I was not going to answer any questions because I wasn't there as part of this board. And furthermore, I had no answers at that time because we were still developing what that fee structure was. I hear you. So there was nothing nefarious in my part to inform the HOA that we were looking at what we could do to generate funds for this airport. I want to make that clear.

I get that. I believe you. And it doesn't change a word what I have said or will say.

I don't like the insinuation that I would not answer any questions because I was being nefarious.

I didn't say anything of the sort. I just said no questions were answered. Okay? Let's keep going. So we asked for a map. Where are the lots that you're talking about? There was no map provided. So as a summary of the January presentation, it was premature. It was certainly in excess of any FAA guidelines. It was a blatant money grab, and I'll get into the details of that later. Absolutely no member of the HOA board agreed with the recommendations or the future recommendations. We are now aware of only two people in the entire HOA that are for it, two out of 129. And so at that point in January, what we were expecting was a rework and come back with all the answers to questions and have that conversation. Because what happened was instead we get four days notice of a meeting in February that we're presenting to counsel these recommendations. Like, okay, so now we're being ignored apparently because the majority of stuff that was brought to us in January showed up verbatim in February. We were literally shocked. It was premature. It seemed excessively rushed. So now it's like, I would never use the word nefarious, but since you brought it up, now I'm wondering if that's the issue. The wrong issue was solved by the wrong group, by spreadsheet magic. Certainly not representative, no business rationale, disrespectful in the fact that we had things to say and there was zero input back to the HOA board who would be, our members would be affected. So we're being ignored. Nothing is comparable with regard to FAA examples, nothing. And when you start taking a base and adding per plane and a hangar charge and, and, and, that's just, eventually it's illegal and you're going to get, or Jason is going to be at the receiving end of litigation. As an aside, But it goes to the tenor of the presentation, and it was brought up again today. Last sentence of the airport fund language page, which was on page six, I found incredibly just distasteful. It's very divisive, and it's uncalled for. Any, any, so basically what I'm talking about there is there's this threat that if the airport doesn't become revenue neutral, which seems to be the mayor's favorite words, then the council consider closing the facility. Well, that's, That's ridiculous because it's the mayor, like I talked about before, and the airport manager and town council. They're the ones that are complicit in this deficit spending. It has nothing to do with any pilot anywhere. It's their job to run it in a revenue-neutral position, period. That's the way businesses do it all the time. As a consequence, if you ever shut the airport down, that $20 million number is just using your 55 number of homes. We know there's more than that that will be affected. If you take away the airport, you're taking away an easement right. And there's already litigation that has said that has significant value, and therefore you'll be paying each of those homeowners affected a significant amount of money, including payback to the FAA. So to even have this sentence on a slide... is just ridiculous. It does nothing but get my hackles up, let alone others that looked at this presentation. So my suggestion as an aside, a very strong aside, is to strike that language. FAA mandates self-sufficiency. Neighbors of the Erie Air Park, your best partner in this deal, We want it to be fiscally sound. Period. So to threaten a loss of facility is ridiculous. So here's some history. I'm relatively new to the air park, but I love chatting with my new neighbors. And so I've... And gained a lot of knowledge about the history. So since starting in a in 1978 this airport has always been air park and you can't have an air park without a runway. Or an airport. They go together. They're weaved together. They're twins. Siamese twins. You can't have one without the other. They had fiscal issues. Fancy that. And went into bankruptcy. So here we are in 1994. Issues of collecting money. Two of nine commercial accounts weren't paying up. That's information that I've gathered and is part of the primary source. So anything, if you see AAC, that's your precursor. It was the airport advisory committee. Today's words, we have a deficit. Let's find some money because we don't want to keep using the general fund.

I couldn't agree more than with more.

That's the way it's supposed to be run. In the last 48 years, we are the second oldest neighborhood. Pilots haven't changed. Residents want the airport to thrive. Access hasn't changed. What has changed is town management and this board. And if you don't know the history, you will be repeating it. The airport is feeling attacked. When you feel attacked, you get emotional. And if you look up there and look at all the developments, because you're a part of the development group, you know a lot of stuff is going on. And you're throwing out ideas that are premature and getting people really riled up. That happened with this very recommendation from you guys. So you're a part of our history now, and it's not good. Airport runway. Sorry, it says airport, airport drive, Sierra Vista, golf course. All these things are going on, and it is. It is a thing. We're trying to mitigate it and help out where we can. But right now, there's a mistrust of the town. We are being disrespected by the town, ignored by the town. If you... Totally off topic. I won't go there. So litigation, and now this absolutely grotesque access user fee increase is, it's another attack. And again, I'll get into the details. So it's just not words. We have the details to back up what we're saying. So our observation right now, the airport manager and the town run the airport with a deficit of their own making. Excuse me. Yeah.

Do you know the history of my management of the airport?

I know some of it.

Can I give you just a brief synopsis of it?

Can we hold off?

I think at this point in time, I think it's very relevant. It's a big chunk of this history that is missing from your analysis and very relevant to this discussion. Go ahead, Jason.

In 2011, the airport was running in a deficit. And so the town put out an RFP looking for solutions to that deficit. I volunteered. I put out an RFP and I volunteered my company to manage the airport. And I worked the numbers backwards. I said, here's how much the airport's using. In fact, we didn't have enough money at the time to match our grants. We hadn't been receiving grants for almost 10 years from the FAA because the town refused to match those grants because there was no money in the airport fund. So I worked the numbers backwards. And I said, this is what it's going to take to put money in that account every year. $50,000. So I ran this airport for 12 years, revenue neutral, and put $50,000 into the account every year so we could get, I think it was close to $14 million worth of everyone. I did that. I didn't take a salary. My company never made money. In fact, we lost, Vector Management lost $10,000 to $15,000 a year for 12 years. Come the end of my contract, I said, I'm done. I've done enough charity work. I did that to protect, and I don't want a pat on the back. I would never like to even bring this up. I did it. I did it at my own decision-making. I did it because all my eggs are in this nest. My company's here. I've got 20 employees. I was watching the airport. Borgo, millions of dollars of federal funds. I was tired of watching improvements not getting made. Our company's responsible for the snow removal equipment building, grant, all the maintenance grants, millions of dollars. I worked that number backwards. I donated 12 years of my time coming to meetings just like this, talking to thousands of angry residents that don't like the noise the airport makes. Hours, hours, hours, hours of my time coordinating airfares, working with airfare committees, just doing things airport managers do. And finally I said, look, I'm done. So at the end of my contract, I said, I'm done. I've done all my charity work. They brought a consultant in. The consultant said, They studied the whole situation and they said, you know what? You've got a really good job or you got a really good deal here with vector management. Well, of course they do because I've been doing it for free. I've been subsidizing the airport every year. And they said, you have a couple of options. One, you can try to top vector and continue doing that. I'm the one who said, I'm done. You can hire an airport manager. Tell the staff report manager, I'm fine with that. You guys can contract out another company to do it. That's fine. You can do that. If I'm going to do it, I would like to receive some compensation. I'm done doing it for free. I'm done doing it volunteer. And ultimately, that's the decision that came to. And so I ran this report for 12 years, revenue neutral, in fact, $50,000 a year every year. in the airport fund and i think it's important though because you're sitting you're telling them complicit you're sitting you're saying i'm not running it like a business i ran like a business for 12 years to the dollar i know every dollar that went into the airport fund and every dollar we collected and there's only so much money we can collect and this board made a recommendation to increase fees to try to make something revenue neutral. I don't actually disagree with the concept that it's not much different than a park or, you know, I think Stan said earlier, Sometimes things cost money, but right now there's only a fixed source of revenue. I run a business. I've run a business for 25 years. There is only so much revenue at the airport. If the solution by this board or the town council is to raise those fees, that's their decision. It's not my decision. But it costs so much money, so the fees have been the same every year for the past 20 years. But every year costs more to maintain the AWAS. It costs more money every year to put bulbs on the runway. It costs more money to pay for electricity, turn the lights on. It costs more money to maintain the concrete and the asphalt or fuel system. All the systems are there. And we've had the same amount of revenue for all those years. Now, if this is not the right solution, I'm not serious to debate that. This is the solution this board put forth, but don't sit here and say that I am complicit in the mismanagement of this airport and this, this deficit. I am not. I was the solution for 12 years. And I, if the town were to go and hire an airport manager and I put the numbers on paper, we'd be looking at a $400,000 deficit.

So we have a limited amount of time. Let's continue. So, um,

So I think we're done with history. So here's looking at, this is the cart before the horse. If you're immediately, if you're told you have a deficit and you immediately go and try to solve it by looking at through the fence fees, It's the wrong way to go, but I'll bite, and let's do the analysis that we have. So from the beginning, 1994, when the town took over the airport, annual increases, 0.68%. 68%, significant litigation risk. A 10-year period where every year it was going up, on average, for 18%. Abusive, egregious, significant litigation risk, and the result of that was actual litigation. My numbers say for the last 15 years, Jason, there hasn't been an increase. But that is an absolute non-answer question. Just because you haven't had an increase, that doesn't mean you need to have one because you haven't had one for 16 years. Because over the lifetime, you've got a 5.4% average when cost of living is at 2.6. So you're running twice the rate for increases. So this alone, if you just look at cost of living, that alone says right now we shouldn't raise the rate. Because you haven't caught up yet. It's not an appropriate slide to make a business decision, but that's what you get when you look at long-term rate through the fence. That's just the fact. So now if we go into it further and you compare what you guys have come up with, The recommended path, it's all in red because it needs to be highlighted. A compounded rate, I've already talked about that. The FAA has never said that that's comparable in the least. If you're a pilot with two planes, now you're expecting a 400% increase. Not 68, not 18 a year, 400%. Three aircraft, 533%. Again, this isn't the right way to do it, but I'm just, okay, you want to raise fees? Here's what it says. Do you guys know that the through the fence fee is, it's not even 50 bucks. It's less than 50. It's 40 bucks at Boulder. It's 40 bucks at Longmont. So that's 250% higher than it is currently. Does it need to change? I don't know. The accounting hasn't been done to figure it out yet. Unsupported, simple doubling of fees.

That's just... For the record, those airports are not written in neutral.

I'm just telling you what the FAA said.

Can we please get through this presentation so we can have an opportunity to engage?

So I'm just saying what it is. As far as doubling, that's not a business decision. Doubling is just, let me get a dice and double it. I mean, that has nothing to do with the business of changing fees. If you push hard enough on the next door neighbor airports and say, what's your fee? What's your fee? What's your fee? Now you're getting really close to price fixing. And that's not something that FTC likes to hear, nor the residents. Collection complexity. In the past, it was always an issue. What's the percentage that we're actually collecting? Is it 100%? No. Why not? I don't know. It's not my job to find out. But I know it's not 100%. You want to know what it is? No. No.

I mean, I do, but there's two people that are not paying tie-downs, and there's one person on stock that is not paying too defensively.

So this is what the chart is saying. Again, it's cart before the horse. We shouldn't even be talking about tie-downs yet. So the general questions that I have are, we're not in a unique position. There are 55 airports just like us. And so if we have a budget issue, it's a budget issue. It's not a through the fence fee issue. Even your precursor AAC board noted that front and center, the through the fence fees is not It's not how you get extra fees to pay for stuff at the airport.

It's just to satisfy FAA.

So why did the town really ask you for help? I'd love an answer. You guys can discuss amongst yourselves. I think it was, you bit off on something you shouldn't have. They've given you a lot of rope to hang yourself. It doesn't look like, I'll just say it that way, that any of you really looked at the final presentation that was then going public. And that's part of the irk, is for you to throw something out to public as oh here's our recommendation and pat yourself on the back that you've fixed a 250 000 hole when it wasn't done done with with thought so here's the hopefully the only real question i'd love an answer to is there anybody on the board that has a background in accounting or finance

I'm an accountant by trade. I've been an accountant for 30 years. I manage and advise my clients all over the country, and I'm talking to clients that have $50, $60 million annual budgets. So yes, I'm familiar with this. I'm really good at it.

There's your answer. So one person drives picking up an accounting issue Not a through the fence issue, but an accounting issue.

Hold on a minute. This gentleman here is on the town staff. He's in the finance department. I didn't see him. He's an accountant by trade.

Okay. You asked about members of the board.

But you're a part of this. Did you see the final slide? He helped us get to where we are. So a lot of this is going to have your name on it.

All right. I will ask you a quick question. This is slide nine. How many slides do you have? There are 30. 30?

No, I'm kidding. I'm kidding. No, it's like three more. Okay, great. So red lines. Okay. We can't find any evidence that the work required to show justification has been done. And that's looking at what the presentation said to us. I wasn't a part of this group. I don't have any of your background information, but I've gone to the town. I've scoured for any financial information they have, and the airport budget is so small it's wrapped up, and there's no data there to look at. solving any airport financial deficit without analysis on the back of through the fence users, it's not an FAA rule and it's not a viable outcome. No tax or fee will be paid based on hangar size, number of aircraft or other private property parameters without business and legal justification. Again, there's a lot more detail in the spreadsheet. Certainly, area park lot owners that don't go through the fence. I mean, the key is in the word from the FAA, through the fence. If you don't go through the fence, you don't pay the fee. That's a user fee. If you're not using it, Sue, you don't have to pay. It's that simple. So again, this is the third separate slide that says on its own, you should resend everything that you've come up with. So here's the biggest picture that I can come up with. So it's today, you're running a deficit. That's not my problem. It shouldn't be your problem. That's the airport manager and the town that need to figure that out. But to use it as an excuse to go find another 250, that's not how you run a business. Accounting is the issue. So the revenue with no analysis shown I would verify every single contract that's out there. No sweetheart deals for anyone, period. You collect what's owed. It's been an issue forever. If you owe it, go get it. New business. There's a lot of new business that's coming down the pike and it's not in here and it needs to be. And once you add up all these extra revenue streams, now your numbers are different. But that's not how you guys did it. Expenses. Paige, I'm getting ahead of myself. You got $422,000 in expenses and zero breakdown of the expenses. So every other business on the planet has efficiency. What are the one-offs? Where's the belt tightening? Does somebody get a pay cut? That's what you do before you start running off and changing through the fence feed. So this slide is saying this is exhibit A. Exhibit A is the spreadsheet. This is something that I think that should have been presented to the HOA as justification Here's the business accounting. Oh, we've got over 100 different things on there. Some of these are legal things, which apparently you don't want to talk about. But it's certainly not manufacturing money. It's closing the gap. What are the things that are missing on the revenue side? And there are a number of issues on the spreadsheet that are listed there as Where's this? Where's this? Where's this? I'm just looking at the data that's provided, and there are plenty of gaps that are there that I am trying to help close. It's revenue ambition, and that's just not appropriate. So if there's any recommendation for fee increases, and again, I'm not against, I'm not, we're not against fee increases if it's legit. Where's the justification? So this isn't just for the residential side. This is for the commercial side as well. And like Dan said, he's on the commercial side. And he's just one of the people that we've talked to about this. So here's the pre-conclusion. There needs to be a lot of financial deficit analysis done to figure out what the one-offs are versus what's the annual rate. Is it heading up or down? What are the big issues? Exhibit A is, again, this presentation. If there needs to be a survey done, we can help with that. And then, again, I've presented here four separate items, four different pages that in and of themselves says, You need to be saying this came out too fast for no apparent reason. And certainly making staff here and the attorneys work extra hard for really no reason when there's some really quick and simple things that you can do to corral your corral your method. So that's the presentation. If you want to shoot the messenger, here's all my background and information. And that's that. We've got multiple copies. Ann, would you pass out copies of the spreadsheet? I don't want to... We don't have all night to go through this. There are a number of issues or questions that I would just point to in here, and then you guys can hopefully. We'll distribute that.

Everybody take a look at it. Thanks for the presentation. I'm going to go around the room and ask the board if they have any particular questions they want to ask this gentleman regarding the presentation. We'll start with.

I don't have any particular questions, but I do have a couple of comments you made. A slew of unsubstantiated allegations based on your lack of knowledge of things, but you felt like making them in a very aggressive manner. Anyways, that does not bode well for moving forward, working cooperatively with someone to come up with a better solution. That's just my impression after hearing your presentation.

It's a terrible excuse. I'm in excruciating pain from surgery. So that amps me up a little bit. Nothing is unsubstantiated. Everything is primary sources right here. My condition is full of errors. Um, I, I am mathematical errors and otherwise, um, I am, he shown to me and we'll fix them, but, but I, here's the meat. Um, if there's something that's wrong up there, we've had a number of people look at this and obviously it's not, um, certainly don't take it personally. If there's something wrong, very personal.

And you shouldn't have. You should have kept it professional. Any questions or no? No, I have no questions.

We're good?

Wow.

I just want to say, Jason, you're the best thing that's ever happened in this airport. Thank you very much.

I second that.

Thank you.

I don't want anything else. No, no comments.

I think it's really important for the board to hear the residents. I want you to hear them. I want you to see how this fee structure is affecting the residents.

Absolutely. Nobody disputed that at all. And he admitted that he was privy to this information back in January from a resident who shared what was coming. You've had access to the recordings. You've had imitation to the meetings. Why do you not show up until June?

Because I was in Arizona for three and a half months. Or anybody else. Well, we're trusting that you guys are doing the job that you're supposed to do. When I ran organizations, we worked our ass off so that could happen. I'm sorry.

We've already said that. We've heard it from you. We've heard from you. We've heard from you.

Do you have anything else you'd like to add? questions you'd like to ask.

Sure. Yeah, there's a number of assumptions that are just false. There's a number of holes in your information. The whole history of what Jason did for this airport and why we got to that point was completely absent. So I've been here for six years working on this board. And there's been a lot of meetings and a lot of discussions. And I, yeah, I think the overall presentation was unprofessional. And that's all I'll say. And thank you, Jason.

My turn. Absolutely. People who know me, I've been the chair since the beginning. This is my last meeting as the chair. Okay. I found your presentation offensive. Grossly offensive. Your tone, what you said. In my opinion right now, I am not going to entertain the rescission of any vote that we had. We had the vote. There were six people here. You voted for it.

Paul, I did not.

Okay. Maybe I misspoke. I thought it was six to nothing. No, I think she may have.

I didn't participate.

No, she didn't. Oh, so you stood aside. Okay. I apologize. I apologize. The bottom line is we all have worked very, very hard on this particular subject, not just the board, the staff, the finance department. We didn't do it in a vacuum. And we have been having the discussions every month for almost a year, at least eight to nine months. The public has had plenty of opportunity to come and speak their mind. We have had guests come at previous meetings from businesses and otherwise. I recognize one individual from previous meetings, this gentleman right here. I do not recognize any other faces. It's not an offense if I don't recognize yours. There has been plenty of time to come in and participate in the discussion. That did not happen. And now we are being accused. I find it offensive. Okay, and you said it's not our mission. I'm sorry, sir. It is in fact our mission as part of what we do. And in contemplating the fees, we asked for advice, not only from our liaison, but from the council and from legal. It was within our purview to do what it is that we did. To say the airport manager didn't is the cause of this. That's just not factual. And you refer to it as the airport manager is not managing. I take offense for this gentleman. I know him personally. I know how hard he works at managing the airport, but you assault him by saying that he's not managing. He does more than manage. I'm sorry. It's not accurate. And again, I take offense to what you say in your presentations. You say that we're premature? You say that two of 29 HOA people are in favor of this? Okay, but of the 100, are you telling me that there's 129 members of the HOA?

Is that what you're saying? There are 129 lots with owners in the Erie Air Park HOA.

Where have they been the last nine months? If you look at the history, they're pretty much fed up with the town. That's not my problem. I hear you. Okay. We've tried to correct the problem that exists. We spent six years doing it. And to say that you've been ignored, I'm sorry, you haven't been ignored. Because you know what? Probably a year and a half ago, I personally, me, went to one of your HOA meetings and I spent an hour. hour and a half in front of you, speaking to you, answering all the questions that your HOA had. So you weren't ignored. Again, I take offense to those accusations. You're saying we put the cart before the horse? I'm telling you, the horse has left the barn. We had a vote. It passed. It's now in the hands of the council. My position? I am not going to support any rescission of any decisions that we've been made. And to say that it has been too fast? Please give me back the last nine months of my time that I have spent as chair of this board trying to do the right thing. And my final comment is, I take offense to someone who comes and makes accusations to a board that has worked incredibly hard to do this. And nowhere in there, in the entire 13 slides, is there anything that suggests how to fix it. Come back to the board with suggestions on how to fix it. Don't sit here and tell me everything that we've done wrong. Okay? I'm sorry, sir. I appreciate the presentation, but you brought this today. Okay? You had nine months to bring something like this to us. Thank you for the presentation. I appreciate it. Moving on to the next subject was to entertain your motion to assume. It's up for discussion. Thank you for presenting. Appreciate it.

It is highly uncommon for an advisory board recommendation to be rescinded by the advisory board if any rescission is to be done. It's usually done by the town council themselves. If we were to rescind our own recommendations, we would be invalidating all the work that we did and say that, oh no, now we just don't believe in it. And I don't vote to do that. We worked hard on that presentation and it is just a list of recommendations that carry no weight. They are simply input to the council to make their decisions of how to move forward with managing their airport.

I have all respect to you. You asked at our last meeting if we bring this to the board. We put it on the agenda, and here we are. You have the floor.

I do. I feel it's my right to ask for this to be rescinded.

Because you're right. You can ask. Absolutely.

I hear you all emotional, maybe you feel offended, but this structure was created without legal counsel. Do we fully understand? what the residents through the park foundation is, the legal, did we create this?

We didn't create a free structure. We recommended a potential fee structure.

Without legal counsel, without fully understanding what our history, our implications are,

We understood that. We went into that with eyes wide open.

And we know that we didn't recommend a fee structure without understanding what's around you, our constraints. Can we truly recommend a structure?

You participated in creating that recommendation.

I was here and I raised my concern. We have no legal council, which all of us say we still have no legal council, that we have to rely on the town. But we created it without the knowledge, without the constraints. And that is very concerning to me. And that's why I'm putting this forward.

The council can absolutely discard it and rescind it.

I understand that they are currently doing that. But the structure was created without the foundational knowledge. And therefore, this is why I'm asking this. This is what I'm going to put forward.

I wouldn't agree with you without the foundational knowledge.

Without the legal advisement?

That's different from foundational knowledge.

Do we all have the foundational knowledge?

It's a collective group. We have a lot of foundation. Right.

We have it all.

A bit of research was that we don't have it all, and that's why we've asked.

Yeah, but we need to pull it in so that you can make a path forward that's informed.

Anybody?

I think there's specific legal questions as far as, you know, which lots have access, that kind of stuff that we can't answer. We looked at a couple of different things. You brought forth a couple of different items. Those specific things have to be answered by staff counsel. As far as the overall structure, I went out personally to Greeley and talked to their airport manager, got all of their information. I pulled up all of the Rocky Mountain information. And I've also looked at Centennial. And so everything was done on the commercial side of it. And all the fees, all the hangers, the tie downs, all that stuff was all done in accordance with the other ones. I've got a hang of Rocky Mountain. I've seen an increase every single year. And back at the January meeting, I stated specifically that this is a guideline towards a revenue neutral airport. This is not to be achieved overnight. This has to be achieved with input from the residents. And that's, while you're all here today, you guys are, you don't maybe necessarily know it, but this is all being funneled towards the people that are gonna make the decisions. So everything that was in there was done to mirror the other airports. We weren't. It's not as expensive as Rocky Mountain. It's actually a lower rate than Greenland. Now, the airport itself is a very unique airport that doesn't exist where it's a municipal airport with an air park. There's through the fence for residential. And I said, I get all that. And I think a lot of engagement has to happen. And we've talked about that over and over. So this is not the end. This is just the beginning for everyone involved with the airport. And part of the mission of us being here is to make sure this airport stays around. And a lot of us have a very vested interest in that. So that's all I'll say. Well, I'll say, sorry, one more thing. I think it's important for all the voices to come out and you have stood up and said, I want to speak up for the air park residents. And so I think that's important. That had to happen. It needs to be part of the process. And that will ultimately go forward to the people that are actually making the decisions, because it's not us. We're not making the decisions, as you know. So I'm saying that for everyone that's here.

We would have welcomed input throughout the entire nine-month process. Any meeting, any e-mails, whatever we didn't get any from the air park and now we are that's great but it's not too late and it doesn't negate the work that we did do it's just part of the process michael is the other air park resident on the board

Unfortunately, over the last 16, 20 years, we've created a major hole financially that we've now been tasked with trying to dig out of. And some of these measures are fairly severe because they need to be severe if we're going to meet the number that's been put in front of us to achieve revenue neutral. I guarantee you the people over at The Main Street Business Park are not happy. The Schofield Barrack people are not happy. Nassar Development people are not happy. The Aeropark people are not happy. I'm not really thrilled about the increase that I'm personally going to pay. But I look at the asset that we have here and that we live with, and we are asking every member, not just the airport, but every member of the airport to participate in getting us out of this hole. So we're not here to penalize the airport. You're just one part of what we're looking at. I don't know the legal answers. I'm not a lawyer. Did we get the cart from the horse? I don't think so. I think we came up with our best recommendation on what we thought was fair across the board to everybody at the airport. And now the legal people are going to take a look at what we did and say whether it's reasonable or not.

Don't you think we would have done a better job?

We didn't have access to those tools. It's going to happen now.

But we can ask for those tools, bring it back, ask for those tools, and make it form fee structure.

Yeah, I don't agree with that going back and going forward. I think let's just go forward.

Why not revisit it?

They're going to do exactly what you're asking them to do. We don't need to go back and rescind it and come look at it. We've already made the recommendation. If they think it's not legal, they're going to tell us. And then we're going to have to figure out what else to do to close that gap.

I don't necessarily agree with that statement. And I want to make sure. I want to make sure you don't feel cornered here. I don't want to make sure that you don't appreciate that. I want to, I want to ensure that you have a voice as one of seven members of this board. Okay. I felt it was important to put it on the agenda and allow you to come forward with your concerns. Okay. The fact remains at this point that if we were to rescind this today, This is the horse has already left the barn. The town and the town's legal department, correct me if I'm wrong, they're going to do this no matter what. And when I say this, I mean, do the illegal analysis, check with the FAA, look at all the documents that the airport residents have presented through the fence, the easement agreements. They will come to a legal conclusion as to Did we screw up or were we even partially right or were we 100% right? I, for one, would expect that we're not 100% right, but we knew that going into it, which is why we asked the town, both attorneys, the staff, and the council to make sure we were very clear with them. I know I was. Do your due diligence because we don't know the answer. Now, what I would suggest to all of us is that when we get those answers, rather than rescind, we come back and we say, knowing what we know now, We are going to make further recommendations in addition to what we already made. Before, because I tell you right now, the council, before they make a decision, they're going to come back to us and ask us again here because they're going to come with their own recommendations and they're going to say, are you all okay? Just like they're going to go to the residents to say, are you okay? Okay. But I don't think rescission is the answer. I think getting more information, being aware of what that information is as the group, because we are responsible for it, have discussions. And I certainly, I won't be chair, but as a member, I certainly would invite and encourage further recommendations from the board as to this subject. That would be what I would suggest. It's not my decision. It's just one opinion of seven. Today, we only have six. But that's what I would recommend.

I hear what you're saying, Paul, but I don't agree with you. I think we should pull it back. Ask for the tools. The town is already using tools. ask for those tools ourselves so we can make it a formed decision instead of... And respectful of that opinion.

But your HOA representative said we are not even the right body to be making those recommendations.

I don't even want to go back to this. We're beyond that. That agenda item is over. We're on your agenda item, and I want to make sure you get to say what it is that you want to say and you feel like you've been heard. That is my most important objective right now is to make sure that you feel like you've been heard. Okay? And I appreciate you don't have to agree with anything I say or even part of what I say. I got pretty thick skin. I'm good with it. Okay. And I respect your opinion. And I want to make sure you do know that I respect your opinion.

Okay. And you're a valuable member of this board. Absolutely. We all know.

Yes. um just as part of the process the the board this board made a recommendation to the council the council could have taken that recommendation so that we don't even like this direction and then there's other options they could have hired they could they could Initial discussions were hiring a consultant, which would have cost more money. And so they tasked this board. So there is other tools that the council has if they don't like any of this, if they think it's all garbage and they want to move a different direction, they can engage a professional consultant. And if this is not the right body to do it, then I think it's the job of the homeowners and the people that are unhappy with the structure. And I don't necessarily agree with everything that's in this structure either. I know the finances of it. I strongly disagree with. We only have so much revenue right now. We need to build hangers. We've been trying to make a movement towards building more hangers to collect more land leases. So there are other things. We are different than other airports. We don't. Most airports don't have a residential component, which is very different than Longmont, Boulder. So those comps are very difficult to make. We also have very little, we're landlocked. We have very little land to build on. Longmont has three times as much available, developable land. So building more businesses on airport. So through the fence is a big source of revenue for this airport. Not big because our overall budget and the overall revenue we have available to us is very small. But at the end of the day, town council could take another route if they want, if they don't think this is the right body and the homeowners and the businesses at the airport could lobby the town council. So look, I don't, I'm not happy with what the board did. You know, I'd like to see you hire professional consultants. We talked about that. The sport talked about that in the beginning, you know, we hired.

So there was a professional consultant several years ago and recommended that

recommended increasing fees since they hadn't been increased right across the board yeah and please read what the recommendation actually was this was not a through the fence fees is going to solve this deficit through the fence fees was only one component but all the fee structures across the board to every entity on the airport were increased right we're aware

Can I have these tools from the city?

Can you have what tools?

The ones I need for the board to make a good decision. If I resend this and I ask for these tools, they would be given to the board so that we can make an informed decision.

I'm not sure they would be. It's a town... It's not something that the board is qualified to do or would be tasked to do.

The board is qualified. I was asking if we can ask the town for these tools to help us make an informed decision.

I think we're going to get them.

Before the fee structure recommendation.

So to clarify, if I can help, could an advisory board, any advisory board, have legal counsel at every meeting while we're discussing these things?

We don't have budget. We can't spend any money.

I'm actually asking town staff. I mean, can we have aviation attorneys here and hired and... have them available for these discussions?

Specialized airport counsel that we use, obviously, is outside counsel, so it comes at a cost. And so we, staff, all work for the talent counsel, so that direction has to come from talent counsel. If talent counsel gives that direction, says airport advisory board, you can hire outside counsel at a cost of X, we will act on that, but not until they give us that direction.

Thank you.

I'm not sure what else to say.

Well, I'm going to go ahead with my motion. I believe this is the correct way to go. My proposed motion, I move that the board rescind its prior recommendation to the town solely as it relates to through the fence fees applicable to air park residents.

We have a motion. Do we have a second? We do not. Good. Thanks for coming. Thanks for coming, everybody. I very much appreciate it. Please come again. Make this your last meeting. Jennifer. Thank you for joining. Jennifer, thank you. Did you get everything? Yes, I did. Thank you. Appreciate it. All right, jumping back up to we'll see. Officer reports. My only report is my swan song. This is my last meeting as chair. I'm not going away, but I'm not going to sit in this seat. I think it's, I said it before. I've been doing it for six years since the beginning. I tried to do the best job I could. I just think it's useful, helpful if someone else took it over. I don't want to be chair forever. I think I told you all three, four months ago, I do not intend to serve as chair anymore. I'll just be a member of the board just like you all.

I mean, thank you for taking it on for six years because obviously it can be a thankless job and we appreciate all your efforts, Paul. I appreciate it.

Personally, In the last six years, I think we've got an enormous stuff done. Okay. Yeah. You look down the tunnel forward and that train is way down that tunnel, but you look backwards from where we came from. You know, your contract, the clarity of the budget and what we're spending and what's being raised. The plans for growth. We have gotten so much done in the six years. It doesn't seem like a lot, but when you look back at where we started... congratulations to you all and to the people who have served on this board prior to you all. I think we all worked very hard. Obviously, we don't get paid, but I think we do it for a reason. As you said, we do it because we want to make sure that the airport stays open. And I think that is the driving charge for all of us, regardless of Disagreements we may not have, where we may not agree on everything. I tried to get everybody a chance to speak. Everybody knows I will jabber on incessantly. But thanks, you all, and you have no idea what you're getting into.

Your first answer was a good one, though.

We're just going to have to abstain from that vote.

It's just the history of it.

well we were seeing this application thank you for for stepping up for these six years and uh thank you john edward for speaking up that's all i have mr secretary i don't have a report i was out of the country the whole month so i i didn't do anything excuse okay

Locky Woods! Alright.

Spreadsheets for your patients. Here, if you all want a copy of this, this was emailed out by Julian, so you do have a digital copy. One of each. But I will share my screen here. We will start with a fake, kind of fake Q2 report on the airport. I call it fake because I made it on June 9th, which is Just a quick question. Yep.

Are these public? Yep.

They're in public record. Yep. They're in our emails.

I'm just asking because it was claimed that they actually weren't, but I doubted that.

Yeah. Anything that's in town email unless it's confidential is public record and get emailed it up to the full advisory board. So it's able to go.

Okay.

Answer is it's public now. All right. So as I was saying, kind of a fake Q2 report was made on June 9th. So not the entirety of Q2, but most of it. You can see here budget to actuals on the revenue end. It looks like we're way off, but that's mostly because the capital projects have not come in yet on either the expense or the grant side with pavement maintenance and vault building. Um, uh, you can see, um, the FBO fees, which is the, the $42,000, um, the vector air pays, um, for rental of the, uh, FBO building lease and rental income is the tie down and, um, port-a-port lien leases, and then you have some miscellaneous items there. The miscellaneous income line, we're working through that with Victoria right now. That's the through-the-fence fees. Jason's just, you know, holding onto those really tightly for some reason this year. No, I joke. We're just figuring out the process of getting those transferred over to the town and then they'll be recorded as normal.

Can I just real quick clarification? The budget numbers are budget through this period?

Oh, that's annual budget. It is annual. It is annual budget. Yep. So it's the annual budget and then the actuals are through the period. Okay, great.

So yeah, you wouldn't... We would expect a shortfall on almost every single one of them.

Yep.

And the budget period ends on...

1231? Yep, 11 to 1231. And then on the expenditure side, it's really pretty simple. There's $100,000, which is five months of the airport manager contract at $20,000 a month. There's about $9,000 so far in utilities, and then some small fees and bank charges and permits, licenses, and other fees. And then a small amount has been expended so far on construction of the vault building. That brings us to the total expenditures there. The budgeted town general fund transfer for this year was $190,000. Based on previous years, I suspect we will end up going over budget and requiring a larger transfer, but perhaps expenses will come in lower this year. Who knows? We'll see, but that's the number that's budgeted, so that's the number that's in here for now.

Question, Julian. This legal analysis that the town is doing for this fee structure, it's going to be added to our budget or no? I think it's going to come from the airport fund.

It is going to come from the airport fund, yeah. That's another element is the legal services was previously not being budgeted correctly and hitting the town's general fund. We're planning to move that to properly hit the airport fund since this is research for the benefit of the airport. That number this year is likely going to be around probably $20,000. It could be more. But I think the reason it's not in this report is I hadn't done the transfer of the expense to the airport fund. But I believe currently when I made this report, it was about $7,000.

I would suggest that that cost be split between the general fund and the airport, simply because we have no control over it. The town is driving that train now. We can't say, no, we don't want to spend any more money. We can't do it. I would highly recommend that that budget line item be split evenly between the airport.

How negotiable is that? $1,000 isn't going to come close to that.

Honestly, it's going to be over $20,000. I'll flat guarantee you, knowing how I know lawyers, I can be optimistic.

This is just an aviation specific attorney that's doing contracted work in addition to the town attorney.

This is specifically the outside aviation attorney that is doing legal research into All of the elements of this fee increase.

Which is this. That we discussed.

Do we have a non-retainer? Do we have someone? We have town attorneys in-house. Yes, we have a firm outside that is our go-to airport counsel. Yeah, it's the firm Kaplan Kirsch. And that's what we're talking about.

So the effort to look at the airport, air park deeds, is that part of this effort?

Yes, that is underway. And that is a part of the... This cost? Yes. Okay. It's just a suggestion. No, appreciate it. I will talk to our finance director about that. Okay. Thank you. Was there another?

Kaplan.

Kaplan. Kaplan Kirsch.

Kaplan Kirsch.

Both Ks. Yeah. And then just briefly, this is the kind of reconciliation form I completed for 2025 that shows you the beginning fund balance that includes the vast majority of that is capital, the value of capital. You can see the beginning fund balance for the airport revenues, operation and maintenance expenses and the capital expenses. the transfers and the net change to the airport fund, which reduces the fund balance by about over $200,000. And you can see here in terms of assets and liabilities, and this is really the most important piece to kind of understand. is there's this $4.6 million fund balance. The vast majority of that is from net investment in capital assets. So the unrestricted net position, which is $168,400.58, which if you'll remember here is what is shown at the top. And the reason that's important is because All funds are statutorily required to have a certain amount of liquidity or unrestricted net position. And that's the amount that we're trying to make sure we hit with the airport transfer from the general fund. So the net investment in capital assets is composed of what? Runways and buildings. The runways are the biggest element of that.

And a lot of that money, it's a large amount of money we don't ever see because it's grant money. Yep. And correct me if I'm wrong, the process with grant money is, in theory, you get the grant money. You don't really get the grant money. They pay the liability directly?

No, it funnels through. It does go through the town? It funnels through. Yeah. Right. So it's not real money.

It goes through finance. It's not real revenue, per se. No.

It's on the books. It's not revenue that can be used for operations. Discretionary. Yeah. Gotcha.

In all fairness, if you took revenue and used the revenue, say, through the fence fee or something, and used it for concrete, it's no different than getting money from the FAA using it for concrete. Yeah.

Yeah, it's all fungible.

So it's all money.

Yeah. Certain colors for certain purposes. The only difference is the government requires you to spend it.

So, Loki, as an engineer talking to a finance guy, make this really simple for me. So we get this $190,000 over here that we need to transfer from the general fund, and then we got $168,000 over here. How do those two relate?

So the $168,000, so this is 2025 numbers. So this is looking at the end of the year, December 31st, 2025. What happened? We transferred $212,000 from the general fund to the airport fund. The reason we transferred that much was to make sure that we would hit... this number $168,000 as the unrestricted net position, basically the liquid amount of money in the airport fund as required, as required by state statute. It's, it's a complicated form. I don't remember off the top of my head, but we had to, you know,

You had to have a surplus.

We had to have an amount of liquidity in the airport fund. So we transferred $212,000 to get to $168,000 as the unrestricted net position. That's where we start 2026 at $168,400 in the unrestricted net position based on the budget, which again... Could be right, could be wrong in many different ways. With only $190,000 transfer, it's showing we're going to have an unrestricted net position at the end of $46,000. I don't know what the statutorily required is. unrestricted net position at the end of the year will be, I can tell you it's definitely going to be more than $46,000. So there will be an additional general fund transfer called for if we were to stick to the budget. Exactly. If the year ended today, which is on the right side with the actuals, there'd be $190,000 transfer from the general fund. And the net unrestricted net position would be this $255,000, which would almost certainly be more than sufficient for the liquidity requirements of the airport. It's a moving target.

It's always moving until the end of the year. It continues moving after months through the current year. Budget numbers are the budget numbers. Those don't change if we're doing our job right for the year.

The biggest expenses are going to be the capital and those are going to have some flexibility in the timeline.

The revenues can change. Fuel flow revenues and whatnot, that's part of it.

Based on the projections.

It's not going to change dramatically based on the current status. We're trying to change it for these recommended fees, whatever those end up being. But the whole idea is that at some point in time, over maybe 10 years or so, that number in terms of transfers from the general fund will be a big fat goose egg. Yes, that's the goal.

We're not there yet. No. So, Jason, last year, I mean, their airport manager contract, that's a fixed number. That's what it is. But the rest of it is kind of a TNM-type cost, the other $240,000 or whatever it is.

Towards the expenses?

Yeah. And last year, we underrun the projection.

Last year, we... We came in less than... Yeah, my original projections to run the airport were around $500,000, and we came in below that. Yeah.

Are you doing a projection so far through the middle of this year?

I haven't done anything this year. In my mind, most of the expenses at the airport minus fresh services, which we don't use much of, but it's maintenance, and that doesn't vary much because we do most of it in-house. So I don't anticipate much of it changing this year, minus a few things with the stuff on tractor and stuff that have come up, but

The biggest non-capital expense last year was actually the utilities. Electric, water, sewer, gas, all of those.

That's O&M? Yeah. Is that treated as O&M costs?

Speaking of utility. Water pressure in... That's just where I come from, so... I came home from a month trip and what have you, and I got half the water pressure that I normally have. I couldn't take a shower normally.

I don't think that's on subject here.

No, it's not. I was asking.

Mine was fine at my house this morning.

Okay.

It was good. Questions, other comments? Thanks a lot.

So, one of our federal-funded programs is they're relocating the Relay Night Vault. It's currently tied into the 50-year-old building we have. And they're repositioning it, I think, right now in the proposed location, not by the Red Sox. They'll upgrade right now the equipment that runs the original runway lighting. The runway lighting has all been upgraded. The actual lighting, the conduits and all that stuff has all been upgraded. The machine that actually turns the lights on and regulates all the regulators. So that regulates all power is 37 years old. So they'll upgrade that as well. So, but the biggest thing is to untangle it from the FBO building because right now it fronts are going. So that's one of two projects we have this year.

Well, that is a project that has been approved and funded with grant money.

Yeah, that was actually last year's project. So there we have a project this year. It's just happening this year, but it was last year's funded project. This year, we're doing some more concrete work.

How is that a revenue? It's a cost to replace, isn't it?

What's that? It's lined here as a revenue. Maybe I'm missing. Well, I mean, that was, it's kind of an allocated because we're getting federal funds.

So that's a funding, the federal. And it comes from multiple.

So 90, the grants are 90, 10. And then so 90% federal, 10% local, and then the state matches five of the 10. So it's 95, five.

I just was asking because I figured it was grant. money, but I thought we said that the grant money doesn't come... I guess it is accounted for. It does get counted.

My question was, do we actually get it? I was under the impression that it's paid by the state directly, but I was wrong.

Some of these lines are grant lines. That answers my question. I should have probably asked it that way.

There's the capital grant revenue, which you can see... And then there's the capital expenditures.

Basically, four sources. Federal grants, state grants, fees, and the town. And rental income. In terms of the transfer of funds to get to the airport's budget.

And donations if you're feeling interested, Paul.

Not today. After today, All right. Anybody else? We good? Thanks, Lockie.

See you in three months.

Can't get rid of him. we don't really have a hangar committee discussion, right?

We can give a brief update.

Oh, okay, great.

We can't really disclose too much, but last time we mentioned anything to you all, we had interviewed four development partner potentials. We selected one at the staff level. We were planning to present that to council and exec session. Our new interpretation by our interim town manager and town attorneys is that that shouldn't really be an exec session item. And so the direction now is that we're just going to proceed with that one selected preferred development firm as our partner. and begin negotiations immediately. So we're starting a kickoff meeting with that firm. It's the same one we mentioned to you all in exec session a couple of months ago. So we'll be doing that with town management and town attorney approval to take that next step. When we have terms, initial terms ready to go, and we can structure them into a confidential but non-binding letter of intent, then we will be presenting it to council once we have those terms. Gotcha. At this point. Things are happening. A lot happens in the background, yes. Right.

Okay. I'm guessing community engagement, nothing to report.

No.

Okay.

Mr. Airport Manager, Jason Heard. Thank you. Just give us some construction projects. We just touched on the runway vault project, which is probably new. Anticipated to be started this fall. We're doing some warranty work. We had some concrete work done about two years ago. A couple hundred panels that were replaced on the airport. I think about 50 of those have failed within the first year. Our consultants that we deal with that manage the project, they don't know, we don't really know if it's installation, concrete mix, sub-base, but next week they're actually going to dig up five, six panels, pour, The same mix from a different plant. They're going to examine the sub-base. It's all warranty work, which is good. It's bad that those panels crack in the air, but they kind of seem to be... In related areas, some of the panels that were done on the taxiway survived without any cracking, but quite a few of the ones that were done on the ramp. Did that shut the airport down at all? No. There's no runway panels that are being replaced. There's going to be a short taxiway closure at the end of Alpha, and so they'll be back taxing for takeoff. Hopefully not for a very long period of time. We are doing another concrete project this year to replace some more panels. So, but that's mostly on the ramp. Most of that is on the ramp. Let's see. Live old cigarette concrete repairs. Update, we submitted a, at the beginning of the year, as part of a house build by the state of Colorado, an unleaded fuel transition plan. As part of that plan, we have... We have bookmarked 2027 for a grant for an unleaded fuel pumping system. That's estimated to be $600,000. That money actually is separate money from our normal AIP money that will be coming specifically from the state of Colorado as part of the house bill that actually affects five airports in the state of Colorado. An update on that is, you know, my position on it was always let's not spend any money on a pumping system until we have a replacement of fuel that actually replaces the majority of the fleet. Right now the fuel doesn't exist. The update on that is there is a new product. being made by Swift Fuels, who makes 94 UL, which is the current unleaded fuel that is available at Centennial and Rachmaninoff Metro Airport. There is a product called 100R that is anticipated to be a direct replacement for about 90% of the fleet and would be the replacement for 100 low lead. At the beginning or middle of last year, they thought by the end of this year, that fuel would be approved and it would be a replacement. Not hearing much on that right now, so it might not happen. Point B, 2027. Right now, we're marking a 12,000-gallon tank for this replacement fuel. If there is no 100R in 2027, we won't spend the money on a 12,000-gallon tank, even though our portion is a small match. We're talking about skid-mounted ones where they can just bring in a tank, because eventually... 100 low lead is going to be gone. The company that makes the light lead additive that's in 100 low lead has stated they won't make it after 2028. So it's gone. So at least that's the theory right now.

If it leaves, we will be able to repurpose our current 100 low lead tank to take the 100 R. So we won't need another tank?

Yeah. So depending on the... The replacement fuel actually coming in to be, if in 2027 it looks like it's going to happen, most likely we'll just get a small skid mounted to provide the 94UL, and then we'll transition the 100L tank into 100R if all this happens. So it's all dependent on the development of the 100R. Pun intended. It's all very fluid. Yeah, it's a very fluid situation right now, yeah. Just to get it out there, because there obviously were a lot of pilots in the room, but as part of that grant, there are For people whose airplanes qualify for the 94 UL fuels, which are available right now at Rocky Mountain Metro and Centennial, there are rebate programs through the state of Colorado that will help pay up to $500 of the supplemental type certificate that you need to apply for to get that fuel. So you can actually do that through the airport, and I can help facilitate that through Division of Aeronautics. Anybody wants to use that fuel, you're going to have to go to Jeffco right now, or Boulder, I think, is actually going to do a skid-mounted tank here next year. But right now it's Rockmont Metro and Centennial. And if you want that STC, there is some funds available to the state to help get that approved for your aircraft.

So we don't anticipate our fuel revenues rising anytime soon.

Well, even if we had the 100R, that's going to take away some of the planes. It's being subsidized right now because the cost of the 100R is actually more expensive than the 100 Low Lead. But at the airports where they're pumping the 94UL right now, they're subsidizing it to bring those prices down so that it's competitive. The number we just heard, I just had a meeting this week, is I believe Centennial and Rocky Mountain Metro are about the same, but they're saying about 15% to 20% of their 100 low-led customers move to the 94UL. There's some flight schools that have been running it. They're talking about in the summertime, their engines run hotter, so they're running 100 low-led in the summer and transitioning to the 94UL. Wow. The goal, in my mind, that's just my opinion, but the new fuel just needs to work, and it needs to work in all the airplanes. Otherwise, it's going to be difficult to transition away from that.

Yep. So, yeah, that's my update. It's something I wanted to ask you and I can't remember. I can't help you. You know, trust me on that particular subject.

Jason, I've been meaning to call you and just got busy, but Metal Lark. I think it's Metal Lark, Metal Lake Airport down south. They're a residential private type of airport. They're a private airport.

As far as I've been told, it actually does receive federal funding.

Yeah, that's why I read that they're maybe the only private airport because they're a reliever for Colorado Springs. Oh. I just wondered, do you have any insight on how they fund their airport?

I mean, because it's mostly private, you know, um, and I don't believe, but I don't, I don't know any details of whether they get any revenue from their municipality or not. I'm not looking at that, but, uh, They are a unique airport, and it would be an interesting...

I was just wondering if there was any parallels between that airport and ours that we can draw information from.

Yeah, it's worth looking into. Do you know the airport manager? I do not, no. I can mostly work with these ones up off here. Most of us, but yeah. I remember my question. Okay.

Ivers had a bill that addressed... Landing fees by using ADS-B information, it would prohibit that. Do we know if that passed or not?

That was a discussion. As part of the new House Bill for the state of Colorado, The five airports.

This is a federal bill I'm talking about. Yeah. Yeah.

Well, but part of the conversation that comes up. So all five of those airports are meeting quarterly now to discuss issues that are affecting all of us. Residential encroachment, noise issues, all these things that are related to the hospital. And right now, I don't think that has been resolved. But I know the FAA stance, or my understanding is the FAA stance, is they don't see the ADS-B data being used to administer.

And it's my understanding the federal bill that's in place now, I don't know if it's been voted on, does in fact prohibit ADS-B information.

I think it's currently in the bill. It's in the bill. I don't know if it's going to stay or not. Right. It'd be a great thing if it did.

I think Florida may have passed one. On a state level.

Yeah. Anyways. I see the error that I saw it. I didn't know if it passed or not. I didn't know if you knew.

I see where the FAA has asked Falcon Field to rescind their use of ADS-B until this gets resolved. It's a violation of privacy.

And there are safety concerns too as well. I mean, it's a transponder and you know, if you don't want to get, people are shutting it off. Yeah. They could potentially. Yeah.

So, I see a lot. If you look at a four flight now, you see a lot of them. It just says private. They're not.

Yeah. And the companies that do the billing, I mean, they're doing some lobbying and try to say, Hey, look, you know, this is, this is a good source of revenue and blah, blah, blah. Uh, They say there's other methods to capture those, and numbers, camera systems and stuff, one of the big companies is called, coincidentally, Vector Systems. But they administer fees from Aspen, a lot of the bigger airports, but they've been lobbying a lot of smaller airports, and I've been on that mailing list as well to try to... push it as a source of revenue. And there's other ways to capture it, but the FAA has now done. So you can take right now, if you put your end number and you call, you submit it, you can get it taken off the flight tracking software so that your end number doesn't appear when you're not flying around. One of the flight traffic traffic systems, air traffic tracking softwares does not use FAA data. They use, if you sign up for the, their app and you, you pay them, they'll send you an ADSB receiver and they're receiving information that is not filtered for flight aware and flight rate or 24 places like that. They use data that comes in front of the FAA. And so the FAA, if you submit your end number, we'll block that information. So they won't get it. Yeah. But, adsb exchange they are able to get it bypass they bypass it what the faa is now allowing you to do is you can get on the faa's website right now look up the number of any airplane and see the registered owner of it and the faa is now allowing that information to be blocked so that you can publicly access it on the internet so Once that happens, I mean, there's so many challenges in the landing fee discussion. A lot of aircraft are registered to LLCs that are out of state. So those LLCs, you know, sometimes go to the mailbox in Wyoming. So a lot of those fees don't get collected, from my understanding. But once the FAA doesn't allow the registration information and addresses, once they allow them to be blocked, which they do now... They won't know where to send it to. Yeah, I don't know how... I haven't heard how these companies are doing the billing or proposing to work around that. Okay.

Thank you.

I guess we're now... Letter H. You got it. 2027 budget request.

Yep, I got four items. Two are time sensitive. We'll see if we can get to the other two. Letter H, 2027 budget request. It is now budget time. I think really, Lockie, it's always budget time. Our 2027 operating budgets were due to finance last week. After talking to the finance team last week, they asked that we come and ask you guys, what's your request for next year in 2027? Next year is airfare year. That's why I'm asking. So in 2025, which was now only got nine months ago, the airfare in 2025, the funding support for that year's airfare was $37,000. So the question for you all for 2027 operating budget for this body is next year's budget request also going to be 37,000. We can always change it as supplemental, but we need something to put in the budget request now.

I would make a recommendation with this gentleman who has done it for us the last several years, primary arbiter of such numbers.

I was under the impression that that would be part of the presentation next month or no.

It's too late at that point. I just need to put in there.

Then same number.

Don't want to open it.

No. Three, seven, five.

No, just same number.

Whatever it was in 25. Yeah.

Make it work. You're sure about that? Yeah. Let's give it back. Do we have any carryover from last?

The big thing is going to be whether we can park cars in the same place. Right. And that's a little bit of a loaded question at this point. Can we round up to 40?

You can do whatever you want. We can request 40 million if you want.

I'm not sure that's good. That pun is intended to. Yeah, but this is good one. I mean, I would probably round up.

I can't recall. And Emmett, maybe you do if there was leftover funds from last year with EVC.

So yeah, we formed an LLC for the sponsor money part of it so that there was no money left over after the last airfare on the town side of it. There was some sponsor money left over. So it's about the same as the previous year. And yeah, I mean, certain things will go up. At this point in time, I don't know. I'm wondering, like, are they going to say yes or no?

To the 40?

To the 40, they'll say yes.

Yeah, they want the aircraft.

Okay. Then, yeah. Actually, make it 39. Oh, come on. Just take it down. 39, 9, 90. Yeah, that would be, you know, I'd be perfectly comfortable with that. And Angela has said she would participate.

Gangs back together. Okay.

How about $39,950?

Lockie's putting it in as we speak, so if you give us a number, he's going in.

He's getting a considerable amount of thought and brain cell damage. I think the first year was $39,950.

We started at $30, then we went up to $35, then we went up to $37.

I'm putting $40.

We just wasted all that bread when you put $40, right?

That's just, you know, I don't want to hog the discussion. Is there anything else that anyone would like to see, you know, as far as a budget requests community engagement?

Apparently we have to add more legal fees.

Well, this is a different budget.

And if it costs to participate in the town's activities, we'd have you with a tent fee. Money for that. Money to purchase a tent? No. Money to pay whatever fee they have for the slot room.

Are you talking about like a town market?

Yeah, the town market or the annual festival things. The annual festival already happened. I know it did. But for next year, we need to start communicating with the town.

I see where you're going. So as our community engagement liaison, you are asking that we acquire a tent? No. Or fees that we'd have to pay should we be required to pay?

The town provides tents for advisory boards that are at no cost.

But does the town provide a spot free to advisory boards? Okay. That's all I needed to know.

HPAB usually does a sustainability tree advisory. They do it pretty often.

Okay.

Good. That was one. All right. 40. Got it. Next item was... Letter I, prepare annual presentation to town council. Emmett mentioned already the now only one time a year annual presentation to council is on July 28th. The presentations are due to the town clerk's office by July 17th, 11 days prior. There is now a set template. I emailed it out to you all a couple weeks ago. Yeah, so we're now filling out a form instead of kind of starting from scratch. Can briefly show you said form so we can go through it because I want to get the whole board's input. And it's quick. It's a very short thing.

You good with doing that? Because you've done it in like the last three times.

Yeah, I'd have to move some things around. Forget about that date. Okay.

If you get a conflict, I'm happy to present it.

Okay.

Okay. Or anyone else can present it for all I care about.

Well, now there's a template, and it's just a matter of filling in a...

Very standard. Seems to be our flavor these days. It is. So there's five items, who's on the board, liaisons, and then kind of the work plan items. So things I want to fill in. Once we get to a officer enlisting, I'll fill in chair, vice chair, secretary, whatever the numbers are. Liaisons, council members, and staff liaison, although I should probably put Locky on here these days. I think you should.

Put both of you on. Sure.

We are now asking that all advisory boards have a, and I'm jumping on the agenda a little bit, but we're asking all advisory boards have some kind of a work plan. that can be detailed more likely than not what most boards are doing is just setting a calendar that says january december and what this board thinks you intend to accomplish at each of those months it'll say um what are we in june june um airpark presentation um july whatever hanger development i'm just making things up so in the work plan we want to list okay for 2026 into 2027 what are the major work plan items that this advisor board intends to accomplish

Does anybody want to help Emmett with that? Because he's volunteered to do it.

Didn't he? Yeah. It didn't last two times.

I mean, yeah, it's fine.

I thought it was going to be sort of a pitch. I mean, to some extent, I was kind of looking forward to maybe doing... you know, our own thing, but yeah, apparently we can't just kind of highlighting. I mean, I, the big part of this, I think is, is not only what is, what are we doing as a board, but the value of the airport in general. Yeah. You know, it, it just feels like it's kind of like reminding them what they're spending this money on. And what it, you know, the last one talked about all the CDOT, you know, valuations on how much we're bringing in economic impact of $40 plus million a year. You know, those are things when they start to look at line items and going, oh, we're transferring this money. Well, here's what we're getting for it. Yeah.

But you could work that sort of into the work plan portion of it. I mean, you're not going to be able to do what you really want. Does that mean five years? Yeah. Okay. So it won't be another one.

Like what are the major work plan priorities that this board intends to accomplish in the following year? Fee structure, we already talked through. New hangars, area fair. Are there any other big ticket items that count as kind of work plan priorities?

Answers to legal analysis.

Yeah, I mean, that's part of the fee structure conversation.

Yeah, but I would spell it out. A sub-bullet, maybe? Yeah.

What do you want to call it?

Legal review? Legal review on... proposed fee structure in revisions of SIG. It's pretty wordy, that Paul. I didn't say that's what you should write. You are the revisionist. I am just a suggestor.

We can wordsmith it later.

Yeah, exactly.

Are we going to do anything in preparation to potentially participate in Boulder's film festival? I think that's a good item. When is that?

January. January of next year. For 10 years. Yeah, I think that's good. Is it called Sundance? Yeah, Sundance Festival. I think it would be something along the lines of valuations, collaboration, what have you.

Any other big-ticket items for the work plan?

When we're all going to get paid?

Nope. Dang it. Highlights from what's been accomplished so far in the first six months of the year. I think that's pretty easy to do. We can put that together. Yeah, and I can start it. Again, back to this one. We did review that airport north-south road connectivity study.

Oh, yeah.

transportation.

It would be nice if we had to put their transfer of FBO building ownership. That would not be correct. We can evaluate that.

The other one is what are you going to accomplish in the next zone?

I mean, these are the same for every board. So what are the major items that you intend to accomplish? I agree with FBO tenant. Revising lease ordinance. Yes. What involvement do we have with the road that's happening?

Or discussions that are happening? There was a presentation.

The north entrance to the airport? Or the other road?

Well, maybe I'm uneducated on all of that.

There's kind of two roads. There's the Let me ask. There's the north entrance to the airport. I think universally it's supported. Everybody wants it. Everybody thinks it's a great idea. There's no real opposition to the road. The only opposition is to the cost. Sure.

Yeah. I was just bringing that up as a subject here. I just didn't know if that was involved in.

It was presented to us what the options were.

That was a separate. That was for the north-south road connection from transportation. That's not the airport entrance. The feasibility study.

There's two roads. There's an entrance to the airport and then there's Desired by someone to figure out another road that traverses to Highway 7. And a couple of those options were going underneath the airport. Those were pretty much just ground.

I guess my question is, are we involved in those discussions?

Is that something that we went on? We have been and we are involved. We were very involved in the initial part of the history. And this goes back to we're able to present our own slides. When I was doing them, I drew a red line that says, why don't we create a new road? The intersection is there. Let's do it. Well, it kind of got legs of its own. They hired a consultant. They did six different potential entrances. They all ended up coming. Well, the best one is the one with the red line that we drew on the thing. Okay. But they also said, yeah, it's going to cost you $8 million. Okay. But I think in the long range scope of what the town desires, it's high on the list, but yeah, It's a desire. It's a desire.

Sure.

Is there any more discussion about the cross-moon runway disposition?

No.

Is that kind of dead? It is for multiple reasons.

It was taken. I'll give you the abbreviated version. The town sold two lots at the airport you saw that are now residential lots.

Yeah.

And that took away what they call RVZ, RV visual zone.

Yeah.

So now in order to build an FAA-compliant crossing runway, it can no longer be 3,000 or 4,000 feet long. It can only be about 2,200 feet long. It was analyzed at the 2016 master plan study. And so if we were to build one and we wanted FAA money, it could only be 2,200 feet long and would probably cost close to $4 million.

It's going to stay closed. I mean, that's not a question. But what the use of that land, which we had discussions on.

Well, they hired a consultant to look at uses of the other side of the east side of the Crosswood runway. The biggest problem right now is access. You know, the property's there, but how do you access it?

Okay, but there won't be any of our involvement in that discussion.

There's a memo at this point in time. There's nothing really. It is. There's no support from council to pursue salary development of the crossroad.

And the existing homes along there don't want to see anything.

Dead issue at this point. We'll leave it there. Okay. All right. I will, Paul and Emmett, I will email you just at least this current copy so you have it, and then you can maybe tweak it, add it, and send it back to me just before July 17th. That was letter I. Letter J. I also emailed out to some of you a link to draft bylaws. He's out of time for the next two weeks. He's probably trying to run out of air pollution. We are now standardizing bylaws for all advisory boards. This body has never had bylaws. The code chapter created when this body was created said that we should adopt bylaws, but never did. So now the clerk's office is standardizing bylaws of all advisory boards. So there is a standard form. It is this template. It is going to look the same for all advisory boards, basically fill in the blank. I wanted to share with you all that this is the copy that we'll be filling in. It's pretty standard text. Seven members, duties pasted from the code.

Not to say I read the whole thing word for word. Okay, okay.

Yes. So the procedural side of this is we'll bring back to you an actual filled-in draft authored for this advisory board, and then you will motion to recommend them to counsel. Council will then approve all the bylaws for all advisory boards in mass by one resolution, and then they'll be considered law. So this will be an agenda item on our next meeting? Yeah. Okay. A next meeting. Okay. I don't know if it'll be the next one, but it'll be a next one. Okay. That's fine. And then the last one was the work plan. And I mentioned that already. All advisory boards being asked to now have a work plan. I will show you as one example, like what the, I think it's the OSTAB, which is the Open Space Trails Advisory Board uses. This is the pagination got really screwy, so don't mind how crappy it looks. See how there's like months down one side and then primary focus of each meeting on the other side. It's not binding. It's just something that each advisory board can have to reference throughout the year to say for this year, here's the things we intend to achieve.

We kind of do that already with our standard agenda, and then we fill in what we...

This is more special topics.

Right. So I was going to say we include the things that we always include, but then sort of like we're going to have discussions prior to or as we approach the airfare. Mm-hmm. And we would just fill in those specific items. Is that what you're saying? Try and pin down.

Yeah, I mean, I know it's kind of small here, but some of the items like OSTAP uses is budget review. For them, it's Arbor Day, Earth Day. For us, it's airfare. Budget discussion, council presentation prep. Got some other random stuff to draft next year, work plan, accomplishments. So it's pretty standardized stuff. But if we have specific items on hangers, on fees, on FBO, on those kinds of things, we should list them. Okay. Would you like to prepare this or would you like us to draft it and bring it back to you guys at the next meeting?

Yes.

Okay.

Thank you. Yes, sir.

That was my items. You're back to election of officers.

Okay. Okay. That will be the last item. All right. We have three positions open. Chair, Vice Chair, and Secretary. Okay. Does anybody have any particular order that we would like to tackle this? Because we're doing one.

I already knew a Secretary, but I don't feel qualified to replace you.

Well, that's beside the point.

Why don't we just start the talk worked out?

So we'll start with chair. As I've said, I'm not running. The seat is available to anybody who wants to run. We would open it for, you can, I believe you can nominate yourself or you can have someone nominate you. Okay. I will tell you right now, I would nominate this gentleman right now.

I would second that. Yes. Yes.

Motion to second. All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Congrats, bud. One down, two to go. Vice chair. I nominate Paul. One second. No one else wants to do it?

Too green.

I'm going to try.

Oh, my gosh. First of all, do you want to do it, Paul?

I will do it, but like I told him on the phone, I will do it if no one else wants to do it. Is anybody else in our missing party interested? I talked to him about it. He doesn't believe that he really has the time to commit. Yeah, we keep up with you probably at the airport. I'm sure.

If you don't want to do it. Jennifer, look how much more power we give you.

There's a motion and a second on the floor right now. We should take a vote on that. If it passes, it passes. If not, you can try another one.

All those in favor? Aye.

All those opposed?

No, I'm just joking. I'll do it. Okay. But I just don't want to do this, Jen. Sounds unanimous. Okay. Secretary.

Secretary. I'm going to nominate Michael Bowden.

Motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Aye.

Okay.

Well done. Excellent.

Yep. Is that fast enough? Actually, I think that we got through this in 915. Yep. This meeting is adjourned.

Thanks a lot, Keith.

Yep.

You're welcome.

All right. Go abroad.

Are you done? Is it off? No.