All right, good evening everybody. Let's call the November 10th, 2022 Airport Advisory Board to order, please. Kayla, can you please call the roll when Steve is done bugging you? Thank you. Before we do public invited to be heard, I just wanna make two really quick notes on the agenda tonight just to call things out. One, we talked last time about having a sustainability discussion that is still planned, but there was not staff availability to come tonight. So that's why you don't see it on the agenda. Two, note that there are no action items on the agenda. So while we will talk about the leases tonight, we are not taking any action to recommend them tonight. That will be next month. That said, we'll move to public invited to be heard. I have three people on the sign up sheet. So I'm gonna go in order there, but then anybody, or four people on the sign up sheet, sorry, but then anyone is also welcome to come forward after them. So Rick Hall is first on the sign up sheet if you'd like to speak now or at the end or both. Your call. And as a reminder to everybody, if you can please start with your name and address, you've got five minutes. My name is Rick Hall, 229 Airport Road, unit H21. And this is probably a big day for Melinda. I've been coming to these meetings for quite some time prior to COVID. And she keeps encouraging me to come up here to the podium. I have a lot of questions about the new lease arrangement. Oh, sorry. Mr. Chairman, board members, city, Mr. Brown. I have a lot of questions about the proposed new lease. The city or the residents of Longmont have wanted a 30 year lease for a considerable length of time. I believe it started about 2013 with the city manager or city, my terminology is not there, but Marcia's nodding her head. She knows what I'm talking about. The city council has been discussing it since about 2013. It finally came up for a ballot referendum in 2018 and it passed. It was supported by, let me see if I get my notes right here. It was supported by our best Longmont, Longmont Chamber of Commerce, the League of Women Voters Boulder County, the Longmont Economic Development Partnership, Longmont Performing Arts Initiative, Longmont City Council, all of Longmont City Council, if I remember correctly, Longmont Corral, the Centennial State Ballet, Ballet, sorry, Joseph Zanovich, who I don't know, but there's, I've got a little note here, the executive director of HOPE, Elliot Moore, conductor of the Longmont City Orchestra. I am probably the only one, and it did pass, by the voters, and it was entered into the city charter or the home rule, city papers, whatever the documents are that tell us how Longmont is supposed to behave. There you go, thank you. I may be the only one that got a 30 year lease for my hangar at Longmont Airport. However, I haven't seen it yet, and this might be an action item for later. Mr. Slater passed on while my paperwork was being discussed with city council. I know I have a lease because the city sends me a bill, have sent me one bill. Why am I the only one that has a 30 year lease? There was a new member or a new participant in the airport managing in the airport, Mr. Brown, and somewhere, somehow, he decided that we're not gonna do 20 year leases anymore. I want to know why. In a nutshell, if I might be a little bit construction-like, somebody is attempting to pull the wool over our eyes.  A 30 year lease is very convenient for just about anyone that wants to use city property. If we're going from a 30 year lease, which reduces the paperwork that the city managers, city officers, city employees have to go through, why don't we just as well make it a one year lease? And you gotta renew one every single year. I don't know if I'm making sense, but I'll be here all night long. Thank you for your time. I hope you take this up in discussion over the next month, maybe two months, and continue with a 30 year lease. I think it's better for just about everybody concerned. Thank you. Thank you. Where's the red button? I gotta push a red button here. No, you don't need to push anything there. Next on my sign-in sheet was Ken Bickers. I'm sorry if I'm mispronouncing anything. But that's fine. Thank you. My name is Ken Bickers. I live at 1153 Princeton Drive here in Longmont. I have a hanger on the south side of the runway, hanger S7E, and thank you to the board chair and the board members and the city council representative. Thank you so much for giving us this opportunity. I've been interested in this issue for a long time. Obviously I have a vested interest. I really wanna talk about it from a different point of view. Professionally, I'm a political scientist and study campaigns and elections and over the several decades have moved from presidential and congressional elections increasingly to local elections. So I love this kind of stuff. And so I wanna talk a little bit about the history of the issue of the lease in Longmont, the length duration. As Rick said, it dates back at least to 2013 as part of a brainstorming activity in this body and elsewhere. And it was part of a brainstorming activity about what could be done to increase the development at the airport, to attract businesses to the airport that would incentivize people to invest their capital in constructive sorts of things that would be good, not only for them, privately, individually, but also that would pay positive returns to the city. That issue bounced around for a while. As Rick mentioned, city council put it on the ballot in 2019 as a charter amendment question. I don't recall and I couldn't find a source whether council in 19 did that unanimously or not. Somebody can fact check and maybe find that out. But it was on the ballot in 2019, it failed. It failed by a vote of about 54% to 46%. Council in the COVID year, when we were all watching council in the Hollywood squares approach, took the issue back up and discussed it. It was really a very compelling, thoughtful, considerate discussion among council members, it was really wonderful. It was really very refreshing to see council talk about this and to wrap it into a larger issue of what are the kinds of things the city could do that would be good for the development, investment in amenities that would be positive for the city that would give predictability, certainty to people that are investing their own money in things that are going to be good for the city. And so council unanimously in 2020 put it back on the ballot in a much, much higher turnout year, this remember presidential election year, in 19, there were only about 29,000 people in Longwood that voted on the issue. In 2020, over 50,000 people voted on the ballot measure the charter amendment question and it passed in 2020. And it passed I think because city council had done a good job explaining the logic, the rationale behind this. Now it was never gonna be mandatory 20 year, I'm sorry, 30 year leases as opposed to 20, but clearly the implication would be that the city would be looking to extend leases precisely because of the logic of providing greater predictability, certainty and that it would be good for the city. So I'm gonna be listening tonight to the discussion about leases. I wanna listen to it from the point of view of not some hanger owner whose lease will be coming up at some point in the future, but listening for an argument that would make sense that could be given with a straight face and in good faith back to city council, all those members in two successive years and all of those voters who agreed with the argument. So I think whatever the rationale is that's offered, it needs to be bigger than just we don't really wanna do 30. It needs to be an argument that can make sense to the voters of Longmont in a very high turnout year, over 50,000 people, and it passed in that year with the percentages basically flipping to 54% in favor, 46% opposed. And that was a lot more people voting in favor that time than had even opposed it in 2019 given this very large turnout. So I'm gonna be listening to hear what is the rationale? What is the explanation? And is it a good enough explanation that we can communicate that back to our friends, our neighbors, all those voters who were compelled by the arguments that they'd heard city council members making. So thank you. I'll be listening through the evening. Thank you. Keith Griffith next on our list. Hello, my name is Keith Griffith. My address is 7066 Johnson Circle in NIWOT. And Melinda, this might be your second to the last meeting, but I thank you for the years that you've put into working with the airport board. That's excellent. Thank you. First, a short piece of advice. I was last meeting, I wasn't here. I was at doing Disney duty with my grandkids.  Okay, last September 8th at the AB meeting, I brought up the topic of a small pocket park at the south end of the airport viewing area along Airport Road. I'd like to give you a short progress report on that. Levi has made very good progress on many of the neglected airport maintenance items. And I'm happy to say that he has added the pocket park concept to his list of things to do. It's number 847, so it might take a while for him to get there, but it is on his list. I talked with the parks people, the city of Longmont Parks people, and that was a very discouraging encounter. They have a very lengthy process, five to seven years, to get onto the CIP list for reviewing, approving, funding, this kind of a thing, even a relatively tiny project like this. This is 100 feet by 150 feet, it's tiny. And so they raised many issues about the staff time to support that, the funding, ongoing maintenance, insurance, all of those things. So they are not a path forward to do this kind of a project within my lifetime. They noted many other improvements. I noted that there are other improvements that have been done in that area over the years, like the unstealable picnic table that weighs 17 tons, and the concrete runway model, the ATC project or ATC tower thing that was done as an Eagle project. So I'm thinking that if we follow that template, where we get permission from airport staff or airport board, whoever was involved in that kind of thing to pursue this as a private project, not as a part of parks, which takes years and years and a lot of process, but to get the thing done the same way it was done for the picnic table, for the runway, for the tower, all of that stuff. So I'm like to get a go ahead, a vote from the airport board, approval from Levi and whatever other process in the city has to be done, and then pursue it as a private matter. I would, having made that step of getting your approval to go ahead and do it, I would get a formal plan drawn up, presented to the board for approval, and then go ahead and finish it, do it as a private effort. I will volunteer to coordinate the fundraising it'll take for that, as long as you keep it under a million dollars. And I think it's very doable, could be done by next summer and it's something that will help the airport to survive. You know, we do all these nice improvements, like painting the runway in the sewer side, sewer on the south side, but if the community does not see the airport as a valuable resource, that'll all be for nothing. Thanks. Thank you very much. Last one on my list is Al Manley. Good evening, Al Manley, 940 Rangeview Lane, Longmont. I'll keep it brief, just that was your last month speaking against the lease terms and just want to reiterate, how the 30 year proposed lease would be very more beneficial than what we think the 20 year would be. And of course, the first right of refusal for all sales. So that's basically it in a nutshell for me and look forward to the new lease terms. Thank you. Thank you very much. Those are the only ones I had on my list, would anyone else like to speak at this time who wasn't signed up? Good evening, Ron Crenzel, 12191 North 61st. When I left the meeting the last time I forgot to mention one thing. I've been at the airport since 97, I think, maybe a year or two earlier. In all of that period of time, and I've been somewhat, I have somewhat paid attention to what goes on at the airport. In that period of time, in all of that period of time, the only thing that the city, that the airport has seeked funding for from the FAA is the Wild Game Fence. And that was done in a period where you could have asked for any money from anyone and they'd have built a fence for you because of 9-11. I'm a proponent of extending the runway. And what I asked at the end of the last master plan and what I ask now is why hasn't the city of Longmont ever, why hasn't the Longmont airport ever aggressively sought funding from the FAA? I mean, we all know anyone in aviation that has paid any attention at all knows that you have to ask first, you have to be dedicated to get it. And the odds are you're gonna get it because they have a lot of funding. The other thing that sort of bothered me was why would the city all of a sudden decide that they wanted to buy your hangar and they wanted to give you a first offer of refusal to buy your hangar? The only logical thing I could see and it's maybe, and I've watched the city of Longmont attorneys which I don't really have a lot of respect for, but they scheme pretty well. Maybe there's something there that would be very positive. And that is possibly if somehow the city of Longmont could own the buildings where the FBO are, they could maybe get federal funding to do a better job than a private investor could possibly do with that facility. Because in many towns across the United States, there's federal funding for FBO buildings. That's not gonna happen here with the structure as it currently exists. Those were my only two thoughts before I went home and started drinking. Thank you. Would anyone else like to speak at this time? Seeing none, let's move on to approving October 2022 minutes from last month. Vice Chair Jordan, I know you have some comments, but does anyone else have any comments as well? Otherwise I'm gonna turn it over to you. Mr. Robeson. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Might be the same as Melinda's. I just noticed the typo page one line 16 should be absent instead of adjacent. Thank you. The page one line 16 last word is just misspelled. It should be absent. Mr. Bliss. Yeah, I have a little tic-a-tac one myself. On the lease agreement, it talks about the city having the right of first refusal to purchase a hanger if somebody wants to sell it. So in line 28, it says right to refusal. So, and I already talked to Tyler here. I apologize for bringing this up. And then line 33, it says right of refusal. And then it's correct on line 37, right of, no, it's not, first right to refusal. So I think we should make that right of first refusal just to be consistent. First right of refusal. No, it's right of first refusal is the standard. Are we, it's right of first refusal? Yes. Okay. So then the corrections are on line 28 and 37 on page three. Okay. Steve, is there anything else from you? That's all. Thank you. Vice Chair Jordan. Under roll call, line 14, we needed Harrison's first name. And then on line 36, where Howard Morgan spoke, there would be a break there. And then his address is later in the minutes that needs to be inserted because he spoke on the second. His address is on line 35 of page four. Then all the first right of refusal. And then on page four, sentence five, Chairman Earl read a letter he wrote in July on choosing blank. And so I think it was lease rates, but I don't even remember what it was. I would recommend that line five then read. Chair wrote a letter he wrote in July, 2021 regarding the rates and charges. Regarding rates and charges, okay. Thank you. Anyone else? All right, thanks everyone for a detailed review. Would anyone like to make a motion to approve the minutes with the corrections noted? Mr. Bliss. Yes, I'll make a motion to approve the minutes with corrections. Thank you, Mr. Robeson. Second. Moved and seconded. Any further discussion? All those in favor, say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Minutes are approved. Next item agenda is updates from the airport manager, starting with the sewer project. Levi. Hi, all righty. Can you hear me? All right. You may want to lean into it, but. Oh, okay, I'll get a little closer here. How's that? Works for me. Everyone's here. Okay, tell us if you can. All right, updates for the airport. It's been a busy month for sure out at the airport. For those of you who've been by, you can tell it's a lot going on out there. This week's been particularly kind of crazy because some of the construction and the shutdowns and stuff like that. So that kind of kicks us off onto our first item there, the Southwest sewer project is rolling along. They started digging on Monday. We kind of tried to sync everything up with the sewer and with all the painting to try to minimize the runway closures. That's worked to some degree. Unfortunately, we are having some struggles with the excavators down there. They're spending quite more time in the runway safety area than they originally thought they would. So that was most of the phone calls and texts and emails and back and forth between me today, trying to figure out a plan moving forward for minimizing runway shutdown time. So at the moment, unfortunately, tomorrow we are gonna have to do, it looks like some more runway closures, but in order to get something accomplished at the airport, we're altering things, we're actually gonna open the airport between 11 o'clock and 12 30 tomorrow. So at the airport tomorrow we'll be open before five o'clock, we'll be open between 11 and 12 30 and then we'll be open of course after five o'clock tomorrow. So we're getting some people in and out. It's not an ideal situation. Having phone calls with the engineers and they understand that it's not so much of an option first to close that runway indefinitely. So moving into next week, there'll be discussions on other methods of getting that project completed if they're continuing to push for runway closures. Apart from that, things seem to be moving pretty positive on the sewer project. We're getting all the equipment that they need, they got all the pipe, they got all the manhole covers already. So far it seems the dewatering issue that they thought they might run into on the project isn't as significant as they thought it would be. So that bodes well for the continued progress of the project and not necessarily slowing it down. So that's good also. But so far, apart from their initial time in the runway safety area, things seem to be going pretty well on the runway sewer project. Just item one. Did anybody have anything to cover on that before I move on to the second item? Mr. Dean. What was the delay with the excavation equipment and is that gonna affect the budget? It should not. To my understanding, the delay as much as anyone will share with you, my gut feeling is to kicking it off, getting tying into that first manhole just took them a little more work than they thought it would is kind of what it seems to be. They also had an issue with locating a gas line that turned out to be deeper than they thought it would. So that took another big chunk of time that they weren't really expecting. So, you know, as much as they're sharing, you know, that's kind of what we got from that. Okay, thank you. Anyone else? Striping? Striping, item number two. Striping went actually very, very well. So starting as a Monday, we had the runway closed out there for striping. Again, coordinating that with the Southwest sewer project, kickoff date, stripers got out there. They were pretty much on schedule the whole time. The weather worked out just perfectly. The temperature was just above what they needed to have to get the striping completed. All striping was completed on the runway surface itself. The taxiways and any additional striping has not been completed yet. We can kind of play that by ear and see if we do have any, hopefully maybe some warmer days yet this year where they can actually get out there and get stuff on. The company is, as of today, they took a step back. They're assessing the paint they put down. We have $60,000 in that budget. So they're gonna kind of give us an outline on how much more they can do and or what kind of our total is. I run that out and get as much of the taxiway striped as possible. And then next year we got a phase two for runway marking and stuff like that and we'll continue the rest of the markings. But that project, very smooth. And if for our pilots out there, I think you'll be happy with the result on the runway. It looks really, really nice. Comments, questions from the ward? Mr. Dean. Question, what's the lifespan on the striping? Kind of the timing or behavior? That's an interesting question. The simplest way to answer that is it varies so greatly depending on the airport. I'd have to get some figures on the last time that striping was done here. To be honest, I'm not 100% sure. To give you a concept at Leadville, we striped about every three, four years. But we also had a whole lot of snow all the time, constantly pushing it. That makes a big difference. The type of material using, we were on asphalt. This is concrete. So there's a lot of things that'll kind of change the lifespan on those. Could you find that for the next meeting possibly? Yeah, I couldn't look it up. Anyone else on the striping? Prairie dogs. Prairie dog mitigation. So we recently had, I think we covered mentioned at the last airport advisory board meeting and FA inspection of the airport. One of the things that was flagged on that. Pretty much we got big thumbs up on everything else on that report saying, hey, great job. One thing that was flagged on that was prairie dogs. Specifically, it was mentioned that prairie dogs in the runway safety area. So the FA definitely took exception to that. They wrote a letter saying that they wished us to remove the prairie dogs from the airport. So that's kind of what we're progressing towards. Couple weeks ago, we did have a meeting with a private contractor who does wildlife mitigation out at the airport. We ran through some different scenarios. We asked them if they could just come out and they do the perking, the Boulder County approved method of mitigation. They unfortunately don't have the equipment and or the availability to do it this year or even into next. So that was less than an option. So right now, we're actively working a couple other potential solutions on prairie dog mitigation. The last two kind of solutions are in-house and how we kind of approach it. Moving forward with carbon monoxide treatment is one option. The other option is trapping and removing the prairie dogs. At the moment, we are kind of in flux on what the plan is.  But it is something that is, we're spending a great little time on trying to get a handle on and we're gonna have to because FA told us that we were gonna have to get a handle on them for grant assurances purposes. So continuing to work with the wildlife control team here at the city. In fact, we got another meeting next week on the plan moving forward for that. Any questions on that from the board? Mr. Dean. Have you looked at the company, I think in Boulder or Denver, that does prairie dog vacuuming and they actually shop back the prairie dogs out of their holes. That might come up and they mentioned that a little bit at the meeting that we did a couple of weeks ago at the, when we were out there in the fields, it was initially kind of tossed back as potentially an overly expensive method of doing it. So, but I mean, at this point, we're continuing to evolve the discussion. Right now we're at the point where we're thinking about doing the trapping, but I'm sure as we start getting into that discussion then it might come back up to the vacuuming a very similar option. Okay, thank you much. Definitely want to update if there's some vacuuming involved. Okay. Mr. Robinson. I was gonna say the same thing. If you go with the vacuuming, we need videos on YouTube, people out there making TikToks of that for sure. Prairie dog shooting across the airport. Just shoot them over the fence. Yeah, so I've actually seen it done before at other airports, it's very interesting.  Yeah, there we go, like the paws flying. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Thank you, goodness. I'm gonna stop there before we get more trouble. Any other comments on Prairie Dog? Well, let's move on to Lisa's. Let's, since this one is definitely interesting to all of us. Good evening, Chair Errol and members of the board. Phil Greenwald Transportation Planning Manager with the city. I was gonna leave a little break here so we can talk about Lisa's in a little different tone and that is to say that both Levi and I have been working with the city attorney's office to try to figure out best way forward. And right now, what we're coming up with is we think that the best way to move forward with the least discussion is to bring this back as a formal action item on December 8th, your December 8th meeting and have a full discussion. We're inviting all the public of course to attend that and be part of that discussion as well. I know you did make some motions at the last meeting and they're contained in the minutes about the 30 year initial lease with the 20 year extension clause. And so that is one of the things we'll be looking at. We do want to put together that more formal discussion so it's transparent to the public and transparent to everyone who wants to talk about the master lease agreements or the last master lease language I should say. And so we want that to be out there and formalized in that way. So on December 8th, we plan on bringing that back to you. There's another item on here about sustainability resolution update. That'll be the other item on your agenda. So I'll keep, if you don't wanna talk about that on the next piece, that's probably all we really have to say is that the sustainability piece was supposed to come today, but the staff for our sustainability staff was not available for today's meeting and they needed a lecture time and they wanted to make sure it's just right. We want to get a good presentation to you as well. So both those items will be coming to your December 8th meeting as action items. So you'll have a pretty full agenda so be ready for December 8th. And the next plan after that is to take your recommendations as a board on the lease master lease language and take those to city council on December 20th. So just a heads up again to the public that on December 20th, the city council will be considering the lease language as well. So you'll have a say there also to be able to speak your piece as a word to the city council and they will ultimately make, the city council will ultimately make the decision on the final reading or the final language that we use for the lease, master lease term. And so that's the plan moving forward and we certainly wanna take any questions that you have about that for comments. Council member, Mark, please go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just because the council will have to be considering this, I think that when all of us at the council, you know, referred the 30 year lease provision to the charter as a charter amendment, we expected that airport leases would have an initial term of 30 years. And since all of the airport leases that we had ever had come before us were exactly the same cookie cutter thing, honestly, we didn't think it through very much farther than that. We just thought the initial term would go to 30 years and that'd be that. But now that, you know, it's gonna be possible maybe to negotiate different renewal terms and I have a couple of questions about what would have happened before with that standard airport lease. So suppose someone wanted a shorter term lease, would they have been able to negotiate one and would it have, for example, lowered their lot rent if they did ask for a shorter term? So, you know, if there's going to be variations, then, you know, what would be negotiable and what would not be negotiable in a new standard lease? And then my second question, because I'm not gonna, you know, keep taking the floor, my second question is, since there's so much discussion about the right of refusal, which is not actually an unusual thing in development on leased property in general, what has it ever happened that someone has come to the end of their lease and walked away and what happens to the hanger that's left there, has ownership reverted to the city before? Because, you know, when a developer is gonna develop a public building on land leased from the city, at the end of the lease term, they either have to negotiate an operating agreement with the city to extend the lease or if they don't, the building actually reverts to the city. And so, I just want to know what would have happened before. Board Harrison, or Chair Harrison and Council Member Martin, if we could answer those questions at the December 8th meeting and take those forward so I can get you, you know, more exact answers to those things, I think the, I mean, we can get into kind of the discussion level, but I can see that it's gonna, it's gonna be the same discussion that we're gonna need to have on December 8th, so I'm afraid that I can answer some of that and I think leave I can too, but it's a lot of what if this and what if that, and so I wanna be really clear with my answers and have, I like having your questions available to be able to share with our attorneys too to get an exact answer for your question too. Yeah, so we had a meeting with the city attorneys as well and I left that meeting feeling like, but you know, the issues had been covered, but maybe they hadn't because I still have questions now. And yeah, it's fine if they're addressed. I also do wanna say, was it not said at the last meeting that the intention was that a 30 year lease would be available? Yeah, that's actually in the minutes. Okay. Levi Brown said, we will do 30 or 30 year lease. So that's actually in the minutes that he. Yeah. He's, we're saying that. Yeah. Levi proposed the change of the airport lease based rate term to 30 years. So.  And then we, you know, as the city staff, we have a bunch of reasons for doing first right over refusals and it's really on the sale of the property. And so it comes down to a lot of issues with when people are selling the property, if it's a property that the city is interested in developing in some other way, shape or form, you know, we're just, we just want that first, you know, ability to be able to say, hey, we have a plan or there's, you know, part of the master plan shows that as doing something else. And so it's not to preclude anything or get in the way or, and it never really comes up is what I understand, except there may be one or two or three, whatever. Corner case. Sales that are happening and, and we can get into that again on this. Yeah. Because it's going to be, it's going to be a convoluted conversation, but we want to make sure we get all those answers, you know, in a more public, I mean, this is a very public forum, but we want to have it as an agenda item so that people can come and talk about it too. Okay, sure. And we, it's also a land use thing that we, that had not really been addressed prior to this in terms of airport development. So yeah, I just wanted to get that all out on the table, but it's, it's, you know, it's not a sheet metal grab, you know. Mr. Robinson. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I was just going to agree with council member Barton and maybe suggest to leave, I, to alleviate some of this concern. I mean, we keep hearing public invited be heard showing up and I would say, unfortunately, they're the first thing on the agenda before we really get to say, you know, some of these things like it, we are planning 30 is the general idea if we could get that out of the way, maybe in your next airport update, some kind of paragraph about this is the way we're headed. You know, I understand it's not a final thing, but to alleviate some of the agitation out there, especially like council member said, we're going for another month before we finalize anything. I think LPA and everybody out in the audience would appreciate everybody in the group that's on your email list knowing what's going on. That's a good point to make too. We did receive another letter from the LPA about redressant assembly. So we are currently working on the response for that and that should go out. I spoke with attorneys yesterday about that and we're hoping to get something out next week. So that'll go out too. So that should help also, hopefully. Will these attorneys be present on December 8th? They may not be, they will likely not be available on December 8th, but they will be at the December 20th council meeting. So we will have them, we will ask them to, we'll tell them about, it sounds like that's, I'm gonna go ahead and say that sounds like a request to have the attorneys here on the 8th. So I'm gonna ask again that they attend. That'd be great.  I'd like to make a motion that we officially ask the city staff to have the attorneys present should they be able to, if anyone would like to second that. Moved and seconded. Discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Okay, motion carries. Thank you. Mr. Dean. Nope, that was it. That was it? Yep. Who else on lease is here? So the other request I would have is given that there is so much still, I think unresolved in the leases, I feel comfortable with the least intent on the term, but definitely not on the right of first refusal because it's not something we've talked through in detail, nor do I think, I'm seeking for myself, but I don't think the board is aligned with the city necessarily on that. I'd love to have a board member or to work with city staff and the city attorneys between now and December 8th, so we at least have a much better kind of ability to have that discussion effectively on the 8th and be able to work through it. I would certainly be willing to be one of those one or two members. I don't know if that's interesting to anyone else, if that makes sense, and if anyone else wants to participate in that. Mr. Dean. I'd be happy to help with that as well. Thank you. Two, that's our two. Yeah, no, understood. I would really like three, but that doesn't work that way. Does that work for everyone? Any other comments on that for many other board members? Anyone else like to make a comment on leases? We're with where we are right now. Information items then. Engineering consultant selection, or update schedule, sorry. Engineering consultant update schedule, so the request for proposals, it's technically the document we released, went out, I think it was a week ago, or almost two weeks ago now. Almost two weeks ago now. So it went out a couple weeks ago, the deadline for those proposals, if I recall correctly, should be the 21st. So, so far so good. I've been trying to go through my own contacts, make sure that the engineers out there have kind of got their heads up on that it is out there. So far, everyone I've kind of reached out to said, yeah, we saw it posted, so it's looking like we're gonna get some pretty good interest out of that. So yeah, so far, so good. Hopefully next board meeting we'll have more information on that for you. Okay, that's what I got. Questions from anyone? I might just add that we won't be able to say too much once the proposals come in, we can't say who's on the list, and we can't talk much about it as a staff, because we're both on the selection committee with board members salvatating, so we won't be able to say too much until we get to a point where we can offer a contract. Do you have a anticipated timeline then? We've only heard due on the 21st. I'm trying to see if we can get that done to you by the eighth, the meeting on the eighth, but I thought we were starting, if we go to, I think if we go to interviews, I believe, trying to find it here, if we start interviews, I think it's gonna be that week of the fifth, so that would be an issue too. So we have a very short turnaround to get these reviewed. Like Levi said, we get the proposals back, all the proposals are due to us on Monday, November 21st. We're gonna take two weeks to review, and then we're in the, and that's over Thanksgiving. And so that's, then we start the interview process two weeks after that, so if we needed, if one corporation, one company comes up ahead of everybody else, and it's just not even close, then we won't do interviews, but most likely there will be interviews. Other questions, comments? I know we kind of hit sustainability resolution, sustainability discussion. Is there anything else you guys would like to bring up on that? Nothing, apart from saying that it is still definitely on our list of stuff to do. They just, we're looking for a little more time so they can get people here and they can prepare presentations. So again, just, yeah, it's not, we're not skipping over it, we're, they're just, they want a little more time to prep stuff for it. And I would ask that next month then as, if that's on the discussion, that the sustainability resolution draft that was, is in the packet, and that's an action item to consider it beyond the presentation. You wanna go with that? We will do that, Chair Earl. The other piece of it is that you've asked for at the last meeting, I believe, you asked for more of a cover memo or a cover page to explain some of these action items when we have action items. So we're gonna have a complete, we call them, we call them airport advisory board columns or memos and that'll, we'll wanna put everything in there that we're requesting of the board and make it very clear and concise of what we're requesting and what the suggested action is and then what kind of choices you have as a board to make with those different selection things. So both that. Is that similar to what goes to council right now? Exactly. Okay. Yeah, we call them council columns there. So, and again, I think you said you just wanted those for the action items. So we're gonna do that for the two action items next month and make sure we're very clear. So I think this would also help in the public realm as people are reading through the packet, they can see exactly what's being, you know, the framework of the public realm the framework of the issue and exactly what's being requested of this board. Thank you. Yeah, I think it'll be helpful and kind of build on the agenda change earlier this year when we separated information and action to make it really clear. Mr. Robinson, hold on. Go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is just kind of tangentially related to sustainability about the FPO. Did you find an end date for their contract or lease? You know, I did, I did look it up and I got the lease sitting on my desk and I forgot to bring it with me, but I do have that. Yes. The what? Yeah, I'm sure we can send the date out. Send it to me. Last information item then. New AAB member selection committee. All right, new AAB member selection committee. So as you all know, we're in the process currently of interviewing new members for the airport advisory board to people applied for the airport advisory board.  So we do have one, hopefully I sent out earlier today if both of you can make it. We have an interview potentially set up next week with Mr. Steve Schuch or the airport advisory committee. Harrison has also applied again. He's a little bit of a different matter. If we want to go through quite the same formal process or we certainly cut off a little, Phil and I already had a meeting with him earlier today and trying to kind of move him through the system too. So hopefully that satisfies the need of the initial interview prior to going to council. We hope. Vice Chair Jordan. So I got the invitation and it'll be a teams interview, right? It certainly can be a teams interview or we're also more than likely to be hosting it at the airport. Also just in case someone wants to come by, it can be either or. Okay. I'll probably have to join remote and then, but then we'll do that interview and then they'll still have the council interview. Is that right? Yes. That's to my understanding. And forgive us if there's a little haziness here. This is a new process for everyone apparently. So it is a little bit of a learning process as we go through this. But you are handling incumbents differently. A little, not really. So do you want to answer that one, Phil? Well, I think our initial thought was, you know the incumbent. And so we'll ask you at the end of the next interview questions about forwarding his name to the city council for further interview. But we didn't think we'd want to spend your time since you've spent so much time with our chair that we will just ask you at the interview whether you feel like it's appropriate to move him forward to the city council interview process. Perfect. Levi, anything else on that? Any other? That's. A note from the board? Nope. Okay. No action items this month. We're saving them all for next month. Final public invited to be heard. Come on down. There's no list for this one. So whoever wants to get down there first, you're up. As before, if you can start with your name and address, you've got five minutes. I've got the timer going once you introduce yourself. Howard Morgan, 1932, Amethyst Drive, Longmont. Been on this board as a chairman at one point. President of the LOPA organization. Been on the airport for 25 years, plus or minus a few months. And I think the people on the airport would like to change the attitude of the city and be treated more as on the order of a partner other than an adversary. And it's least fiasco is just another example of many examples over the years. There's a lot of talent of various kinds on the airport that can work on things like this. I've spent considerable amount of time on the lease project with outside sources and I've offered my sources last time. Nobody wants to know what I know. This airport is a substandard. I don't know how many of you've been to other airports around the country, but there's airports with populations of 10,000 or less that make this look terrible. And cities with 100,000 population have considerably nicer facilities. So I would like to see us spend more time on coming up with development. The third year lease would help. This writer first refusal, I think is a bad idea. It's a city who wants to buy a building. They can buy it, they can be a bid on it just like anybody else and buy it if they want. A lot of reasons that we don't want a first writer refusal and it should be stricken was mentioned that what do we do if somebody walks away from a hanger? I don't think that's even a remote possibility when the hangers are worth as much as they are a day and I can't imagine anybody walking away from a hanger so that just makes no sense to me. So it's the bottom line here is I'd like to see the people on the airport treat more in the order of a partner as we collectively put in somewhere around a half a million dollars a year for the operation of the airport. So if it wasn't for us, the airport would go away. So that's my comment and thanks, Melinda, for your service. Thank you. Would like to be next. Thank you. Dave Copp, 229 Airport Road, unit 33. I'm an officer with the LOPA and I'd just like to reiterate some of the things Howie has said, certainly the 30-year lease, just exactly the way Levi wrote it in the last minute since September is acceptable to us, 30 years with a 20-year renewal. That takes all the pain away. What Howie said, you know, I've been here 20 years, spring chicken compared to Howie, but nobody's walked away from a hanger in that 20 years and otherwise the city would already own it and be renting it. The only thing the city owns is the old Twin Peaks building where the airport manager's office is. To Marsha's point, everything's negotiable. Well, not everything. You know, leases have to be fair and equitable. And so whatever you can change it, you control the lease, but the bottom line is you need to be fair and equitable going forward. Right now you've done five or six leases that represent 75 hangers out there with a 30-year lease with a 30-year renewal. So now we've already talked about the FAA recommendation, which is not a hard, fast rule and it's certainly not a grant assurance violation. Really sitting up there doing 30 years leases with 30-year renewals. They've never lost a nickel in grant assurances and it can teach us all a lot about how to get some grant assurance or some grants because the bottom line is we are still pretty much the worst airport of this size in the entire state and applying for and getting grants. To your point, Mr. Robinson, that's exactly right. You got to apply, you're not gonna get much without it. I mean, some of the scenarios they've done here, we gave, I think it was Grand Lake, back in the early 2000s, our 150,000 year for four years, 600,000 because they didn't wanna pay the nickel on the dollar to get the lease. And the bottom line is we had a lot of deferred maintenance we got lot now, lot less because of Levi's contribution and help, but the bottom line, there's still a lot of work that needs to be done. The, I wanted to talk about a document that I just read today that was quite distressing and it was published in 1918, but it's still online and it's terrible and the author did a lot of, footnotes on who they talked to, but the bottom line, the biggest puzzle in there to me was that they compared us to, at that time was Jeff Coe, Paul Anzels, the airport manager down there now and said that while they had $480 million worth of economic contribution to the two counties and we had 400,000, well those apples and oranges, we clearly have $60 million that's listed by the AOP as our economic contribution and that I think is not overstating it and that makes us, if that was published, that's not what they published, they published our 400,000 which is just our P&L, just our lease contributions and the expenses for the airport, so they compared 480 million for 400,000 and it looks pretty much like crap and the bottom line is that that's pretty unfair because that's just a P&L, I guarantee you, and I had a hanger at Jeff Coe now called Metro, Rocky Mountain Metropolitan and they don't get $400 million of income off that airport. They do bring in an awful lot of people that do a lot of business and that's where that economic contribution, one of my tenants probably contributed more to the city than anybody else and that's in the hundreds of millions and so the bottom line is he's still running from me, he's still doing business here, you keep pushing on this and he's gonna move his operation down to Metro because that's what's his initial plan until I spent half a million to building a hanger and I'm not happy about the fact that I spent twice as much on the permit fees in Longmont as I would have spent building the same hanger in Jeff Coe, so, how is exactly right? I don't expect you to treat us as partners but we're more than just tenants. We certainly like to contribute. We've done an awful lot of good for this airport. I've done a lot less than many others but I've done 200 young Eagle flights for people that most of those kids are in this community that have gotten free helicopter rides. That's just the beginning. I've also helped with the prairie dog issues. We spent weeks out here trying to smoke these things out of here. All that time was donated and many, many more people have done a lot more than I have so all that doesn't get advertised. Even the innovation center. I've taken many of those kids for helicopter rides. Thank you, Mr. Cobb. Five minutes has expired. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Would anyone else like to come down? That's Rick Hall again. I haven't moved in the hour or two hours we've been here. There were a couple of things that I had neglected to say being as it was my first real public meeting or public speaking engagement in about 65 years. And I can't read my own writing. I'd like to thank Mr. Brown for the work that he's done in the about six months that he's been here. I can't tell you what a change that has happened since Mr. Slater left us. And I've been here since Tim Barth was airport manager. I'm not the spring chicken like, no I am the spring chicken like Mr. Cobb stated. There were a couple of things that I forgot to say as I mentioned. The right of first refusal troubles me immensely. And I'm sure that you're going to work on that as the new lease takes shape. The airport as I understand it is an enterprise, not an enterprise zone. It's an enterprise. It cannot draw funding from the city. It has to be as self-sufficient as it possibly can. And this might have something to do with the airport improvement program funds. I don't know, I haven't dug that deep into the law yet. The right of first refusal is, like I say, it troubles me. The airport would have to buy a property if I would have to buy my property if I decided to sell. My property is worth over $500,000. That's 2% of the city budget. Where are you going to come up with that kind of money? You can't even afford to pay to have the lawn mowed. I don't look at this as rocket science. The second item concerns prairie dogs. It's ordinance 0-0-2019-01. I have a copy here if you want to take it. The Council of the City of Longmont ordains section one, blah, blah, blah, disclaimers, restrictions and whatever. It's a bill for an ordinance emitting Title VII of the Longmont Municipal Code on prairie dog control on page three after they've done all the things that you're not supposed to do, they have the exemptions. A, acts by a person who owns or operates an airport facility or by a person acting at the direction of the owner of the airport facility, necessary to promote human safety or to comply with Federal Aviation Administration Standards or regulations and it goes on to item B. You don't need anybody's permission. Thank you. Thank you. Don Dolcey, 335 Pratt Street, Longmont. Just a comment back to Levi. He said they were gonna be doing some further evaluations of some of the work that's been done on the runway and in that environment as follow-up. I would just comment that there was a night flight we did last night and the striping on the runway is really not very uniform. So you definitely can see it, but you can tell that it's very faint on the paint in some of the long white stripes. My other comment that is about prairie dog trapping, which was one of the possibilities that was mentioned, I was involved back when that occurred some years back with Tim Barth and the downside was there were so many traps placed along the taxiway that aircraft actually had to dodge right and left to keep from hitting a low wing on the traps that were stacked up. And in the end, I don't think they trapped more than just a few prairie dogs before that was all done. And then they went to another method of a phosphine type compound that they put in the holes and that worked very well. Lastly, I would say if you can put something on your list relative to the beacon light, the green light is almost ineffective. The white light can be seen for quite a few miles, but the green light is just almost not observable at all. So it may just need an adjustment. Thanks. Thank you. Was there anyone else? I didn't see more hands, but anyone else? Okay. Then we've got board city council and our staff comments, starting with board members. What do they want to have? Vice-chair Jordan. I have a response on the Pocket Park proposal that we formed a nonprofit a handful of years ago, the Friends of Bants brand. And Dale Benzant is the president of that and I'm the secretary treasurer. And we have not met or discussed that for a long time because it was funded through the air show beer garden. We used it for the ADA access in front of the FBO to get on to the ramp for injured pilot in the community. And then we sponsored, we did a scholarship pre-COVID. So we really haven't met or discussed what's in the bank and what we've got, but that would be a source of funds for the, I think that would be reasonable. We were trying to raise money for the extension and to have something to help put with the city in kind. So I'll talk to Dale and see what we've got in the bank and let him know that this is, that I just volunteered the money. Second, the thing on the first right of refusal also troubled me immediately when I saw it. I think the thing we do have to keep in mind is that the use would have to be aviation. And I think we've all gotten a little distracted by the language and the nature of that, but it would have to be aviation. So the city can't take it and put up a retail store or a coffee shop or something like that. I don't believe. So while I'm also, I don't like that clause. I don't like the time that it involves and the liability that it puts the seller at, but to remember that it would have to be aviation purposes to be on the field. And on the air show, I was gonna ask Russ to give us an update about his Airbus status. And then we did pick a date for next year for the air show and now we actually have to do something. And Malcolm did volunteer himself to work on our Civil Air Patrol Cadet Sheriff's Explorers. So I would volunteer told him to be the volunteer coordinator if he's up for that job and coordinate the staff that we would need for that. Again, it's a huge undertaking. So we do have to have commitments, either yes or no, clearly from the starting at the board. And then I've asked, I saw Dale Vanzant a couple of weeks ago and asked him. And I'm still not getting from commitments from the prior leadership, but I'll continue to ask. And we do have all of our documents. We archived everything from the last one, but it's a Herclian effort. And so with every day that passes, we'll get further behind the ball on that. But volunteers is a huge portion of that. And then the logistics for safety and fire and not competing with other events and things like that. So it is still on my list. And then seeking a leadership team that we can continue to have the discussion. And if we don't feel like we can make it next year, we'll push it to the next and just keep that conversation alive. Real quick, as far as the volunteers, I mean, we have a full city staff talking about partnership that could work and be part of that. We give these wellness points away for being volunteers on these kinds of things. So we can open that up to the whole city and pretty much get the volunteers I think you need. We'd love traffic. We'd love humor. Do you want me to start? That'd be fantastic. Thank you. Mr. Dean. Yeah, my only comment was try to get a date set for that. And I did talk to Melinda. I was a sheriff back in the day and it's something I would be happy to get a hold of them because the cadets also need hours to meet their minimum requirements. So they're always looking for something to do and something to help. So, but yeah, if you could try to get that going I'll let us know that would be fantastic. I got a specific date. September 23rd, 23. Mr. Robeson. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I guess I'll start with the air show. I think I got a proposal for a bid, I guess, from Tom Larkin and his mini-jet. I think I sent it to Levi and Harrison. Is that right? No? I think so. Anyway, I'll go back and check it. I'll send it again. So we got a proposal from one of the performers with a dollar amount. So we can start budgeting a bit from that. I don't know, should I just send it to you guys? Does it need to go to the whole board or what's the process for? Yeah, I would encourage to send it to Levi and maybe forward it to the board for now but until we have a real leadership team in place for it. Yeah, that's what I was just thinking. We need that leadership team like you were talking about so we can figure this out. It's Melinda and me as far as I know. Yeah, just to- Hold on a second. Nope, you're good. Oh, can you do multiple? I think I can actually. Just to clarify, yeah, the board does not, it's not a duty of the board to do the air show. It's been where they, I don't wanna say the leadership arises from there but not all the board members have participated or have participated whatever level they were able to but it's not a function of the board and it just comes out of here. It conveniently hangs out here. So- Yeah, but other people on the field that would be assets to that leadership board is what we need for sure. So that's good. You're looking at them up there. Yeah. So we have two, Bob and Tom have both said, they'll be there September 23rd. They're arranging their air show schedule around us. So they're giving us priority. They're gonna be there. So I would say pushing it to 2024 would not be a good look. We're gonna do it. I'll be there. There'll be two performers there for sure. That's what we got so far and let's improve from there. I did have another couple of things since I think this is the section for future agenda items. Mr. Griffith said he wants our approval to go ahead with Pocket Park as a private fundraising thing. So I would say let's put that on the agenda for next month and make a motion unless we're gonna do it right now. And what was the other one? Oh, my idea. I was listening to, let's find his name. Mr. Bickers, talk about what can the airport or what can the city do to help the airport do better things for itself? And I think I've mentioned an idea before where the city would take care of all pavement on the airport. Currently the lease holder is responsible for 15 feet or some number of feet. Maybe it's different for each lease. I think a lot of the complaints about pavement end up being on the private or leased pavement. I see a lot of the potholes and loose pavement tends to be within 15 feet of the hangar. So I don't know if everyone knows exactly what those are. Haven't read their lease in a while. But I feel like we could make a future agenda item to look at the feasibility of having the airport just take over all pavement, increase the lease rates to cover the cost, and that might be something that would make the airport look better, help the airport do better for itself. Thank you. I'm good with having those as future agenda items. My comment on the park, I love this idea. I had a discussion about a very different airport, very different park at work, where there was some concerns about putting it on an ALP and then never being able to develop it in the future. So I would encourage airport leadership to have the conversation with your engineers or planners or whoever, just to make sure we're not doing anything that messes with future development potentially. But it would be really nice to do something. Yeah, I'll start, perhaps a little more formal conversation. I have already tickled the FAA a little bit about it. I was talking with Mike Moffs and said, hey, you know, we're thinking about making this into a more beautiful area. And he didn't seem to have any objections at that time, but I'll look for a more formal kind of response from them. Well, and it may even be if it's not formally on an ALP then. No. But I just want to raise the concern because I don't want something we do to handicap us, but it's a great idea. Council Member Martin, is there anything else for me this evening? No. Thank you. Any other? Oh, Vice Chair Jordan, sorry, go ahead. Since coming way out of left field, but thinking about the Eagle Scout project, so this is infield, how did he get permission to put that there? And out of left field then comes the question of the annual report. I believe I in the past, I've interviewed pilots that do animal rescue. We featured the Boy Scout project and included some of the other volunteer efforts and things that go on at the airport to make the annual report more robust. And it used to be due, used to start in January, be presented in June, I think, but with everything that's been going on, we've missed that opportunity. That says... You recall the last time that they did one? 2020, I think. Oh, okay, yeah, gotcha. Like June 2020, maybe? They did it in 2021, right? So this came up in our bylaws discussion and we adjusted the timeframe, but we still missed it this year. Okay. So it probably, we have enough in December. I think January, bring this up and actually get this moving. So we have an early 2023 report would be my preference unless anyone wants to accelerate it, in which case, Melinda, we can ask for favors from anyone in the audience, including potentially, to help with that.  Making noise, that's what I was gonna say.  But I, people see the helicopters as being purpose, that they have a purpose, that they're rescuing, bringing the life, they're going back and forth to the wildfires of the hospital and they don't see anybody else out there as doing anything that's of any value. And there is, we all know, there's a lot of stuff that happens at the airport, a lot of flights coming in and out that do matter and that the, I'm always trying to get the public perception changed that the day may come that you actually wanna get on a commercial flight and you need a pilot and he might have trained at Aerosphere, he might have started there, and that you may need a quick flight for some medical need. We have those things happening out of there. You could end up with a lucrative business that needs to come in and out. So to change that public perception, it's always very favorable when we have the air show, they love that. But the rest of the time, it's whinging about just people out, burning up fuel and we do that too. But more, that's always my goal with that annual report is to really show the things of meaning that have been happening out there as well. People are contributing, the pilots are always contributing into the comments that were made. A lot of the work at the airport is done on a volunteer basis on a city asset. And even, you know, tuning our own horn on that as to what the pilots have contributed to keep the airport looking nice. So just to help in, I'll gladly help around this. We have stories and interviews and just pieces that can show, because Dale Cataches's planes are still used for the medical flights and there's still just a lot of stuff that's happening in our airport that's the public deserves to know about. Okay. Mr. Robinson. Thank you. Just said one quick question. Who is doing the content on the city airport webpage? So that's actually been a point of discussion currently. So the city's kind of going through, to my understanding, kind of a reboot on what they want to do with the website in general. So I've already had a few preliminary meetings about what it potentially can look like moving forward and stuff like that. At the current time, until they get the time to kind of kick that project off, I've kind of been trying to make little corrections to it. So for example, I got in there after the last meeting and we posted the proposed rates and charges. There was some information on there from the 2018 air shows that come out to the 2018 air shows. So we got that stuff removed. So currently it's me, but moving forward we're hoping to get a little more updated website coming up for the airport. That'd be great. Yep. Mr. Dean. I just wanted to second one with the, she said as well, Jordan, because a lot of people in Long Island seem to think that there's not a lot of benefit for the airport. And if there was more information that came out about all the uses and the people that were using it and all the good that it's for her, I think you'd get a lot better public reaction. So I definitely wanted to second kind of what she was saying as well. Yeah, and I was just thinking if you have a copy of the old one, if you could just shoot it to me, that would be great. I could probably dig and find it, but if you just have it, that would be great to just have it at my fingertips. Okay. I know I have it somewhere. So one of us will make sure we get it to you. Staff comments, leave my fill, anything that you'd like to bring up that we haven't talked about yet. I think we covered it all. Okay. Then I'm not seeing any other comments from anyone. So let's go ahead and adjourn tonight's meeting. We'll look forward to seeing everyone in December for a no doubt busy and productive meeting. Thank you all.