[Call to Order and Roll Call]
[Mayor, City Council]
[00:00:09]
MEETING MONDAY, AUGUST 24TH. THIS IS OUR WORK SESSION. WE ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO BEGIN WITH THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS, AND WE HAVE DIRECT OR EXCUSE ME, COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCIS, TO BEGIN THAT CONVERSATION. DO WE HAVE TO DO ROLL AFTER WE HAVE A ROLL CALL TO ESTABLISH A QUORUM? GOOD AFTERNOON. COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRANCIS HERE. COUNCILOR RADFORD.
COUNCILOR DINGMAN HERE. COUNCILOR FREEMAN HERE, COUNCILOR LARSON HERE.
COUNCILOR LEE HERE. THANK YOU. MAYOR. YOU HAVE A QUORUM. OKAY. NOW, IF COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCIS WILL START. SO I WANTED TO DISCUSS THIS BEFORE WE GET FURTHER INTO THE MEETING, BUT WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING WITH PUDS. AND I THINK TODAY WE SHOULD TRY TO GIVE A DIRECTION TO THE LEGAL AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES OF WHERE WE WANT THEM TO GO. SO A COUPLE OF OPTIONS IN FRONT OF US WOULD BE. RESCIND, RESCINDED THE WHOLE PUD SECTION OF THE ORDINANCE AND DECIDE WE LOOK AT IT AND TRY TO REWRITE IT FROM SCRATCH. OR WE COULD DO A MORATORIUM. AND THE MORATORIUM HAS. AT FIRST I WAS THINKING, OH, MORATORIUM IS A GOOD IDEA, BECAUSE THEN WE COULD JUST REFORM IT. BUT IN THINKING IT OVER, I THINK IT MIGHT BE BETTER IF WE TELL LEGAL AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO RESCIND IT ENTIRELY, AND WE JUST START FROM SCRATCH. AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS THAT WAY DEVELOPERS AREN'T THINKING, WELL, I'LL JUST WAIT YOU OUT A COUPLE OF MONTHS AND THEN I'LL COME BACK BECAUSE WE MIGHT NOT COME BACK AT ALL WITH PUDS. AND THE MORATORIUM DOES HAVE TO HAVE A FIRM END DATE. AND SO THAT ALSO CREATES IT CREATES THAT UNCERTAINTY. BECAUSE IF OUR GOAL IS LET'S LET'S JUST FIGURE THIS OUT. SO WE'RE NOT INTO THESE. IT SEEMS LIKE EVERY TIME THEY'RE COMING UP RIGHT NOW, WE'RE HAVING DIFFICULTY WITH THIS OR THAT OR THE OTHER THING. AND IT'S NOT ALWAYS THE SAME THING. THIS OR THAT. BUT SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE TO MAKE THEM BETTER AND CLEARER IF THEY'RE GOING TO BE THERE AT ALL. SO THOUGHTS ON WHETHER IT'S BETTER TO GO WITH RESCIND OR MORATORIUM, BECAUSE THIS IS THE DIRECTION WE'RE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. AND OH, AND I NEED TO GET ONE MORE BACKGROUND INFORMATION. VERIFY IF I GET THIS WRONG, MR. SANTER, BUT I BELIEVE THERE'S THREE MORE KIND OF IN THE WORKS, THREE MORE PUDS IN THE WORKS. AND THEN ABOUT MID-OCTOBER, THOSE WILL ALL HAVE PROCESSED THROUGH. AND IT WOULDN'T BE FAIR TO DROP ONE OF THOSE IN THE MIDDLE. SO ABOUT MID-OCTOBER, WHATEVER WE DO WOULD TAKE EFFECT. YEAH, THERE'S ONE THAT'S COMING THURSDAY, ONE IN THE PIPELINE AND ONE THAT WE HAVE PREDEVELOPMENT ON. SO AND THEN YOU SAID THAT WAS ABOUT IT. THERE'S NO NO OTHER ONES COMING DOWN THE LINE. SO THAT WOULD JUST KIND OF BE A GOOD PLACE TO END IT ON THE PREDEVELOPMENT.
HAVE THEY WHAT HAVE THEY DONE IN PREDEVELOPMENT? THEY HAVEN'T SUBMITTED OR ANYTHING. IT'S JUST DISCUSSION. ALL THE DONORS HAD A CHAT. SO WE COULD WE WE HAVE A MINIMUM OF TWO. SO THOSE ARE THE TWO QUESTIONS THAT POPPED TO ME. THE PROS AND CONS OF RESCIND AND MORATORIUM.
WE'VE HAD A LITTLE CONVERSATION ON THAT, BUT I'D LIKE TO GET FEEDBACK FROM LEGAL AND FROM CVS ON THAT. AND THEN ALSO WHAT YOU JUST TALKED ABOUT. AND THAT IS WHEN WE HOW DO WE CUT IT OFF SO THAT WE TREAT DEVELOPERS FAIRLY AND ALSO DON'T STRING IT OUT. COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRANCIS, WOULD IT BE GOOD TO HAVE A WORK SESSION ON THIS SO WE CAN HAVE COUNCIL MORE FULLY DELIBERATE ON THE VARIOUS OPTIONS? THE REASON I THOUGHT WE COULD DO IT UNDER DISCUSSION IS THIS IS SORT OF GIVING IT DIRECTION IN AN OPEN MEETING OF WHERE WE WANT THE PLANNING TO GO. YEAH.
I RECOGNIZE YOU'RE NOT MAKING A DECISION. NO, NO, I MEAN, I, YEAH, I FEEL LIKE WE, I FEEL LIKE I AGREE WITH COUNCILOR COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRANCIS, I'M NOT INTERESTED IN WAITING ANOTHER MONTH TO GET ON AN AGENDA. SO I THINK WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH I SUPPORT JUST RESCINDING IT. I THINK THERE'S TOO MANY CHALLENGES WITH A MORATORIUM. AND THEN WE CAN DISCUSS WHAT A DATE LOOKS LIKE AS THE LEGAL LIAISONS WITH ZACH. OKAY. AND. GO FROM THERE BECAUSE THE ONLY THING TO RESCIND, THE ONLY THING WE NEED IS THE DATE IT WOULD GO INTO EFFECT. IT'S THE ONLY THING TO DISCUSS REALLY, AT THIS POINT IN TIME, BECAUSE ALL THAT COUNCIL WOULD BE DETERMINING, AND THEN WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THE WORK SESSION AGENDA
[00:05:05]
ITEM. THAT'S THE DISCUSSION OF AFTER. I THINK WE WORK WITH LEGAL, MAYBE SUGGESTING SOME CHANGES AND WE CAN WORKSHOP THAT. YEAH. AND WHAT I'M TRYING TO AVOID IS PLANNING DEPARTMENT PUTTING TWO PACKAGES TOGETHER WHEN THERE'S REALLY ONLY ONE IN OUR HEAD, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.LIKE IF THERE'S INSTEAD OF, OH, DO ONE FOR MORATORIUM AND DO ONE FOR RESCIND AND WE'LL LOOK AT IT AND DECIDE WHICH IS RIGHT. RIGHT. NO, I THINK IT SHOULD BE EITHER A GENERAL, JUST A LOT CLEANER. THE ONLY CLEAN, NOT CLEAN PART IS JUST FIGURING OUT WHAT HAPPENS TO THESE PEOPLE THAT ARE THAT ARE A LITTLE BIT DOWN THE ROAD. SO WE WOULD WE WOULD TRY TO TIME IT. YEAH, THEY WOULD BE GRANDFATHERED IN, SO TO SPEAK. OKAY. I THINK THAT'S NOT A NOT A LEGAL TERM, BUT BUT IT WOULD BE ONCE WE CHOOSE OUR, OUR DATE CERTAIN YOU GOT IT RIGHT THEN THEY KNOW THEY HAVE X DATE TO GET IT IN. AND IF THEY'VE ALREADY STARTED THEN THEY EITHER GOT TO EXPEDITE THEIR, THEIR WORK TO GET IT READY, OR THEY WAIT UNTIL WE COME BACK WITH THE MODIFIED. AND I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN FIGURE OUT AND WE CAN BRING THE COUNCIL. YEAH. THE QUESTION THAT I HAVE IS WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO BRING BACK SOMETHING FOR THURSDAY THAT THAT IS, YOU KNOW, JUST THAT UNDERSTANDING THAT IF CDS GETS PROPOSED A PUD IN THE NEXT DAY OR TWO, IT'S LIKE THE FAIR WARNING. YEAH, I THINK WE'RE I MEAN, THAT DISCUSSION IS THAT THIS IS I'M ONLY INTERESTED IN MAKING SURE THAT THE ONES THAT HAVE ALREADY SUBMITTED PAPERWORK AND PAID SOMETHING. RIGHT? RIGHT. BECAUSE WHAT I'M AFRAID OF IS, IS THIS CONVERSATION SPURS SOMEBODY TO TOMORROW COME IN AND PUT SOMETHING IN REAL QUICKLY BECAUSE THEY WANT TO GET IT UNDER THE UNDER THE LINE. SO ARE YOU SUGGESTING THAT THE REALITY IS A PRETTY SIMPLE THE MORATORIUM MAKES ME MORE NERVOUS. DIRECTOR. I'M SORRY.
IS A VERY IT'S PRETTY, PRETTY SIMPLE DOCUMENT. SO SEE, THAT'S WHAT I'D LIKE IS FEEDBACK FROM BOTH SIDES BECAUSE I'M INCLINED TO DO THE RESCIND AS WELL. BUT I'D LIKE FEEDBACK FROM YOU CDS AND LEGAL SO WE COULD. I MEAN, THEY CAN ALWAYS GIVE US THAT OPINION ON THURSDAY NIGHT TOO.
OKAY, SO IS IT TOO LATE TO GET IT ON THE AGENDA? LET'S PUT IT ON THE AGENDA SO WE CAN MAKE A FORMAL DECISION. WAIT, SINCE THIS IS A LAND USE DECISION, WOULD IT HAVE TO GO TO PNC FIRST? BECAUSE IT'S LAND, IT'S OUR AS OUR CODE FOR LAND USE. YEAH, IT WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH PNC. SO WE'D HAVE TO DO THAT. AND IT'S JUST A STRIKING OF THE CODE. SO IT'S IT'S A VERY EASY CODE. SO IS THERE ANY KIND OF A PUBLIC HEARING INVOLVED IN THAT. YEAH, YEAH.
AS PART OF PUBLIC HEARING, WOULD YOU HAVE A SAY? WELL, JUST THAT IF IF A GROUP HASN'T ALREADY BEEN WORKING ON ONE AND BEEN HAVING CONVERSATIONS, YOU CAN'T PUT SOMETHING TOGETHER IN 48 HOURS. OKAY. IT'D BE AT LEAST NOTHING THAT WOULD BE REALLY CONSIDERED. OKAY, SO WE'LL JUST MOVE. WE'LL WE'LL HAVE IT ON A VOTE OF COUNCIL TO BRING THAT FORWARD THROUGH PNC AND, AND MOVE IT THROUGH THAT PROCESS OF A CHANGE OF CODE. OKAY. DO YOU WANT SO THAT'LL COME FROM WADE'S OFFICE. IT'LL COME FROM WADE, FROM US. OKAY. SOUNDS GOOD. OKAY, OKAY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. COUNCIL. APPRECIATE IT. I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD. THANK YOU.
COUNCIL MEMBER. FREEMAN. I JUST THOUGHT I MET WITH THE FIRE CHIEF EARLIER, AND I JUST LET YOU KNOW THAT WE HAVE PEOPLE DEPLOYED, HAVE PEOPLE IN CALIFORNIA AND IN UTAH HAVE PEOPLE PRE-POSITIONED. IN BOISE, WE HAVE ADMIN IN RENO. WE'VE GOT EIGHT OR 10 OR 12 PEOPLE DEPENDING ON PRE-POSITIONING OR WHATEVER DEPLOYED AT THIS TIME. AND, AND THEY KIND OF THINK THAT'S THE, THE SPOT THEY'D LIKE TO BE. ALSO, PJ WANTED ME TO BRING UP THAT THE GRANT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED FOR FOR THE PARK. I KNEW THAT YOU WERE PROBABLY AWARE OF THAT, BUT LET'S SAY IT IN A PUBLIC MEETING THAT WE ARE FULLY IN COMPLIANCE AND WE HAVE MADE A PROPOSAL OR A SUBMITTAL FOR FOR A NEW GRANT FOR THE FIRST TIME IN 30 YEARS. YEAH, YEAH, AT LEAST 30 YEARS. YEAH.
OKAY. THAT'S ALL I HAD. EXCELLENT, COUNSELOR. TWO THINGS. THE FIRST, OVER THE WEEKEND, I RECEIVED AN INVITATION FROM MIKE COULSON, WHO IS THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BONNEVILLE COUNTY REPUBLICAN CENTRAL COMMITTEE. AND HE WOULD LIKE TO HE WOULD LIKE ME TO INVITE ALL OF COUNCIL TO A BARBECUE THAT'S HAPPENING THIS WEEKEND. ON SATURDAY EVENING, OUR GOVERNOR WILL BE THERE, LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, OUR US REPRESENTATIVE. SEVERAL OF OUR STATE LEGISLATORS WILL BE THERE. SO IT WOULD BE IT WOULD BE A GOOD EVENT TO GO AND RUB SHOULDERS WITH OUR COMMUNITY AND WITH OUR OUR CONSTITUTIONAL LEADERS. IF IF YOU'RE ABLE, TALK TO ME AND LET ME KNOW. I'M ORGANIZING A TABLE FOR US. OKAY, THAT'S THIS WEEKEND. THAT'S
[00:10:05]
THIS SATURDAY. AND I KNOW THEY STILL HAVE SOME TICKETS AVAILABLE. SO I ENCOURAGE ANYONE WHO CAN COME AND PARTICIPATE. IT SHOULD BE A FUN EVENING BASED ON WHAT THEY HAVE PLANNED. THE SECOND THING I WANTED TO DISCUSS, AND YOU CAN ALL CAN CORRECT ME IF THIS ISN'T THE TIME TO BRING. THIS IS THE TIME TO BRING IT UP. IS OUR. THE LIGHTING OF OUR WATER TOWER AND THE POLICY THAT WE HAVE AROUND THAT. I WAS APPROACHED BY SEVERAL INDIVIDUALS OVER THE WEEKEND IN RELATION TO A PARTICULAR CASE AND SCENARIO AND SITUATION. I RECOGNIZE THAT THAT THAT THIS IS LIKELY SOMETHING OR YOU COULD ALWAYS FIND PROS AND CONS.AND I THINK AS A COUNCIL, WE SHOULD JUST KIND OF DISCUSS WHAT WE THINK THAT THE POLICY PARAMETERS SHOULD BE. WHEN I TAKE A STEP BACK AND I LOOK AT IT AGAIN, AND MAYBE I'M JUST THIS IS JUST ONE PERSPECTIVE, BUT I SEE THAT WE HAVE THIS REALLY COOL ASSET IN THE CITY THAT LITERALLY CAN BE A BEACON OF LIGHT, RIGHT TO PEOPLE TO UNITE BEHIND THE CAUSE, CERTAIN CAUSES. RIGHT. AND THEN THE QUESTION BECOMES, OKAY, WELL, WHAT CAUSES CAN WE LIGHT FOR AND WHICH ONES DO WE NOT? AND I RECOGNIZE THAT THAT'S THE DISCUSSION. BUT, YOU KNOW, THE SITUATION THAT WAS BROUGHT BEFORE ME WAS, YOU KNOW, A YOUNG MAN IN OUR COMMUNITY WHO LIKELY HAS LESS THAN NOW, LESS THAN A WEEK TO LIVE, WHO'S BEEN FIGHTING CANCER FOR AN EXTREMELY LONG TIME. AND WHEN I THINK OF THINGS LIKE THAT, AND IF WE TURN IT GREEN AND OUR COMMUNITY IS LIKE, WELL, WHY IS THE WHY IS IT GREEN? IT JUST I THINK IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO UNITE US AS A COMMUNITY TO UNDERSTAND WHY WE HAVE THAT AND WHAT WE'RE DOING IT FOR. AND I THINK IF WE WERE TO SET SOME PARAMETERS AROUND WHAT MAKES, YOU KNOW, A GENERAL POLICY, BUT KIND OF A RECOGNITION OF WHY WE WOULD, YOU KNOW, WHAT MAKES SENSE FOR US IN A WAY TO LIGHT THE TOWER. I'D LIKE TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION. SO I COULDN'T REMEMBER. AND NOW I THINK I JUST ANSWERED MY OWN QUESTION. BUT YOU WERE NOT HERE FOR THIS CONVERSATION. I WAS NOT. SO THAT WOULD BE WHY YOU DID VOTE. YEAH, YOU DID VOTE. OKAY. IT'S GOOD. I MEAN, WHICH IS FINE.
YOU ACTUALLY DID VOTE. YES. YOU THERE WAS LIKE A LITTLE SURVEY, THE SURVEY. SO SORRY. LET ME FRAME I'M BECAUSE I DID KNOW THAT COUNCIL MEMBER LEE WAS GOING TO BRING THIS UP. I DID I WANTED TO FRAME THIS CONVERSATION THAT WE DID THIS SURVEY COUNCIL AND MYSELF WHEN THE WHEN WE COMMISSIONED THE WATER TOWER. OKAY. AND BASED ON THIS SURVEY, WE HAVE HAD AN INFORMAL INTERNAL POLICY HAS NOT BEEN WRITTEN DOWN. IT'S LIKE, WELL, HERE'S WHERE COUNCIL LANDED ON THIS. SO THIS HAS BEEN WHAT WE'VE BEEN USING AS AN INFORMAL INTERNAL POLICY.
THEN CHIEF JOHNSON CALLED AND ASKED IF WE COULD DO LIGHT TOWER BLUE FOR LIGHT BLUE. SO I CALLED ALL THE COUNCIL MEMBERS. AND YES, WE DECIDED TO GIVE THAT DEPARTMENT AUTHORIZATION TO LIGHT THE WATER TOWER BLUE. I HAVE ALSO BEEN RECEIVING TEXTS AND EMAILS, EVEN TO THE POINT WHERE SOMEONE WAS LIKE, WELL, HOW MANY SIGNATURES IS IT GOING TO TAKE? RIGHT. AND, AND FOR ME, IT WAS LIKE, THAT WAS ALMOST A BIT LIKE, WELL, HOW MUCH MONEY IS IT GOING TO TAKE TO LIGHT THE WATER TOWER? RIGHT? IT JUST REALLY, TO ME, I HAVE FELT VERY UNCOMFORTABLE TO SAY THIS IS A GOOD CAUSE. THIS ISN'T A GOOD CAUSE. THIS CHILD MATTERS, THIS CHILD DOESN'T.
THIS ONE HAS A LOT OF POPULARITY. SO I HAVEN'T THAT THAT HAS BEEN A REALLY UNCOMFORTABLE SITUATION FOR ME. SO AT THE VERY MINIMUM, I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE A WRITTEN FORMAL INTERNAL POLICY OR COUNCIL NEEDS TO MAKE A POLICY, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT NORMAL FOR US TO HAVE POLICIES THAT DIRECT DEPARTMENTS, AT LEAST WE'VE GOT TO GET SOMETHING FORMALIZED THAT WE CAN POINT BACK TO. YEAH, I THINK SO. IT'S NOT SO INFORMAL. I MEAN, I THINK PRIOR LEGAL COUNCIL COMMUNICATED TO US THAT THE LIGHTING OF THE TOWER WOULD BE A FORM OF GOVERNMENT OPINION AND COMMUNICATION, AND THEREFORE THERE WAS SOME PARAMETERS ON FREE SPEECH. AND WHAT WE THAT THE LIGHTING COMMUNICATES SUPPORT FOR CERTAIN THINGS AND THAT IT. I THINK ONE OF THE EXAMPLES WAS, YOU KNOW, LET'S SAY THAT THE KKK WANTS TO LIGHT THE WATER TOWER AND THEY SUBMIT A THING THAT. CAN WE LEGALLY SAY NO? ABSOLUTELY. YEAH. WELL, I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY. YOU'RE NOT AN ATTORNEY. THE ATTORNEY AT THE TIME SAID, I WOULDN'T DO THAT IF I WERE YOU. IF THAT'S WHAT YOU HAVE TO ALLOW ALL. AND THAT'S WHAT IT CAME DOWN. THAT WAS HIS OPINION. OH, I COMPLETELY DISAGREE. THAT WAS WITH THE FLAGS IN FRONT OF CITY HALL. YEAH. SO IT'S KIND OF LIKE AN ONGOING LIKE SPEECH. I'M JUST SAYING, JUST LETTING YOU KNOW THIS HAS BEEN THIS TYPE OF CONVERSATION HAS OCCURRED OVER TWO CITY ATTORNEYS. WE'RE ON NUMBER THREE NOW. THIS WILL CONTINUE. SO HERE'S MY MY QUESTION. IF WE
[00:15:02]
WERE TO SET PARAMETERS THAT SAY, OKAY, LIKE WE DON'T WANT IT TO BECOME A POLITICAL TYPE OF THING, RIGHT? SO IF IT'S NOT A POLITICAL CAUSE, BUT IT'S, IT'S AGAIN, WE AND I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING ON SIGNATURES, BUT I DON'T NECESSARILY I'M NOT AS OPPOSED TO IT WHEN I SAY, OKAY, IF WE'VE GOT 100 PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY THAT HAVE SIGNED SUPPORT OF THIS. AND JUST TO ME THAT'S LIKE, OH, I'M NOT SAYING THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT YOU DO, BUT THAT SHOWS, OKAY, THERE'S SUPPORT FOR THIS PARTICULAR INDIVIDUAL OR CAUSE, RIGHT. BUT WHEN OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT ASKS FOR IT, I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE SOMETHING THAT WOULD THAT WOULD BE AN AUTOMATIC. RIGHT. SO YEAH, SO THAT'S KIND OF HOW WE GOT TO THE AND YOU CAN SEE ON THIS LAST QUESTION, THE. LET'S SEE, THERE WAS IT'S ACTUALLY NOT ON HERE, BUT ALLOWING CITIZENS BUSINESS SCHOOL. YEAH. BUT BUT ABOUT IMPLEMENTING WELL, NO IMPLEMENTING PARAMETERS THAT WERE GOVERNMENT RELATED AGENCY REQUESTS. SO SCHOOLS WOULD COUNT BECAUSE THEY'RE A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OR WHAT IS THAT RIGHT. YEAH. YEAH, YEAH. AND SO THERE WAS SOME IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT ANYTHING WRITTEN HERE, WHICH IS WHY WE NEED SOMETHING IN WRITING. BUT THERE WAS SOME OF THIS CONVERSATION OF THAT WOULD BE IT WAS RECOMMENDED ANYWAY, THAT THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD REDUCE LIABILITY. THEREFORE WE COULD SUPPORT SCHOOLS WITH DIFFERENT THINGS. YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? LIKE THE SCHOOL REQUESTS COULD COME THROUGH UNDER THAT. YEAH. AND THAT THAT WOULD HELP REDUCE LIABILITY OF SOME OF THE OTHER ISSUES THAT HAVE GOTTEN BROUGHT UP. SO AFTER I'M NOT AFRAID OF A CONVERSATION, I JUST THINK, YOU KNOW, JUST LIKE ANYTHING ELSE, WE GET LEGAL ADVICE, WE DECIDE WHICH WAY TO GO RIGHT AFTER THAT LEGAL ADVICE AND AFTER THIS, EVEN JUST THE SCHOOL REQUESTED INDIVIDUAL LIGHTING SCHEMES. IT WAS KIND OF LIKE, YEAH, UNLESS THE SCHOOL REQUESTS FOR A PERSON, RIGHT? LIKE, OH, WE HAVE THIS BECAUSE THEN YEAH, IT'S LIKE THIS. YEAH. BECAUSE THEN IT'S EASY TO GET, YOU KNOW, AN EMAIL FROM ANOTHER ELECTED OFFICIAL FROM ANOTHER TOWN. WELL, THERE WAS THERE, I MEAN, WELL, BECAUSE THERE WAS CONCERN OF LIKE, OKAY, WELL, IF, IF, IF SOMEONE CAN REQUEST SOMETHING IN HONOR OF ONE PERSON, WELL THEN THAT MEANS SOMEBODY CAN REQUEST A COLOR FOR SOMEONE'S BIRTHDAY, SOMEONE'S ENGAGEMENT, SOMEBODY'S QUINCEANERA, SOMEBODY'S WEDDING ANNIVERSARY. AND THERE WAS A POINT WHERE IT'S LIKE, OKAY, WE'D BE CHANGING THE LIGHTS EVERY DAY. AND NOBODY WAS A COST. NOBODY KNOW WHAT IT WAS FOR THAT. HOW ARE WE GOING TO COMMUNICATE WHAT THESE LIGHTS ARE FOR? BECAUSE THE LIGHTING AND THIS IS WHERE IT GOT KIND OF, YOU KNOW, THINK ABOUT THE CONVERSATION ABOUT DIFFERENT COLORS THAT THESE WERE REPRESENTING SPEECH COMING FROM THE CITY AND THAT THAT'S COMMUNICATING A MESSAGE. AND HOW DO WE AND HOW DO WE EXPLAIN THAT MESSAGE PLUS JUST, I MEAN, THE IDEA WAS THAT WE'D GET A REQUEST FOR 365 DAYS A YEAR. WE WOULD OH, FOR SURE, BECAUSE WE GET PROCLAMATION REQUESTS. I MEAN, I IF YOU'VE NOT EXPERIENCED THE PROCLAMATION THAT WE DID WITH THURSDAY, WE DID AMBER HOOPS, RIGHT. SO IT WOULD BE. BUT IF YOU COULD HAVE.I MEAN, BUT IF PEOPLE KNEW THEY COULD JUST SUBMIT A REQUEST. YEAH, WHY WOULDN'T I DO IT FOR MY KID'S BIRTHDAY? SO THEN WE TALKED ABOUT A FEE STRUCTURE TO PAY FOR ADMINISTRATIVE TIME.
YEAH. I GUESS AS I THINK JUST THROUGH THE ASSET ITSELF, I ENVISION IT BEING SOME THINGS LIKE THAT. IT'S NOT AN EVERYDAY TYPE OF THING, BUT THAT WHEN YOU HAVE A CAUSE THAT PEOPLE ARE RALLYING AROUND, WE HAVE AN ABILITY TO HAVE THIS LIGHT AND HAVE PEOPLE ASK QUESTIONS, WHICH I THINK FURTHER CAN UNIFY, RIGHT? OR IT COULD DIVIDE WITHIN A CERTAIN GROUP. YEAH.
BUT IF WE PUT THE RIGHT PARAMETERS, RIGHT, IF LET'S JUST SAY THAT WE ARE LIKE, OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO USE THE COLOR GREEN FOR SOMEBODY WHO'S FIGHTING FOR THEIR LIFE IN THIS PARTICULAR YOUNG MAN IS ONE THAT'S GOING TO GO, RIGHT. YEAH. AND I THINK THIS, BY THE WAY, I THINK THIS IS A WORTHY CAUSE, WITHOUT A DOUBT. ALL THE THINGS I DON'T THINK ANYBODY'S DISAGREEING WITH THAT. SO WHEN YOU PUT SOMETHING OUT LIKE THAT FOR AN INDIVIDUAL WHO, YOU KNOW, AGAIN IS FIGHTING FOR THEIR LIFE, RIGHT? OR MAYBE IT'S A CAUSE FROM OUR FIRE OR OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT, RIGHT? SO WE IDENTIFY KIND OF THE PARAMETERS THAT WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH.
AND IT'S NOT SOMEBODY'S BIRTHDAY OR QUINCEANERA OR, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT A POLITICAL TYPE THING. I THINK THERE'S WAYS TO PUT PARAMETERS AROUND IT THAT WE COULD GET COMFORTABLE AND STILL UTILIZE THE ASSET. I MEAN, TO SAY AT THE TIME, I DON'T THINK THAT WE THAT THAT THAT WAS RECOMMENDED AS BEING LIKE A POSSIBILITY. SO WE CAN PURSUE ANOTHER CONVERSATION. WE HAVE DIFFERENT CITY ATTORNEY GENERALLY THAT SO FIRST, FIRST AMENDMENT, IF YOU OPEN IT UP AND MAKE IT A PUBLIC FORUM, BASICALLY PUBLIC FORUM, THOSE ARE THE THINGS I WAS LOOKING FOR BECAUSE THERE IS A CASE THAT HAPPENED, I DON'T KNOW, FIVE YEARS AGO WHERE THERE WAS A CITY FLAG IN FRONT OF, I CAN'T REMEMBER SOMEWHERE OUT EAST I WANT TO SAY. AND THEY WOULD SAY, HEY, IF YOU WANT TO, YOU CAN COME RUN YOUR OWN FLAG UP IN FRONT OF CITY HALL. AND SO THEY DID THAT FOR A WHILE. AND THEN THE GROUP CAME THAT HAD A MESSAGE. IT WAS OBJECTIONABLE. RIGHT. AND THEY SAID, WELL, YOU'VE GOT TO LET US DO IT TOO. AND THE SUPREME COURT SAID, YEAH, IF YOU OPEN IT UP TO ONE, YOU OPEN UP TO ALL. AND GENERALLY WHEN YOU DO
[00:20:04]
SOMETHING LIKE THAT, YOU CAN MAKE RESTRICTIONS, BUT THEY HAVE TO BE VIEWPOINT NEUTRAL.SO YOU CAN'T DISCRIMINATE BASED ON THE CONTENT OF THE MESSAGE. ONCE YOU'VE OPENED IT UP AS A PUBLIC FORUM, YOU CAN'T DISCRIMINATE ON THE ON THE CONTENT. SO WE'D HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT IF. SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT BY THAT YOU'RE YOU'RE SAYING THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO ALLOW THE KKK TO FLY TO FLY THE COLORS. IT'S GOING TO. WELL, IF WE OPEN IT UP AS A PUBLIC FORUM.
SO HOW DO YOU MAKE IT NOT A PUBLIC FORUM? WELL, THEN IT HAS NOT TO BE OPEN TO JUST ANYBODY TO COME IN AND PUT SOMETHING ON IT. SO AND I CAN RESEARCH IT MORE. BUT I KNOW THE MAYOR WAS SAYING THERE IS GOVERNMENT. IT IS AN INTENSELY COMPLICATED AREA. IT WAS VERY IT WAS VERY THERE IS GOVERNMENT SPEECH. AND SO WE ARE ALLOWED TO DO THINGS LIKE, YOU KNOW, FOR THE THE POLICE COLORS. BUT IF WE'RE OPENING IT UP TO THE PUBLIC, THAT'S WHERE YOU START RUNNING INTO FIRST AMENDMENT LIBERALLY. AND I DISAGREE FOR THIS ONE REASON IS BECAUSE I GET A LETTER FROM A MOTHER WHO'S TRYING TO GET HELP FOR HER FOUR YEAR OLD FOR CANCER. THEY DON'T HAVE THE SAME COMMUNITY CONNECTIONS AND RESOURCES. THEY ACTUALLY LIVE IN THE CITY. I DON'T I'M NOT SURE THAT THIS MOST RECENT ONE DOES. LIKE AT SOME POINT, IT'S LIKE THIS PERSON GETS MORE DESERVING OR LESS DESERVING. THAT'S WHERE FOR ME, IF COUNCIL WANTS TO HAVE A POLICY THAT SAYS THAT IF A CHILD PASSES AWAY, THAT YOU LIKE THE COLOR FOR THEM, I'D BE ALL IN FAVOR OF THAT BECAUSE IT'S LIKE NO DISCRIMINATION AGAINST CHILDREN, BUT I JUST HAVE NOT I'M NOT IN THE GOD MAKING DECISION. WE JUST COULDN'T COME UP WITH A WAY THAT OUR ATTORNEY SAID WE DIDN'T HAVE TO OPEN IT UP FOR EVERYBODY. WE COULD NOT. WE JUST COULDN'T FIGURE THAT OUT AT THE TIME. SEE WHAT WHAT I AND I UNDERSTAND, RIGHT, THAT THERE'S THAT IT CAN BECOME COMPLICATED. BUT FOR ME, I JUST THINK IT WOULD BE UNFORTUNATE, THOUGH, IF WE HAVE SOMETHING THAT COULD BE UNITING AND WE'RE JUST CHOOSING NOT TO USE IT BECAUSE WE'RE AFRAID OF, I DON'T KNOW, TAKE THE OPPOSITE SIDE TO THAT, PLEASE, BECAUSE AS SOON AS WE SAY THIS ONE AND NOT THAT ONE, YEAH, WE'RE DISUNITING, WHICH IS WHY I DON'T WANT THE COLORS FOR THE EMOTION BOWL TO BE ON THE WATER TOWER BECAUSE IT DIVIDES. IT IS THE THE OPPOSITE OF UNITING. IT SEEMS LIKE EVERYBODY COME TOGETHER BECAUSE WE DID IT IN A PARTICULAR COLOR OR A PARTICULAR TRAGEDY. AND THE PROBLEM IS THEN THE NEXT PERSON COMES AND THEY DON'T GET IT, BECAUSE THEN YOU DIVIDE IT INSTEAD OF UNITED. TO ME, RED, WHITE AND BLUE IS ABOUT AS UNITING AS I'M WILLING TO GO AND CALL IT GOOD. I'M WILLING TO GO. AS A SURVEY SHOWS, WITH THE FEDERAL HOLIDAYS, BECAUSE THERE'S A NATIONAL RECOGNITION OF THOSE HOLIDAYS. BUT THAT'S ABOUT IT. AS FAR AS USING IT FOR A PUBLIC A PUBLIC STATEMENT BY THE CITY, JUST THOSE HAVE TO BE DONE IN OTHER WAYS AND FINDING OTHER WAYS TO BRING A COMMUNITY TOGETHER, WHICH THE COMMUNITY DOES COME TOGETHER WHEN THERE'S TRAGEDY. IT DOES, BUT IT'S NOT AT THE WATER TOWER. I AGREE. THE OTHER THING TO DO IS TURN THE WHOLE THING OFF AND LEAVE IT STERILE. BUT I'M GOOD WITH THE RED, WHITE AND BLUE. BUT ANYTHING ELSE WE DO ACTUALLY DISUNITES AND DIVIDES. YOU THINK SO? YOU REALLY DO BECAUSE YOU RECOGNIZE THIS ONE.
BUT YOU DIDN'T RECOGNIZE THAT ONE. YOU COULDN'T POSSIBLY DO THEM ALL. YOU COULDN'T DO ALL THE TRAGEDIES ON THAT WATER TOWER WITHOUT STARTING TO. AND THE OTHER THING THAT HAPPENS, I THINK, IS THE MORE CHOICE THAT WE THROW TO THE MAYOR'S OFFICE, THE MORE DIFFICULT AND PRESSURE IT PUTS ON THE MAYOR, WHICH IS REALLY SHOULD JUST MAKE A POLICY AND LIVE WITH IT AND COUNCIL BACKS IT. SO TO ME, LET'S JUST LEAVE A RED, WHITE AND BLUE AND WE CAN DO THE NATIONAL HOLIDAYS AND THAT'S IT. SO YEAH, SO THAT WAS THAT WAS ONE OF THE OPTIONS. BUT THE BULK OF COUNCIL SAID THEN INCLUDE VALENTINE'S DAY, SAINT PATRICK'S DAY, HALLOWEEN AND CHRISTMAS. WELL, CHRISTMAS EVE WAS ALREADY LISTED AS ONE OF THOSE 12. NO, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TRYING TO HAVE A LITTLE FUN. THAT'S ALL THAT WAS THE IDEA. THAT WAS THE KIND OF THING. AND IF WE. AND IF WE NARROWLY. AND IF WE NARROWLY SAY FEDERALLY RECOGNIZED HOLIDAYS, IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT WASN'T GOING TO CAUSE ANY ISSUES. THERE ARE ISSUES THAT WILL MAKE ME CRY AT THE DAIS, BUT THIS IS NOT ONE OF THEM. BUT IT'S OPENING IT UP TO EVERYBODY. NO, BRANDON, I THINK IT'S TWO WELL AND TWO DIVISIVE IN ITS OWN WAY. YEAH. I MEAN, I'M TRYING TO SEE THAT POINT. I BUT I LOOK AT LIKE THE EXAMPLE THAT YOU GIVE OF LIKE THE EMOTION BOWL. I THINK THAT THAT IS A PERFECT THING TO DO. PERFECT. LIKE I THINK THAT'S A UNITING OF AN EVENT AS WE CAN HAVE IN OUR COMMUNITY. AND I LOVE IT. I LOVE THE EMOTION BOWL TO HAVE SOMETHING. I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THE EMOTION BOWL, DON'T GET ME WRONG, BUT I DON'T WANT TO MAKE THAT STATEMENT ON THE WATER TOWER. WELL, AND THEN DO WE DO THE CIVIL WAR? WELL,
[00:25:05]
THEN AGAIN, I WOULD I DIFFERENT BUT YEAH NOT. YEAH. WELL BUT THE CIVIL WAR IS INSIDE THE CITY SO. WELL SOME OF IT IS TINY PARTS I KNOW. SEE LISTEN WHEN THE WHEN THE LAKERS WIN A RING THIS NEXT YEAR. OKAY. AND YOU AND I REQUEST A WATER TOWER LIGHT OF PURPLE AND GOLD, YOU WILL HAVE SOMEONE COMPLAINING. SEE, I I'M IN FAVOR OF THE EMOTION BOWL, BUT YOU DON'T PUT THE WINNER ON IT. NO. BOTH COLORS. YOU PUT HALF, HALF ONE COLOR. YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. THAT'S HOW AS SOON AS THE GAME IS GOING TO STICK WITH THE HOLIDAYS, IT GOES AWAY. NOW WE'RE GETTING RID OF OKAY. SO SO OUR INFORMAL POLICY MATCHES THIS SURVEY. IT WILL BECOME A WRITTEN POLICY BY THE END OF THE WEEK TO MATCH THE SURVEY. IF COUNCIL I WILL BRING SOMETHING FORWARD. IF COUNCIL IS IS WANTS TO REVISIT IT SO THAT IT IS A FORMAL COUNCIL POLICY. IF NOT, IT WILL BE A WRITTEN FORMAL POLICY BASED ON EMOTION. BOWL OUT EMOTION BOWL WAS OUT. THIS IS WHAT IT. THIS IS HOW IT WAS VOTED. PREFERENCE FOR IMPLEMENTING A BASE LIGHTING SCHEME EVERY NIGHT. SEVEN YESES. PREFERENCE FOR IMPLEMENTING THE FEDERAL HOLIDAY LIGHTING PLAN ONE NO. SIX YESES, INCLUDING THE HOLIDAY SEASON OF CHRISTMAS THROUGH NEW YEARS. THAT WAS SEVEN YESES. PREFERENCE. MAYOR, IF I COULD JUST ADD ONE THING TO THAT WE HAVE DONE FROM THE DAY OF THE TREE LIGHTING TO NEW YEAR'S, A LITTLE SOMETHING WE WANT TO TAKE IT. OKAY, SO THAT WOULD BE CHANGED. SO THEN THE NONFEDERAL HOLIDAYS DID GET STILL A FIVE TWO VOTE FOR VALENTINE'S DAY, SAINT PATRICK'S DAY, HALLOWEEN, AND CHRISTMAS EVE. THEN THE PREFERENCE FOR ALLOWING. THEN THIS WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD WANT TO REALLY LOOK AT. WELL, LET ME SAY THIS FIRST PREFERENCE FOR ALLOWING CITIZEN BUSINESS OR SCHOOL REQUESTED INDIVIDUAL LIGHTING SCHEMES TO. WERE YES. FIVE WERE NO. AND THEN. BUT WE DID ALLOW THE DEPARTMENT. SO DEPARTMENT REQUESTS FOR NATIONAL. POLICE NIGHT OUT OR SOMETHING OR. YEAH, SOMETHING FOR THE POLICE. OKAY. MAYBE. MAYBE FOR FIRE. SO. 911 I DON'T KNOW. I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW WHAT ABOUT PUBLIC WORKS? WHAT COLOR DO THEY GET? GREEN LOOKS GREEN NOW. HOW MANY THINGS CAN WE PUT UNDER GREEN? BUT ITEM NUMBER FOUR DOESN'T LIST ALL THE FEDERAL HOLIDAYS, SO AT LEAST NO ITEM NUMBER THREE TWO DOES. THAT'S THE FEDERAL HOLIDAYS. ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS MORE OF OUR POP CULTURE DAYS. OKAY, SO IT DOESN'T INCLUDE THANKSGIVING FOR EXAMPLE, DOES NOT OKAY. BECAUSE THANKSGIVING IS UNDER NUMBER TWO. YES. IT WOULD BE INCLUDED. WHO GETS TO DECIDE WHAT COLOR IT'S A THERE'S ALREADY A LIGHTING SCHEME FOR THOSE. OKAY. PERSONALLY, I LIKE THE RED, WHITE AND BLUE THE BEST OF ALL THE LIGHTING SCHEMES. WHENEVER WE PUT BLUE AND GREEN TOGETHER, IT LOOKS YELLOW. OKAY. ALL RIGHT, ALL RIGHT. THOSE ARE THE THERE WILL BE AN INTERNAL POLICY AND THEN WE CAN BRING IT BACK FOR HALLOWEEN. IT LOOKS LIKE A BIG PUMPKIN. SO ARE WE GOING TO PUT THIS AS A DEPARTMENT KIND OF A LEVEL THING? DEPARTMENT INTERNAL. BUT IT'S GOT TO BE FORMALIZED, RIGHT? I'M ABSOLUTELY WITH YOU. I JUST DIDN'T WANT TO RAISE IT TO A TO A COUNCIL LEVEL. OKAY.COUNCIL MEMBER FRIEDMAN AND I ARE LEAVING TOMORROW MORNING, AND WE WILL BE BACK IN TIME FOR OUR COUNCIL MEETING THURSDAY NIGHT. WE ARE HITTING THE ROAD TO BE BACK ON TIME. IF FOR SOME REASON WE ARE NOT, THEN COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRANCIS WILL BE IN CHARGE AND WE WILL BE ONLINE. I MEAN, WE'LL BE WE'LL BE HERE. WE'LL BE HERE. IT'S ABSOLUTELY OUR PLAN TO BE HERE. YOU HAVE GREAT FAITH IN AIRLINES, OKAY? WE'RE NOT FLYING. WE'LL BE HERE. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO OUR DISCUSSION. I JUST FEEL LIKE I'D BE REMISS IF I DIDN'T SAY THE VERY, VERY TOP LIGHTS THAT WERE RED ON THE TOWER AND THE WATER TOWER HAVE TO STAY ON. THOSE ARE OBSTRUCTION LIGHTS. I WAS GOING TO OFFER THE TOWER AT THE AIRPORT AS AN ASSET FOR, WELL, YOU KNOW, THIS ITEM IN FRONT OF YOU MIGHT HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU TO PROVIDE SOME INPUT TO THAT EFFECT.
THANK YOU, AIRPORT, FOR BEING PATIENT WITH US. IF WE WILL NOW TURN THE DISCUSSION TO OUR AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER. AND WELCOME TO EVERYONE WHO HAS TRAVELED TO TO BE HERE WITH US.
WILL YOU MIND INTRODUCING EVERYONE? ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU, MAYOR. TO MY IMMEDIATE RIGHT IS NATHAN CAVALLARI WAS HERE AT THE LAST WORK SESSION. HE'S THE PROJECT MANAGER WITH ARDURA THAT'S ALSO OVERSEEING OUR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ON THE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER. ON
[00:30:01]
THE FAR RIGHT IS DALE BRENNAN, THE PROGRAM MANAGER FROM POND ARCHITECTS, WHO IS DOING THIS SUBUNIT OF WORK FOR THAT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS. AND JANET ROMANICK IS THE ARCHITECT THAT IS DESIGNING AND WORKING THROUGH OUR AIRPORT TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER. AND I AM GOING TO TURN THIS OVER TO NATHAN TO START AND GO FROM THERE. ALL RIGHT. WELL, THANKS, EVERYONE, AND GOOD TO SEE YOU AGAIN SO SOON. THIS. I JUST WANT TO GO TO THE NEXT ONE. SO[Airport]
IT'S BEEN A LONG PROCESS. WE'RE GOING TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT'S GONE ON OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS WHERE WE'RE AT TODAY, AND THEN ALSO WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT NEXT. YEAR WITHOUT SLIDES, BUT TRY TO RESTART IT. THAT'S ALL RIGHT. I'LL KEEP GOING AND THEN IT'LL CATCH UP. THERE'S THE FIRST PARTS AREN'T TOO CRITICAL. ALL RIGHT. SO BACK IN 2023, WE ACTUALLY STARTED ON A PROJECT TO DO AN AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL SITING STUDY. AND THAT DEFINITELY HIT SOME BUMPS IN THE ROAD. AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT SOME OF THOSE, BUT WE'VE NAVIGATED THEM AND WE'RE AT THE POINT WHERE WE'RE STARTING TO WHAT WE CALL NEPA OR NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT REVIEW. AND A BIG ELEMENT OF THAT IS THE PRELIMINARY DESIGN. AND THAT'S A BIG PART OF WHAT WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT TODAY. SO IF EVERYONE REMEMBERS THE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER WAS CONSTRUCTED IN 1960. SO IT WAS TWO YEARS AFTER THE ORIGINAL TERMINAL BUILDING. AND IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE PICTURE, YOU CAN KIND OF SEE HOW IT'S SANDWICHED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE EXISTING TERMINAL BUILDING. AND NOW BEING 60 YEARS, YOU KNOW, BUILT IN 1960, OVER 60 YEARS OLD, DEFINITELY STARTING TO REACH THE END OF THE USEFUL LIFE. AND, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY WE COULD TRY TO REHABILITATE IT IN ITS CURRENT LOCATION. IT HAS BECOME AN IMPEDIMENT TO FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TERMINAL BUILDING, PARTICULARLY THE GATE HOLES IN ANY EXPANSION TO THE NORTH. AND SO PART OF WHAT WE EMBARKED ON WAS AN AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER SIGNING CITY. AND SO THAT STARTED IN 2023. AND WE HAD IDENTIFIED THREE FEASIBLE SITES, AND WE HAD ADVANCED THOSE INTO WHAT IS CALLED THE VIRTUAL IMMERSIVE. YES SIGHTING TOWER ASSESSMENT. IT'S CALLED A VISTA PROCESS IS WHAT IT IS. AND IT'S PRETTY NEAT. THEY ACTUALLY BUILD A VIRTUAL REALITY MODEL OF THE AIR VIEW. EVERY SINGLE BUILDING. WE GIVE THEM ALL THE HEIGHTS. THEY ACTUALLY SIMULATE AIRCRAFT MOVEMENTS GOING UP AND DOWN THE TAXIWAY ON THE RUNWAY, AND THEN THEY PLACE A REPLICA OF THE TOWER INSIDE THE VR MODEL, AND THE TOWER MANAGER ACTUALLY PUTS ON A SET OF VIRTUAL REALITY GOGGLES AND IS STANDING ON WHAT WOULD BE THE FLOOR OF TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER, AND THEN IS LOOKING AROUND AND ALL ELEMENTS OF THE AIRFIELD, MAKING SURE WE HAVE VISIBILITY OF THE RUNWAY ENDS, THE TAXIWAYS, ALL THE KEY AREAS. AND THEN WHEN WE'RE DOING THIS, IT'S A VERY HIGH LEVEL OF ACCURACY. SO WE'RE ACTUALLY MOVING THAT TOWER FLOOR UP AND DOWN AND MAKING SURE WE HAVE VISIBILITY OVER ALL THE DIFFERENT ELEMENTS OF THE AIRFIELD, PARTICULARLY IN THIS CASE, THE EXISTING AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER AS WELL AS WE MODELED THE FUTURE BUILD OUT OF WHAT WE DID ON THE AIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN. SO WE ACTUALLY HAD A PARKING GARAGE MODELED IN THERE. ANY FUTURE HANGARS THAT WE KNEW WERE GOING TO BE CONSTRUCTED? WE DID A WORST CASE ESTIMATE ON THEIR HEIGHT. AND, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY THEY'RE BUILDING AN AIRFIELD IN THE FUTURE AND THEN MODELING IT. WHEN WE DID THIS, THERE'S TWO SITES. YOU CAN SEE HIM NUMBER ONE AND NUMBER TWO, BOTH IN THE TERMINAL AREA. THOSE ACTUALLY HAD TO BE RAZED. ONE OF THEM I THINK WAS AROUND 15FT, THE OTHER AROUND TEN FEET. AND THEN THE THIRD SITES ON THE FAR SIDE OF THE AIRFIELD. AND ACTUALLY THAT ONE WE WERE ABLE TO LOWER. NOW THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT FROM A TOWER PERSPECTIVE, BECAUSE A LOT OF TIMES WHEN WE'RE COSTING THESE, IT'S A PER VERTICAL FOOT COST, RIGHT? THE TALLER THE STRUCTURE WE'RE BUILDING, THE MORE EXPENSIVE IT IS. SO DEFINITELY A VERY PART OF THE PROCESS. NOW, WHEN WE GOT DONE WITH THAT, WE'RE MAKING SURE THAT WE MEET ALL THE FAA REQUIREMENTS FOR LINE OF SIGHT. AND WE HAVE DONE PRELIMINARY STUDIES ON AIRSPACE, ON THE NAVAIDS ON THE FIELD, AND THEN WE SUBMIT WHAT'S CALLED A 7460, A NOTICE OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION. SO WE SUBMIT THIS TO THE FAA, JUST AS IF THIS STRUCTURE IS GOING TO BE BUILT. AND SO THEN THEY'LL DO A FULL ANALYSIS. IF WE BUILT IN THIS CASE, YOU KNOW, ON SITE THREE 140 FOOT TALL TOWER, WHAT WOULD THE TRUE IMPACTS BE? AND SO WE SUBMITTED THAT IN EARLY 2024. AND IN THE SUMMER OF 2024, WE RECEIVED NOTICE FROM THE FAA THAT THEY HAD RAISED ISSUES WITH ALL THREE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER SITES. NOW, OUT[00:35:04]
OF THAT VISTA PROCESS, REALLY FAST. SITE THREE WAS THE PREFERRED SITE BY THE AIRPORT.THAT'S THE ONE THAT'S ACROSS THE RUNWAY. AND THEN SITE ONE AND TWO WERE BACKUPS. WHEN WE SUBMIT THE AIRSPACE CASES, WE SUBMIT IT FOR FULL EVALUATION OF ALL THREE. ON THE CHANCE THAT YOU KNOW THE FIRST CHOICE ISN'T AVAILABLE, WE CAN PIVOT TO NUMBER TWO. IF NUMBER TWO DOESN'T WORK, WE COULD PIVOT TO NUMBER THREE. WELL, WE WE RECEIVED OBJECTIONS TO ALL THREE SITES. THOSE OBJECTIONS WERE BASED ON IMPACTS TO A NAVIGATIONAL AID ON FIELD. IT'S CALLED VOR FOR SHORT. PROBABLY BEST TO KEEP IT AT THAT. IT STANDS FOR VERY HIGH, VERY HIGH FREQUENCY OMNIDIRECTIONAL RANGE. AND IT IS A NAVIGATIONAL AID THAT ACTUALLY GOES BACK TO THE 1950S. AND IT EMANATES BASICALLY MULTIPLE RADIO SIGNALS. AM AND FM AND AIRCRAFT ARE ABLE TO USE THOSE TO NAVIGATE. THEY CAN LOCATE THEIR POSITION, THE THE ANGLE THEY ARE FROM THE NAVIGATIONAL AID AS WELL AS THE DISTANCE IN THIS CASE, THE. THE WHOLE AVIATION WORLD HAS MOVED TOWARDS SATELLITE BASED NAVIGATION, BUT THE VORS ARE THE BACKUP IN THE CASE THAT, YOU KNOW, SATELLITE NAVIGATION FAIL, THE VOR WOULD STILL BE AVAILABLE. AND THEY ARE STILL USED TODAY TO NAVIGATE AIRCRAFT. SO DEFINITELY IMPORTANT. IT'S USED NOT ONLY FOR POINT TO POINT NAVIGATION, BUT IT ALSO IS USED FOR DIFFERENT INSTRUMENT APPROACHES. IT'S ACTUALLY USED FOR INSTRUMENT APPROACHES AT IDAHO FALLS, AT REXBURG, AT JACKSON HOLE. SO IT SERVES A MUCH WIDER PURPOSE THAN JUST ON THE AIRFIELD. WE SPENT A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF TIME TRYING TO MITIGATE THOSE IMPACTS IN DIFFERENT WAYS.
AGAIN, IT'S A RADIO SIGNAL. SO A A LARGE FLAT OBJECT IS WHAT CAUSES THAT REFLECTION. AND WHEN WE DID THE ORIGINAL ANALYSIS, YOU MAKE THE ASSUMPTION THAT THAT LONG FLAT SURFACE IS GOING TO BE ORTHOGONAL TO THE VOR. SO THE REFLECTIONS ARE GOING TO BE IN THE WORST CASE, WE SPENT A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF TIME TRYING TO ROTATE THE SHAFT TO FIND A PERFECT ANGLE THAT WOULD MINIMIZE THOSE. ULTIMATELY, THERE THERE WERE SOME POTENTIAL OPTIONS, BUT I CAN TELL YOU I'VE BEEN WORKING ON THE AIRFIELD FOR ALMOST 20 YEARS, AND THIS VOR HAS BEEN A THORN IN THE SIDE FOR A LONG TIME. PART OF THE GRANT ASSURANCES THAT ARE AGREED TO EVERY TIME THAT THE CITY ACCEPTS A GRANT IS ONE THAT THEY WILL PROVIDE SPACE ON THE AIRFIELD FOR NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND ONE OF THIS TYPE NOW ACROSS THE UNITED STATES, VOR IN SOME CASES ARE BEING DECOMMISSIONED BECAUSE THEY HAVE AN OVERLAP OF COVERAGE. THEY'RE MAINTAINING WHAT'S CALLED A MINIMUM OPERATING NETWORK, WHICH UNFORTUNATELY OR FORTUNATELY. EITHER WAY, THIS IS ONE OF. SO EVEN WITH THE ONES THAT ARE DECOMMISSIONING, THIS ONE IS PLANNED TO REMAIN. BUT IN A LOT OF CASES THEY ARE TAKING THEM OFF AIRPORTS BECAUSE OF THAT, JUST LIKE THIS CASE. BUT THAT THAT RESTRICTION OF HAVING OBJECTS, YOU KNOW, CAUSE INTERFERENCE WITH THE AIRCRAFT, IT CAN BE BUILDINGS, IT CAN BE A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS. AND THERE'S NO WAY FOR US TO BE ABLE TO GET OURS ON THE LIST TO GET REMOVED. NO, NOT AT ALL. SHORT ANSWER. NO, I ASKED THAT QUESTION. I WAS TOLD NO. OKAY.
THANK YOU. SO THERE ARE THERE WERE SOME OPTIONS WE EXPLORED OF TRYING TO MITIGATE THE IMPACTS, YOU KNOW, TO THE EXISTING VOR AND LEAVE IT WHERE IT WAS, BUT ULTIMATELY FOR THE BEST KIND OF LONG TERM INTEREST TO THE AIRPORT, WE ELECTED TO STUDY RELOCATING IT OFF SITE.
AND IF YOU LOOK ON THE EXHIBIT, YOU CAN SEE KIND OF A A RED DOT WITH A BIG RED CIRCLE AROUND IT.
AND SO WHAT WE DID IS A FEASIBILITY STUDY ON MOVING THE VOR ONTO THE JOHNSON PROPERTY.
AND THEN, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY HAVING EVERYTHING REDESIGNED FROM THAT POINT. AND ULTIMATELY THAT WAS FOUND TO BE FEASIBLE. AND THE FAA ACCEPTED THE STUDY. AND SO ESSENTIALLY, TO MITIGATE WHAT THE FAA RAISED AS OBJECTIONS TO OUR AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER SITES, WE ARE NOW PROPOSING TO RELOCATE THE VOR OFF SITE. ANY QUESTIONS THERE? I KNOW THAT'S A LOT. OKAY, SO THAT BRINGS US WHERE WE ARE TODAY. WE HAVE SEVERAL WHAT WE TERM FEDERAL ACTIONS INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT. ONE IS OBVIOUSLY THEIR APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROPOSED AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER SITE, THE HEIGHT, ALL OF THOSE ITEMS. AND THEN ULTIMATELY, WE'RE GOING TO SEE FEDERAL FUNDING FOR IT. BOTH OF THOSE ARE TRIGGERS FOR THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT. SO NEPA, AND THAT'S WHERE WE HAVE TO DO AN EXHAUSTIVE REVIEW OF ALL THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT. AND IN THIS CASE, THAT INCLUDES RELOCATING THE VOR, AS WELL AS CONSTRUCTING A NEW AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER. AND OBVIOUSLY ON THAT WEST SIDE OF THE AIRFIELD, THIS WOULD BE THE FIRST, YOU KNOW, AIRPORT RELATED STRUCTURE OF ANY KIND
[00:40:04]
TO BE CONSTRUCTED. AND THEN WE'LL ALSO BE A RATHER TALL AND NOTICEABLE STRUCTURE. SO WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE AS PART OF THIS PROCESS THAT WE HAD A GOOD UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE TOWER WOULD POTENTIALLY LOOK LIKE ON THAT SIDE OF THE AIRFIELD. AND THAT'S WHAT BRINGS US TO WHERE WE ARE TODAY. AS PART OF THAT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, WE HAVE A VERY SIGNIFICANT PRELIMINARY DESIGN EFFORT TO TAKE A LOOK. YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY THERE'S MY WORLD OF THE BORING STUFF THE ROADS, THE SEWER, THE WATER, THE UTILITIES. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, THERE'S THE MORE EXCITING STUFF OF WHAT THE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER IS ULTIMATELY GOING TO LOOK LIKE.AND SO THAT BRINGS US WHERE WE ARE TODAY. AND I HAVE DALE AND JANET HERE WITH POND, AND THEY'RE GOING TO TALK MORE ABOUT WHAT THE TOWER MAY LOOK LIKE. AND THEN THAT'S WHAT WE'D REALLY LIKE TO SEEK YOUR FEEDBACK ON TODAY. NATHAN, I HAD ONE QUESTION ABOUT THE SITE.
THREE. YEP. AND AND IT'S DISTANCE FROM 11735 ABOUT. I KNOW YOU SAID THEY DID THE, YOU KNOW, THE WHERE THEY FIGURED ALL THE ANGLES AND EVERYTHING, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S REALLY A LONG WAYS AWAY, DOESN'T IT? IT IS, BUT IT ACTUALLY HAS GOOD VISIBILITY OF THAT RUNWAY END.
BASED ON THE HEIGHT OF THE TOWER. BUT THAT WAS THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THROUGH THAT VISTA PROCESS THAT THEY CHECK, CHECKING ALL THE RUNWAY ENDS AND THEN THE ENDS OF THE PARALLEL TAXIWAY. SO AND WE'RE LOOKING THROUGH THE AIRPORT BASICALLY, YOU KNOW, OVER THE TOP OF THE TOWER AND, YOU KNOW, THE STUFF THAT'S THERE ALREADY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. NOT ONLY THE STUFF THAT'S THERE, BUT THE STUFF THAT IS PLANNED TO BE BUILT LIKE A GARAGE OR SOMETHING. YEAH. WE EVALUATED A MULTI-LEVEL GARAGE OVER THE EXISTING PARKING LOT AS PART OF THAT. SO I'LL ADD ON TOP OF THAT. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I'M SORRY. SO I'LL ADD TO THAT WHAT YOU WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT WITH THE VISIBILITY. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE NOTICED, I'VE BEEN TO SEVERAL TOWERS THAT ARE EXISTING THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON IN OTHER LOCATIONS. AND WE NOTICED THAT THIS ONE WAS INTERESTING IS THE CONTROLLERS HAVE TO DO A FULL 360 TO BE ABLE TO SEE EVERYTHING AT THIS AIRPORT, AND WHICH IS NOT COMMON BECAUSE IT'S A LOT OF WORK FOR THEM TO HAVE TO DO THAT. IF THERE'S A PLANE COMING IN ON THAT BACK ONE, THEY'RE TURNING ALL THE WAY AROUND, WHICH TAKES THEIR EYES OFF THE FRONT. SO PUTTING IT ON THE WEST SIDE REALLY HELPS THEIR VISIBILITY OF THE ENTIRE AIRPORT. SO, SO THERE IS SOME, THERE'S A LOT TO THE SITING AND YOU KNOW, WHY THINGS ULTIMATELY GET DECIDED. SO WE CAME, DALE AND I CAME OUT HERE BACK IN JUNE AND MET WITH THE TEAM TO TRY AND UNDERSTAND WHAT THE AIRPORT WAS LOOKING FOR, WHAT THEIR NEEDS ARE, HOW THEY WANT TO USE THIS AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER. BECAUSE BELIEVE IT OR NOT, EVERYBODY USES THEM DIFFERENTLY. A LOT OF THINGS ARE REQUIRED THAT HAVE TO GO INTO THESE, BUT EACH PLACE ALSO HAS THEIR SPIN THAT THEY PUT ON THEM. SO THESE ARE THE DIFFERENT THINGS THAT WE'VE SEEN. YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE THE VIEW OF COURSE, FROM THE MAIN ENTRANCE DRIVE. IT'S VERY ATTRACTIVE. THE BLUE GREEN GLASS GRABS EVERYONE'S ATTENTION. WHAT YOU SEE FROM THE AIR. AND THEN WE LOOKED AT IT FROM, YOU KNOW, IT'S IT'S GOT SEASONAL CHANGES THAT OCCUR. AND YOU JUST, YOU KNOW, THE DIFFERENT VIEWS OF WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. IT'S GOT A LOT GOING ON. OF COURSE, IT'S KIND OF INTERESTING TO THINK ABOUT ONCE THE TOWER IN THE CENTER OF IT GOES AWAY, WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE THEN? IT'S REALLY GOING TO CHANGE. SO IT'S, IT'S, YOU KNOW, A LOT GOING ON HERE. IT'S EXCITING. THIS ONE OF THE THINGS WE THOUGHT WAS GREAT WAS WHEN WE CAME IN THE VIEW FROM THE ARRIVALS. WHEN YOU COME IN UP ON TOP, IF YOU ACTUALLY WALK OVER TO THAT GLASS WALL AND LOOK DOWN, IT'S REALLY BEAUTIFUL. AND THERE WAS A LOT OF ACTIVITY DOWN THERE, SO WE LIKED SOME OF THE CURVES AND COLORS AND THE WOOD SLATTED WOOD CEILING THINGS THAT ARE GOING ON. AND WE TOOK SOME INSPIRATION FROM THAT AS WELL. AND THEN ALSO WE WENT OVER TO SEE THE SITE WHERE THE SITE NUMBER THREE WITH THE BASALT FLOWS AND, YOU KNOW, WALKED ON THE GROUND AND GOT THE FEEL FOR IT. AND THIS IS A VIEW OF EXACTLY WHAT THEY WILL SEE FROM THE CONTROL TOWER. LOOKING BACK AT THE AIRPORT. WE ALSO LEARNED ABOUT THE PLANNED EXPANSION THAT IS GOING ON RIGHT NOW THAT YOU'VE ALL LOOKED AT. AND WE WANTED TO BE, YOU KNOW, COGNIZANT OF WHAT THEY'RE DOING, TRY TO KEEP EVERYTHING SO IT LOOKS LIKE IT BELONGS TOGETHER.
SO YOU HAVE A CAMPUS FEEL. SO WE'RE TAKING SOME CUES FROM WHAT THEY'RE DOING WITH THEIR MATERIALS AND THE STYLE AND INCLUDING THAT AS WELL. SO THIS IS JUST ANOTHER VIEW. SEEING SITE THREE. WE DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING SLIDE AT THAT TIME. ONE OF THE THINGS WE HEARD ALSO
[00:45:03]
WHEN WE WERE AT THAT MEETING WAS THAT THERE WERE SOME THERE WAS SOME CONCERN FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S CLOSE TO THE AIRPORT ABOUT THE VISIBILITY OF THE TETONS. THEY DIDN'T WANT TO LOSE THEIR VIEWS. AND THERE WAS CONCERN AS TO, YOU KNOW, HOW TALL THE TOWER WOULD BE. WAS IT GOING TO BE IN THEIR LINE OF SIGHT? YOU KNOW, WHAT WOULD THAT FEEL LIKE? SO WE DID A SITE STUDY OF THIS SHOWS THE CITY LIMITS, THE RED DASHED LINE, AND THEN THE PART OF THE CITY THAT'S BEEN ANNEXED, WHICH INCLUDES THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. AND OF COURSE, THE SOCCER FIELDS. AND THEN THE DIAGONAL LINES THAT YOU SEE THERE ARE KIND OF WHERE WE TOOK, OKAY, WELL, THAT'S GOING TO BE YOUR VIEW CORRIDOR TO THE MOUNTAINS AND INCLUDING THE TOWER. SO THE NEXT SLIDE SHOWS YOU WHERE THE TOWER WILL BE RELATIVE TO THE VIEW. SO YOU CAN SEE FROM THAT THAT YOU'LL SEE IT, BUT THERE'S GREAT DISTANCE THAT IT'S GOING TO BE FROM THOSE RESIDENCES. IT'S CERTAINLY NOT GOING TO OBSTRUCT THE VIEW OF THE MOUNTAINS, AND IT WON'T EVEN LOOK MUCH TALLER THAN THE HANGERS THAT ARE ALREADY OUT THERE JUST BECAUSE OF WHERE IT'S LOCATED RELATIVE TO EVERYTHING ELSE. SO THIS WAS A PROJECTION OF WHAT YOU WOULD ACTUALLY SEE IF YOU WERE LOOKING IN THAT DIRECTION. FROM THAT POINT, WE MOVED ON TO SOME INSPIRATION. WE WERE STRUCK BY THE JUST THE GREAT NATURAL BEAUTY THAT YOU ALL HAVE OUT HERE. YOU'RE SO LUCKY TO ENJOY. AND WE WANTED TO TRY TO GIVE THE TOWER OF LABOR THAT FIT WITH YOUR COMMUNITY. THE FALLS. OF COURSE, YOU GOT THE NATURAL FALLS, BUT YOU'VE ALSO GOT YOUR MANMADE FAULT, WHICH IS PROMINENT IN THE CITY, IN OUR TOWN. RIGHT. BUT IT'S IT'S PRETTY COOL. I MEAN, IT POWERS YOUR CITY. WHY NOT SHOWCASE IT? SO THAT WAS INSPIRATIONAL AS WELL TO US. SO MOVING ON. WE'VE GOT WE'VE GOT FOUR DIFFERENT OPTIONS ULTIMATELY THAT WE WANTED TO PRESENT TO YOU. THIS ONE, OF COURSE, KIND OF GROWS OUT OF THE THE MOUNTAINS AND THE, YOU KNOW, JUST THE LANDSCAPE THAT HAS SO MUCH VARIATION TO IT THAT WE SAW.AND IT'S, IT'S KIND OF AN EARTHY KIND OF GROUNDED SENSE THAT WE WERE TRYING TO GET WITH THIS ONE. AND THEN THE DIFFERENT PARTS THAT GO TOGETHER, THE TOWERS HAVE SPACES THAT ARE ABSOLUTELY REQUIRED, THAT THEY HAVE TO BE IN EVERY TOWER, AND THEN THEY HAVE SPACES THAT AREN'T. SO OF COURSE, THEY ALL HAVE THEIR THEIR BASE, THE ENTRANCE, THE TOWER PORTION REALLY INCLUDES PRIMARILY A STAIR AND ELEVATOR TO GET YOU UP TO THE CAP, WHICH IS WHERE, OF COURSE, THE ACTUAL CONTROL WORK GOES ON. AND IN BETWEEN THERE YOU'VE GOT MULTIPLE FLOORS. THERE ARE A FEW THINGS THAT ARE ABSOLUTELY REQUIRED. THERE'S AN EQUIPMENT ROOM WHICH HAS THE SERVERS AND EVERYTHING THAT CONTROL ALL OF THE EQUIPMENT THAT THE CONTROLLERS ARE USING. THAT'S PRETTY CLOSE TO THEM. USUALLY THE FLOOR, JUST NOT JUST BELOW THE CAP, BUT THE NEXT ONE DOWN SO THAT THE EQUIPMENT RUNS ARE CONTROLLED. THERE'S A BREAK ROOM REQUIRED FOR THE CONTROLLERS BECAUSE OF COURSE, THEY CAN'T LEAVE THEIR STATIONS FOR VERY LONG. AND SO THAT'S ALWAYS IMMEDIATELY BELOW THEIR COW. AND THEN THERE'S AN OFFICE FOR THE CONTROL MANAGER. AND THEN YOU'VE GOT THE EQUIPMENT SPACES FOR THE VARIOUS THINGS THAT OPERATE THE TOWER, FOR THE FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM, THE ELECTRICAL ROOMS, THE MECHANICAL ROOMS. SO ALL OF THOSE BUILDING SYSTEMS THAT OPERATE WITHIN THE TOWER. AND THEN IF THERE'S ANY SPACE LEFT OVER, SOMETIMES THERE'S A CONFERENCE ROOM OR A TRAINING ROOM OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BUT THAT IS ABOUT IT. THESE ONLY HAVE A FOOTPRINT OF ABOUT 32 BY 32FT, SO THEY'RE NOT VERY BIG. THIS IS PROBABLY AN IMPOUNDED 25. SO NOT A LOT BIGGER THAN THIS ROOM FOR THE FOOTPRINT, SURPRISINGLY. AND THEN IT GOES UP. IN THIS CASE, WE GO UP TO 105FT TO THE FLOOR. SO THE X-BRACING IS REAL STRUCTURAL. IT'S NOT. YES. IT CAN ABSOLUTELY BE REAL STRUCTURAL. YES, WE CAN DO IT OUT OF MOMENT FRAMES, BUT IT CAN ABSOLUTELY BE REAL STRUCTURE AS WELL. AND WE DO HAVE THAT IN THE FIRST OPTION.
ANY COMMENT ON THOSE TWO OPTIONS? I MEAN FACADE OR REAL STRUCTURE. OH WELL IT DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU WANT TO SEE RIGHT. BECAUSE YOU'LL SEE IT THROUGH THE GLAZING. BUT IF YOU REALLY WANT IT TO BE A STATEMENT, THEN YOU WOULD PROBABLY ENHANCE IT ON THE EXTERIOR AS WELL. BUT NO, IT'S, IT'S SERVING A REAL FUNCTION. IT'S, IT'S KEEPING THE STRUCTURE FROM TWISTING. SO
[00:50:02]
WE HAVE TO HAVE IT. I MEAN, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE X BRACING. THERE'S ANOTHER OPTION CALLED MOMENT FRAMES. IT GETS VERY TECHNICAL, BUT IT'S JUST A WHOLE DIFFERENT STRUCTURAL SYSTEM. AND THAT LOOK JUST LIKE, YOU KNOW, GRIDS. IS THERE ANY DIFFERENCE SUBSTANTIVE DIFFERENCE IN COST. THE X BRACING IS PROBABLY LESS COST. YEAH. I'M NOT A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER, SO I CAN'T GIVE YOU ALL THE DETAILS, BUT IT'S PROBABLY A LITTLE LESS COSTLY TO DO THE BRACING. I KNOW THEY WILL DEFAULT TO THAT AUTOMATICALLY, UNLESS WE REALLY DON'T OPEN DOWN AND SAY, YOU'RE GOING TO BLOCK ALL THE VIEWS WITH THAT STUFF. CAN WE DO SOMETHING ELSE? AND THEN, YOU KNOW, THEN THEY'LL GO TO FRAME. SO THAT TELLS ME PROBABLY THAT'S THE LESS COSTLY OPTION. OF COURSE, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE STEEL. IT COULD BE CONCRETE, BUT YOUR, YOUR WALLS GET TO BE, YOU KNOW, PRETTY BEEFY IF WE DO IT OUT OF CAST CONCRETE. BUT IT IS AN OPTION AND WE ARE DOING THAT ON SOME OF THEM. NOT QUITE AS TALL AS THIS ONE. SO IT'S AN OPTION. SO OUR FIRST ONE, WE'VE GOT SOME DIFFERENT MATERIALS LISTED THERE. THE TEXTURED FIBER CEMENT THAT WE HAD INCLUDED IS IT'S OKAY. IT'S, IT'S INSPIRED BY THE SAME MATERIAL THAT THEY'RE PLANNING TO USE FOR THE EXPANSION, OR AT LEAST FROM WHAT WE'VE SEEN THAT THEY'VE PRESENTED FOR THE TERMINAL EXPANSION. SO THAT WOULD BE SPEAKING THE SAME LANGUAGE. AND OF COURSE, THE NATURAL STONE FROM JUST THE ENVIRONMENT AROUND US AND WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. SO, SO THIS IS THE FIRST OPTION. AND YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE IS A LOT OF SIMILARITY BETWEEN THESE BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, THEY ALL HAVE THEIR STANDARD THINGS THAT THEY HAVE TO HAVE. IT HAS TO BE THE SAME HEIGHT FOR ALL OF THEM, WHICH WE AGREE. YOU HAVE TO HAVE THESE, WE CALL IT USUALLY JUST AN APPENDAGE, WHICH IS THE LOWEST, YOU KNOW, SINGLE STORY PART THERE THAT HOUSES THE FIRE, FIRE PUMP ROOM, THE FIRE COMMAND CENTER, ALL THE MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL. SO THAT'S ALL THE UTILITY TYPE FUNCTIONS THAT NEED TO HAPPEN IN THIS ONE. ALSO, YOU CAN SEE THE CATWALK UP THERE, WHICH IS JUST BELOW THE CAB. THERE'S A RAILING. THAT CATWALK ACTUALLY SERVES A FUNCTION. IT'S INTENDED SO THEY CAN GET OUT AND WASH THE EXTERIOR OF THE WINDOWS FREQUENTLY. SO, BUT IT'S, IT'S USEFUL. WE'LL HAVE AN ACCESS HATCH TO GET OUT ONTO THAT. SO YOU WILL SEE PEOPLE UP THERE. AND THEN ON THE NEXT LEVEL DOWN IS, LIKE I MENTIONED, THE BREAK ROOM. WHEN WE WERE OUT HERE. THE WEATHER WAS ABSOLUTELY BEAUTIFUL. IT'S BEAUTIFUL TODAY, BUT A LITTLE BIT WARMER. IT WAS A NICE BREEZE AND EVERYONE SAID, THIS IS WHAT IT'S ALWAYS LIKE. AND I. AND YOU BELIEVED IT? I BELIEVED IT, OF COURSE, BECAUSE I LIVE IN ATLANTA WHERE IT IS NOT NICE AND COOL. RARELY IS IT NICE AND COOL AND BREEZY. SO, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS WE THOUGHT WOULD BE REALLY KIND OF NEAT TO INTRODUCE WAS A WAY FOR THE CONTROLLERS TO BE ABLE TO ENJOY THAT WEATHER WHEN THEY'RE UP IN THE TOWER, TEN HOUR STRETCHES, RIGHT? SO WE GAVE THEM A BALCONY. SO THIS ONE HAS A LITTLE FLAIR WITH A LITTLE BALCONY THERE FOR THEM. BUT OF COURSE, THAT ALL COMES DOWN TO COST. SO YOU MAY OR MAY NOT BE THERE. BUT YES, THIS INCLUDES CURTAINWALL GLAZING. WE TOOK THE BLUE GREEN GLASS THAT YOU HAVE AT THE TERMINAL TO ALSO REFLECT THAT SAME LANGUAGE ACROSS. SO THIS IS OPTION ONE. THE NEXT OPTION WE CALLED IT IDAHO TRACE. IF YOU NOTICE, WE USED JUST THE STATE TO OUTLINE THE BORDER OF IDAHO TO GIVE A GRAPHIC IMPRESSION ON THE TOWER THAT WOULD THEN DIVIDE THE MATERIALS AND COLORS JUST TO GIVE IT A DIFFERENT REPRESENTATION FOR THE SKIN. YOU CAN OF COURSE JUST DO LIKE WE WERE SHOWING THE RECTANGULAR PANELS ALL THE WAY UP, OR YOU CAN DO SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT MORE CREATIVE. AND THIS WAS ONE OF OUR OPTIONS. YOU PROBABLY HAVE THIS, BUT I'M GONNA ASK, DO YOU HAVE LIKE A SLIDE THAT WE CAN SEE THE SIDE BY SIDE BY SIDE? OKAY, I DO, YES, WE ACTUALLY DO. SORRY. BECAUSE BECAUSE WE WERE AFRAID THAT WE AT THE END, EVERYBODY WOULD SAY, WELL, WHAT WAS OPTION TWO? WAIT, DID YOU GO TO THAT'S OPTION ONE. SO WE WENT AHEAD AND DID THAT. SO THIS IS THE OPTION TWO. AND YOU SEE WE'VE GOT SOME OF THE SAME SIMILARITIES. WE CARRY THE SAME MATERIAL THROUGHOUT ON THIS ONE. SO THAT THE THE IDAHO OUTLINE WOULD INSTEAD BE WHAT YOUR EYE WAS DRAWN TO, RATHER THAN THE DIFFERENT BASE MATERIALS OR MATERIALS AND THINGS. SO WE WOULD JUST[00:55:02]
REPRESENT THAT WITH DIFFERENT MATERIALS OR DIFFERENT COLORS. I'M SORRY FOR THE SAME MATERIAL.WE DON'T HAVE THE BALCONY ON THIS ONE, SO YOU CAN SEE IT WOULD STILL READ JUST BLIND WITHOUT IT, BUT IT WAS A NICE LITTLE ADDITION. IF YOU CAN GET IT. THIS IS A REAL TOPOGRAPHY I WANTED TO SHARE WITH YOU AS WELL. WE HAVE A PROGRAM THAT WE CAN FIT IN. IT'S CALLED INSCAPE, WHERE WE CAN ACTUALLY USE THE GIS INFORMATION AND CITE IT EXACTLY WHERE IT WILL BE. SO THIS IS ACTUALLY WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE IN THE INSIDE. NEXT WE HAVE WHAT WE CALL THE ROCKY WATERFALL. SO THIS WAS OF COURSE INSPIRED BY YOUR DOWNTOWN WATERFALL AND THE BEAUTIFUL PARK THAT YOU HAVE ALL ALONG. YOU KNOW, THE COLORS WE, WE TRIED SOME DIFFERENT OPTIONS, BUT WE WERE AFRAID THAT IF WE PRESENTED IT IN LIKE A BLUE PURPLE OR KIND OF AN IRIDESCENT METAL, WHICH OF COURSE YOU COULD DO, WE WERE AFRAID THAT THEN PEOPLE WOULD EITHER BE DRAWN TO OR DISLIKE THE COLOR, AND NOT NECESSARILY EVALUATE THE FORM ITSELF. SO WE WENT AWAY FROM THAT, AND WE HAVE THEM ALL KIND OF PRESENTED AS SIMILAR COLOR SCHEMES. BUT OF COURSE, KEEP IN MIND THIS IS AN EARLY CONCEPTUAL DESIGN AND THAT'S IT DEVELOPED. YOU CAN ADD COLOR IF THAT'S THE DESIRE. OR NOT. SO OR ACCENTS. SO WITH THIS OPTION, WE WANTED TO TRY AND EMULATE THE CURVES OF THE WATER AND THE WATER KIND OF RUNNING DOWN THE FACADE OF THE TOWER. SO THIS ONE WE'VE GOT HARD TO TELL. I SEE A GLARE FROM THIS PERSPECTIVE.
HOPEFULLY YOU CAN SEE IT, BUT WE'VE GOT THE WATER KIND OF CURVING DOWN AND FLOWING IN VERTICAL LINES DOWN THE FACE OF THE BUILDING. AND THEN OF COURSE, WE USED KIND OF A SIMILAR LANGUAGE AT THE LOWER APPENDAGE. WE BROUGHT THE BALCONY BACK WITH THIS ONE AND HOW THE WATER OVERFLOWING THE BALCONY AS WELL. THE WINDOWS DO SERVE A REAL FUNCTION. THEY DON'T HAVE TO BE THE VERTICAL LINE. WE COULD DO THEM AS JUST INDIVIDUAL WINDOWS, BUT WE THOUGHT IT LOOKED A LOT SLEEKER AND A LOT MORE ATTRACTIVE WITH THEM IN THIS KIND OF SOARING VERTICAL LOOK, THE INDIVIDUAL ONES JUST IT LOOKED A LITTLE BIT TOO MUCH LIKE A FORTRESS.
SO WE WE WENT AWAY FROM THAT. BUT THERE CERTAINLY ARE OPTIONS. THE WINDOWS ARE FUNCTIONAL. AND THE LAST OPTION THAT WE HAVE IS WE DON'T WANT TO LEAVE OUT THE RED BARON. WE THOUGHT THE HANGER. WHEN WE SAW IT, IAN TOOK US OVER TO SEE. THE HANGER WAS JUST AN INCREDIBLE ASSET.
TO HAVE THAT HERE. BE ABLE TO SAY THAT YOU HAVE ONE OF THE ONLY ALL WOOD HANGERS THAT'S STILL REMAINING IN THE COUNTRY. I MEAN, WOW, THAT IS REALLY SOMETHING. SO WE WANTED TO TRY AND BRING SOME OF THAT IN AS WELL IF WE COULD. SO WHAT WE TOOK WERE WE WOULDN'T HAVE ACTUAL WOOD. BUT YOU CAN GET WHAT APPEARS TO BE A WOOD PANEL, BUT IT WOULD STILL BE THE SAME FIBER CEMENT. SO IT'S VERY DURABLE MATERIAL. IT WILL LOOK LIKE WOOD, BUT YOU WON'T HAVE TO GET UP AND STAIN OR WORRY ABOUT IT AND IT WON'T. AND WE TOOK THE SPLIT FACE CMU, WHICH IS WHAT IS ON THE BASE OF THE AIRPORT CURRENTLY. AND THEN WE TRIED TO EMULATE THE X'S THAT ARE IN THE HANGER, KIND OF GIVE IT ITS FLAVOR AS WELL. SO NEXT SLIDE. SO THIS IS OUR FOURTH OPTION AND WE WERE TOYING WITH, YOU CAN SEE THAT WE'VE GOT THE WOOD. WE BROUGHT IN THE X'S, BUT WE DIDN'T WANT TO MAKE IT OVERWHELMING WITH IT. AT ONE POINT WE TRIED LIKE X'S ALL THE WAY DOWN AND IT STARTED TO GET A LITTLE TOO BUSY. SO WE TRIED TO WE DIDN'T WANT IT TO LOOK LIKE THE HANGER. WE WANTED TO JUST HARKEN TO IT. SO THIS WAS OUR ATTEMPT TO DO THAT. AND WE ALSO WERE TRYING TO INTRODUCE SOME OF THE BREAD. SO WE HAVE THE RAILING AT THE TOP OF THE CAB, WHICH IS ACTUAL SPACE THAT THEY HAVE TO GET OUT ONTO FOR THE MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT, THE BEACON, THE ANTENNAS. SO THERE'S ACTUALLY USE UP THERE AS WELL. SO WE'VE GOT THE RAILING THERE. AND THEN ALSO AT THE CATWALK AND TRY TO BRING IT BACK IN THAT THE CANOPY. SO THOSE ARE THE FOUR OPTIONS. AND THEN MY LAST SLIDE PUT THEM ALL TOGETHER FOR YOU SO YOU CAN SEE THEM ALL, SEE WHAT YOU LIKE OR DON'T LIKE AND LET US KNOW. I LIKE ALL OF THEM. YOU REALLY
[01:00:07]
SURPRISED ME WITH THAT RED BARON ONE. IT'S JUST LIKE, IT'S JUST SUCH AN ELEGANT LOOK. IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE AN AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER FOR ME. IT'S A CLASSIC KIND OF LOOK, I HAVE A QUESTION, ROMAN. REALLY? FOR THE KIND OF VERANDA THAT'S IN IN A AT SEA, THE LOWER BALCONY THAT COMES OUT THAT THE. HOW BIG A DEAL WOULD THAT BE FOR? FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY WORK THERE? I TALKED TO THE AIR TRAFFIC MANAGER ABOUT THAT. BASED ON THEIR STAFFING. HIS FEEDBACK WAS FAIRLY IN THE MIDDLE OF HOW MUCH IT WOULD BE USED. THEY'RE TOO BUSY TO GO SPEND MUCH TIME OUT THERE. I MEAN, THERE'S GENERALLY ONLY TWO OF HIM, TWO OF THEM ON ON SITE AT THE MOST AT ANY GIVEN TIME. SO ITS UTILIZATION WOULD BE FAIRLY LOW AS IT STANDS TODAY. BUT TEN, 15 YEARS FROM NOW, THAT COULD CHANGE. NOW, ONE LAST QUESTION.THE UP WHERE YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT SO PEOPLE CAN COME OUT AND CLEAN THE WINDOWS, COULD THEY BE OUT THERE OR IS THAT REVOKED? YOU COULD CERTAINLY, BUT IT'S ONLY ACCESSED THROUGH A HATCH. SO IT'S LIKE A THREE BY THREE PANEL THAT YOU GET OUT ONTO ONTO IT. YEAH. THEY DON'T GO OUT THERE RIGHT NOW. YEAH. I WOULD IMAGINE OFFERED TO THEM. I WOULD IMAGINE THEY DON'T.
YEAH. OKAY. SO THE QUESTION THEN IS, I MEAN, WE HAVE WE HAVE MORE THAN JUST WE LOVE THIS AIR TRAFFIC TOWER, RIGHT? I MEAN, WE HAVE A LOT OF FUNDING ISSUES THAT CLEARLY ARE GOING TO COME INTO THIS. SO I GUESS HOW WOULD YOU HOW WOULD YOU SUGGEST, YOU KNOW, IF THE COST IS THE COST IS EQUAL FOR ALL OF THESE? WHICH ONES AREN'T? THE OTHER QUESTION THAT I HAVE HAD IS, HOW LIKELY IS IT THAT WE END UP CHANGING THE FACADE ON THE FRONT? I'D HATE TO MATCH IT. AND THEN AND THEN HAVE IT BE VERY DIFFERENT A FEW YEARS FROM NOW. I MEAN, I REALLY DO LIKE THE FACADE OF THE CURRENT AIRPORT, BUT IT'S CHANGED A LOT OF TIMES OVER THE YEARS. SO MATCHING MATCHING TOO MUCH TO ANY ONE THING FEELS SHORTSIGHTED. SOME OF THAT, I THINK, IS EXACTLY THE DIRECTION WE WILL LOOK FOR MOVING FORWARD. AS NATHAN NOTED EARLIER, THIS IS A PRELIMINARY DESIGN EFFORT SO THAT WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH OUR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND THEN FURTHERING THIS ON THROUGH A FINAL DESIGN WILL HAPPEN AT SOME POINT DOWN THE LINE. SO THE LOOK CAN CHANGE DRAMATICALLY FROM TODAY MOVING FORWARD. IF THAT'S THE DIRECTION. THERE'S ONE OF THESE THAT YOU'RE SAYING, YES, WE DEFINITELY DON'T WANT TO DO THAT. THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL DIRECTION. AND SAME WITH THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT SPECTRUM.
ABSOLUTELY. YOU KNOW, OPTION NUMBER 1 OR 4 OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES IS WHAT WE ENVISION IN THIS PROCESS, AS WELL AS NONE OF THESE HIT THE MARK. YEAH. LET'S JUST, LET'S JUST WORK AROUND THE TABLE AND WE'LL START WITH COUNCILOR FIRST. THANK YOU. YES, WE APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME. I'M TRYING TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT FROM THE PERSON WHO'S GOING TO SEE IT. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO KNOW THE BACKDROP. AND TO YOUR POINT, TEN YEARS FROM NOW, THE FRONT OF THE TERMINAL COULD LOOK DIFFERENT. SO I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, LOOK AT IT FROM A POINT OF VIEW. AND I'M NOT ADVOCATING FOR ANY ONE OF THEM, BUT FROM THAT POINT OF VIEW WHERE THEY'RE JUST GOING TO SEE IT, THIS TOWER OUT THERE ALL BY ITSELF, WHICH 1ST MAY BE, IS THE ONE THEY FIND MOST APPEALING. WHAT DO YOU THINK THAT IS? YEAH. I'LL GET BACK TO YOU ON THAT. STAKE A CLAIM, COUNCILMEMBER. I LIKE NUMBER ONE. I LIKE THE THE ONE WITH THE WATERFALL. I LIKE THE CONCEPT. I DON'T THINK THE AVERAGE JOE IS GOING TO LOOK AT THAT AND THINK IT LOOKS LIKE A WATERFALL, BUT I LIKE THE LOOK. TWO AND FOUR KEEPS STICKING IN MY BRAIN. THEM. COUNCILMEMBER I LIKE I LIKE THE LOOK OF ONE AS IT MATCHES WOULD MATCH WHAT WE'VE CURRENTLY CONTEMPLATING FOR THE AIRPORT. SO I LIKE THE CONTINUITY. BUT TO YOUR POINT, LIKE I THINK NUMBER FOUR IS PROBABLY THE LEAST. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RIGHT WORD IS. LEAST FLASHY MAYBE. RIGHT. SO IT KIND OF, IT PROBABLY BLENDS THE MOST IN TERMS OF ITS CURRENT SURROUND. SO I LIKE THAT BECAUSE IT'S KIND OF A NEUTRAL, EARTHY. YEAH, I LIKE 1 IN 4. I LIKE THE OLD HOMAGE TO
[01:05:02]
THE RED BARON. THAT'S KIND OF FUN. YEAH. NOT THAT IT'S GOING TO BE WIDELY, REALLY WIDELY KNOWN, BUT THERE'S A STORY THERE. AND I THINK THOSE ELEMENTS ARE, ARE GOOD. I PARTICULARLY LIKE FOR YOU LIKE FOR AS WELL, I DO LIKE FOUR. I FEEL LIKE WHEN YOU LOOK OUT, NOBODY'S GOING TO SAY, OH, YOU BUILT THE TAJ MAHAL OF THE WATER TOWER, RIGHT? IT'S JUST KIND OF LIKE, EVEN IF GLASS MIGHT BE A LITTLE LESS EXPENSIVE, IT JUST FEELS LIKE FOUR LOOKS AND FEELS LIKE A AIRPORT TOWER. AND I DO LIKE THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE NODDED TO THE RED BARON. YEAH. YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS IF THOSE LITTLE EXTRA DETAILS CAN BE ADDED, GREAT. IF NOT JUST PLAIN OLD WATER. JUST WATER TOWER. TOWER. COUNCILMEMBER FRANCIS WELL, I HAVE TO START BY ELIMINATING NUMBER TWO BECAUSE I THINK I LIKE THE BALCONY THING. ON THE OTHER ONES, THERE'S SOMETHING JUST MORE STERILE. TO MY VOTE WOULD BE TWO, 1 OR 4. AND WHAT I LIKE ABOUT ONE ARE THE, THE WINDOW, THE GLAZING DESIGN MAKES IT LOOK UNIQUE AND NOT NOT TOTALLY UTILITARIAN, BUT IT'S STILL ALL OF THEM. IT'S CLEARLY A ā TOWER IS THE STONE PART OF THE NUMBER FOUR THE SAME AS THE STONE PART OF NUMBER ONE ON THAT LOWER BUILDING. THESE THINGS CAN ALL CHANGE. I MEAN, BUT YES, THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS I LIKE ABOUT ONE. AND I LIKE THAT, THAT THE GROUND LEVEL, THAT NATURAL STONE LOOK NATURAL STONE TO, I THINK FOR ME, THE THING THAT RATEPAYERS WILL APPRECIATE IS WHAT'S THE MOST ECONOMICAL. SO I THINK WHATEVER THE MOST ECONOMICAL OPTION IS, I LIKE ONE AND FOUR, MAYBE A LITTLE BIT MORE DESIGN WISE, BUT SOMEBODY WILL SAY IT'S UGLY. SOMEBODY WILL THINK IT'S REALLY COOL. YEAH, I THINK RATEPAYERS JUST WANT TO KNOW THAT. WE THOUGHT ABOUT HOW MUCH IT COST.YEAH. THAT'S IT. I MEAN YOU COULD BUILD ANY OF THOSE AND I WOULD SAY GREAT. I GOT A QUESTION FOR YOU. IF YOU WERE A RATEPAYER JUST LOOKING AT THIS, WHICH ONE WOULD YOU THINK WAS THE MOST ECONOMICAL? I THINK ANYTIME YOU'VE GOT PEOPLE, PEOPLE SEE WINDOWS AS EXPENSIVE.
I DON'T, I DON'T THIS IS MY. SO YOU THINK NUMBER ONE WOULDN'T BE GOOD? I THINK I THINK THAT AGAIN, I'M NOT SURE THAT I SEE A HUGE DIFFERENTIAL BETWEEN THE FOUR OF THEM FROM A RATEPAYER PERSPECTIVE, OR IF THEY'RE GOING TO SAY IT WANTS FANCIER LOOKS MORE EXPENSIVE THAN THE OTHERS. I DO THINK THAT NUMBER FOUR MIGHT LOOK A LITTLE BIT MORE LIKE WE, WE TRIED TO CONSERVE COSTS. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S BECAUSE THE WINDOWS ARE LOOK MINIMIZED ANYWAY AND PROBABLY ARE A LITTLE BIT NARROWER. WE MADE THEM A DIFFERENT COLOR, SO THEY DEFINITELY BLEND IN MORE. SO, BUT OTHERWISE I, I DON'T THINK ANY OF THEM LOOK PARTICULARLY MORE EXPENSIVE THAN. ARE THEY ALL WITHIN A BAND LIKE A RELATIVELY COMPARABLE RANGE? DO YOU THINK FROM A COST STANDPOINT, AS YOU BLEND THOSE MATERIALS? I WOULD THINK SO, BECAUSE IT'S TYPICALLY THE SAME MATERIALS. I MEAN. YEAH, AND THE AND THE FIBER CEMENT IS MORE BECAUSE IT'S A VERY DURABLE BUT ALSO LIGHTWEIGHT MATERIAL. SO WHAT THAT HELPS WITH IS IF WE GO PRECAST, YOU HAVE A LOT OF REALLY HEAVY STRUCTURE. YOUR FOUNDATION GETS MUCH BIGGER, RIGHT? SO IT'S, IT COSTS MORE. THE, THE PANELS ARE VERY LIGHTWEIGHT, SO YOUR STRUCTURE CAN GET LESS. JUST THE STRUCTURAL FRAMING, BUT ALSO THE FOUNDATION DOESN'T HAVE TO BE AS MASSIVE. WELL, THIS LAST ONE LASTED US 66 YEARS. THERE WAS A COMMENT ABOUT, WELL, WHAT IF IT OUR OUR AIRPORT CHANGES IN TEN YEARS. I'M NOT SURE THAT COULD HAPPEN.
SO I WOULD BE WORRIED ABOUT MATCHING IT BECAUSE I THINK WHAT WE'VE DONE AT THE AIRPORT IS GOING TO BE AROUND FOR A LONG TIME. SO BUT AND I ALSO DON'T THINK THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE LIKE, WOW, COULDN'T THEY JUST MATCH THE AIRPORT WITH THIS, WITH THIS TOWER? I THINK THAT'S GOING TO BE A THING EITHER. SO I THINK WE CAN INDEPENDENTLY PICK A DESIGN.
BUT YEAH, MY PREFERENCE THEN IF IT'S ALL ABOUT THE SAME ON COST, IS PROBABLY 1 OR 4. SO FOUR SEEMS TO BE THE ONE THAT'S CONSISTENT. YEAH, I. THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I'M HEARING. ALL OTHER THINGS. I MEAN RIGHT REFLECTION ALL THOSE ALL OF THOSE THINGS JUST WILL COME INTO PLAY. BUT I DO THINK THAT THAT THOSE ARE THE TWO MOST OBVIOUS ONES. SO COUNCIL. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT PROCESS AND WHERE THIS IS HEADED FROM HERE? WE YOU SPEAK
[01:10:01]
TO THAT A LITTLE BIT BEFORE WE HAVE QUESTIONS. YES, YES. YEAH. AS FAR AS THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF WHERE WE'RE AT WITH THAT, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS, IS IT DEFINITELY SITE THREE THEN? YEAH. OKAY. BARRING SOMETHING UNFORESEEN SO FAR, I. THANK YOU. SAME SAME GROUP FOR THE NEXT DISCUSSION. OR JUST YOU, NATHAN. OH, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HELP US THROUGH OUR FUNDING PROBLEMS HERE. SO WE'LL DEAL TOWERS. NATHAN WILL DEAL WITH THE WHEN THIS ONE'S DONE, WILL THE OLD TOWER BE REMOVED FROM THE TERMINAL? IT WILL NEED TO BE REMOVED. OKAY, OR WE DO THE NEXT REMODEL OR OUR PLAN IS TO REMOVE AS MUCH AS WE CAN WITHOUT INTERRUPTING THE STRUCTURE OF THE EXISTING TERMINAL. YEAH. SO YOU TAKE THAT OFF SO WE CAN'T LET THE FIRE DEPARTMENT COME OUT AND PRACTICE. YEAH. WE NEED TO GET YOU OUT FOR TWO. AND YOU CAN SEE EXACTLY HOW MUCH CONCRETE THERE IS THERE. SO SO YOU GOT TO YOU GOT TO EXPLODE IT AND HAVE IT GO LIKE THIS. I MADE A JOKE THAT I WANT TO POP SOME POPCORN AND WATCH THEM TAKE THE BUILDING OUT FROM THE MIDDLE OF THE BUILDING. YEAH, IT'S GOING TO BE SOME SORT OF BUILDING OUT IN THE MIDDLE OF A BUILDING. YEAH, YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU ALL. SO THIS NEXT ITEM I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY THANK YOU FOR BEING I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY YOUR, YOUR VISUAL INTERPRETATION OF THE CITY IS WELL APPRECIATED. IT IS A BEAUTIFUL CITY. SO ARE YOU GOING OUT OR DISTRICT GOING? SO THIS NEXT ITEM DID COME OUT OF[Airport]
A CONVERSATION ABOUT HOW TO FUND THE CONTROL TOWERS CONSTRUCTION. AND THIS PRESENTATION DOESN'T HAVE LIKE A CLEAR ENDING. IT IS LEFT A LITTLE BIT OPEN ENDED. BUT WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS GO OVER THE PURPOSE IS THAT AS A CITY, WE NEED TO IDENTIFY AND UNDERSTAND HOW REGIONAL AIRPORTS CHALLENGE TO CARRY FORWARD MEANINGFUL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, PARTICULARLY WHEN IT COMES TO LOCAL ONLY PROJECTS. I WOULD LIKE TO ARTICULATE THAT OUR RATE OF GROWTH OVER THE LAST TEN YEARS HAS DRIVEN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS THAT HAVE OUTPACED THE REVENUE GROWTH, AND THEN GENERALLY HAVE A DISCUSSION, A VERY HIGH LEVEL, WHICH PROVIDES ME DIRECTION ON HOW TO PROCEED FORWARD IN THE LONG TERM FOR THE AIRPORT. AND JUST A VERY QUICK NOTE HERE AT THE BOTTOM, THE NEXT SEVERAL SLIDES HAVE SOME EXACT NUMBERS ON THEM, SOME ESTIMATED NUMBERS. THEY DON'T NECESSARILY MATTER TOO MUCH. THEY'RE JUST ILLUSTRATING MY POINT. LET'S TAKE A MOMENT TO CELEBRATE SOME SUCCESS. A DECADE AGO, THE AIRPORT WAS TAKING GENERAL FUND DOLLARS TO FUND ITS OPERATION. THREE YEARS AGO, JUST PRIOR TO MY ARRIVAL, THE CITY. THE AIRPORT WAS SELF-SUFFICIENT, BUT IT WAS ONLY SELF-SUFFICIENT THROUGH REIMBURSEMENTS OF GRANTS, REIMBURSEMENTS OF PASSENGER FACILITY CHARGES AND RELIANCE ON PROJECTED FUTURE AIR SERVICE GROWTH. TODAY, THE REGIONAL AIRPORT DOES STAND ON ITS OWN. WITHOUT THESE REIMBURSEMENTS OR RELIANCE ON THAT NEW GROWTH, AND THAT CAN BE EVIDENCED BY THE CASH FLOW STATEMENTS IN THE CITY'S AUDIT, WHICH I HAVE AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS SLIDE, OR TO LOOK AT IT, A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT VIEWPOINT AS FROM OUR YEAR END CASH BALANCE, AS I PULLED IT OUT IN LINE FOR 2022 TO 2025, THERE'S YEAR OVER YEAR GROWTH IN THOSE FIGURES. AND SO WE'RE ON A POSITIVE TRAJECTORY, BUT IT DOES LEAVE US IN A LITTLE BIT OF A LURCH WHEN IT COMES TO OUR CAPITAL PROJECTS. LAST WORK SESSION IN JUNE, THIS WAS A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN THAT YOU GAVE ME THE APPROVAL TO MOVE FORWARD WITH WITH THE FAA. THIS WILL CHANGE A LITTLE BIT AS WE MOVE THROUGH CONVERSATIONS WITH THE FAA OVER THE NEXT 6 TO 8 WEEKS, BUT I WANT TO FOCUS ON THESE HIGHLIGHTED PROJECTS SUBSTANTIALLY. THIS IS THREE LARGER PROJECTS BROKE DOWN INTO SMALLER PORTIONS. ONE IS THE TERMINAL EXPANSION, ANOTHER IS ONE YOU JUST HEARD A PRESENTATION ON WITH THE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER AND THE DOOR. AND THEN THE THIRD ONE IS THE RUNWAY REHABILITATION FOR THE PRIMARY RUNWAY. RUNWAY 321. I GET A QUESTION. COUNCIL MEMBER QUESTION NO. OKAY, NO.JUST TRACK. THANK YOU. SO TAKING THOSE THREE SELECTED PROJECTS, THE TERMINAL EXPANSION IS FIRST, AS MANY OF YOU ARE WELL AWARE, THAT PROJECT HAS BOTH STARTED AT A CERTAIN DOLLAR FIGURE BALLOONED TO 70 PLUS MILLION DOLLARS. WHAT YOU SEE MOVING FORWARD WILL LAND SOMEWHERE AROUND THE $56 MILLION THRESHOLD. THAT DOES INCLUDE THE ENABLING
[01:15:06]
PACKAGES THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN THE WORKS OR BEING CONSTRUCTED AS WE TALK. SO WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT THIS AS ANY SLICE AND DICE SPECIFIC CONTRACT. AND IT DOES INCLUDE ANTICIPATED BORROWING OF 5 TO $7 MILLION, ESSENTIALLY, DEPENDING ON THE INTEREST RATE AND THE LENGTH OF TIME IT EQUATES TO DEBT SERVICE OF 6 TO $700,000. AND IT ADDRESSES BAGGAGE SCREENING, BAGGAGE, MAKEUP, AIRLINE OFFICES, AND AIRLINE TICKET COUNTERS. THIS IS A VERY SMALL NUMBER OF THE ITEMS THAT THE AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING IS DEFICIENT IN, AS WAS IDENTIFIED IN THE 2021 AND 2022 CONCEPT BUDGET REPORT THAT SET US ON THE PATH WE'RE ON NOW UNDER PHASE ONE, WHICH IS WHERE WE'RE AT RIGHT NOW. WE HAVE AN UNFINISHED PORTION OF ABOUT $14 MILLION. THAT'S WHAT GETS US FROM THE 56 TO THE 70 FIGURE. THERE ARE ADDITIONAL PHASES BEYOND PHASE ONE AND PHASE TWO AND PHASE THREE ARE 30 TO $40 MILLION. YOU ADD IN THE UNFINISHED WORK IN THIS VERSION, AND NOW YOU'RE SAVING AT ABOUT 50 PLUS MILLION DOLLARS OF UNFINISHED WORK WITH NO IDENTIFIED, NO IDENTIFIED WAY TO FUND IT. TRANSITIONING TO THE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER. THIS IS THE ONE THE MAYOR AND I WERE DISCUSSING. WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE RELOCATION COSTS, INCLUDING THE VOR RELOCATION, CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW TOWER, THIS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, SITING STUDY, ALL OF THAT TOGETHER WILL RUN ABOUT $27.5 MILLION. WHEN WE EMBARKED ON THIS, WE HAD ANTICIPATED UTILIZING FUNDING FROM THE IIJA FEDERAL CONTRACT TOWER PROGRAM. THE FIRST FIVE YEARS OF THAT PROGRAM, IT DEDICATED $20 MILLION PER YEAR TO FEDERAL CONTRACT TOWERS. THAT IS PROGRAM WE'RE USING TO FUND THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT. WE HAVE A $1.5 MILLION GRANT THAT GETS US UP TO THE POINT YOU JUST HEARD ABOUT FIVE THE FIVE YEARS AFTER THAT INITIAL FIVE YEAR PERIOD, THE FIRST $100 MILLION OF UNOBLIGATED FAA DOLLARS OUT OF THE IJA GETS TURNED BACK TO THE FEDERAL CONTRACT TOWER PROGRAM THIS FISCAL YEAR. THAT NUMBER OF BOTH THE $20 MILLION IN THE FIRST YEAR OF THAT $100 MILLION TURNED BACK TOTALED $86 MILLION. OUR INDUSTRY ASSOCIATIONS ARE ANTICIPATING THAT FOR THE NEXT FOUR REMAINING YEARS OF THE PROGRAM, WE WILL SEE $50 MILLION TOPS IN EACH OF THOSE YEARS FOR TOTAL FUNDING NUMBER OF $200 MILLION REMAINING. THIS YEAR ALONE, THEY RECEIVE $513 MILLION OF REQUESTS. SO THE REASONABLE EXPECTATION OF A GRANT AWARD, IN MY MIND, IS 3 TO $5 MILLION. SOME OF THAT TAKES FROM A CONVERSATION I HAD WITH NATHAN RECENTLY, AS WELL AS LOOKING AT WHAT THOSE AWARDS WERE COMPARED TO WHAT THE ASK WAS FOR. AND JUST AN IMPORTANT NOTE, YOU'LL HEAR WHAT NATHAN SAID A FEW MOMENTS AGO, THAT THE TOWERS AT THE EXISTING TOWER WILL BE REMOVED AS PART OF A TERMINAL PROJECT, SO THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE THE REMOVAL OF THE EXISTING TOWER, WHICH WILL HAVE TO HAPPEN. THE QUESTION COMES DOWN TO WHAT? WHERE DOES THE BALANCE FROM 27.5 TO THE 3 TO 5 IT'S EXPECTED COME FROM? I'LL LEAVE THAT OPEN ENDED FOR A SECOND. AND THEN WE HAVE RUNWAY 321 REHABILITATION. THIS IS OUR PRIMARY RUNWAY TAKING OUT OF OUR MASTER PLAN. THE TOTAL PROJECT COST ON THAT IS ABOUT $20 MILLION. AND THE FAA CURRENTLY HAS THIS PLAN IN 2030 AND 2031 UNDER THE TRADITIONAL AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. THAT'S A 90% AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM COST, WITH 10% COMING BACK TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT, WHICH WE INTEND TO PAY FOR WITH AIRPORT FUNDS AND PASSENGER FACILITY CHARGES. FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE HAD LOTS OF CONVERSATIONS ABOUT ON ELIGIBILITY AND THE COST SPLIT, WE DO ANTICIPATE THE AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM GOING BACK TO A 90/10 SPLIT, AS OPPOSED TO THE 955 SPLIT THAT IT'S AT NOW. SO JUST JUST A FEW $0.02 THERE.SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT ABOUT $2 MILLION. THEY'RE GOING TO THE RUNWAY. I THINK THIS PROJECT IS FAIRLY SAFE TO RECEIVE FEDERAL FUNDING. HOW IT COMES, THE CONSTRUCTION, ALL OF THOSE ARE STILL SEVERAL YEARS INTO THE FUTURE. BUT PRIMARY RUNWAYS ARE HIGH PRIORITY PROJECTS. WHAT DOES THIS DO TO THE AIRPORT WHEN WE ARE MAXING OUT? ANY BORROWING WITH THE EXISTING TERMINAL FOOTPRINT IS THAT WE HAVE PARKING LOTS THAT NEED TO BE REHABILITATED, AND WE HAVE NO WAY OF FUNDING THOSE SKYLINE DRIVE, FOOT DRIVE, FEDERAL WAY OR AVENUE, ALL OF WHICH HAVE SIGNIFICANT PORTIONS THAT ARE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AIRPORT, ARE NOT BEING TRACKED TO BE ADDRESSED. APRON REHABILITATION OR RECONSTRUCTION HAS BECOME MORE DIFFICULT TO FUND THROUGH TRADITIONAL AP DOLLARS. YET WE HAVE FAILING PORTIONS OF OUR
[01:20:02]
TERMINAL APRON THAT WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING WITH TAXIWAYS AND TAXI LANE EXPANSION. THIS IS THE CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS THAT MEET THE DEMAND OF GENERAL AVIATION. THOSE 30 HANGARS THAT WE HAVE ON THE WAITING LIST RIGHT NOW, THE 41 THAT WERE IDENTIFIED IN OUR MASTER PLAN IS BEING NEEDED OVER THE NEXT 20 YEARS. WE'RE ALREADY THREE QUARTERS OF THE WAY TO THAT FIGURE, AND WE'RE ONLY A YEAR AND A HALF AFTER ACCEPTING THAT MASTER PLAN. SO THAT DEMAND, I BELIEVE, IS MUCH HIGHER THAN THE 41. STORMWATER IMPROVEMENTS ARE DIFFICULT TO GET FUNDED AS STANDALONE PROJECTS. THE FAA LIKES TO PUT THOSE IN WITH OTHER PROJECTS, BUT YET WE HAVE SIGNIFICANT PORTIONS OF OUR STORMWATER FACILITIES THAT ARE WELL AWAY FROM OUR OTHER PROJECTS THAT WE HAVE ON OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. SO THOSE ARE PRETTY GIANT QUESTION MARKS. I THINK NATHAN AND I WERE HAVING A CONVERSATION TEN MONTHS AGO, AND WE STOPPED COUNTING AT 25 OR $30 MILLION. AND THEN OBVIOUSLY WE'VE TALKED PARKING GARAGE AND THE MASTER PLAN. THAT'S A $30 MILLION PROJECT WITH A. IT'S JUST THERE. IT'S SOMETHING WE NEED. BUT TALKING ABOUT HOW TO PAY FOR THAT IS DIFFICULT. SO I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO THIS SLIDE REALLY QUICK BECAUSE THIS IS A SUCCESS FOR US TO THIS A LITTLE ON THE DEPRESSING SIDE TO ME, I WAS LIKE, WELL, THAT'S WHY I WENT BACK TO THAT. BUT HERE'S THE DEAL, IS THAT WHILE WE'RE IN A MUCH BETTER PLACE FINANCIALLY ON AN OPERATING BUDGET, WE STILL ONLY HAVE A FEW HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS IN POSITIVE OPERATING CASH EACH YEAR TO APPLY TO CAPITAL PROJECTS. AND WHAT THIS DRIVES IS A QUESTION FOR YOU ALL ON HOW DO WE RE-ENVISION OPERATING THE AIRPORT? AND I'M LOOKING AT SOME BROAD DIRECTION BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THE STATUS QUO IS NOT CUTTING IT. OKAY. DID I MISS ANYTHING FROM OUR CONVERSATION? NO. ALL RIGHT. CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE WILL YOU GO BACK TO THE BIG LIST? NOT THAT ONE. THAT ONE. I THINK MY FIRST QUESTION IS. HOW DO WE RIGHTSIZE FEES THAT WE'RE CHARGING AT THE AIRPORT WITHOUT DRIVING PEOPLE AWAY? I MEAN, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY IT'S A PRETTY GOOD DEAL TO BE AT IN GA HERE IN IDAHO FALLS. ARE WE CHARGING THOSE PEOPLE ENOUGH? THAT'S A DIFFICULT QUESTION TO ANSWER.AND I WOULD START BY SAYING, THERE'S NO WAY YOU'RE NOT GOING TO DRIVE SOME PEOPLE AWAY. IF YOU GO THAT ROUTE. THE I MEAN, HOW DO WE COMPARE TO, YOU KNOW, OTHER. THAT'S THE SECOND PIECE OF THAT IS WHEN PEOPLE CAN RELOCATE TO OTHER NEARBY AIRPORTS, A MUCH LOWER RATE.
THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO A CERTAIN EXTENT. THE. BUT IT COMES AT A COST ON THEIR SIDE.
THEY DON'T HAVE AIRCRAFT RESCUE, FIREFIGHTING ON SITE. THEY DON'T HAVE THE. I KNOW THE TSA IS NOT THE EASIEST GOVERNMENTAL BEAST TO TO DEAL WITH ON A REGULAR BASIS, BUT THAT DOES COME WITH SOME BENEFITS FOR SECURITY OF YOUR AIRCRAFT AND YOUR SIZABLE INVESTMENT IN YOUR HANGAR. AND THOSE AIRCRAFT. SOME PEOPLE SEE THE WISDOM IN THAT SLIGHTLY HIGHER COST TO, TO BE ON THE AIRPORT. AND THERE AREN'T TOO MANY OTHER AIRPORTS NEARBY THAT CAN HANDLE THE AIRCRAFT THAT WE CAN. POCATELLO IS GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, THE NEAREST ONE, AND DRIGGS IS IMPROVING. BUT EVEN WITH THE RUNWAY EXTENSION, THEY'VE SEEN IT. THEY CAN'T HANDLE EVERYTHING THAT THEY'RE THAT I THINK THAT THEY COULD PUT IN THERE IF THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY OTHER OBSTACLES. SO THAT'S ABSOLUTELY A PROCESS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH. COUNCIL MEMBER.
FREEMAN. I THINK REALLY THAT THAT QUESTION COMES DOWN TO HOW AGGRESSIVE DO YOU WANT ME TO BE, AND WILL I HAVE YOUR SUPPORT WHEN PEOPLE COME KNOCKING ON YOUR DOOR? AND, AND, AND I WOULD ADD, AND IS IT ENOUGH? I MEAN, IF WE INCREASE, YOU KNOW, TO WHERE THE MARKET SAYS WE SHOULD BE, IS IT ENOUGH TO MAKE UP 6 OR $7 MILLION LIKE WE JUST HITTING A HORNET'S NEST, BUT NOT STIRRING UP A HORNET'S NEST, BUT NOT HAVING THAT CASH? YEAH, NOT EVEN THAT WE NEED ANYWAY.
IN THE END, NOT EVEN I'M NOT SAYING IT'S NOT THE RIGHT THING TO DO ANYWAY, BUT BUT RIGHT.
YOU KNOW, I, I GUESS WE'VE SAID THAT WE'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE BID, RIGHT.
AND WE, WE FEEL LIKE WE VALUE IT, ENGINEERED IT AS DOWN AS MUCH AS WE CAN. OUR NEXT STEP IS LET'S, WE'RE GOING TO WAIT AND SEE WHERE THE BID COMES IN. AND WE ARE ROUGHLY 6 OR $7 MILLION THAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY GO TO ONE OF OUR OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND TRY AND GET AN INTERNAL LOAN FOR SHORT TERM. BUT THEN, YOU KNOW, WE STILL HAVE THE, THE AIR TRAFFIC
[01:25:08]
CONTROL TOWER CONSTRUCTION. IT'S ALL JUST IT'S ALL JUST SITTING OUT THERE. AND WE JUST NEEDED TO HAVE A BETTER SENSE OF WHERE THAT ALL SAT. BECAUSE IN THE PRIOR YEARS SITTING ON THIS BOARD, I'VE ALWAYS FELT LIKE IT WAS LIKE, OH, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS GOING TO PAY FOR THAT. OH, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS THIS IS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THAT'S GOING TO PAY FOR THAT. AND NOW WHEN IT COMES RIGHT DOWN TO IT, THERE'S NO MONEY IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO PAY FOR THIS. AND AND TO TAKE THAT ONE STEP FURTHER, THE FAA HAS IN THE PAST DECIDED TO PAY THE ENTIRETY OF SINGLE PROJECTS. THEY'RE NOW SLICING AND DICING THAT. SO IF I PUT A $25 MILLION CONSTRUCTION GRANT APPLICATION AND THEY COME BACK AND SAY, HERE'S $4 MILLION, FIGURE OUT THE OTHER. 21, THEN WE HAVE A QUESTION OF DO WE EVEN ACCEPT THAT GRANT, OR DO WE FIND ANOTHER, YOU KNOW, BUILD IT IN PIECES? WELL, THERE'S A THERE'S SOME RAMIFICATIONS FOR BUILDING IT IN PIECES. I SPEND $4 MILLION, JUST SO YOU KNOW, MY WORKOUT TO RELOCATE THE BAR BY ITSELF. BUT THERE'S, THERE'S TACTICS THAT WE CAN, CAN TAKE.IT'S. SO DO WE HAVE CONTROL OVER HOW MUCH THE PASSENGER FACILITY CHARGE IS. SO THAT IS ONE ONE TACTIC. I'VE GOT A LIST OF IDEAS HERE THAT I PUT DOWN TO SPUR SOME CONVERSATION. AND YOU'RE TOUCHING ON. ONE OF THEM IS THAT WE WE USE OUR LEGISLATIVE. I DON'T WANT TO I MEAN, INFLUENCE, WE TRY TO GENERATE MONEY. JUST READ WHAT I WROTE DOWN. WE PUT IN FOR MORE COMMUNITY PROJECT FUNDS, WHICH IS ONE OPTION. WE ENHANCE OUR CONGRESSIONAL INVOLVEMENT WITH AT DIFFERENT AREAS, MEANING WE, AS WE'RE APPLYING FOR GRANTS, WE'RE MAKING SURE THAT OUR CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION KNOWS IS WRITING LETTERS OF SUPPORT THAT CAN HELP. AND WE ALSO NEED TO WORK TOWARDS REFORMING HOW GRANT MONEY IS AWARDED OR EVEN EXPANDING, AND HOW THAT GRANT MONEY IS BEING AWARDED. THAT IS ONE TACTIC THAT WE CAN TAKE.
ABSOLUTELY. IT'S NOT ONE THAT WE WILL. WE'VE COMPLETELY ABANDONED, BUT SINCE WE'VE RECEIVED THAT $12 MILLION, IT'S ONE THAT'S MOVED BACK TOWARDS THE BACK BURNER FOR SURE. AND DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? SORRY. AND ONE OF MY ISSUES HERE TOO IS THAT TRYING TO REFORM HOW GRANTS ARE FUNDED AT A FEDERAL LEVEL, RIGHT. AND, AND TRYING TO INCREASE THE PASSENGER FEE FOR WHAT, SINCE 1990? YEAH, 2000. IT'S BEEN $4.50 SINCE THE YEAR 2000. SO IT FEELS LIKE SOME OF THAT. IT'S LIKE WE GOT TO FIGURE THIS OUT ON OUR OWN, YOU KNOW? NO.
YEAH, EXACTLY. I MEAN, I THINK THAT WAS KIND OF MY POINT IS THAT SOME OF THIS WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT ON OUR OWN, BECAUSE OTHERWISE WE'RE NEVER GOING TO GET A PARKING LOT TO GENERATE A GRANT AWARD. IT'S GENERATES REVENUE. IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE A NO. SO, DIRECTOR TURNER, IF YOU WERE TO, TO, TO GIVE US GIVE COUNSEL. WHAT YOUR PROPOSAL IS FOR, FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS, WHAT WOULD, WHAT WOULD YOUR PROPOSAL BE FOR? I MEAN, YOU KNOW, STEP ONE, WE GET OUR BIDS BACK AND WE TRY AND GO FOR INTERNAL FUNDING. THINGS THAT YOU AND I HAVE TALKED ABOUT. WHAT WOULD YOU SEE AS YOUR PLAN FORWARD? WE DEFINITELY HAVE TO START OPERATING THE AIRPORT FAR MORE LIKE A BUSINESS AND LESS LIKE A GOVERNMENTAL UTILITY. AND I NEED TO BE GIVEN THAT CLEAR DIRECTION TO MAKE THAT STEP AND DO THAT, EVEN IF IT'S GOING TO BE UNCOMFORTABLE POLITICALLY FOR ALL OF YOU, THAT THAT IS THE ONLY WAY FORWARD. I CAN SEE THAT THIS IS WORKING AND WE MEET DEMAND. CAN YOU GIVE US SOME EXAMPLES? WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? WHAT THAT MEANS? GO AHEAD. SO SO NUMBER ONE IS WE NEED TO GETTING BACK TO WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT LAST FALL IN REGARDS TO GENERAL AVIATION. AND THIS IS LONG TERM EXTENSIONS THAT AUTOMATICALLY RENEW WITH VERY LITTLE IN THE WAY OF FINANCIAL BENEFIT FOR US. SURE. YES, I WOULD TO RECOUP OUR COSTS. AND IT COULD EVEN JUST STRAIGHT UP BE A FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTION TO INFRASTRUCTURE ON THE AIRPORT. IT DOESN'T, WHICH IS WHERE I WAS TRYING TO ARTICULATE, BUT THAT WORKS AS WELL. SO LIKE A CAN THEY PAY A CAM FEE RIGHT NOW, THE COMMON AREA MAINTENANCE FEE, NOT SOME DO. YEAH. THOSE ON THE SOUTH QUAD DO HAVE AN INFRASTRUCTURE FOR, FOR, FOR THEIR LEASES THAT HAVE ALLOWED THEM TO DO THAT, BUT IT'S PRETTY INSIGNIFICANT. IT'S $0.06 A SQUARE FOOT A YEAR. YEAH. OKAY. OKAY. SO SOME OF YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE OTHER
[01:30:02]
THINGS IS, YOU KNOW, THE IDEA OF A PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP A NUMBER OF TIMES IN CONVERSATIONS THAT THAT IS A POSSIBILITY. IT DOESN'T COME, YOU KNOW, CHEAPLY TO, TO THE CITY IN ALL SITUATIONS. AND SO, YOU KNOW, PRIVATE INVESTMENT ISN'T GOING TO COME IN AND INVEST IN THE CONTROL TOWER BECAUSE THERE'S NO ROI ON THAT. BUT IT MIGHT HELP ADDRESS THE TERMINAL EXPANSION. SOME OF THE DEMAND IN GENERAL AVIATION HANGAR SPACE, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS, THOSE ARE THINGS THAT WE DO NEED TO PURSUE REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE PRIMARY GOAL IS HERE. THE ONE DIRECTION THAT I HAVE THAT I WANTED TO BRING UP, BECAUSE I HAVE GIVEN THIS TO DIRECTOR TURNER BASED ON OTHER SITUATIONS, IS THAT THIS BODY WANTS TO REMAIN THE OVERSIGHT OF THE AIRPORT. WE TALKED ABOUT PRIVATIZATION OF THE AIRPORT, BUT I FELT LIKE FROM OUR CONVERSATIONS ABOUT POWER, THAT THAT WOULD KIND OF BE A NONSTARTER TO TRY AND PRIVATIZE THE AIRPORT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I GET A FEW NODS FROM THAT ONE, THAT THAT WAS THE DIRECTION THAT THAT IS STILL OKAY. I'D BE OPEN TO LOOKING AT IT. I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT MEANS. IT CAN MEAN JUST ABOUT ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE IT TO AT DIFFERENT LEVELS. WE'RE ALREADY EMPLOYING THAT WITH OUR LEASE, OUR GROUND LEASES. SO THAT'S PRIVATE INVESTMENT, CONSTRUCTING HANGERS ON A GROUND LEASE. IT'S HOW FAR DO YOU WANT TO TAKE IT AND AT WHAT COST DOES IT COME IN, WHETHER IT'S A 40 YEAR LEASE OR AS LONG AS THE FAA ALLOW A 50 YEAR LEASE? THOSE THINGS THAT WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH, OR DOES THAT GIVE AWAY TOO MUCH POWER? YEAH. I MEAN, I THINK PHILOSOPHICALLY, WHEN WE KNOW THAT THE TAXPAYERS HAVE INVESTED IN THIS ENTITY, THE THOUGHT OF TAKING AWAY AN ASSET THE TAXPAYERS HAVE BUILT AND PRIVATIZED THAT FOR PROFIT DOESN'T REALLY, TO ME, I'M MORE INTERESTED IN WHAT OBLIGATION CAN WE TAKE AWAY FROM THE TAXPAYERS TO PRIVATIZE. WELL, RIGHT NOW WE HAVE ZERO OBLIGATION TAXPAYER, BUT NOT LOOKING AT THESE NUMBERS. WELL, WE DON'T HAVE THAT MONEY IN OUR BUDGET ANYWAY. THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. SO IF THESE ARE IT'S NOT LIKE THIS IS A PLAN THAT WE HAVE TO LIKE IF FAR LEFT COLUMN IS GOOD, RIGHT? LIKE IF I, I GUESS MAYBE COMING BACK TO THE LIKE, IS THIS A CONVERSATION WHERE LIKE, HEY, YEAH, THIS WAS, THIS IS SOMETHING WE'D LIKE TO DO IF WE CAN FIND A WAY TO FUND IT, OR IS THIS LIKE, HEY, WE GOT TO DO THIS OR, OR THE AIRPORT? RIGHT, RIGHT. SO TO ME, IT'S LIKE, WELL, WHERE ARE WE IN THAT, IN THAT PART OF THE EQUATION? I DID NOT HIGHLIGHT THOSE PROJECTS WITHOUT ANY INTENTION. THOSE ARE PROJECTS THAT HAVE TO HAPPEN. YEAH. THE ONES THAT ARE HIGHLIGHTED, WHAT ARE THEY HAVE TO HAPPEN? BOND OPTIONS LOOK LIKE 66, TWO THIRDS. OKAY. THAT'S THE ONLY THING WE HAVE. TO DO IT TO DO A MUNICIPAL BOND. SO AIRPORTS HAVE AN EXEMPTION FROM GOING TO A VOTE. YOU COULD STILL SEND IT TO A VOTE. OH WE WOULD HAVE. BUT GETTING GETTING BACK TO THIS AND I KNOW I NEVER LIKE FORMALLY CLOSED THE LOOP ON THE QUESTION OF BORROWING THAT WE HAD HIRED WJ ADVISORS FOR. BUT THIS FIGURE HERE. IS RIGHT AROUND WHAT THEY SAID, REMOVING THE PFCS OUT OF THE EQUATION. MOST OF THAT WAS DRIVEN MORE ON THE AIRPORT'S PAST FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE, NOT NECESSARILY FISCAL YEAR 2025. WHEN THEY FINISH THAT, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. NOW, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SAY THAT AGAIN. WHAT WHAT THE ADVICE OF THE CONSULTANT WAS, IS THAT BECAUSE THE AIRPORT DID NOT HAVE A LONG ENOUGH HISTORY OF SOLID FINANCES, IT WAS GOING TO BE VERY DIFFICULT TO GO TO THE MARKET TO ISSUE A BOND. SO THAT'S WHY YOU YOU'VE BEEN THINKING FOR I GET THE SENSE YOU'VE BEEN THINKING THAT 5 TO 7 NUMBER WOULD COME INTERNALLY, POSSIBLY BASED ON PAST PRACTICE. THE DIFFERENCE WITH THAT IS WE DON'T HAVE A GRANT THAT WE'RE WAITING FOR TO PAY IT BACK. SO IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO GO FULL TERM. WHAT KIND OF BECOMES A QUESTION WITH THE POWERS YOU ALL? IS THAT MONEY BEST USED AT THE AIRPORT OR THE WASTEWATER OR WATER OR POWER? AND WHAT KIND OF A REPAYMENT TERM WOULD YOU FIGURE IN WHEN YOU CAME UP WITH THAT PAYMENT AMOUNT? AND THEY COULD DO THE MATH, BUT IS THAT A TEN YEAR REPAYMENT? IS THAT A 600 000 WAS WAS $7 MILLION, I BELIEVE, AT I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT THE INTEREST RATE WAS. BUT TO YOUR POINT, LIKE IF LET'S ASSUME THAT'S YOUR DEBT SERVICE IS 600 GRAND, CAN YOU MAKE ENOUGH TWEAKS OPERATIONALLY TO COVER THE DEBT SERVICE ON THAT FIGURE? YES. AND AND THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE'RE, WE'RE PLANNING ON RIGHT[01:35:01]
NOW. MY, MY GOAL IS TO REDUCE THAT 5 TO $7 MILLION FIRST AND THEN, YEAH, WE'LL GO THAT ROUTE.BUT I GUESS JUST STARTING WITH THE FEE CONVERSATION, THE FEES THAT YOU HAD SUGGESTED, YOU KNOW, ARE PRIMARILY LOOKS LIKE LANDING FEES, RIGHT? AS FAR AS NEW FEES, TERMINAL RENT. I'M LOOKING THROUGH THIS. MOST OF THOSE ARE IN LINE WITH WHERE WE'RE AT TODAY. THOSE WOULD NEED TO BE REEVALUATED NEXT FISCAL. RIGHT. WE ONLY WE ONLY PUT IN THIS THE ONES WE INCREASED BY MORE THAN 5%. CORRECT? CORRECT. SO I'M LOOKING JUST A SUPER, SUPER QUICK RESEARCH ON SOME AIRPORTS THAT HAVE SIMILAR ENPLANEMENTS LIKE MONTEREY, GRAND JUNCTION.
THESE ARE, I GUESS WITHIN 20 30,000. CORRECT. OKAY, GREAT. WELL, WE, OUR, OUR LANDING FEES ARE LESS THAN HALF OF THOSE AIRPORTS, RIGHT. I THINK THAT, I MEAN, I LOVE SOME THOUGHTS ON I TRIED TO RAISE LANDING FEES $0.12 PER THOUSAND POUNDS LAST YEAR, WHICH WAS WITHIN OUR FEE STRUCTURE. AND I'VE GOTTEN MAJOR PUSHBACK FROM AIRLINES, ONLY ONE THAT DIDN'T EMAIL ME.
SO WHY? SO WHY DO THEY NOT HAVE A PROBLEM SPENDING $3.04 IN GRAND JUNCTION? BUT THEY WOULD HAVE A PROBLEM SPENDING BASED ON A PERCENTAGE INCREASE OVER. YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. YEAH.
BUT THOSE ARE THOSE ARE DEFINITELY DISCUSSIONS, DIFFERENT KINDS OF PHILOSOPHIES.
I MEAN, HOW DO YOU GUYS FEEL WHEN I TELL YOU THAT MONTEREY IS 350 PER THOUSAND POUNDS? GRAND JUNCTION'S 304. WELL, I AND WE'RE $1.35. I'M OKAY WITH ELIMINATING MONTEREY, BUT WHEN I HEAR GRAND JUNCTION, I'M LIKE, WELL, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY IT WOULD BE THAT DIFFERENT. AND I MEAN, THE CONVERSATIONS GOING BACK TO REMEMBER, RICK WOULD SAY THINGS LIKE, WELL, ARE WE BUILDING THE AIRPORT OR ARE WE IN A POSITION WHERE WE'RE STRONG ENOUGH THAT THEY ARE NOT GOING TO SAY, OKAY, WELL, ALASKA'S GOING TO PULL THEIR PORTLAND DAILY FLIGHT? LIKE, WHERE ARE WE AT FROM AN AIRLINE PERSPECTIVE THAT THEY WOULD SAY, WELL, FOR THIS LANDING FEE, IT MAKES SENSE FOR US TO COME HERE. I MEAN, THERE IS THAT COMPETITIVE PIECE OF THE MARKET WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT. AND IF THE PROBLEM IS THAT IT WAS A TOO BIG OF AN INCREASE AT ONCE, WE COULD PHASE IT IN OVER A, YOU KNOW, 2 OR 3 YEARS. SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT. COUNCIL MEMBERS, YELLOW PIGMENT IS THAT DOES THAT HAVE THEIR COST PER ENPLANEMENT INCLUDED WITH IT? BECAUSE YOU'RE JUST LOOKING AT A SPECIFIC LANDING FEE. THEY'RE LOOKING AT FUEL FLOWS. THEY'RE LOOKING AT TERMINAL RENT, THE WHOLE PACKAGE, RIGHT? SO IF YOU LOOK AT SOMETHING THAT TERMINAL RENTS SEPARATE, I CAN TELL YOU THAT RIGHT NOW. YEAH, OUR, OUR, OUR COST PER EMPLOYMENT IS RIGHT AROUND $6.50, WHICH IS INCLUDES EVERYTHING ROUGHLY WHERE I WOULD LIKE IT TO BE FOR, FOR THE COST TO BE THE AIR CARRIERS, TO BE COMPETITIVE AND NOT REDUCE THE POSSIBILITY OF NEW ROUTES. AND SO THAT'S AND TO COUNCIL MEMBER LEE GRAND JUNCTION IS PROBABLY THE MOST SIMILAR AIRPORT IN OUR REGION FOR US. I GUESS THE QUESTION IS FOR ME IS, DO YOU FEEL LIKE WE'RE COMPETITIVE? DO YOU FEEL LIKE THAT? WE ARE, WE ARE. WE ARE SORT OF AT THE MARKET LIMIT. OR DO YOU FEEL OR DO YOU NEED SUPPORT TO GET US THERE REGARDLESS OF THE PERCENTAGE INCREASE? I GUESS THAT'S WHAT I HEAR. THE I, I, WE CAN INCREASE THE AIRLINES FEES SOME, BUT NOT ENOUGH TO, TO GENERATE ALL THE REVENUE THAT WE NEED THERE. SO SURE. IF DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? I MEAN, I MIGHT BE ABLE TO WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO FIND WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO FIND $40 MILLION. YEAH, EXACTLY. RIGHT. RIGHT. I GET THAT. BUT IN TEN YEARS IT WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE. RIGHT. AND SO, I MEAN, THIS IS ONE OF THEM THAT HAVE ALREADY STARTED LOOKING AT, I HAVEN'T PENCILED IT OUT BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE A FINAL DESIGN ON THE TERMINAL. BUT WHEN WE ALTER THE TERMINAL, THAT'S A GOOD NATURAL POINT TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION WITH THE AIR CARRIERS. AND QUITE FRANKLY, I EXCHANGED EMAILS WITH DELTA TODAY ON THIS TOPIC. THEY KNOW SOMETHING'S COMING BECAUSE THEY'VE SEEN THIS ALL OVER THE COUNTRY. GRAND JUNCTION'S $3.04 PER THOUSAND POUNDS, AND THEN A $59.13 ANNUAL TERMINAL RENTAL RATE AND A $14.50 PASSENGER LOADING BRIDGE CHARGE TURN. YEAH. SO I THINK THE THE DIRECTION THAT DIRECTOR TURNER AND I HAVE TALKED ABOUT IS A WE WANTED TO, YOU KNOW, THERE'S IS THAT PRIVATIZATION. BUT THEN THERE'S, YOU KNOW, WHO OWNS THE ASSET. THERE WAS THAT CONVERSATION THAT I SAID, THIS COUNCIL HAS NOT BEEN INTERESTED IN PRIVATIZATION. YEAH. YOU KNOW, FOUR OUT OF SIX OF US, I DON'T THINK THE THE CONVERSATION TO LOOK INTERNALLY FOR FOR THAT MONEY AND THEN TO DO A TRUE. COST OF HANGARS, THIS IS WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE AND JUST LAY OUT WHAT IS IT GOING TO TAKE FOR US TO CHIP AWAY? IF WE WERE TO SAY,
[01:40:05]
DIRECTOR TURNER, RUN IT LIKE THIS BUSINESS? AND AND WHAT WOULD THAT MEAN POLITICALLY AND FINANCIALLY FOR US? FIVE YEARS, TEN YEARS. AND TO BUILD OUT THIS FINANCIAL PLAN, RECOGNIZING WHAT KIND OF YOU KNOW, YOU'LL NEVER KNOW FOR SURE WHAT KIND OF HEAT YOU'LL GET. BUT WHEN YOU KNOW, HOW WOULD HOW WOULD DIRECTOR TURNER DO IT? YEAH. YOU KNOW, IF THE PRIVATIZATION IS IS OFF THE TABLE. YEAH. I THINK IF WE SAW LIKE WHAT CHANGES NEED TO BE MADE OPERATIONALLY TO COVER THE DEBT SERVICE FOR WHATEVER YOU THINK IT IS AND GIVE US THE RANGE, RIGHT? WHATEVER, 6 TO 700,000, IF THAT'S WHERE YOU THINK YOU'RE GOING TO FALL, WHAT OPERATIONAL CHANGES NEED TO BE MADE IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THAT DEBT SERVICE COVERAGE? RIGHT. AND THEN FOR ME, THEN, YOU KNOW, WE COULD, I WOULD, I WOULD RATHER LEND THAT INTERNALLY AND HAVE THAT KIND OF, YOU KNOW, PAYING OURSELVES, SO TO SPEAK. RIGHT? VERSUS EVEN I AGREE, I DON'T THINK WE COULD GO TO THE TRADITIONAL LENDING MARKET BASED ON WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH TRACK RECORD YET FOR OUR FOR OUR AIRPORT. RIGHT. BUT INTERNALLY, IF YOU COME AND YOU SAY, HEY, HERE'S THE, HERE'S WHAT WE WOULD NEED TO DO. AND WE ALL THINK THAT THAT MAKES SENSE. IF YOU DO, THEN I CAN SEE THAT IN THE MEANTIME, I WOULD PURSUE A COMMUNITY PROJECT, FUND ANOTHER TRY AND GET ANOTHER 12 OR SOME NUMBER TO START COVERING THE TOWER. I THINK THAT WOULD BE THE NEXT STEP AS OPPOSED TO JUST DOING MORE ON THE TERMINAL, BUT THAT WOULD BE A. DECISION THAT I. THE TOWER PROJECT BECOMES THAT NEXT PIECE. IS THERE A PART OF THAT TOO, WHERE WE ENCUMBER? I'M JUST ASKING, YOU KNOW, ABOUT ENCUMBRANCE OF FUTURE COUNCILS KIND OF A THING? DOES THAT BEAR ON THIS AT ALL? BECAUSE WE'RE IF WE DECIDE THAT WE'RE GOING TO BORROW SOME MONEY THAT IS GOING TO GET PAID BACK 15 YEARS IN THE FUTURE KIND OF A THING, ARE WE ENCUMBERING FUTURE COUNCILS? I'M NOT SURE HOW THE HOW THAT WORKS WITH THE UTILITY, LIKE WITH WITH THE. PASSENGER FEES. I'M JUST ASKING THE OPERATIONAL FEES. IT'S NOT GENERAL FUND MONEY. EVENTUALLY, IF IT TURNS INTO GENERAL FUND MONEY, THEN IF AIRLINES PULL OUT, THAT'S WHAT GIVES US THAT. WHAT WOULD BE AN EXAMPLE OF A, OF AN INTERNAL ENTITY THAT YOU WOULD FORESEE AS POTENTIALLY UTILIZING? IF, IF WATER OR WASTEWATER HAS BEEN PLANNING FOR A PROJECT THAT IS NOW 15 YEARS IN THE FUTURE, AND THEY HAVE MONEY THAT IS IN THE MARKET NOW, BUT THEY DON'T PLAN ON USING IT FOR. SO WE BORROW FROM THE UTILITY, BORROW FROM THE UTILITY. OKAY. THE FAIR MARKET RATE. YEAH. SOMETHING ELSE I'D BE INTERESTED WHEN WE TALK ABOUT GRAND JUNCTION BEING A FAIR COMPARISON TO US, I'D BE INTERESTED AS YOU LOOK AT DIFFERENT KINDS OF FEE INCREASES, GOING BACK A LITTLE BIT TO WHAT COUNCILMEMBER LEE SAID, SEE HOW THAT PRICE, HOW WHAT YOU WANT TO DO OR NEEDS TO DO COMPARES WITH THE MARKET, RIGHT? AND I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE GRAND JUNCTION IS IT MAYBE I DON'T KNOW WHO ELSE MIGHT BE IT? BOISE, WHATEVER. YEAH, JUST BILLINGS. BILLINGS. OKAY. YEAH, I'D KIND OF LIKE TO SEE THAT COMPARISON TO SAY, OKAY, THEY'RE AT THIS LEVEL. IF WE WANTED TO GO MORE THAN THAT, THAT MAY BE A DISTRACTION, THAT MAY DRIVE BUSINESS AWAY.BUSINESS BEING DEFINED AS AIRLINES. YEAH. IS THERE ANYTHING OTHER DIRECTOR TURNER, THAT YOU'D SAY? THIS IS ANOTHER DIRECTION THAT I REALLY LIKE TO HEAR FROM COUNCIL. IF YOU GO THAT WAY AND THEN END UP FEELING. I HAVE A QUESTION, COUNCILMEMBER FRANCIS. SO IF WE DID BORROW INTERNALLY, YOU HAD MENTIONED MAYBE 6 MILLION, BUT WE HAVE NEVER BORROWED THAT MUCH INTERNALLY UP TO THIS POINT. BUT I CAN'T IMAGINE BORROWING 30 MILLION INTERNALLY.
THAT'S THAT'S OFF THE TABLE. AND IS THERE 30? WHAT'S YOUR LIMIT? I HEARD THREE OF THEM. I GUESS LOWER LIMIT. NO, 30. I KNEW I HEARD IT WRONG BECAUSE I'M SAYING 30 MILLION. WE GOT TO WE GET THE AIR TRAFFIC TOWER AND IT'S A SAFETY ISSUE AND ALL GOOD, BUT WE CAN'T BORROW INTERNALLY TO GET ANYWHERE NEAR THAT NUMBER. SO DOES IT DO YOU ANY GOOD IF WE BORROW 5 MILLION FROM OURSELVES? AND IS THERE A REVENUE SOURCE TO PAY THAT BACK AND STILL GET THE THINGS DONE THAT NEED TO BE DONE? WELL, YEAH. TO TO GET THE TOTAL $56 MILLION PORTION OF PHASE ONE BORROWING, 5 TO $7 MILLION, DEPENDING ON WHERE BIDS COME IN, IS GOING TO BE NECESSARY. SO THIS, THIS IS ONE THAT I'VE RUN SOME NUMBERS ON AND I'M COMFORTABLE WITH. YEAH, BUT ISN'T THAT BORROWING? IT IS STILL JUST KIND OF A REVENUE BOND OR WHATEVER WE CALL IT.
IT'S, IT'S NOT BORROWING INTERNALLY FROM POSSIBLY, BUT THIS, THIS FIGURE WOULD NOT NEED TO BE BORROWED UNTIL THE EARLIEST LATE NEXT FISCAL YEAR. AND SO WE WILL LOOK THROUGH
[01:45:01]
THAT IN 2027. IT'S IT'S ABOVE AND BEYOND THIS THAT WE'RE WHAT IS WHAT I'M CONCERNED WITH.YEAH, YEAH. ME TOO. HOW MUCH DID WE BORROW FOR. WELL, AND I APOLOGIZE. SO SO WHERE THIS COMES FROM, WE NEED TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION. I NEED TO SIT DOWN WITH CITY FINANCE AND AND JOSHUA AND CHRIS FREDERICKSON AND CHRIS CANFIELD AND HAVE SOME OF THESE DISCUSSIONS, BECAUSE THE BIGGER PIECE ABOUT BORROWING THIS INTERNALLY IS, CAN THEY PART WITH THAT MONEY FOR POTENTIALLY A FULL TERM OF A LOAN? BECAUSE THAT'S NOT BEEN THE CASE IN THE PAST BECAUSE YOU'RE LOOKING AT 15 YEARS OR BETTER, PROBABLY FOR A LOAN, TEN, TEN, TEN, TEN, TEN YEARS. I WOULD LIKE TEN YEARS. I RAN THE NUMBERS AT 6%. THAT CAME UP TO LIKE 16 YEARS OR $6 MILLION. YEAH. AT THAT REPAYMENT. I MEAN, IN THAT, I MEAN, DOES THAT IS THIS CURRENT PACKAGE THAT IS ON THE STREET? WELL, YEAH. I MEAN, THAT IS THAT'S HOW MUCH IT'S PREDICTED.
WE'RE GOING TO BE SHORT WITH WHAT'S ON THE STREET RIGHT NOW. SO QUICK QUESTION. AND I AM FULLY HOPING TO UNDER-PROMISE AND OVERDELIVER ON THAT FIGURE. I MEAN, I'VE GOT SOME SOME OTHER OPTIONS OUT THERE, BUT UNTIL IT'S WELL DEFINED, I CAN'T PUT THAT PUZZLE TOGETHER.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? THE DESTRUCTION, DESTRUCTION OF THE EXISTING TOWER. WHERE WHO'S WHOSE TRUCK DOES THAT FIT INTO? DOES THAT FIT INTO THE REPLACEMENT TOWER ITSELF? AND THAT'LL GET FUNDED. SO SHOULD THAT NUMBER BE ADHERED TO. IT WOULD BE A REQUIREMENT DOWN HERE IN THESE TWO PHASES OF THE TERMINAL EXPANSION. OKAY. SO WE CAN BUILD THE NEW ONE WITHOUT TEARING THE BUILDING DOWN. YES. OKAY. DENNIS, JUST MAKING SURE HE'S HERE. WHY NOT ASK HIM? OKAY. WE CAN BUILD THE NEW TOWER WITHOUT TEARING THE OLD ONE DOWN. YES. OKAY. I GOT THE SENSE EARLIER THAT THAT WAS GOING TO BE TAKEN OUT. WELL, IT DOES NEED. IT NEEDS TO COME DOWN FROM THE BUILDING CODE PERSPECTIVE FOR US TO WORK ON. IF WE DON'T TAKE IT DOWN. NO.
OKAY. IT IS. WE CAN BLOW IT UP. WE'RE GOING TO SEND YOU THE FIRST INVITATION IF THAT'S THE WAY WE'RE GOING. AND I'LL LET YOU PUSH THE BUTTON, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT THE PART THAT EXCITES ME. I WANT TO WATCH THAT. THE WATER TOWER WAS KIND OF GETTING TO THAT POINT. YOU KNOW, THAT WAS KIND OF GETTING THE POINT. IT WAS STARTING TO WORRY ABOUT STRUCTURAL. AND IF WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THAT WITH THE WITH THE EXISTING TOWER, THEN THAT'S SOMETHING THAT TIME. YEAH, IT'S THE SYSTEMS IN, IN THE FACILITY. IT'S THE FACT THAT THE STAIRCASE IS NONSTANDARD. ALL THE STEPS ARE DIFFERENT WITH THE DIFFERENT HEIGHT. YOU KNOW, THAT TYPE OF THING. BUT IF NOBODY'S USING THAT, IT DOESN'T MATTER. RIGHT? SO CAN WE, WE CAN DO THE TERMINAL EXPANSION ACCORDING TO PLAN AND JUST LEAVE OUT THAT 14 MILLION UNFINISHED PORTION THAT'S ALREADY BEEN PULLED. WHAT'S THAT? THAT 14,000,001. OKAY, SO YOU REWIND TO THAT THIRD MONTH. I WAS HERE IN 2024 AND I FROZE THE TERMINAL PROJECT BECAUSE WE RECEIVED A $0 AWARD, RIGHT? THAT WAS THE BALLOONED PRICE TO $70 MILLION. AND WE DIDN'T HAVE A CLUE. WE STARTED PURSUING THE COMMUNITY PROJECT FUNDING REQUEST, AND WE BROUGHT THAT BACK DOWN TO $56 MILLION. WITH THAT VALUE, VALUE ENGINEERING EXERCISE, THINGS HAVE CHANGED.
AGAIN, IT JUST SO HAPPENS WE LANDED A $56 MILLION AGAIN. BUT TO DO EVERYTHING THAT WAS ORIGINALLY PLANNED TODAY WOULD NEED THE ADDITIONAL $14 MILLION. BUT IS THAT ESSENTIAL TO GET THE AIRPORT TO WHERE IT NEEDS TO BE? OR IF I HAD 14 MILLION, I WOULD PUT IT FOR THE TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER EVENTUALLY. WE'RE JUST CHIPPING AWAY, CHIPPING AWAY AT IT. AND YOU'RE I MEAN, LET ME PUT IT THIS WAY. YOU'RE YOU'RE TOUCHING ON ONE ELEMENT OF. THE BROADER CONCERN I HAVE IS THAT IT'S ALL NECESSARY IN ONE WAY, SHAPE OR FORM. WE CAN PRIORITIZE IT BASED ON THE FAA'S STANDPOINT. WE'RE NEVER GOING TO GET THE FAA TO PAY FOR EVERYTHING, EVEN IF IT'S ELIGIBLE. THEY'VE GOT TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO GENERATE FUNDS. SO WHAT WE CAN DO AT THE LOCAL LEVEL AS WELL, AND BRING IN DOLLARS, RIGHT. SO, DIRECTOR TURNER, I'M GOING TO I'M GOING TO FRAME THIS AND THEN YOU CORRECT ME IN ORDER THE BID PACKAGE THAT WE HAVE OUT RIGHT NOW, IT'S GOING TO REQUIRE FIVE, 5 TO 7 MILLION EXTRA DOLLARS THAN WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE. WE CAN LOOK AT THAT AS INTERNAL FUNDING. WE CAN TRY AND VALUE ENGINEER IT. WHEN IT COMES BACK.
[01:50:01]
ALL OF THOSE OPTIONS WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO DO JUST TO GET OUR CURRENT PHASE ONE TERMINAL PROJECT DONE. THEN WE WILL ASK DIRECTOR TURNER TO BRING US BACK A LIST OF BEST BUSINESS PRACTICES THAT HE FINDS CAN BE BOTH COMPETITIVE TO THE AIRLINES WITHOUT DRAWING THEM AWAY, BUT GETTING US A LITTLE MORE INTO THE MARKET, AND THEN BRING US A LIST OF CHANGES THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO TO OUR GROUND LEASES, TO OUR HANGARS, TO WHAT WHAT THE WHOLE OPERATIONAL BUSINESS OF AN AIRPORT MIGHT LOOK LIKE, AND HELP US UNDERSTAND WHAT SOME OF THOSE PRESSURE POINTS WILL BE AS WE MOVE FORWARD TO TRY AND INCREASE REVENUE. IN THE MEANTIME, WE WOULD CONTINUE TO GO AFTER THE COMMUNITY PROJECT FUND REQUEST WITH THE TOWER SPECIFICALLY IN MIND, SO THAT AS WE MAKE THESE THE BUSINESS CASE FOR OPERATING THE AIRPORT DIFFERENTLY THAT WE WOULD HAVE OUR OWN CONGRESSMAN WHO'S WILLING TO DO IT AS CONGRESSMAN SIMPSON. THEN THEN WE WOULD GO TO CONGRESSMAN AND THEN SAY, THESE ARE THE BUSINESS CASES THAT WE'RE MAKING TO GET THE TOWER. SO WE'VE GOT A LOT OF DOMINOES THAT ARE KIND OF NOT READY TO TIP. IS THERE ANY SPACE ON THERE FOR, I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE A PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP IN THIS FIRST PHASE. IS THERE ANY KIND OF THERE? THERE WASN'T BECAUSE IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY REVENUE FOR ANYBODY TO BUILD US A. WHAT'S THE INCENTIVE? THERE'S NO REVENUE. YEAH. AND THERE'S NO NAMING. NO NAMING. YOU CAN'T NAME A PARKING LOT.WE CAN'T NAME. I THINK IT'S LOOKING. I THINK THAT'S A CONVERSATION. IF THAT'S SOMETHING YOU'RE INTERESTED IN ME EVALUATING, I WANT TO RETHINK ABOUT HOW I PRESENT IT TO YOU BECAUSE YOU'RE LOOKING AT A FRONTIER CENTER TYPE PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP.
THAT'S THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS WOULD LOOK LIKE. YOU WOULD GIVE UP REVENUE GENERATION FROM THE AIRPORT. YES. TO A THIRD PARTY TO CONSTRUCT THIS OVER A 40 OR 50 YEAR TERM. YEAH. AND THAT'S WHAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO BE, I GUESS I JUST PRESENTED IT. SO THIS GOES BACK TO THAT TO COUNCIL MEMBER LEE'S QUESTION ABOUT PRIVATIZING. AND WE CAN KIND OF DO FROM NOTHING TO EVERYTHING FIGURED OUT. SO IF WE DECIDED TO DO PARKING IN A PARKING GARAGE, FOR EXAMPLE, WE COULD FIND SOMEBODY WHO WAS WILLING TO BUILD IT. WELL, WE PRIVATIZE PARKING FOR A LONG TIME. IT DID NOT DO US ANY FAVORS AND IT DID NOT DO US ANY GOOD. YOU KNOW, OUR OUR LEASE ITSELF, WE HAVE NOT BEEN VERY GOOD AT DOING HAVING THOSE AT THE MARKET. RIGHT. AND SO THEN WE FOUND IT WAS MAYBE BETTER TO START WRITING OUR OWN PARKING. AND WE'VE RUN INTO. I MEAN, THERE'S, THERE'S PROS AND CONS TO ALL OF IT. YEAH. BUT IT'S ABOUT OPERATING AN AIRPORT.
YEAH. BUT IT SEEMS LIKE PARKING FEES ARE ONE REVENUE SOURCE. WE COULD INCREASE AND STILL BE COMPETITIVE WITH OTHER AIRPORTS. I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE WE'RE PRETTY DARN CLOSE RIGHT NOW TO OUR LIMIT TO FOR OUR SIZE AIRPORT. YEAH, YEAH, WE'LL WE'LL CONTINUE TO LOOK AT THAT.
AND THEN AND SOME OF ADJUSTMENTS HAVE BEEN PLANNED FOR NEXT FISCAL YEAR TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE STAYING WHERE, WHERE WE'RE AT. BUT YOU GET TO TOO HIGH AND WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK TO THE DIRECTION YOU CAME FROM. THE PEOPLE DRIVING TO SALT LAKE CITY TO FLY OUT, RIGHT? I MEAN, THIS IS NOT A CASE OF YOUR OTHER ENTERPRISE FUNDS WHERE YOU HAVE A CAPTIVE AUDIENCE. PEOPLE HAVE CHOICES AND THEY ARE AT AN ALL TIME HIGH USING THAT AIRPORT, WHICH IS GREAT, BUT IT'S BRINGING THESE OTHER CHALLENGES AND EVEN EVEN SOME INCREASE WOULD GENERATE ENOUGH REAL DOLLARS TO, I MEAN, PARKING, RIGHT? IT'S MUCH BETTER TO INCREASE FEES INCREMENTALLY INSTEAD OF IN ONE FELL SWOOP, BECAUSE IT'S REALLY HARD TO SELL A 200 OR 300% INCREASE ON SOMETHING. OKAY, I'LL TELL YOU A STORY ABOUT THAT LATER, COUNCILMEMBER. SO THAT, I MEAN, UNLESS I HEAR ANY BEING THAT THERE'S ANY OTHER BIG. I, II OR GRAND, WHAT ABOUT THAT IS THE DIRECTION THAT WE WILL THAT WE WILL HEAD. I THINK I THINK IT'S INTERESTING THAT, YOU KNOW, WE TALKED ABOUT A BOND BEING AT 66 AND TWO THIRDS, AND THEN IT JUST GOES AWAY BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT PASS. RIGHT. WELL, THIS DOESN'T HAVE TO. WELL, THAT'S WHAT THAT'S THE INTERESTING PART ON THIS ONE. SO THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT THE FORMER CITY ATTORNEY AND SOME FORMER AIRPORT STAFF HAD DONE SOME RESEARCH ON. AS I STARTED, I SEE A HAND FROM. MR. YEAH. SO WHAT YOU GOT TO TALK TO THIS IS THE EXPERT, RIGHT? HE'S AN ENGINEER. ALL RIGHT. SO
[01:55:03]
IT'S A CARVE OUT IN IDAHO CODE THAT FOR AIRPORTS, YOU DO NOT NEED TO PUT IT FORWARD FOR THE 66 AND TWO THIRDS VOTE, AS LONG AS IT'S GOING TO BE PAID BACK WITH AIRPORT REVENUES. SO IF YOU'RE GOING TO USE PUBLIC MONEY TO PAY IT BACK, THEN IT FOLLOWS THE SAME BONDING THRESHOLD. BUT IF IT WILL BE PAID BACK WITH AIRPORT REVENUES, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO GO TO A PUBLIC REVENUE. THIS HAS TO BE 50%. SO OR IT DOESN'T HAVE TO GO TO A VOTE. YOU CAN JUST TAKE IT, JUST TAKE A BOND. YEAH. SO WE DECIDE THAT DOESN'T GO TO THE PUBLIC IS THE ULTIMATE. BUT THEN DO THEY RATE, THEY RANK, THEY RATE US BASED ON MOODY'S OR THEY RATE US BASED ON CITY OF IDAHO FALLS. LIKE HOW WHO'S WHO'S. YEAH. YES. WE NEVER GOT THAT FAR. BUT BUT IT'S GOING TO BE BASED MORE OR LESS ON THE AIRPORT'S ABILITY TO REPAY. AND YOU'RE GOING TO WANT IT THAT WAY. YEAH. BUT THEN WE GO BACK TO THE PROBLEM OF TWO YEARS WITH THE PROFITABILITY ISN'T ENOUGH TO REALLY E AND ALSO NOT PROFITABLE ENOUGH, RIGHT? SO WE'RE 3 TO 5 YEARS, I THINK, FROM BEING ABLE TO ISSUE A REVENUE BOND PAID FOR WITH AIRPORT DOLLARS THAT ARE NOT PFC ONES THAT ARE. NO, I GOT TO GET THIS OUT BECAUSE THE LAST TIME WE TALKED ABOUT THIS, THERE WAS A HESITANCY ON COUNCIL. SOME OF SOME OF YOU VOICED THIS, THAT EVEN THOUGH IT'S ALLOWED, IT WASN'T NECESSARILY SOMETHING THAT YOU HAD BEEN REAL COMFORTABLE WITH ISSUING. AND THAT WOULD BE ONE OF THE INTERNAL POLICY DISCUSSIONS AND QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED IS, IS THIS BODY COMFORTABLE WITH ISSUING A BOND FOR THE AIRPORT IN THE FUTURE WITHOUT PUTTING IT TO A VOTE FROM AN OPTICS STANDPOINT? AND SO THAT'S NOT A QUESTION NEEDS TO BE ANSWERED RIGHT NOW. THAT'S JUST ME SAYING THAT'S KIND OF WHERE THAT WAS LEFT IN MY MIND FROM A PREVIOUS COUNCIL MEETING WHERE THIS WAS DISCUSSED. LET ME THINK OUT LOUD ON THAT, IF THAT'S OKAY, BECAUSE I'M NOT I'M NOT RELUCTANT ON THE BASIS OF. WHAT MAKES ME RELUCTANT IS I'M NOT SEEING THE REVENUE SOURCE GUARANTEED TO PAY IT BACK BECAUSE WE'RE HAVING TROUBLE FIGURING WHERE THE REVENUE SOURCE IS RIGHT NOW TO PAY FOR THINGS. IF I'M I MEAN, WE'RE GOOD WITH WHAT WE HAVE, BUT AS WE DO THESE KINDS OF THINGS FROM REVENUE SOURCES, I'M NOT SURE I SEE WHERE THE REVENUE IS COMING IN. DO YOU SEE WHAT I MEAN? AND PARTLY I'M SAYING THIS BECAUSE WHEN YOU SAY, WELL, WE COULD DO THIS WITH THE LEASING, BUT WE MIGHT LOSE PEOPLE. WE COULD DO THIS WITH PARKING, BUT WE MIGHT LOSE PEOPLE. SO THAT'S WHY I CAN'T SEE THE GUARANTEED REVENUE SOURCE THAT MAKES ME RELUCTANT.THAT DOESN'T MAKE ME VOTE AGAINST IT. THAT MAKES SENSE. YOUR RELUCTANCE IS IS WELL RECEIVED WITH ME. PART OF WHY I BROUGHT THIS DISCUSSION UP WAS TWO MONTHS AGO. NOW I DON'T REALLY RECALL IS I'M LOOKING AT ALL THE LOW HANGING FRUIT THAT I'VE TAKEN, AND I GUESS FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM SINCE I STARTED. AND IN MY HEAD, I HOPE TO JUST BE A LITTLE BIT MORE EFFECTIVE. NOW, GRANTED, IT'S ALLOWED US TO. GET TO THIS POINT, AND SO I'M A LOT MORE COMFORTABLE ON A YEAR TO YEAR BASIS. NOW IT'S JUST THE NEXT THE NEXT STEP OF THE WHOLE IDEA OF RIGHT SIZING THE AIRPORT'S FINANCES. BECAUSE IN A PERFECT WORLD, I WOULDN'T HAVE TO ASK FOR A LOAN. WE JUST GO OUT AND MAKE THIS HAPPEN. THAT'S WHERE I WANT TO BE IN FIVE YEARS, TEN YEARS, MAYBE. SO MAYBE WE'RE PUTTING THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE. MAYBE WE'RE WE'RE.
INSTEAD OF MAKING SURE WE CAN RAISE THE REVENUE, RIGHT, WE RAISE THE FEES AND WE RAISE THE REVENUE FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS AND SEE IF IT ACTUALLY DRIVES PEOPLE AWAY. IF WE START MAKING SOME MORE MONEY, THEN THEN WE DECIDE TO DO THE BOND INSTEAD OF DOING THE BOND AND THEN RAISING THE FEES. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? IT MAKES SENSE. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THAT'S REQUIRED. WE JUST OKAY, WE'RE TOO RISKY RIGHT NOW. YEAH. SO TO GET TO THAT POINT, HOW DO YOU WANT ME TO GO AROUND IT? SO LET ME REPHRASE. WHAT THE MAYOR SAID IS THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE ANY INDIVIDUAL ONE OF THESE FOR THESE REASONS. YOU JUST MENTIONED PUSHING PEOPLE AWAY OR SOME OTHER VERSION OF THAT. BUT I DO NEED TO PURSUE RAISING RENTS WHERE FEASIBLE AND RATES AND FEES WHERE FEASIBLE. AT A HIGH LEVEL. THAT'S THAT'S WHAT I AM HEARING FROM THIS DISCUSSION. AND THAT'S WHERE I WAS LOOKING FOR SOME VERSION OF THAT. AND I WILL CONTINUE TO WORK ON THAT. SOME OF THESE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN BATTED AROUND AND ARE WRITTEN ON THE BACK OF A PIECE OF NOTEBOOK PAPER. A COUPLE OF THESE ARE NEW IDEAS. AND BY ALL MEANS, IF YOU'RE CURIOUS WHO I COMPARE US TO IN A REGIONAL BASIS, I CAN SHARE THAT WITH YOU AS WELL. SO YOU CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION OF WHY MONTEREY'S BAD COMPARISON. AND THEN IN THE MEANTIME, CAN WE GET, AS WE START LOOKING AT ALL OF THESE RATES, IT'S LIKE, WHAT IS THE HISTORY AND WHAT IS IT GOING TO TAKE TO GET A MOODY RATING INDEPENDENT OF THE AIRPORT? I MEAN, INDEPENDENT OF
[02:00:05]
THE CITY SO THAT WE CAN HAVE REASONABLE TERMS ASSOCIATED WITH A BOND? MOST OF THAT'S ALREADY PUT IN PLACE. I MEAN, I WAS MOVING DOWN THAT ROAD. YOU'VE GOT ZIONS PUBLIC CAPITAL AS OUR MUNICIPAL ADVISOR. I'M DRAWING A BLANK ON WHO OUR. ADVISOR IS FOR THE ACTUAL ISSUANCE, BUT FOR THE YES, BUT BUT GO AHEAD. YEAH. AND THEN BOND COUNCILS. HOLLY TROXEL THEY THAT WAS IN THEIR SCOPE OF WORK TO PROVIDE. SO MY QUESTION FOR THEM, FOR OUR BOND ADVISORS WOULD BE IF WE PUT SOMETHING IN PLACE THAT SHOWED WE HAVE THE CASE THAT SHOWS, YES, THIS BOND CAN BE PAID BACK FOR FROM AIRPORT REVENUES AND NOT OUT OF, YOU KNOW, ANYTHING FROM THE TAXPAYER, SO TO SPEAK. RIGHT. WHAT HAPPENS THEN IF THE AIRPORT DEFAULTS ON THAT? DOES THE CITY HAVE TO GUARANTEE THAT DEBT? THAT'S WHAT MY QUESTION IS. SO IF YOU CAN FIND THE ANSWER TO THAT, I'D LOVE TO KNOW. UNLESS YOU'RE ALMOST CERTAINLY YES. BUT THEN THE OPPOSITE OF THAT IS. AND THAT IS RIGHT. RIGHT WHERE WE HAVE GOTTEN. SO MAYBE THE VOTE IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY. BUT IF THEY VIEW THE AIRPORT AS A RISKY AS A RISK, THEN THEY'RE GOING TO SAY, WELL, IT'S A 20 YEAR TERM AT 15%. RIGHT? RIGHT. I MEAN, SO SO THAT'S THE THAT'S THE METRIC THAT I'M LOOKING AT THAT SAYS, LET'S FIGURE OUT OUR RATE AND OUR TERMS AND WHERE DO WE REALLY HAVE TO BE WITH MOODY'S OR WHOEVER ELSE TO SAY NOT ALL THAT RISKY. WE'RE SURE THAT THAT THIS IS THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE THEY'RE GENERATING. AND WE START WITH THAT HISTORY.OKAY. IN THE MEANTIME, I DO THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO INTERNALLY BORROW TO GET THAT PROJECT DONE. YEAH, I THINK SO. BUT THERE'S JUST NO WAY AROUND THAT PART OF IT. BUT I GUESS.
THE QUESTION IS FULLY COMPLETING THAT PROJECT WITHOUT CUTTING MORE OUT OF IT. THE BEST USE OF, WELL, THAT'S IT. THERE'S A VALUE ENGINEERING THAT MIGHT GO INTO THERE.
THERE'S THREE, YOU KNOW, I CAN TELL DIRECTOR TURNER WE CAN'T ENGINEER MUCH. YES, WE HAVE REALLY WE HAVE. AND I THINK THAT'S BEEN CUT. BUT BUT TO YOUR POINTS, COUNCILMAN, I THINK ONCE YOU SHOW US KIND OF OPERATIONALLY HERE THE THINGS THAT NEED TO BE MODIFIED AND CHANGED TO ACHIEVE THAT DEBT SERVICE, THEN I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'LL PROBABLY GET THIS GROUP MORE COMFORTABLE IS THE REALITY OF THAT. OKAY, OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR BEING WILLING TO HAVE THE DISCUSSION, GIVING THE DIRECTION. I KNOW THAT THIS IS WHAT WE USED TO DO IN AN AIRPORT BOARD MEETING. SO IT IS NOW IN OUR WORK SESSION. SO IT MIGHT FEEL A LITTLE UNUSUAL TO HAVE IT HERE. BUT THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THE CONVERSATION IN AIRPORT BOARD WOULD BE. SO THANK YOU. OKAY. DIRECTOR TURNER, DO YOU FEEL LIKE YOU'VE GOT THE RIGHT MIX OF TO COME UP WITH MORE QUESTIONS? I'LL ASK THEM AS WE GO. OKAY. WELL, THIS WILL BE SOMEWHAT OF A DYNAMIC SCENARIO. MY, BUT MY, MY INTENTION AND I KNOW YOU HAD YOUR OWN TO A CERTAIN EXTENT. I'M I'M COMFORTABLE FOR THE TIME BEING. YOU'VE PROVIDED A GENERAL DIRECTION. AND THAT'S USUALLY WHAT I LIKE IS A GENERAL GOAL. I'LL FILL IN THE SPECIFICS.
[Executive Session]
GREAT. OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCIS, WILL YOU PLEASE READ US INTO THE NEXT SECTION? I MOVE COUNCIL MOVE INTO THE EXECUTIVE SESSION TO ADDRESS LEGAL OPTIONS REGARDING AN AIRPORT TENANT CALLED PURSUANT TO IDAHO CODE 74-2061F, TO COMMUNICATE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL FOR THE PUBLIC AGENCY TO DISCUSS THE LEGAL RAMIFICATIONS OF AND LEGAL OPTIONS FOR PENDING LITIGATION OR CONTROVERSIES NOT YET BEING LITIGATED, BUT IMMINENTLY LIKELY TO BE LITIGATED, AND WE WILL NOT RETURN AFTER THE EXECUTIVE SESSION. SECOND. OH, SORRY, THIS HAS TO BE A SPECIFIC ROLL CALL WITH YESES BEHIND IT. OKAY. FRANCIS A DINGMAN. YES. LEE. YES. FREEMAN. YES. LARSON. YES. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU.* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.