Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutAAC Minutes 1998 06/03AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES June 3, 1998 The Airport Advisory Committee meeting was called to order in the Toothman-Orton conference room on the second floor of McCall Air Taxi's building at 12:00 noon. Persons present were Rick Fereday, Tom Tucker, Mike Anderson, Gordon Colburn, Doug MacNichol, Kevin Bissell, Marylin Arp, Mike Dorris, and Gene Heikkola. The first item of business was the adoption of minutes from the May 6 meeting. The second page contained an pronoun which did not make it clear whether it refered to Brian Olson or Mike Anderson. It will be corrected to indicate that it refers to Brian Olson. Otherwise, the minutes were approved as submitted. There being a guest present, it was decided to move up New Business item "D" and let Doug MacNichol present his case concerning weed control, so he did not have to sit through a long meeting. Doug stated that he is a member of the Valley County Weed Control Board whose resources are being stretched these days, making it impossible for them to control all the noxious weeds. His proposal was for the airport to find a private contractor, hit the weeds heavy the first year, follow-up with reseeding grasses in the fall, then spot control after that. Tom Tucker asked who the contractor is for Cascade airport. Doug said he didn't know and suggested contactin John Johannen in Cascade or Wilbur Ellis, a weed consultant in Boise. He thought maybe an outfit like CENEX could do it for $16/acre, but they need to have $2000.00 worth of business/day to make the trip from Boise worthwhile. Rick estimated that although the airport covers 96 acres or so, much of it is pavement and buildings, so the total cost should fall in the $1000.00 to $1600.00 range. Mike Anderson brought up the point that it is a definite concern because of the possibility that aircraft could be unwittingly spreading the weeds when they fly into the backcountry airports. Marilyn proposed the idea of getting someone from the Golf Course to spray the weeds since they have certified personnel. Gordon asked if the County would be able to cover us until we can get something lined up and Doug responded that they could, but would not be able to cover all the airport grounds. Old Business: 1. AIP-06 Construction: Kevin reported that Roberson Construction was in the process of preparing the grades and planned on paving the relocated Deinhard Lane Thursday and Friday, but we learned after the meeting that their schedule had been slipped to Monday and Tuesday. He also reported that he and Gene had been coordinating the start date for the GA apron over the last couple days and had arrived at a date of July 6th. That would avoid leaving the GA apron torn up over the Fourth of July weekend and still get construction on that area started as soon as possible, since Seubert Construction had actually proposed a July 20th start date. In the meantime, they will be doing work on the Diagonal Taxiway and Taxiway "C" , which would leave more routes open after the GA ramp work gets started. At about that point, Mike Dorris handed Rick a letter about the storm drains NW and SW of the McCall Air Taxi hangar, "putting us on notice" that we have a serious safety issue there. Even to the point of saying that the cones that were stationed around the SW drain as temporary notification were a hazard as well. Kevin pointed out (again) that the warranty on the pavement had expired since that drain was installed, making it a City maintenance issue. Tom asked if it couldn't be addressed with a change order to AIP-06. Kevin said he'd check with Jerry Trujillo to see how he would respond. Rick asked Kevin to coordinate with Gene to see what we can do because it is a safety issue. Mike Dorris then turned our attention to the NW drain and stated that it is also a serious problem because of poor visibility over the nose of a "tail -dragger" and the drop-off is rather steep. After discussing several options, Kevin suggested painting the edge with stripes to indicate non- structural pavement, which seemed to be the Committee's consensus as the best solution all around. Mike Dorris presented a preliminary drawing of his proposed location of a new cardlock fueling system and made a case for moving the taxiway farther away from his hangar. At that point, he had to leave, after which Tom reminded us all that the Airport Advisory Committee in conjuction with the engineers had moved the taxiway closer to the McCall Air Taxi hangar to accomodate Mike Dorri's' request for more tie -down spaces. New Business: Fuel flowage fees were discussed, but Mike Anderson asked if we couldn't table that item until we get some good answers on the airport budget figures, especially since the Airport Advisory Committee had already increased hangar lease rates. The subject then turned to the Valley County Airport Tax Levy. Tom Tucker gave a run-down of where we stand on that issue, which was to coordinate with Cascade and Donnelly airports for the split on the increased tax levy and get it thru Donnelly and Cascade City Councils before going back to the Valley County Commissioners. Rick suggested that we need some solid figures, possibly in reference to airport size, to use in our presentation. Tom countered that traffic volume figures might be more beneficial, and that the previous (undated) split formulated by V.A.L.U.E.D. gives us a basis to negotiate from. Rick then asked Tom Tucker and Mike Anderson to continue the negotiations. The topic then turned to the airport budget. Rick felt we needed a tnew budget format that provided more detail, such as breaking out snow removal costs and runway light repairs from the line item titled "Repairs, other". Tom then asked where the $43,005.98 hangar lessees paid to the County last year went and delivered the County Tax Roll to Gene. Referring to the tax statement included in last month's minutes, and applying the stated mill rate (.005049734) to that amount gave a figure of $17,126.52. Since Gene had drawn up a draft budget proposal for next year, the consensus of the committee was to include that figure in the budget proposal (335.000 - Other Shared Revenue). The draft budget proposal allowed for radios for Public Works' snow blower and front-end loader, as well as a salary of $18,000/yr. for the Airport Manager (in keeping with initial negotiations at last October's interview) and still came out balanced with ample allowances for administrative overhead, Public Works transfers, and routine maintenance items based on this years expenditures. Some discussion ensued concerning discrepencies in this year's budget figures relative to grant funds coming in and significantly less allowed for on the expenditure side and Marilyn suggested that the Auditors were our best bet for answering those questions. Rick asked that the budget proposal be put on next month's agenda. Next was agenda item IVB - Airport Water Rates: Tom began by explaining that, since the new water rates went into effect a couple months ago, the size of the meter determines the base rate charged, even though most lessee's he knew hadn't used enough water in three years to make the meter register. With an 1.5 inch meter, the rate is three times the base rate of $42.74, which gets expensive real fast, so Tom had his disconnected even though it cost him $100 to do it. Nobody seems to know who made the dicision on what size meter to install. Mike Anderson stated that this is City owned property and the lessees do not derive any economic incentive from providing more water because there is no development opportunity, so it makes no sense at all to charge lessee's for water they don't use and have no opportunity to use other than to flush a toilet or wash an airplane once in a while. Marilyn suggested that maybe Dale Points knew the rationale - perhaps it was in relation to fire flows, but the general feeling was that even a 1.5 inch meter wouldn't provide enough flow for that. (When we talked with Bill Keating the next morning, he said it used to be good to oversize, but now it just costs you money. He (Bill) said that he could tell us what fittings were needed to swap to a smaller meter, and he would be glad to make the swaps because he needs more large meters.) Item IVC: Gene asked that the committe look at the marks he had painted on the ground planning for the berms separating the parking lot from Deinhard Lane. These were placed as close as he could determine from a drawing in the (yet -to -be -adopted) Airport Master Plan. However, there was no guidance on how far away from the edge of the pavement they should be placed, so the marks were set at 12 feet to allow for another lane of traffic. Some discussion that followed concerned the issue of how the berms would affect drainage. We all went out to the parking lot later to have a closer look, agreed to adjust the eastern entrance to line up with the edges of the pavement on the opposite side of Deinhard, and the only remaining issue noted was the apparent necessity of placing a culvert under the westernmost berm to ensure that the parking lot would continue to drain west along Deinhard. (Gene met with Bill Keating the next morning and established a 30 foot set -back from the edge of the pavement, which placed the berms in line between the existing dirt pile next to the NE corner of Manchester's fence and the red stake which was already in place next to the traffic light on the SW corner of the intersection of Deinhard and Hwy 55. That put the westernmost berm south of the drainage swale, which meant that no culvert was needed since the present drainage would remain unaffected.) Open discussion: Tom Tucker brought up the issue of the stalled process of getting our Airport Master Plan submitted to City Council for approval and adoption. He stated that no less than four public hearings were held when the Master Plan was being formulated, that input was already incorporated from City Staff, but the new City Manager insists that we send it around to Planning and Public Works again. And what would be the outcome if they have changes they want to make? New public hearings would have to be held, which would drag the process out even more, and neither FAA or the State Division of Aeronautics is going to pay for it. It would come completely out of the City's "pocket". While this discussion was in progress, the phone rang and Rick went to answer it. It turned out to be the City Manager, so he was put on speaker phone and Rick asked what the timeframe was for getting the Master Plan submitted to City Council. Brian responded that it Planning and Public Works still needed to make their input, and he hoped to get the Master Plan to City Council by the second meeting this month, or by the first meeting in July (9th) at the latest. He hoped to have their comments in a day or two, and said that, if necessary, he could draft a cover memo stating that Planning & Zoning's comments would follow. When the conversation ended, Mike Anderson expressed his dismay about the never-ending planning/replanning process, which parallel's the contractor's comments the same morning to Gene. He (Rick Albert at Transportation Solutions, Inc.) had stated that they were already way over budget for the Master Plan and thought they were through when they sent 30 copies of the plan to us in February. He had asked Gene how many copies remained and if they could be sent back so they could incorporate the last round of changes and save some expense by at least using the binders and pages that didn't need changing. Rick Albert made it very clear that TSI would only do one more change and that was it. Tom Tucker then brought up the drawing of the cardlock fuel tank placement that Mike Dorris had given us before he had to leave. Mike Anderson pointed out that the location on Mike Dorris' drawing would created a "bottleneck" since airplanes can't back up. Tom pointed out that it wasn't a formal proposal, so he suggested that Gene get with him to discuss alternatives. Gordon Colburn suggested that Mike Dorris make a formal proposal at next month's meeting. The meeting was then adjourned at 2 :18 p.m. Submitted by: Gene Heikkola, Airport Manger. Approved by: Rick Fereday, Chair HECK PAYABLE TO: COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR _. HEALY 382-4293 BILL+ DX 738 IDAHO 83611 r HALF DUE 347.60 2ND TAX LATE INT COST TOT HALF DUE- 347.60 TUCKER FAMILY TRUST* ETAL C/O THOMAS A TUCKER BOX 579 MCCALL ID 836.38 FLITELINE CONDOMINIUMS FIRST AMENDED PLAT UNIT 4 LOT A BLOCK 8 AIRCRAFT HANGAR *TRUST. DATED 7/17/1992 ETAL: T. SCHENCK REMSEN * * *IMPORTANT* * * PLEASE READ BOTH FRONT AND BACK * MONTHLY PAYMENTS ARE ACCEPTED * * * PAYMENTS RECEIVED WITH A DELINQUENCY WILL BE APPLIED TO THE OLDEST DELINQUENT YEAR. TO AVOID LATE CHARGES, PAYMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED OR POSTMARKED BY THE DUE DATE. KEEP TOP PORTION FOR YOUR RECORDS. PERSONAL CHECKS ARE YOUR RECEIPT SUBJECT TO BANK CLEARANCE. !!! RETURN TAX STUB WITH PAYMENT YOUR CHECK IS YOUR RECEIPT 1997 TAX SILL/RECEIPT 59 CODE AREA TAX LATE_ INT COST TOT PARCEL NUMBER LRM03990080AC 3--00 I 54.8: FULL DU: 695.20 TAXING DISTRICT COUNTY SCHOOL *421 CITY MC CALL MCL CEMETERY MCL MEM.HOSP. MCL.RUR.FIRE SOLID WASTE AMOUNT OUE TOT MV RATE .002242823 .003488483 .005049734 .000017933 .000969962 .000911176 .012680116 54.9� AMOUP 122.<. 191.i" 276.t s� 53.1 49.5 695. ; AIRPORT FUND MID -YEAR BUDGET AMMENDMENT DATE: June 10, 1998 Current projections show that Account 446-137.000-442.000 will be significantly over budget by year end. It is already at (minus $4,208.33), and future expenses to this account could add another $9,600.00 (including an estimated $5,400.00 in Public Works transfers), bringing the total shortfall to $13,808.33. These expenses can be balanced by the following account transfers to that account: Account 446-137.000-461.000: 446-137.000-434.000: 446-137.000-435.000: 446-137.000-432.000: 446-137.000-451.200: Fund Description Repairs, Other Equipment Minor Equipment Motor Fuels & Lubricants Department Supplies Communications, Radio Amount $11,317.33 $ 473.37 $ 100.00 $ 917.63 $ 1,000.00 $13,808.33 Resulting Balance Zero Zero Zero $896.43 Zero Revenue account 446-137.000-331.000 is seriously understated. Federal Grant funds expected thru the fiscal year (and end of project) total $1,873,978.00. It is O.K to receive more than projected. Advice from our auditors is that this item cannot be changed, just keep track of the actual amounts. Jim Henderson's memo of 4/14/98 agreed with what the Airport Advisory Committe has been saying for some time now. The total of the property taxes that airport lesees pay to Valley County, which is returned to the City amount to $17,126.52. This amount should be applied to the Airport Revenues, which could provide some of the City's matching funds. Here is how I see the figures shaping up: Original Contract amount $1,987,858.00 Change Order #1 9,500.00 Change Order #2 3,834.00 Change Order #3 (bike path) 30,667.00 Total Project Cost $2,031,860.00 City Match: $101,593.00 Paid to date: $36,201.00 Remaining: $65,392.00 Account 446-137.000-473.165 (196-1997 AIP Grant) will see a much larger amount coming out of this line item. The actual amount will be $1,517,398.69, barring any more change orders, instead of the total projected amount of $320.000.00. However, as the FAA grant will also be correspondingly higher, as shown above. Advice from the auditors is that this item cannot be changed. You will note that the City Match remaining figure is somewhat higher than the $63,000 Jim quoted before he left. This is due to the added cost of Change Order #3. Applying the tax revenue to the balance shown, leaves a new balance of $48,265.48. This amount could be deducted from the $300,000.00 the City has in reserve for the "Airport Sewer Project". Operating expenses will be held to the bare minimum throughout the remainder of the year.