| Today's Feature Airport Land Discussed.
The Airport Relocation
Committee met at City Hall last Thursday
afternoon to continue the discussion of acquiring
land for a new airport. Economic Development
Director Max McKnight reported on the minimum
costs that could be expected for a turf runway
that could eventually be converted to a taxiway
with a parallel paved runway.
According to McKnight's report,
which used estimates from the 1990 airport master
plan, the land, grade and site work and seeding
cost would range from $600,000 to $920,000.
McKnight noted that there was some hope that the
National Guard could assist in the grading and
surface preparation. This would reduce the
estimates by as much as $400,000 resulting in a
minimum estimate of $200,000 to $520,000.
McKnight stressed to the
Committee that these estimates were probably
optimistic considering that the master plan was
nearly ten years old. The bulk of the cost would
be affected by the ultimate price of the
approximate 160 acres of land used for the
airstrip. The estimates reflect a minimum of
$1,000 per acre to the high of $3,000 per acre,
or $160,000 to $480,000 for land.
Committee Chair/City
Administrator Tom Short suggested that the
Committee go into closed session to discuss the
possible purchase of property. Member John
Cuaderes stated that he saw little need to go
into closed session.
"I am opposed to going
into closed session," said Cuaderes.
"We should be able to discuss this openly.
This is a very sensitive issue in the community
and I think if you go behind closed doors, the
community will become a little more suspect. Of
course, that's my personal feelings and if I'm
outvoted, I'm outvoted."
Member Ray Grace seemed to
agree.
"I'm not sure you're
wrong," said Grace.
After some clarification of
procedure, Member Art Dunaway moved to go into
closed session.
"The only reason I think
it might be a good thing to do this early in the
ball game," said Grace, "is that
everything out there is so 'iffy', and when you
start throwing numbers around it totally confuses
the people I'm talking to." (Grace has been
given authority by the Committee to begin
negotiations with land owners.) In particular the
fellow with the number one location. I think he
just has to be totally convinced in his own mind
that he is getting full value from it.
"I've developed a position
like John's, I don't think anything should be
kept secret from the public. But it can hamper
trying to reach some kind of middle ground on the
price. I don't think there is any danger in
looking at the numbers in a closed session,
because no votes will be taken at this
time."
Cuaderes stood fast.
"I just disagree,"
said Cuaderes. "I think people out there are
pretty smart who own this land. I don't think
that anything we do in closed session is going to
be earth shattering or change the whole scheme of
things, but I do think that in the public's eye,
well, they are discussing issues that really
ought to be out in the open. Again, that's just
my own personal feeling.
"If we want to have a
chance to get reimbursed (with state or federal
grants) we are going to have to pay fair market
value. If anyone tries to stiff us on this,
whether we're in close session or not, we are
going to have to go with fair market value."
Member Bill Johnson was also
sympathetic to staying in open session.
"If the man doesn't know
what he wants today isn't going to affect what
he's going to ask," said Johnson. "If
you're going to have to go with an appraisal,
that's what you're going to go with."
Short argued that he would also
like to discuss strategy.
"I think when you are
talking about strategy," said Short,
"of acquiring land, negotiations on a
contract, you try not to negotiate out in the
open when the other side is not."
The Committee went into closed
session and reported afterward that they would
pursue several options and locations for a new
airport.
|
