I have yet to be convinced that our airport needs a completely new terminal, but the city and county leaders have embraced the issue and now it has taken on the feel of a runaway train.
Before we go to vote on whether local taxpayers should pick up the tab on what looks like a Taj Mahal of a terminal, let’s look at how some other cities have tackled similar situations.
Minot, N.D. (population 46,000), recently opened a new 115,000-square-foot terminal that cost $40 million. This will serve about 222,000 current enplanements, similar to our level of traffic, with six gates.
And yet, this was done without using local property tax dollars. There is a component of local funding, but this comes from passenger facility charges and contract facility charges. In other words, those that use the airport help pay for it.
Jacksonville, N.C. (population 69,000), opened its new terminal a year ago. It includes 67,000 square feet with second level boarding through three jet bridges. They counted 170,000 enplanements in 2015.
This project (a $26 million terminal) was part of an overall airport improvement totaling $44 million, but again, no local tax dollars were used, neither sales nor property.
Our local officials must be asked, “Why does our small city need to burden taxpayers for the money when other cities have found better ways to fund their airports?” And “Why does our terminal need to be so extravagant when the oil and gas business is tightening its belt?”
Unless there are clearer answers to the issue, I am voting “No.”
Sandy Alexander
Hesperus
