Sometimes it’s good to leave the past behind. That’s the approach Biddeford Mayor Alan Casavant is trying to take with discussions on the future of the Biddeford Municipal Airport, and we hope he has success.

Few issues in Biddeford have as much baggage as this airport ”“ excuse the pun ”“ from the passions of those who argue for its closure to the pleas of those who would see it renovated to a top-notch facility for both recreation and business.

The divisiveness had gotten so bad, in fact, that the city just decided to give up on even trying to discuss the airport. Funds for improvement were denied for years and no consultant was hired to plan the work, even as the safety issues pile up.

Significant tree cutting on the airport property in 2006, to improve line of sight for pilots, caused an uproar among abutters, and progress there has been stalled every since. Engineering firm Stantech Consulting Services, experts in this field, were recommended for future engineering on the property, but the proposal was stonewalled due to their involvement in the tree cutting.

The airport commission was disbanded about six years ago and never reformed after dissenting parties couldn’t agree, and the facility has been left to flounder ever since. Now its runway is ranked 39th out of 44 airports in the state and is failing to meet Federal Aviation Administration safety standards in several areas.

Clearly, it’s time for city leaders to step up to the plate, act like adults and develop a plan for this airport going forward. No longer can its maintenance be ignored simply because a vocal minority is blocking the discussion process. Voters said back in 2008 that they did not want to close the airport, so there is no reason to bring that option back to the table. The level of investment the city wants to make in the facility does need to be addressed, however.

The needed safety improvements can be paid for through federal grants and airport user fees, hangar leases and fuel sales, not taxes, according to airport manager Tom Bryand ”“ but the city needs to give its approval.

Yes, the federal money means that closure of the airport would be penalized, but voters have already said they do not approve of closing the airport. It’s hard to imagine their minds have changed only five years later. In this age of municipalities competing with each other for major employers and tourist dollars, it simply would not make sense for Biddeford to shut down an amenity that may make it more attractive to business people and tourists alike.

We agree with Councilor Brad Cote, who said he would like to see some data before deciding to invest taxpayer money in improving and promoting the airport. The council does indeed need to know who uses the airport, how often it’s used and what businesses might use it in the future, as Cote has requested. A study would show the city whether or not this facility should simply be maintained or if it should be renovated, promoted and possibly even expanded ”“ which is the approach that Sanford has taken with its municipal Sanford Seacoast Regional Airport.

We wish Casavant and other city officials the best in finally moving forward on plans for the airport. Biddeford voters have already said they want to keep the facility, so the maintenance needs to be done and a study should be completed to see if further investment is warranted. Let’s follow his lead and leave the bad blood and bickering in the past so the city can move forward with this property.

Ӣ Ӣ Ӣ

Today’s editorial was written by Managing Editor Kristen Schulze Muszynski on behalf of the Journal Tribune Editorial Board. Questions? Comments? Contact Kristen by calling 282-1535, Ext. 322, or via email at kristenm@journaltribune.com.