BIDDEFORD — Important decisions concerning the fate of Biddeford Municipal Airport will be made at tonight’s City Council meeting, according to city officials.
Two weeks ago councilors voted 5-4 to table a $962,500 project proposed last year to address safety concerns at the airport.
Councilor Bradley Cote, who proposed the motion to table, said he wants a study conducted to assess the economic value of the airport before pumping hundreds of thousands of dollars into it. Councilors Clement Fleurent, Robert Quattrone, Roger Hurtubise and Marc Lessard agreed with Cote, while Council President John McCurry along with Councilors Michael Swanton, Bob Mills and Michael Ready did not.
Councilors will vote tonight on whether to move forward with Cote’s suggestion, specifically deciding if the city will pay Planning Decisions, Inc. ”“ a Portland-based research and planning firm ”“ $27,000 to conduct a study assessing the airport’s economic value.
In order for the study to pass, two-thirds – or six members – of the council must approve it, McCurry said Monday. It’s not as simple as a majority vote, he said, because the money for the study would come out of contingency funds, as opposed to the city’s regular budget.
If the study doesn’t pass, the council will then vote to remove the originally proposed project from the table, and if that happens, a vote on the project would take place, said McCurry.
As it stands, the project requires the city to accept federal and state grants in the amounts of $866,250 and $48,125, respectively, and to contribute $48,125 of its own funds to address safety concerns at the airport; trees close to the runway have grown taller than what the Federal Aviation Administration considers safe, and they must be trimmed or removed to bring the airport up to FAA standards.
If the council doesn’t want to approve that project, said McCurry, then perhaps the city should hold another referendum to ask voters if they want to close the airport altogether. But, as McCurry pointed out, in 2008 more than 80 percent of residents voted in favor of keeping the airport open.
“That’s pretty good numbers in my book,” he said. “It’s not like it was a (close vote).”
Councilor Cote said Monday that he doesn’t see the study passing by the required two-thirds margin. “It’s going to fall on its face,” he said of the order.
But despite his doubts over whether the study will actually come to fruition, Cote said he believes that anyone with faith in the airport’s economic viability should be on board with it, and he suspects those who are against it fear what it would reveal about the airport.
“If they were confident that the airport was worthy of putting that tax money into, they would have no problem with this study going through,” he said. “They don’t want that research to be done because I think they know that the ultimate statistics to come out of it wouldn’t necessarily be flattering for the folks that use the airport.”
On the contrary, Gerry Bernier, Friends of Biddeford Airport chairman and a pilot, said Monday that the study is simply a waste of time and money.
“It’s a waste because the Maine DOT has done studies,” he said, “and they’re in the process of doing another study of the economic impact of airports in the state of Maine.” In those studies, the DOT determined that many businesses rely on Biddeford Municipal Airport, he said, adding that it’s a “valuable asset” to the community.
Furthermore, Bernier said it makes no sense for the city to consider pursuing a study that would cost roughly 56 percent of what its share for the project to address the safety concerns would be.
“That $27,000 is more than half of our downpayment on the FAA (and state) funding,” he said.
Bernier said that with financial interests aside, it all comes down to safety.
“There’s a safety factor here. Those trees need to be trimmed. … We don’t want to expand the airport. We just want to make it safe,” he said. “That’s all we’re asking.”
McCurry said he too hopes the study doesn’t pass tonight and that the city can finally move forward with its decision on the original project, which he hopes will be the approval of the project.
“It’s time to vote one way or another,” he said. “We’ve got to maintain (the airport), not expand it ”“ just maintain it. And that’s what the project does.”
— Staff Writer Angelo J. Verzoni can be contacted at 282-1535, ext. 329 or averzoni@journaltribune.com.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less