Cape May County to reclaim airport control; private sports complex pitched for airport land

CAPE MAY COURT HOUSE, N.J. — The Board of County Commissioners announced June 24 that it will move forward with reclaiming control of the Cape May County Airport while hearing a proposal to place a privately financed indoor sports complex on airport land. The decision and the presentation took place during the board’s regular meeting at the County Administration Building.

The move to reclaim the airport follows a process that began more than a year ago, officials said, and included a notice of non-renewal to the Delaware River and Bay Authority (DRBA). Vice Director Bulakowski read a statement the board said came from the director saying, in part, “this decision was not taken lightly by the Board,” and that regaining control would let the county “enhance quality of life, further strengthen our local economy, and place the County in the best position possible to address some of the most pressing issues facing our residents.”

Why it matters: the county said regaining control would allow it to plan capital improvements on county-owned land and pursue revenue-generating uses that the board says better align the airport with local priorities. The board said DRBA officials had declined to provide the county additional control over airport land during lease negotiations.

During a presentation earlier in the meeting, representatives from Aviation Sports Complex, LLC described plans for a 100,000-square-foot domed facility on roughly seven acres at the airport. Jamie Sutton, a representative of Aviation Sports Complex, said the dome would contain about 60,000 square feet of hard courts for basketball and volleyball and 40,000 square feet of artificial turf for sports including lacrosse and soccer. Sutton said the project would also include a 15,000-square-foot welcome center for offices and restrooms.

Bob Buglak, another Aviation Sports Complex representative, said the facility would host local clubs and tournaments so families would not have to travel out of the county to participate. Buglak told commissioners the developers had engaged ESI, Inc. to produce an economic-impact study that estimates roughly $38.9 million in annual economic benefit and about 320 local jobs. Buglak said the project would be “100% privately financed.”

Commissioners asked practical questions. Commissioner Barr asked if the facility would include Americans with Disabilities Act seating and whether underprivileged children would have opportunities to use the complex; Buglak said they were following local accessibility practices and had plans to serve a broader range of children. Vice Director Bulakowski asked if the turf floor would be convertible for dance and cheer competitions; Sutton said, “It will be.” Bulakowski also asked whether schools could use the facility at no cost; Sutton replied, “this is a for-profit facility, but they will work with the community.”

County staff also said an attornment agreement would appear on the July 8 meeting agenda. A staff member, Mr. Lindsay, advised the board that the attornment agreement would clarify the county’s rights when the DRBA lease expires.

What was not decided: the board announced it would “move forward” with reclaiming airport control but the meeting record does not show a formal vote or ordinance adopting a specific transfer plan. No zoning or permitting approvals for the proposed sports complex were recorded at the meeting.

Next steps: the board said it will share more details about airport plans “in the coming weeks and months” and that an attornment agreement will be on the July 8 agenda.

Ending: The Aviation Sports Complex presentation and the airport control announcement were part of wider caucus and regular meetings that included routine resolutions and public comment.