Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Airport Terminal Expansion topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County proposes up to $78M for Provo terminal expansion; $19.5M upfront appropriation to be requested
Summary
Airport director told the council that Utah County has offered an interlocal commitment of up to $78 million from tourism‑related revenues to support a multi‑phase Provo Municipal Airport terminal expansion; the interlocal includes a $19.5 million upfront payment the city will be asked to appropriate at an upcoming council meeting.
Airport Director Bridal Torgerson briefed the Provo City Council on a proposed interlocal agreement with Utah County that would provide up to $78 million in tourism tax‑backed funding for a multi‑phase Provo Municipal Airport terminal expansion.
Torgerson said Utah County has already provided earlier contributions (about $4.3 million previously and $10 million earlier in the airport project) and is now prepared to commit up to $78 million in total, with $19.5 million to be provided up front once the interlocal agreement is signed. The county monies would come from existing tourism tax receipts and the interlocal contemplates either a county bond issued on the airport’s behalf or a direct county payment; the parties will choose the structure that minimizes interest costs and maximizes funds available for construction.
Torgerson described the project phasing and funding needs: immediate apron/pavement work and a ticketing/baggage screening expansion are prioritized so the airport can meet FAA grant timing and operational demand; a full baggage handling system and additional terminal phases would be built in later stages to align with funding. The total project budget discussed at the meeting is roughly $132–140 million across apron, terminal and site work; the $19.5 million from Utah County is intended to be spent on early design and construction phases.
Council members asked about the source and security of the county contribution. City staff explained the county funding is tourism‑tax revenue and that the interlocal agreement includes protections for bond coverage and covenants to preserve priority pledge for the county funds; staff said the county has also considered establishing coverage or reserve requirements to satisfy potential bond market concerns. Torgerson and finance staff said the county has been “flexible” and “supportive,” and that the approach is meant to reduce overall financing costs by maximizing up‑front county funding.
Ending: Torgerson said the administration will bring two items to the council agenda in two weeks: (1) the interlocal agreement with Utah County and (2) an appropriation resolution to accept and spend $19.5 million in the airport fund for terminal expansion work. No final council action occurred at the work session; the items were scheduled for a forthcoming council meeting.
