Citrus County aviation board tables proposed policy on non-aviation events after public safety and tenant concerns

The Central County Aviation Advisory Board on Wednesday tabled a proposed policy that would govern non-aviation events at county airports, after board members, pilots and community speakers raised safety and business-impact concerns and asked staff to solicit tenant feedback before finalizing the rules.

The proposal, presented to the board in May 2025, would create an application process and set requirements — including insurance and financial terms — for groups seeking to use airport property for non-aviation activities. Board members and public commenters debated whether approvals should be limited to one-time events, whether recurring events should be allowed subject to annual review, and how the county should notify and consult fixed-base operators (FBOs) and other tenants.

Board chair Heiko Kallenbach said the proposal existed to provide a predictable framework because the airports had been asked to close runways or taxiways for events several times in recent years. "We were getting these kind of requests in, three that I can think of over the last two years to close a taxiway, close a runway. And there didn't seem to me to be a process in place," Kallenbach said.

James from Cristero Group, who spoke during the public-comment portion, urged caution. "I had serious concern about this policy. The airport is space and the property used for aviation related, and this use is for non-aviation related activity," he said, warning that routine approvals could set a precedent that would harm tenant businesses.

Citrus County Commissioner Holly Davis, present at the meeting, stressed community benefits but said safety and FBO consultation are critical. "I have grave concern about ever closing the runway for any reason that we don't have to for maintenance purposes," Davis said, recounting a past incident in which a low-performing engine required an emergency landing.

Board members debated draft language. Several members favored a presumption that approvals be one-time only, with a path to allow recurring events subject to conditional approval and annual review; another group said an annual-review pathway should remain to avoid unduly limiting community uses. Members sought clearer criteria to determine when closure of operational surfaces would be considered acceptable, and agreed the airport owner — the Citrus County Board of Commissioners — should have final authority.

Todd Regan, airport manager, said the draft already requires notification to FBOs, tenants and users and that staff would incorporate board input. After discussion, the board directed staff to gather written comments from FBOs and tenants, incorporate the board's suggestions, and return a revised draft for further consideration. Kallenbach said staff would aim to circulate a revised draft for the June meeting but could delay to July if more time is required.

The board did not take a final vote to adopt the policy. The item was tabled so staff could coordinate revisions and gather tenant feedback; the board asked staff to notify all leaseholders and FBO tenants and provide a timeline for comment.

Background: The draft policy requires requestors to apply well in advance (the draft referenced a 180-day lead time), to provide an information sheet identifying whether the event organizer is a nonprofit or for-profit entity, and to supply insurance and financial terms. Board members suggested adding an initial estimate or range for anticipated fees so applicants can assess feasibility before completing the full application. The board also discussed limiting recurring approvals to rare exceptions and requiring conditions that protect aviation operations and FBO business.

What’s next: Staff will collect written comments from FBOs and tenants, revise the draft to clarify the approver and the review standard, and return the policy for further board review in a future meeting.