Finance Committee staff presented an airport budget status report at the June 12 meeting showing year-to-date FY25 revenues above expectations and direct expenses running close to budget. Jeff, a treasury/finance staff member, said the department’s FY26 projections are slightly higher than FY25 budgets but that the most recent actuals for FY25 were stronger than the FY26 projection.

Why this matters: Town meeting members have questioned airport fees and the airport’s net fiscal effect in prior meetings. The update shows the airport’s operations are approximately a wash when direct revenues and direct expenses are considered, and staff said some items previously underbudgeted have been corrected in the FY26 draft.

Jeff explained that a $120,000 portion of legal counsel budget in the general fund is attributable to airport legal expenses; the general fund’s total legal number remains broader than airport-specific legal costs. He and committee members also noted the airport has periodically reviewed fees: Miss Ryan (airport staff referenced in the discussion) had looked at fees in FY24 and continues to monitor them.

Staff and members discussed accounting and formatting questions in the presented tables; the committee asked for clarified spreadsheets to show the correct sums. Committee members also reviewed a trend analysis that suggested prior years’ conservative revenue assumptions (covering the COVID period) had influenced recent budgeting and that the FY26 budget aligns more closely with expected ongoing revenue.

Ending: Staff said they would correct formatting issues in the packet and provide clarifications on legal allocations and fee reviews. No formal action was taken at the meeting.