Powell council votes to support growth of Powell Airport, directs staff to assist with planning and grant efforts

2979452 · April 7, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Sign Up Free
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After a lengthy presentation by airport advisers and economic-development staff, the Powell City Council voted unanimously April 17 to endorse expanding Powell Airport and asked city staff to help locate legal records and pursue grant funding for utilities and infrastructure.

Powell City Council voted to support plans to grow Powell Airport during its April 17 meeting after a multi-hour presentation from airport advisers, economic development staff and local operators.

Council members passed a motion—moved and seconded and approved by voice vote—that the council “supports growing the Powell Airport,” a nonbinding endorsement intended to advance planning, grant applications and outreach to potential aviation and aerospace tenants.

The council and airport advisers emphasized that utilities and a rental-rate study are immediate prerequisites to attracting private investment and larger tenants. Tom Roman, who described himself as operating UAS flight training at the airport, summarized the advisory board’s work and the airport’s assets, saying, “This airport’s been around since 1946,” and outlining a three‑phase master plan and a concurrent 10‑year master plan drafted by Kaufman Associates.

Why it matters: airport expansion proponents told the council the effort could increase hangar capacity, create an industrial park adjacent to the airfield and attract aviation, aerospace and defense‑industry firms that would create local jobs and tax revenue. The advisory commission and economic-development representatives identified several funding sources they intend to pursue, including the Wyoming Business Council (Business Ready Community program), the State Lands Investment Board (SLIB) and the U.S. Economic Development Administration (EDA). Those grants are needed to bring water, sewer and additional electrical capacity to the airport, officials said.

Key discussion points and staff direction

- Utilities and engineering: Advisers said bringing utilities to the airport will likely require engineering work and substantial capital investment. An early figure mentioned in the discussion was about $14 million as a possible long‑term infrastructure scale, though speakers framed that as an illustration rather than an estimate finalized by engineering studies. Council members and staff discussed prioritizing engineering and grant applications for water, sewer and power extensions.

- Rental‑rate study: Economic‑development staff and airport advisers urged a formal rental‑rate study to establish market rates for hangar leases and other airport property. Staff said current airport hangar rent is well below market—one speaker cited a historic rate of “10¢ a square foot per year” for some hangars—and that comparable markets show substantially higher hangar rents (examples cited in the meeting ranged from roughly $2,500 to $5,000 per month in larger markets; one attendee said a hangar in California rents for about $5,000 per month). Several council members questioned the timing and cost of a paid rental study and asked staff to compile existing comps and ask potential grantors whether that level of market analysis is required before spending funds on a formal study.

- Legal/annexation record: Advisers said an annexation ordinance dating to 1989 exists and that some record‑filing steps may not have been completed; they asked the city to help locate and file any missing legal documents. Staff confirmed the city would search for the relevant records and advise on next steps.

- Aviation assets and users: Presenters highlighted an established UAS (unmanned aircraft systems) flight operations area and said the airport currently hosts flight training and some UAV operations. They said demand exists for additional hangars (roughly 19 were discussed as a planning target), maintenance, aircraft manufacturing and advanced R&D uses; they also said potential users have approached the advisory commission, including companies seeking UAS range access and firms in aerial surveying, firefighting and aircraft maintenance.

Formal action and next steps

The council approved the nonbinding motion that it supports growing Powell Airport. The motion was moved and seconded; the record shows a voice vote in which all present answered “Aye” and the mayor declared the motion carried. Council members directed staff to assist the advisory commission by searching for legal documents related to the airport’s annexation, coordinating with Kaufman Associates on the master plan finalization, and advancing applications or letters of interest for grant programs (Wyoming Business Council, SLIB and the EDA). Staff agreed to compile available rent comps and seek guidance from grant programs on whether a formal rental study is required before filing applications.

What the council did not decide

Council members did not commit city funds to a rental‑rate study during the meeting. They also did not approve specific grant applications or engineering contracts; presenters said those would come back to council for formal approval after scope and funding details are clearer.

Quotes

“This airport’s been around since 1946,” Tom Roman said during the presentation, noting the airport’s existing facilities and the advisory commission’s 3‑phase plan.

“Are we interested in going to Powell Airport?” Roman asked the council during discussion; a subsequent motion to support airport growth was approved by voice vote.

“There you go. Thank you, sir. Now it's legal,” the mayor said immediately after the council’s voice vote, signaling the motion’s approval.

Ending

Advisers urged council members to view continued engagement as urgent because utility grant deadlines and business interest are time‑sensitive. Council members directed staff to return with documents and with recommendations for next steps, including whether to fund an engineering report or a rental study before filing grant applications.