Board approves action to pursue airport development fund after heated debate over timing and conditions

Marathon County supervisors voted June 24 to authorize a resolution directing county administration to include funding for a Regional Air Aviation Development Fund in the 2026 budget, but the vote was not unanimous. The item, Resolution 39-25, drew extended debate over whether the county should signal support now or wait to set budget priorities later.

The vote followed a motion by Supervisor Fifrick, seconded by Supervisor Marash, to approve the resolution. Supervisor Robinson offered an amendment to make Marathon County's commitment contingent on participation from Portage County and contributions from the business community; that amendment was seconded by Supervisor Hartinger but later withdrawn after discussion and requests for clearer wording.

The dispute centered on timing and leverage. Supervisor Lemmer questioned why the board should act now instead of waiting for the regular November budget process: "I'm just not sure how this is advantageous to do this today with all the uncertainty in the state and federal budget going forward." Administrator Leonard responded that the expression of board support is intended as an inducement for private-sector partners and for the other owner county to join the effort, and that the resolution does not itself bind funds immediately. "This expression of support does not actually tie any funds... What it tells me to do is present a budget to the HR finance and property committee on September that has funding provided consistent with this resolution," Leonard said.

Airport Director Griefy told the board that matching participation by Portage County would be logical because Marathon and Portage are co-owner counties of Central Wisconsin Airport. Griefy asked for flexibility in how the board describes outside participation so he could pursue foundations, businesses or other outside funding sources.

Opponents argued the move short-circuited the budget process and risked privileging one discretionary request over others. Supervisor Rosenberg said the county should not "assure [air carriers] two years to succeed with no obligation to continue," adding he had "no interest in subsidizing discount air carriers flying to vacation destinations." Vice Chair Dickinson countered: "To me, this is a no brainer decision... This is what is necessary for our airport," and said the county needs to be more proactive to support economic development and retain talent.

County counsel and staff clarified that the draft resolution directed the administrator to include a sum of $150,000 in the 2026 budget; counsel also cautioned there was uncertainty whether an amendment that made inclusion conditional would be operable because the resolution, as drafted, directs a budget recommendation rather than committing funds immediately. Supervisor Robinson said he would withdraw his amendment with the understanding that staff would return with an update on outside participation when the budget is presented.

After discussion and the amendment's withdrawal, the board voted to approve Resolution 39-25. Supervisor Opel recorded his vote on the floor as "aye." The chair announced the motion carried but was not unanimous. The administrator will present a 2026 budget that includes the requested funding to the Human Resources, Finance and Property Committee in September for further review and possible amendment before final budget adoption in November.

Why it matters: County officials said the fund is intended to improve the airport's competitiveness and help recruit carriers by combining public support with private contributions; opponents said committing to include a line in the budget before budget priorities are set risks displacing other local needs. The resolution does not itself allocate cash but directs staff to include the funding in the 2026 budget for committee and board consideration.