Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mitchell International Airport Survey topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Airport NEXT survey: Mitchell International scores above average for infrastructure and stakeholder alignment
Summary
An Airport NEXT stakeholder survey placed Milwaukee Mitchell International in the program's upper-right “soaring” quadrant, with above-average scores for infrastructure and alignment; the committee received the informational report and placed it on file.
Milwaukee County’s transportation committee received an informational presentation on the Airport NEXT stakeholder survey for Milwaukee Mitchell International and voted to receive and place the report on file.
Paul Ouimet, founder and chairman of Airport NEXT Solutions Inc., told the committee the assessment surveyed 62 stakeholders and scored the airport above the program average for both infrastructure and stakeholder alignment, placing it in Airport NEXT’s “soaring” quadrant.
Ouimet said Milwaukee ranked eighth of 24 participating airports overall and third of five in its tier by passenger volume. He told the committee the airport performed particularly well in terminal operations and transportation access, and that the airport ranked in the top three of the 24 airports on 17 specific statements. Areas identified for improvement included international/border services (customs and immigration), pre-security food and beverage options, general aviation services and passenger charging stations.
Director Drenzic (Milwaukee County Department of Transportation, Airport Division) introduced the Airport NEXT presenters and said the county participated in the program as part of a pilot of 24 airports; the program is a partnership with Airports Council International—North America. Paul Ouimet and Alex DeBell explained the methodology: the instrument surveyed key stakeholders (airport staff, industry partners, community organizations and others) rather than passengers and weights responses across those groups.
Supervisor Ekblad praised the assessment and asked follow-up questions about the industry and infrastructure sub-scores; Ouimet explained that industry respondents included airlines, concessions and cargo and that infrastructure covered six areas including terminal, services, border processing, technology, security and transportation access.
Supervisor Ekblad moved to receive and place the report on file; the motion carried on a committee roll call, recorded as five ayes, zero noes.
Printed copies of the 10–15 minute report were distributed to committee members; the presenters said they would share the presentation slides with the members who did not receive them during the meeting.
