Speaker 5 told the Public Welfare Committee on Nov. 18 that Gardner Airport could attract operators from nearby airports that may close, but that the airport’s repair budget is thin and several maintenance items require immediate attention.

Speaker 5 said the airport has roughly $700 left in the repair budget for the fiscal year after an unexpected $2,600 electric gate repair and warned about liability concerns if operators run snow‑plow equipment without proper CDL licensing. He reported finding two CDL‑licensed contractors to provide snowplowing this winter to limit risk to the city.

On capital items, Speaker 5 asked the subcommittee to allow transferring $20,500 leftover from the recently completed runway project into the airport budget to pay the local share of a tree‑cutting project (required by FAA approach‑safety standards) and to retain an FAA fee return of approximately $9,000 so $4,600 can be used to repair a leaking main hangar roof. He said Gale (transcript also referenced the name as "Gail") Associates will have a new contract; purchasing is processing a multi‑year contract to replace a short‑term consultant arrangement.

Committee members asked whether the mayor had been notified; Speaker 5 said he had sent formal emails. Members suggested the airport pursue a revolving account so small recurring payments from MIT and visiting researchers (noted as $100 per month plus $100 per project/visit in the transcript) could be kept at the airport for maintenance rather than reverted to the general fund.

Speakers and councilors discussed FAA funding details: Speaker 4 explained recent federal grants covered a high share of runway work (95% federal in current cycles), and outlined follow‑on steps such as obstruction analysis, environmental assessment and tree easements and a fencing project to reduce wildlife hazards on the field. The committee raised process questions about how to route fund transfers (auditor, purchasing, finance committee and city council vote) and asked airport staff to work with the auditor and DPW to identify items that could be handled via existing services or capital planning.

No binding appropriation was approved in the committee; staff were advised to submit formal transfer requests via the auditor and purchasing for review by finance committee and city council.