Committee approves hangar rent ordinance change after heated debate over study

The Winnebago County Facilities & Property Management Committee voted 4—1 to forward an amendment to Chapter 21 of the county general code that updates airport hangar and land rental rates, following a lengthy public-comment period and internal debate.

Tenants who spoke at the start of the meeting urged the committee to reject or delay the increases. "There's no rhyme or reason" to how the percentages were chosen, said Larry Wasco, a tenant for more than three decades, who listed row-by-row increases and said older hangars have seen little maintenance. Joel Scheibinger, who rents in G and H, said leaks and freezing in winter made a large increase unjustified and suggested the county allow tenants to perform minor sealing work if staff would not.

Mary Beth Gabbard, District 12 supervisor and chair of the aviation committee, said she opposed the increases as presented and recommended postponing major changes until 2027 so tenants would have time to prepare. "You can raise the rent. Yes. But you don't hit people up with 29%," she said.

Several critics also challenged the consultant study underlying the changes. Remote commenter Brian Eberwein cited FAA guidance and argued the county did not provide the historical financial and forecasting data the FAA expects during rate consultations, saying steep increases could make the airport accessible "only to the wealthiest aeronautical users." Appraiser Tom Swan and another experienced appraiser in the room said the document read like appraisal work without the required scope and certification and urged an appraisal-level analysis.

County staff and the airport director defended the process. Jamie (staff) clarified the county had requested a market-feasibility study rather than a property appraisal and said the consultant produced a market-rent analysis meant to inform fee-setting, not a formal appraisal. The airport director listed maintenance and capital work completed in recent years and said the proposed adjustments would produce about $62,000 in additional annual revenue, narrowing the airport's funding gap by roughly 6.5%.

Committee members split over whether the study was sufficiently rigorous. Those supporting the ordinance said the county had the authority to adjust rents and that the proposal was a market "reset" after years without a systematic review; opponents said the report lacked the documentation needed to justify percentage differences among hangar rows.

After discussion the committee approved the amendment 4—1 and sent it on to the full county board for final consideration.

The county board will have the next opportunity to accept, modify or reject the ordinance change; committee members said they expect further discussion there.