Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Airports topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Draft airport operating agreement presented for Dutch John, county asked to review and match budget
Summary
Commissioners heard a draft interlocal operating agreement for the Dutch John Airport and discussed next steps including counsel drafting and a proposed budget with $42,000 from the town and a matching $42,000 from the county; presenters recommended quarterly reporting and clarified operational roles.
A county presenter asked the Daggett County Commission to authorize counsel to convert a draft interlocal operating document into a formal agreement to govern operations at the Dutch John Airport and, potentially, Manila Airport.
"This is the beginning of an IOLA that we need to have to, proceed with what we wanna do with the airport in Dutch John," the presenter said, describing the document as a starting point built from prior meetings and bullet points meant to capture prior discussions. The presenter said the draft was reviewed by counsel and asked the commission to allow legal staff to begin writing a formal interlocal agreement for simultaneous review by the town of Dutch John and the county commission.
Commissioners focused discussion on budget responsibilities and operational oversight. The presenter said the town had budgeted $42,000 to start operations and said he believed the county had agreed on the record to match that funding. "We're we're putting 42,000 in, and then, the commission was talking about putting 42,000 in to match it," the presenter said, describing a breakout of operational ($30,000) and capital ($12,000) uses in the town's budget.
The draft envisions the airport manager developing an operational budget and reporting quarterly to both the town council and county commission; commissioners asked staff to add language ensuring collaborative review—an initial review by an executive committee—before submission to the town council. Commissioners also discussed governance details such as who would carry enterprise funds, how revenue would be used (the presenter said revenues would be returned to airport operations), and differences in municipal budget cycles that the agreement would need to accommodate.
No formal vote was taken on the agreement during the meeting; the presenter sought direction to proceed with counsel drafting and to circulate draft language for commission review. Commissioners requested copies of the draft, said they would coordinate review with county staff and counsel, and asked that operational responsibilities be expanded in subsequent drafts with input from the airport manager.
