Log In


Reset Password
Opinion Editorial Cartoons Op-Ed Editorials Letters to the Editor

Airport expansion

New designs have lower costs, but a great deal still remains to be decided

Revised plans for expanding Durango-La Plata County Airport were shown to the public at an open house on Jan. 21. As Tom Greenhut, chairman of the airport commission, put it, “This is something that gives the city and county a place to start talking.”

And, there is a lot to talk about. That should begin with the core questions: Who pays, how and how much? That discussion should begin by moving away from property taxes and toward user fees.

One change noticed at the open house was the plans’ lower price tags. That might make expanding the airport more palatable to the voters, who will probably be asked to approve a tax hike or bond issue. The problem is that no matter how badly a new airport is needed, and regardless of how carefully the plans are drawn, the airport expansion does not exist in a vacuum.

Three basic options are envisioned: Remodel the existing terminal, build a new one alongside the old one or build a whole new facility on the other side of the runway.

The last has been designated the preferred option. Construction could go on without interfering with the operation of the existing airport and that area offers more room for parking and future expansion.

That option would cost $85 million in the first phase, down from what had been estimated to be $114 million. But the total cost at completion would be $131, down only $3 million from the initial estimate.

Questions abound. Is the $131 million completion necessary, or could we live with the $85 million version for a decade or two? (Three years ago, there was a proposal to expand the airport for $6 million.) And is the whole project put at risk by making it turn on approval of the $85 million?

Airport commission member – and Durango Mountain Resort CEO – Gary Derck raised that last point. He voted against recommending the move to the east side because it comes with fixed infrastructure costs and would be hard to scale back. As he put it, “We either find 85 million bucks or we don’t go, and that scares the heck out of me.”

A consultant advising the commission said the plan could qualify for $35 million to $40 million in funding from the Federal Aviation Administration. But the operative word there is “could.” There is no guarantee.

Derck suggested moving general aviation to the other side of the runway and expanding commercial operations into that space, which could more easily be scaled or done over time. But that option does not appear in the plans.

Derck’s concern is legitimate. Asking a homeowner for $50 or so more per year for a new airport is not in itself onerous. But the city of Durango just raised water and sewer fees significantly. City voters are being asked to renew the half-cent sales tax for parks and recreation. And the county is talking about higher taxes to offset declining gas revenue and fix roads. (See Page 1C.) None of those are unreasonable, but they add up.

Why not take the airport out of that mix with a users fee? There would still be tax money going to the airport, but a fee could help cover a bond. A fee would automatically scale with usage. There are a lot of New Mexico tags in the airport lot, and those folks do not pay La Plata County property taxes. A fee on each ticket would also be fair to local residents who, while broadly benefiting from the airport, are not frequent flyers.

Let the talking begin.



Reader Comments