Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-18-2014 Airport Commission Meeting Minutes • Airport Commission September 18,2014 Page 1 MINUTES FINAL IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 18, 2014—6:00 P.M. AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING Members Present: Jose Assouline, David Davis, Minnetta Gardinier, A. Jacob Odgaard, Chris Ogren Staff Present: Michael Tharp, Eric Goers, Dennis Bockenstedt Others Present: Matt Wolford, Jeff Edberg, Larry Bell, Greg Broussard, Tim Busch RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council action): None. DETERMINE QUORUM: Chairperson Ogren called the meeting to order at 6:04 P.M. She welcomed new Member, Dave Davis. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes from the August 21, 2014, meeting were reviewed. Ogren noted that she gave Tharp a couple of corrections prior to the meeting. Gardinier moved to approve the minutes of the August 21, 2014, meeting as presented, seconded by Assouline. Motion carried 5-0. PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION: a. Gilbert Street/Bell Lease— Larry Bell addressed the Commission, asking if they would release him from the lease on this property. He explained that when he originally came to the Commission five years ago, it was for the building at 1565 S. Gilbert Street. He has since sold this building to Jack Young, who would like to purchase the lot but has no intention of leasing the lot. The lot is no longer of use to Bell. He gave the Commission some background on its usage, noting that it really is of no use at this time to anybody. Bell continued, noting that he and his wife are now on Social Security and that he has no means to pay the $325 per month on this lease. He stated that he could honor the rest of this year. Tharp stated that until they complete the Master Plan they are currently working on, they should not consider selling this land. It may come under the Runway Protection Zone, as it has in the past. Ogren noted that the Commission discussed this at their last meeting and that the decision was to cut the remaining lease in half. Bell noted that he is aware of this and that he is asking for the Commission's mercy in getting out of the lease. He has no way to Airport Commission September 18,2014 Page 2 generate revenue on the leased property and basically cannot afford to continue the lease since he sold his building. Tharp noted that this ultimately comes down to the Commission's decision. In previous meetings, Members had decided to offer half of the lease as the break point. He added that they can also offer something else. Bell asked if Young could buy the lot and make it into a parking lot, in order to avoid any building hassles. Tharp replied that they basically cannot sell it at this time, as they would have to get the FAA release in order to do this. With the Master Plan being worked on currently, this would not happen. Gardinier stated that she would not be comfortable making a decision this evening without addressing this further. She added that the Commission has already reduced the lease by 50%. Gardinier suggested they get an idea on where the Master Plan planning is going before they make any further suggestions at this point. Assouline asked Jeff Edberg what he thinks of this area, if this lot is developable. Edberg replied that the lot is, first of all, small. It is also in the flight path of the runway, which would limit what could be done there. Edberg continued, stating that really there are only three buyers who could use this lot—Jack Young, Tom Lepic who has a building to the north, and Java House, which abuts this property. Members continued to discuss this issue, questioning if they shouldn't look into selling this—once the Master Plan is completed and they see what comes out of that. Davis asked if the Airport operating budget depends on this amount, and Tharp responded that it accounts for approximately 1% of their budget. He stated that they would be able to make adjustments, if necessary. Davis stated that it appears to him that due to the change in circumstances for Mr. Bell, he believes they should work something out with him. Ogren explained that this is what the Commission decided previously, to split the remainder of the lease in half Davis noted that this does not appear to be acceptable to Mr. Bell, as he explained his situation to the Commission. Discussion continued, with Members weighing in on how they believe they could make this contingent upon completion of the Master Plan. Bell thanked the Members for listening, and Ogren noted that they will continue to discuss the issue. Tharp stated that if the Commission wants to they can form a subcommittee to discuss this further. He then responded to Members' questions regarding the Master Plan and how this piece of land may be viewed, but that until the Plan is done they really cannot move ahead at this point. b. Airport Commerce Park—Jeff Edberg addressed the Commission next. He shared a copy of a Letter of Intent to purchase three lots -#11, 12, and 13. He noted that the buyer has asked for confidentiality in this sale, and therefore the Letter of Intent has gone directly to City Manager Tom Markus first. Markus approved the price, noting that he would accept the offer, but not a penny less. Edberg stated that the price is the same as what the previous lot sold for, which was of course public record. Edberg then explained that if the Members approve the Letter of Intent amount, he will prepare a Purchase Agreement for the necessary signatures. He then further explained who the company is and what their background is. Assouline asked about the products this company will be selling and whether it will cause issues with the Airport. Edberg stated that he does not know of any, that basically it is going to be a 30,000-square foot warehouse stacked with sheetrock and other building supplies. Gardinier asked if the amount of trucks coming to this location could become a problem for the Airport Commission September 18,2014 Page 3 roadway in the area. Edberg stated that this is a good question, but that the trucks being used will be regular ones meant for normal city streets. Edberg noted that if the Commission approves this sale and everything goes as planned, they will only have lot#7 left to sell. Assouline stated that he sees no problem with moving ahead. Davis asked for some clarification of the selling price and how this was previously handled. Edberg responded, noting what other comparables in the area are. Members continued to discuss the Airport Commerce Park property and how far they have come in selling these lots. Tharp stated that this will go a long way in helping to pay down the Airport's debt. He stated that from what he is hearing, the Commission is agreeable to these terms. Goers noted that the Commission does not have to vote on this issue, that they are looking for consensus basically in order to move ahead with the Purchase Agreement. Edberg stated that he will get the process going on his end. c. Budget/LOST Presentation— Dennis Bockenstedt, the City's Finance Director, spoke to Members next regarding the local option sales tax referendum, City finances, and State property tax reform. He noted that he will be going around to the City's various boards and commissions and giving this presentation. Bockenstedt began by explaining the local option sales tax (LOST) issue, noting that a committee was formed to evaluate the overall feasibility of such a tax. Secondly the committee was to look at how the revenue from this tax would be used. The third directive was to look at the language used on the ballot when presenting the LOST issue for voter consideration. The essential factors identified by the committee, according to Bockenstedt, were the City's strategic plan, the property tax reform legislation that was adopted by the State in 2013, and then other state, regional, and local considerations identified. Bockenstedt went on to further explain what the City's strategic plan is and how it is used. He pointed out how these strategic plan priorities infiltrate their way through the budget. Looking at the State's property tax reform of 2013, Bockenstedt noted that this is probably one of the most significant pieces of property tax legislation in the state in some 25 or 30 years. He explained how the reform will shake out over the next eight to 10 years as the various provisions are phased in. Due to the provisions of this bill, Bockenstedt stated that the City expects to see a loss of revenue of around $37 million. In addition to this lost revenue, the City will also see a loss of$14.7 million that will be replaced through State funding. The State is reimbursing the County, the School District, and the other taxing jurisdictions for a portion of this lost revenue. Continuing, Bockenstedt stated that the State's history of paying these types of backfill situations has been less than stellar. How long it will continue is an unknown. Bockenstedt continued to explain those provisions of the State's property tax reform that primarily affect the City. Looking at residential property, he noted that it is looked at statewide cumulatively and that it was limited to grow 4% annually as a cumulative class across the entire state. The provision of the bill actually reduced that cumulative growth limit from 4%to 3%. The effect of this, according to Bockenstedt, is that taxable property growth would slow. The next provision involves commercial, industrial property valuation. The State implemented a rollback this year to 95%, after being taxed at 100% of their value. Next year the rollback goes to 90%. Bockenstedt continued, noting that in the current State Airport Commission September 18,2014 Page 4 budget there is an appropriation to backfill this piece of the legislation to the taxing jurisdictions. The third provision, which creates a new classification for multi-residential, will have a significant impact on the City. This portion will be phased in as the others, according to Bockenstedt, but the State will not be backfilling any of this revenue. Bockenstedt fielded questions from Members on the new multi-residential aspect of the legislation. Continuing, Bockenstedt explained that the fourth provision is exemption of property for telecommunications. He stated that right now they are unsure what impacts this will have on the City. This takes portions of telecommunication property, perhaps underground as well as above, and exempts it from property taxes at a tiered rate. Overall the impact of this legislation is: it's going to slow the taxable growth of residential property it's going to lower the taxable values of commercial, industrial property; it's going to treat commercial, multi-residential property as residential; and it's going to exempt portions of telecommunication property from property taxes. Using a model that the Iowa League of Cities and the City of Des Moines created, it shows that Iowa City is looking at a $51.7 million reduction in property tax revenue over the next 10 years. The maximum backfill that is hoped to be received from the State is around $14.7 million. Bockenstedt continued, stating that in looking at this shortfall they have come up with three different approaches simultaneously. One is to diversify the City revenues, in light of the fact that property taxes are a huge part, about 70%, of the General Fund. Secondly is to develop a set of contingency and emergency funding, like a 'rainy day' type of fund. This could provide temporary relief when situations such as this arise. A third approach is to control spending and create better operating efficiencies. Bockenstedt noted that the City has been using this third approach for the past few years as they seek to control spending and diversify revenue. Speaking to the local option sales tax issue, Bockenstedt noted that Des Moines and Iowa City are the only two major metropolitan areas that do not have such a sales tax. Des Moines, unlike Iowa City, spans three counties and includes 10 or 12 other jurisdictions that are contiguous to it, creating even more complexity for them. Overall statewide 91% of the Iowa jurisdictions have a 1% local option sales tax. Using Ames as an example, Bockenstedt stated that in FY14 they received slightly over$7 million in sales tax revenue. Of this, 60% went to property tax relief, which reduced their property tax levy by$1.84 per$1,000 of value. The remaining dollars went to fund community betterment projects and human service agency funding. Bockenstedt noted that across the state there is a wide array of uses for these sales tax dollars. From a property tax rate comparison, Bockenstedt noted that Iowa City has historically had one of the highest rates. Looking at those areas where they have this sales tax, they are near the bottom of the rate list. He added that neighboring jurisdictions, such as North Liberty, Tiffin, and Coralville are all significantly lower than Iowa City. Bockenstedt then described the hotel/motel tax that is another revenue source for cities. He noted that it is generally 7% and that pretty much everybody charges the same rate. Gardinier asked if this rate has remained unchanged for many years, and Bockenstedt noted that it has, that there is a cap on the allowable rate. Airport Commission September 18,2014 Page 5 Continuing, Bockenstedt noted that the franchise tax is another source of revenue. This is a percentage that shows up on consumers' gas and electric bills. Currently there is a 1% franchise tax in Iowa City, which creates around $900,000 per year. Des Moines has a 5% and Dubuque collects 3%, according to Bockenstedt. Back to the local option sales tax issue, Bockenstedt noted that Cedar Rapids recently renewed their tax. The previous one was to cover flood costs, and the renewed one is for streets. Bockenstedt noted that Iowa City did have a 1% local option sales tax for four years, but it expired last year. This was used for flood-related projects and also paid for a large portion of the south wastewater treatment plant reconstruction, which will then allow the north plant to close. This area is slated to become a riverfront park within the Riverfront Crossings area. The remaining $25 million, according to Bockenstedt, will help to pay for the reconstruction of Dubuque Street. Another form of revenue for the City comes in utility rates. He noted that Iowa City has some of the highest utility and property rates in the state, but that if you look at other sources of revenue—hotel/motel, franchise—they are much lower than other cities in the state. Bockenstedt noted some of the other forms of revenue around the state, such as gambling, and how this can be quite lucrative for these cities. Ames, for example, has an electric utility fee that gives them a substantial amount of revenue. Bockenstedt continued to explain the local option sales tax, noting that in order for a city to bring this issue to a vote, they must have more than 50% of the population of the jurisdictions, which Iowa City does at 52% of the county's population. He also explained how the contiguous, versus the non-contiguous entities, vote on this issue and how the sales tax ends up being distributed in the end, should it be voted in. If everyone does pass the LOST, Bockenstedt noted that they expect a pool of about$20 million. This would be distributed according to the formula, with Iowa City collecting slightly less than half of this. The County would collect approximately $4.7 million, and Coralville would see around $2.5 million. If only the contiguous cities were to pass the LOST, the pool would be slightly less at$19.3, with Iowa City seeing around $13.5 million, Coralville around $3.3 million, and North Liberty at approximately $2 million. Bockenstedt noted that the Committee then looked at what uses the LOST funds would be used for. It was decided that 50%would go for street and trail improvements, 40%for property tax relief, and 10% for affordable housing opportunities. The annual budget process will solidify these amounts. Assouline asked what the 10%, affordable housing opportunities, is exactly. Bockenstedt stated that this can mean economic development projects that include affordable housing, and there have been many discussions with the housing agencies that provide affordable housing within the community. The hope is to take this money and apply for federal grants and foundations, basically growing this money so that it can be used in the best ways possible. Bockenstedt noted that each year as the Council goes through its budget process, these types of dollars can be used as needed for specific projects, etc. Ogren asked if the Airport falls under any of these categories. Others noted that there doesn't appear to be anything directly related to the Airport. Bockenstedt noted that what would be most applicable is the property tax relief, since the Airport's funding comes from the Airport Commission September 18,2014 Page 6 General Fund, which is funded through property tax revenues. He further explained what 'property tax relief' means in this situation. As the presentation continued, Bockenstedt noted results from a citizen survey regarding the City's streets. He explained the road use tax revenue and how these have pretty much stagnated at this point. He continued, explaining the street overlay program and the annual trail program, and the funds the City sets aside for these types of projects. The LOST revenue would go a long way in helping to keep these projects going. Bockenstedt continued, stating that in looking at ways to raise revenue and/or save on costs where possible, the few options would be to cut services, raise rates on other revenues, and to diversify the City's revenues. He stated that the Committee also set a 'sunset clause' on this issue, with 10 years as the cutoff date. The length of time was chosen, according to Bockenstedt, so that they could see the impact of the LOST overall and whether it met with the public's expectations, as well. Bockenstedt then responded to Member questions regarding the LOST and how the previous LOST differed from the proposed one. d. Airport Master Plan—Greg Broussard addressed Members next. He stated that normally Melissa would be present but that they had to make some staff changes today. He basically gave Members a quick update on where they are with the Master Plan process. Broussard stated that last month they had their first Master Plan Advisory Group meeting. This group will lead the planning, basically. They discussed the goals of the Master Plan and the process that they will be following. Broussard noted that the group will meet four times throughout the Master Plan process, typically at critical times where they need to further discuss those areas needing specific input. There is also a web site now for the Airport's Master Plan. Tharp noted that they are in the process of adding a link to this from the City's web site. Broussard noted that they will keep this up-to-date so that Members can look at this at any time for an update. Broussard stated that he can email a direct link to all of the Members. One of the things that came out of the group's first meeting was the need to set up two surveys—one for pilot users and one for business users at the Airport. Broussard stated that they have sent these out and he urged Members to let them know of anyone they missed. There are also surveys online, according to Broussard, and he showed Members the web page and how it's laid out. Ogren noted that her husband received two copies of the survey. Broussard noted that he was in Kansas City this past weekend for the Federal Aviation Conference, and he spoke with a couple of airports in the area that also received the survey. Broussard then explained what the company Quantum Spatial does for them as far as the Master Plan process goes. He noted that they take survey shots and pictures from their planes, which then gives them information regarding any obstacles, such as trees, buildings, etc. The information that Quantum Spatial collects is then narrowed down to a usable data set. Broussard continued, further explaining the process that will be followed as the planning progresses. He noted that in the past year the FAA has put out new criteria regarding the runway protection zones (RPZ) and what can and cannot be allowed. Gardinier asked Broussard if he knew how many surveys were sent out in total. He stated that he is really unsure, but that there was a huge list. Tharp shared the many lists they used and how they also spoke with the Chamber of Commerce and the Airport Commission September 18,2014 Page 7 Convention and Visitors Bureau, as well, for even more names. Broussard agreed, adding that Melissa also went through the DOT to get registered pilot names. Gardinier asked Tharp if he felt that most everyone was contacted that should be, and he stated that he is pretty confident they have. He added that there are also surveys in the building that they are asking pilots to complete as they come to the Airport. e. FAA/IDOT Projects: AECOM (David Hughes)— i. Runway 7/25 Parallel Taxiway—Tharp stated that David Hughes is not present and is actually in Minnesota with his wife, helping her with some medical issues. Giving Members an update on the 7/25 parallel taxiway, Tharp stated that they are finalizing quantities and working through many of the subs to get these finalized. Gardinier asked for some clarification, and Tharp noted that it is to close out the project and be able to bill for the work. ii. 2014 Iowa DOT Grant Projects— 1. Taxiway B rehabilitation and overlay—Tharp stated that this should be ready to close out next month. 2. Taxiway B lighting—Tharp noted that there was a broken light on the corner and a few other things to complete, but that this should be wrapping up soon. 3. North T-hangar pavement maintenance—This project should also be ready to close next month, according to Tharp. iii. 2015 Iowa DOT Grants—Tharp stated that they do have both of the grants expected from the State in. 1. Fuel Tank Maintenance—Tharp stated that he has been working closely with Jet Air on this issue. They have been talking to the contractors and the paint manufacturer to get some pricing on this project. Basically the contractor they have been working with is getting ready to wrap up the work for the year before the weather gets too cold. Tharp stated that they all agree they should wait until spring to complete this project. Members talked about this project briefly, noting that with the grants arriving late for this project, they really do need to wait until spring to complete it. iv. Runway 12130 Obstruction Mitigation—Tharp noted that he and Hughes have been speaking with the FAA to make sure they have what is needed for the environmental evaluation. They will know what they are going to target once they get to the obstruction mitigation work. f. FBO/Flight Training Reports— i. Jet Air—Matt Wolford with Jet Air shared his monthly reports with Members. He stated that August was mowing and getting prepared for the Sertoma breakfast. He added that the attendance for this was down due to the fog that morning. There was also trash pickup, weed control, and replacing fuel system filters. Members questioned the number of filters and Wolford further explained how the fuel system is set up. This was part of the Airport's annual replacement of fuel filters. Gardinier asked about the weeds that were a problem on the old runway. Tharp stated that Michael has been out there several times spraying and Airport Commission September 18,2014 Page 8 mowing, trying to get this under control. Moving on to September's report, Wolford noted that it is more of the same— mowing, filter replacement, and some miscellaneous maintenance. Wolford then spoke to how Jet Air is doing. Their shop has been consistently busy, and in fact they need to hire another line service tech as their current techs are moving more into flying roles. A big thing for Jet Air is to do anything possible to maximize the runway length. He further explained what type of runway length a jet needs in order to land and why this is important to them. ii. Iowa Flight Training—Tim Busch spoke to Members next about IFT. He gave Members a brief history of IFT, stating that they are a multi-location, single-service business. Their object is to specialize in flight training and nothing else. In 2009, IFT partnered with Jet Air to offer flight training. However, with the economic downfall, things changed somewhat. Busch stated that things finally appear to be looking up, but that he was somewhat surprised when Jet Air announced that they intended to take over flight training again in Iowa City. He added that IFT would like to continue operating here in Iowa City and he briefly explained where IFT is currently with their operation. Tharp noted that for the Commission's information, there is an application process needed in order for IFT to stay at the Airport. As noted, IFT has been operating under Jet Air, but now that Jet Air is taking over the flight training operations themselves, IFT will need a direct agreement with the Airport in order to continue operating. Tharp stated that he can put together such an agreement for the Commission to review. Busch further explained what IFT does and how they benefit the Airport and the community. Wolford stated that Jet Air sees no problem with there being two flight training operations at this location. John Ockenfels spoke from the audience at this point, stating that the vast majority of people who learn to fly never get beyond the private pilot stage because that is all they are interested in. Gardinier stated that the one disappointment she has on the Commission side of this is that this is the first time the Commission has seen Busch in many months. He agreed that he has been absent from these meetings, and he noted that the Commission can count on seeing more of him now. He then responded to Member questions, trying to alleviate any concerns they may have about his operations. g. Airport"Operations:" —Tharp noted that he would begin with an issue regarding John Ockenfels hangar. There are some water issues going on with hangar L. Tharp stated that he is having difficulty with the contractor fulfilling what he sees as warranty obligations. With the Commission's blessing, Tharp is going to have Goers send a 'strongly worded' letter to the contractor regarding this. Gardinier asked what the specific problems are, and Ockenfels stated that water is 'gushing' through the top, that Airport Commission September 18,2014 Page 9 he has videos of this. This is basically a brand-new building with two hangars in it. There is a seven-year warranty on this hangar, according to Tharp. Discussion continued on this issue, with both Ockenfels and Tharp explaining exactly what they see as the problem. Members agreed that Legal needs to send a letter to the contractor in this instance. Tharp stated that another long-standing issue is the water coming through the terminal building. He stated that he did receive a proposal from the company that is also doing work for the University. The proposal would be first trying one set of windows to see if that solves the problem, and if not a second set of windows can be tried. Tharp stated that he would recommend replacing both sets of windows. The cost of this will be around $12,000. Ogren asked if they haven't had several companies look at this issue. Tharp stated that they have tuckpointed the building, reroofed it, and there is still water coming down the front. The windows are the only thing that has not been done. They have tried some different sealants on the windows, but have not replaced them. Ogren asked how doing this would be any different from where they are now. Tharp stated that what wasn't done with the tuckpointing was that the system was not pulled apart in order to see how the windows were draining to begin with. Members continued to question moving forward with this project, especially since it is a fairly expensive one and could result in what they already have. They questioned Tharp extensively over the proposed replacement, asking why all of the windows need to be replaced and if there is not some other method that can be tried. Assouline stated that he believes they need another opinion. Tharp responded that they have already done this, that they have done everything so far—except window replacement. He added that he wished Gene, the contractor, were present as he could probably better explain exactly what is going on with the water issue. Assouline asked if they have the funding for such a project, and Tharp stated that they do have the cash for it, even though it hasn't been budgeted. Davis asked if they could break the project down, do half of it to see if this is the problem. Tharp stated that they could do this, that the contractor did break the project down this way. After lengthy discussion, Tharp asked what the Commission would like him to do. Gardinier stated that she would like to have two independent window professionals assess the situation. Members agreed that by next month's meeting they would like to see another proposal on the windows and the water issue. Strategic Plan-Implementation— ii. Budget—Tharp noted that they are dealing with the University's underground storage tank, more specifically the system that monitors the leakage of the tank. There have been some issues with the way it is printing, at times coming out completely garbled. Tharp noted that the system is basically obsolete, so they are Airport Commission September 18, 2014 Page 10 unable to find replacement parts. He believes the control boards are beginning to die. Therefore they are looking at a system replacement, which will be fairly expensive to do. By next month he hopes to have some prices for this, but is expecting it to be around $15,000. Discussion continued on the underground tank and what replacement of something like this would entail. iii. Management— h. Subcommittee Reports— i. For September— Review use of subcommittees—Ogren suggested that in light of the time they put this off to next month's meeting. Members agreed with this sentiment. i. Commission Members' Reports — Ogren noted that she attended Sertoma. Gardinier reported that she is flying to Storm Lake on Sunday and Bardstown, Kentucky, the end of next week. Odgaard shared that on Sunday he took a student to Minneapolis to get further flying experience. Davis shared that he was an air traffic controller during his military career but that he is not a pilot. j. Staff Reports—Tharp reiterated that Sertoma had a fairly low turnout due to the poor weather. Gardinier stated that she went to the Dubuque flight breakfast and they had a really good turnout for it as the weather was good. SET NEXT REGULAR MEETING FOR: The next regular meeting of the Airport Commission will be held on Thursday, October 16, 2014, at 6:00 P.M. at the Airport Terminal Building. ADJOURN: Ogren made the motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:48 P.M.; seconded by Assouline. Motion carried 5-0. //S /5 CHAIRPERSON DATE Airport Commission September 18,2014 Page 11 Airport Commission ATTENDANCE RECORD 2014 TERM o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 s -& , ' 1 NAME EXP. a Et) a 0) a o i i U, w i ip a s a a a a as a a a a a a a 03/01/14 X X X X X X X NM NM NM NM NM NM NM Howard Horan Minnetta 03/01/15 Gardinier X X X XX X X XX X 0/EX X X Jose 03/01/16 Assouline X X X XX X X XX X X X X X Chris Ogren 03/01/18 X X X XX X X XX X X X X X Paul Hofineyer 03/01/17 X X X XX X X X NM NM NM NM NM NM A.Jacob 03/01/18 Odgaard NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM X X X David Davis 03/01/17 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM 0 X Key: Airport Commission September 18,2014 Page 12 X = Present )UE = Present for Part of Meeting O = Absent O/E =Absent/Excused NM = Not a Member at this time Airport Commission ATTENDANCE RECORD 2014 (continued) TERM NAME EXP. rn Minnetta 03/01/15 Gardinier Jose Assouline 03/01/16 Chris Ogren 03/01/18 A.Jacob 03/01/18 Odgaard David Davis 03/01/17