rss
mobile
Feeds
The Town of Hilton Head Island wanted a seat at the table on decisions affecting the airport, and its decision to limit by law the length of the airport runway puts it at the head of that table.
Hilton Head officials must decide whether they want commercial air service to continue at the island airport. If the answer is yes, they must be willing to pay the price of a safe airport that meets the needs of commercial airlines.
Kubic's statement that he would recommend the town take over the airport is an unneeded distraction borne of his frustration in dealing with the town on issues affecting the county-owned airport. But decades of ownership and financial decisions made by the county make such a transfer far from easy, and it serves no real purpose other than to remove a major headache for Kubic.
Also not helpful was Hilton Head Mayor Tom Peeples' immediate negative reaction to a recommendation to extend the runway by 1,100 feet to 5,400 feet to accommodate private and commercial regional jets.
Instead, county and town officials should focus on getting a completed airport master plan in hand. That master plan should present the options and their costs so that informed decisions can be made.
Until the plan is finished, everyone should keep quiet about what they want or don't want to see happen at the airport. Otherwise, we end up with an emotional debate, not an informed one. Quite frankly, that's all we've had for years on this subject -- threats and counter-threats, accusations and conspiracy theories that hinder any meaningful discussion about what is best for the airport and the community. That applies to airport supporters and detractors. Commercial air service to Hilton Head began in 1976, and so did complaints about noise and air traffic. And so did predictions of economic doom and gloom should commercial service end.
Yes, public input is supposed to be part of the master plan process, but there's a difference between helpful input and divisive argument.
The master plan, due in October, is to address these scenarios:
• Leaving the airport as it is with a 4,300-foot runway.
• Extending the runway to 5,400 feet.
• Extending the runway, but not beyond the current boundaries of airport property.
• Moving the airport to another location.
The Federal Aviation Administration, which is helping pay for the $423,000 study, requires that one of the options explored is to do nothing.
Each of these scenarios has financial ramifications, and there are concerns about the financial health of the island airport. The county's 2010 revised budget as of Jan. 31 projects a $70,000 operating surplus on $1.7 million in revenue, but the county also has loaned the airport about $1.6 million to cover operations over the years, and it paid about $1.9 million to build hangars the county rents out to private aircraft owners.
Eliminating commercial service would mean a loss of revenue, but it also would mean fewer expenses. Personnel expenses at the airport, for example, are budgeted in 2010 at $934,000, more than half the $1.67 million in total operating expenses budgeted.
But all of that is only a portion of the financial impact of the airport. Those figures don't take into account property tax revenue generated by the airport, nor the overall economic impact of the airport, an estimated $80 million, according to a S.C. Aeronautics Commission study. The airport's net assets total about $15 million, a big investment by federal, state and county government.
Some big, complicated decisions lie ahead, but let's not debate them absent the comprehensive information this master plan is to give us.
