NORTH ADAMS, Mass. — The Airport Commission Advisory Panel continued its review of the airport rules and regulations and discussed how much power the airport manager should have.

 

The panel held a hybrid meeting Tuesday and as members worked their way through sections of the draft, they often paused to discuss where the airport manager fits into the decision making when it comes to day-to-day operations.

 

"The airport manager at every airport has the authority to do daily operations, and they make judgment calls on a day to day basis," panelist Trevor Gilman said. "If there is questionable opposition the airport commission does have overall authority … but the manager needs to have the power to manage the airport because it isn't always easy to hold a commission meeting." 

 

The panelists and Administrative Officer and acting Airport Manager Angie Ellison agreed that the Airport Commission should not have to be involved in every single decision that takes place at the airport. It was agreed that the permanent  manager, that the city has yet to hire, should be trusted to use their own discretion.

 

However, where this discretion ends and begins was a point of contention with some panelists asking that these parameters be clearly spelled out in the regulations while others saw this as overregulation.  

 

Gilman felt that the document could be edited down allowing the manager to make decisions in regard to allowable activities in the airport as well as who is allowed airside. He felt if the manager was ever questioned it could simply go to the airport commission for review.

 

Ellison, from a legal standpoint, felt that these rules needed to be clear in the document.

 

"Legal says they need to define and give everyone the same rules and regulations instead of whoever is interpreting those rules at the moment," she said. "... This document needs to be black and white and not up for interpretation."

 

She said it is not enough to subjectively say something is not allowed, and the manager needs documentation to point to when questioned. She added that in the past she felt manager decision making has been pretty subjective and more objective guidance was needed.

 

This was driven by a discussion over who should be authorized to be airside.

 

Panelist Michael Milazzo wanted some reassurances baked into the regulations that wouldn't leave authorization completely up to the manager.

 

"We have seen this play out in the very recent past," Milazzo said. "If you were a friend of the airport manager you were given a badge. I don't think they should have this power."

 

The conversation shifted to how the airport would determine authorized users, but the panel had a hard time determining wording that would include everyone who needs access to the airport, including different users and clubs. They did agree they did not want people airside who were not familiar with the operations of an airport.

 

They cited people walking dogs in the airfield or unauthorized vehicles driving near the runway as immediate concerns.

 

They listed plane owners, hangar owners, pilots, transient pilots, and tenant employees. They also discussed whether authorized badge holders should be allowed to bring in guests.

 

Gilman still felt it was too cumbersome to form a long list of users and felt this should be at the manager's discretion. 

 

"Here we are again adding rules we don't need," he said. "… I don't think it matters how long we make this list. There will always be someone that we all agree should have access to, but we failed to put that in the section and there is no reason for it." 

 

He used the example of a trash hauler visiting the airport to pick up trash or a chartering service making a pickup. He also used the example of different clubs at the airport noting that some members aren't pilots. 

 

Milazzo said now people have access to the airport that shouldn't. He said it is a safety concern. 

 

"I have had to stop an airplane after landing, taxiing to get to a hangar because cars are in the way or people are in the way," he said. "People that have no attachment to the airport. They are not pilots, they do not have badges, and they are in the way." 

 

Gilman said if the people in question did not have permission from the manager they would be trespassing. If they did have permission and were not conducting themselves properly then the commission would have the right to question the manager.

 

The other topic was if the manager should be able to determine use at the airport if it goes against other regulations. 

 

Gilman felt that the manager should be able to make decisions on the fly. He used the example that a charter service who may need to momentarily break traffic regulations should not have to wait for a commission meeting.

 

Milazzo agreed with Gilman that there is no need to overregulate but called out Gilman's earlier example of a car show. He felt something as big as a car show should go before the commission for a vote. He felt the manager should not have the right to independently approve an event that could shut down services at the airport.

 

"I don't think any airport manager should have the right to shut down a public use airport without the commission's knowledge," he said. "... But I would hate to see North Adams turn into the situation that they have in Pittsfield or some other airports where it is so regulated that there is barely any real activity."

 

Gilman agreed and said something like a car show or movie would have to go before the commission anyways.

 

Gilman said most airports give this power to the manager and changing the authority structure would go against Federal Aviation Administration guidance.

 

"This is not up for us to decide. This has already been decided by the FAA and we are basically talking about going against their authority," he said.

 

The panel did edit some language that would give airport badge holders the ability to act independently of the airport manager but could not come to an agreement on some of the reviewed sections. They admitted more wordsmithing was needed. They did make some edits to clear up language to better reflect actual airport operations and deleted some redundancies.

 

They also agreed to eliminate a bullet point that would regulate alcohol consumption on the airfield. The majority of the panelists felt that airport users should be able to bring their own drinks and consume them in their own hangars after a long day of flying.

 

"Someone will have a barbecue and, yeah, we will sit down and have a beer," Milazzo said. "We are done flying and there are plenty of regulations involved in how that works. If you are a badge holder and you are allowed on that side of the fence you should be able to be responsible."

 

There was some pushback from panelists fearing an all out party could develop but Gilman stated this has never happened and other policies would deter a possible large-scale party. The majority of the panelists also agreed that state and FAA rules in regard to alcohol were clear enough and did not need to be repeated in the city's document.

 

Before the meeting started in earnest, Ellison asked the panel to revote on their past decisions that are now considered moot after a recent ruling by the City Council. However, the panel declined to retroactively approve illegal votes. 

 

"I disagree with the city's policy of ratifying votes taken illegally at meetings that did not legally occur," Gilman said. "I believe it is best if we don't do any a business yet … we start anew today … let's move on. This is meeting number one." 

 

In November, the City Council declined to retroactively appoint members of the Airport Commission the mayor had appointed on his own.

 

Earlier this year, Mayor Thomas Bernard appointed new members Daniel Caplinger and Bonnie Howland to the commission.

 

This means all votes the commission has taken with these two members are illegal. Because of this the commission must go back and ratify all of these votes.

 

Because the advisory panel was created by the commission during this time they, too, have to go back and ratify their own decisions.

 

That being said, the panel had only held two meetings, one of which they were unable to delve into because the panel did not have proper documentation. The only votes they actually took in their short history were to approve minutes and to appoint a chairman. 

 

The Airport Commission voted to form this panel to provide the commission and the city feedback and input. The committee is largely made out of airport users and business owners who are staged at the airport.