Still no decision by Chandler council on airport runway proposal

By Jason W. Brooks
Mail | X: @JasonWBrooks2

A work session, a lengthy discussion and a regular meeting haven’t been enough to help the Chandler City Council decide on how it wants to handle its airport runway situation.

With airport staff and the city’s main airport advisory in agreement, Chandler Municipal Airport Director Ryan Reeves brought to Council a proposal to extend Chandler’s main runway 4R/22L by 680 feet to a length of 5,500 feet.

This length, Reeves told Council in both a September work session and at the Oct. 12 study session, wouldn’t permit any larger or new types of aircraft, but would give current aircraft the ability to take off from Chandler year-round, instead of only the cooler months of the year.

Council left both the work session and the Oct. 12 study session without having made a definitive decision, though it did direct staff to put together options it can choose from in November.

Reeves presented council with two options, begin a bond election process in accordance with a 2006 ordinance, or amend that ordinance to remove the bond-election requirement for extending the runway.

Council is not unanimous on either option, which means no one directed staff to craft an amendment to the Ordinance 3888. That 2006 ordinance includes 5,700 feet as a runway length maximum, along with aircraft length, width and weight maximums, and calls for a special “bond election” if council ever wanted to change the runway dimensions in the future.

Matt Orlando, who’s the mayor-elect and currently the most-tenured council member, said he believes the “bond” mention was included in Ordinance 3888 not so much to get taxation or spending authority from voters — the FAA would fund much of a runway extension, Reeves said — but mainly to ensure Council gets voters to weigh in on the proposal.

“The bond election part was just a mechanism to get it on the ballot,” Orlando said. “To me, a third option here is to ensure the word ‘bond’ isn’t part of our pamphlet language and such, but still take it to a public vote. Even the feedback I received from people who support the extension still want to see a public vote on this.”

City Clerk Jennifer Ekblad covered both the estimated $500,000 expense if the city held a special election on its own in an odd-numbered year like 2027, and added that there are only four dates next year when an Arizona city could hold a special election, in March, May, July, and November.

Ekblad said with the city charter currently requiring a second reading of an ordinance that would call for a special election, the earliest Chandler can realistically hold a special election is July 2027.

Councilmember Christine Ellis became angry at Mayor Kevin Hartke during the September work session because he declared his informal polling of council who were present as a 3-3 impasse on whether to amend the ordinance or take it to a bond election. She said not including input at the work session from Councilmember O.D. Harris, who wasn’t present, was a mistake.

At the Oct. 12 study session, Ellis favored amending the ordinance, saying making decisions about amending it is something voters elect councilmembers to do.

“I have business owners, sitting in the airport, who must relocate every six months because they can’t take off from here in the summer,” Ellis said. “Now, we are telling employers of our workforce, business owners, that we can’t even start the FAA’s four-year process until we get a ‘yes’ vote ... I am trying to move the people’s interest forward and for us to have the courage to make this decision.”

Ellis also pointed to the 307 people surveyed at the past two airport open-house days and at the Chandler Innovation Fairs, 74% support the extension, with 21% wanting more information and only 4% opposing it, as sufficient evidence that there’s support for extending the runway.

Councilmember Jane Poston disagrees with Ellis, saying voter trust and taking a promised vote to the people are critical. She said the survey data likely was pulled from a pro-aviation audience likely to support the extension.

Reeves said there are multiple phases of the FAA’s runway extension approval process that includes multiple points of public input. He said while there aren’t recent and/or local examples of a runway project being stopped, there are examples of FAA plan changes based on public input.

Councilmember Angel Encinas said he’d like to hear more from staff about all options.

Hartke asked City Manager John Pombier to bring some pros and cons and more information about the three options of removing the election requirement, changing the bond to a general election and also taking no action and leaving the runway as-is.

Pombier mentioned bringing, to a November meeting, ordinances to take action on each of the first two options. He made no mention of simply taking the “bond” to voters as worded in Ordinance 3888.

Jason W. Brooks can be reached at jbrooks@iniusa.org. Please submit comments at yourvalley.net/letters or email them to AzOpinions@iniusa.org. We are committed to publishing a wide variety of reader opinions, as long as they meet our Civility Guidelines.

INDEPENDENT NEWSMEDIA

Jason W. Brooks
News Editor | Chandler Independent

Jason W. Brooks joined Independent Newsmedia, Inc., USA, in July 2021 as an associate editor. After a year covering Buckeye, he has covered Chandler since the fall of 2022, in addition to assisting the Daily Independent throughout his time at INI.

Education: University of New Mexico, bachelor of arts in journalism and mass communication, print emphasis, English minor.

Random Fact: He and his siblings witnessed a Space Shuttle launch and landing in the same year in person, on opposite coasts.

Hobbies: Karaoke, bicycling and American Sign Language.

Community: He supports animal shelters.