One notable issue discussed was the threat posed by wildlife, particularly geese and turtles, around the airport. A wildlife biologist had recently conducted a three-day survey at the site, documenting sightings of four geese and two types of turtles. The presence of these animals highlighted the need for a robust management plan to prevent potential hazards on the runway. Participants discussed the installation of a fence on the west side of the runway, with a proposed height of ten feet, to deter wildlife. However, the effectiveness of this solution, particularly against geese, was met with skepticism. The airport manager shared anecdotes of daily efforts to chase away geese with the assistance of a dog.

Further complicating the wildlife issue is the presence of turtles, which require careful mowing management due to their small size and potential environmental regulations concerning endangered species. This necessitates additional caution when conducting maintenance activities near the runway. The biologist’s report is expected to inform future fencing and wildlife management decisions, highlighting the ongoing challenge of balancing wildlife safety with airport operations.

Financial constraints emerged as a significant theme during the meeting, impacting the commission’s ability to address necessary repairs and maintenance. The airport manager reported that the budget would remain flat. With the fiscal year ending on June 30, there was a pressing need to prioritize essential inspections and repairs. The annual inspections of fire extinguishers and the fuel tank were highlighted as critical, consuming a portion of the limited budget. The QT pod, a credit card kiosk for fuel transactions, also required a costly inspection, further straining financial resources.

The commission discussed the necessity of a spill kit, which costs approximately $700. There was some debate over whether the entire kit was needed, with one participant suggesting that only the container was required as the internal materials remained usable. This item was deemed essential following several incidents necessitating its use, including a broken hose during fuel unloading.

Budget discussions revealed a significant shortfall, with only $4,850 remaining for repairs and maintenance after accounting for necessary inspections. This left little room for additional expenditures, such as the $2,000 repair required for a tractor used in mowing operations. The commission emphasized the importance of monitoring equipment conditions to prevent unexpected costs, acknowledging the unpredictability of maintenance needs.

The meeting also touched on a lease agreement with a tenant named Dakota, who occupies a hangar at the airport and is involved in aviation-related projects, including drone parts manufacturing. Confirmation of Dakota’s status as a pilot, despite lacking a personal aircraft, was noted. The lease agreement required signatures, and discussions were held on prioritizing the airport’s equipment and supply needs, particularly concerning safety requirements such as spill kits and fire extinguishers.

A potential change in ownership at the Sterling airport also surfaced in discussions, raising uncertainties about future developments and operational impacts. The current owner’s desire to construct a structure that would necessitate runway alterations was deemed potentially unfeasible due to surrounding wetlands. This situation prompted concerns about how such changes might affect the airport’s treatment and operations.