The meeting of the Carson City Airport Authority for Wednesday, June 17th, 2026, will please come to order.

Um may we have the roll call and determination of a quorum, please.

Chair Pulitz.

Present.

Vice Chair Norville.

Treasurer Sutton.

Present.

Member Flint.

Here.

Member Horton.

Member Hutter.

And Member Stewart.

Here.

We have a quorum.

Thank you.

Curtis, would you lead us in the pledge?

Please join me in the pledge.

I pledge the allegiance to the flag.

I mean that is still given there.

And to the republic or what's it say?

One nation.

With liberty and justice for all.

Thank you.

On to item number C approval of the minutes of past meetings of the airport authority.

Do the members have any corrections or additions to any of the past minutes of the airport authority?

No, no corrections here.

Seeing none, I guess we're no longer voting to approve those.

Generally we have done that in the past.

I make a motion that we approve the minutes from the previous meeting.

Motion has been made and seconded.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Motion passes unanimously.

Members of the public who wish to address the airport authority.

So we would ask that you keep those comments to about three minutes.

Are there any is there any public comment?

Would you give us your name, please when you get started and turn your mic on?

Loretta Hamilton with Sport Aviation Center.

Approximately nine fifteen, I drove up to the uh gate on the northwest side of the airport as I was rolling down my car door window to swipe the access card through the card reader.

I glanced in my rear view mirror to see a black pickup truck pull up behind me with the same fellow and driving that I have had encounters with uh twice before.

The fellow waved what may have been an access card.

Um I swiped my access card in the card reader and the gate opened.

I pulled my truck forward and stopped to wait for the gate to close.

Uh the gate began to close, but then the black truck he was in moved forward and the gate opened.

Um I exited my vehicle to ask him to back up so the gate could close.

Um he told me he had swiped his card and should I should move and allow him to enter.

Um I didn't see him swipe his card, so I asked him again to back up so the gate would close and explained to him that if I allow him through um I could lose my gate key privileges.

Um he said he was late for a flight and that he should I should let him through the gate.

Um I again said he should just back up and let the gate close.

Um then he could enter on his own card rather than mine.

Um he refused and the gate continued to stay open.

We were at a stalemate, and so I figured uh after all these times I should probably speak with the airport manager about it.

Um this is the third time with this particular fellow, and um I informed him that you know I could lose my privileges by allowing him through and the gate crashing.

Um I'm in and out of the airport here and there.

Um it just seems to be a common occurrence, and there are occasionally very courteous people who um wait their respectful turn and uh um have no problem, but it just seems that this is um a safety issue, a security issue, and just common courtesy at the airport.

Well, just a couple of things.

One, we don't want anybody going to war over the gate.

Oh god, no.

In a situation I've had this happen too at the Mountain Westgate, gate number three.

I had the same situation with a tenant on the airport some time ago.

And once you say something and they do not intend to comply, then please continue on.

Report that to the airport manager with all the information that you have.

Yeah, and let him handle it.

Um the correct procedure uh is just as you did.

To open the gate with your card to drive through a safe distance and allow the gate to close, then the next person behind you does the same.

Right.

It is improper for him to tailgate through with you or not wait for that gate to close.

The gate uh evidently the sensors, correct me if I'm wrong, Corey, are such that the gate is not gonna come down on a car.

If there's a car sitting there, it's gonna come back up.

Correct.

But that's not authorization to drive on the airport.

No.

So are you aware of this, these all these gate entries, I am aware of this incident.

Were we able to identify access is all uh on uh video tape, we were.

Okay.

So you have this in hand.

Yes.

Okay.

So we want the you know, the public to understand that this is um a safety and a security issue for everybody on the airport.

It is.

And so I'm hoping that uh, you know, with your comments, people will hear this and understand that we're not trying to be difficult.

No, it it's it's we're all when we receive a gate card, we have a responsibility to to follow the driving rules on the airport, and those are available either in the airport manager's office or on our website.

Yes, but if somebody again, I'll reiterate if somebody looks as if they are not going to comply, don't feel like you have to get out and explain the situation to them.

I don't want you to ever be in that situation, just continue on.

Please give a call to the airport manager's office and explain what happened, that you're not comfortable telling somebody that they can't come through behind you, but that this occurred and give them whatever information you have about the vehicle, but please don't try to engage with somebody behind you.

It's not your fault, it's their fault.

I appreciate that.

Thank you.

Yeah, just note the time you came through the gate.

Okay, well, thank you very much for your time.

Thank you very much.

Is there any other public comments, Paul?

Paul Hamilton.

I run the flight school FBO at the airport.

Now, you had just said uh basically what we have here is we have a kind of a bigger problem, and the point of me talking to you is to inform this board that we do have a problem.

Now, when you say we don't want war, I drove th and and I've done the same thing here with the airport incident report.

I drove through the gate, a person tailgated me, okay, started honking the horn making a bunch of you know stuff, and I said, Hey, would you mind moving back?

Furious, angry, starts yelling at me.

So what do I do?

Leave, go drive over to my FBO.

This person comes out and essentially starts yelling at me.

He came after as though he was gonna assault me.

Okay, I back down, and amazingly, Corey witnessed that.

Okay, and you know, he took care of it as as much as he can.

So when you say you don't want to have a war, I agree completely.

Okay.

Let me give you another example.

This happened, this is all this happened um April 16th.

Um I came through the gate, guy comes up, tailgates me.

Um there we are, and honks' horn.

I get out, and what I've been trying to do is to go back and say, hey, would you mind backing up the airport rules are such that um you know we can't let anybody in.

Well, I flash my gate card.

Okay, well, I I don't know whether that gate card's any good or not.

Anyone can flash anything.

Um, and so I f he was courteous enough to let me finish.

Then he looks at me and says, You're just an asshole.

Now, okay, this is really pissing me off.

Okay, and and especially with people harassing my wife.

I've had it.

Something needs to be done.

Now, when the whole thing is here, I mean, I've been into other airports.

Other airports, as I go in, I say, Hey, what's going on here?

What do you?

You know, kind of quizzing them about the gate.

Oh boy, if we don't stop and go through this and obey that, we'll have our gate car revoked.

No questions asked.

Now, this is for large airports and small airports.

Some airports don't have this.

Um, so the problem is, besides my personal experiences, we have a serious security problem here.

That I mean, I've been working with Corey and it's gotten better.

Three minutes.

Okay.

Now it used to be 100% of the people in back of me would argue.

Now it's only what would come through and follow.

Other the other 50% stop.

Now you're a good example of someone who stops and waits, Jim.

Okay?

She said, Boy, that yellow does a good job.

So uh but and so we've had improvement.

Now now when I stop and someone's it's only like 50%, but these 50% are angry and not good.

Even yesterday, I know I'm going over my three minutes here.

Just yesterday at 5.08, I'm pulling off an arrowhead.

I'm ready to go into the go into the uh uh Corey.

You have any heard about this one.

I'm ready to go into gate four.

I look, I see two cars blasting through the gate.

Okay, the gate's wide open.

Okay.

I blast through, I follow them, I got their hangar number, and I've got another incident report for that.

Um, so the problem is now any criminal terrorist mentally in sync and easily follow through the gate by just going through, flashing a three by um uh three by five card, uh people getting onto the runway, causing an accident, aircraft sabotage.

I mean, I could go on about all this stuff.

Now, it's the responsibility of this board and this Carson City Airport to fix this.

So if anyone, because I would assume we're liable for this, if we know there's a problem, and now we don't do anything about it.

So if this is official notification that we have a safety and security problem that needs to be fixed.

Any questions?

Well, let me address one thing first, and that is your personal safety.

Please don't get out of your car.

Please don't roll your window down.

If somebody is forcing you through the gate, note the time, continue on and notify the airport manager.

In addition to that.

Let me read.

In addition to that.

Just a second.

In addition to that.

If we were a Part 139 airport, we would have real teeth.

If you do this in Reno, I flew out of Reno for years and had a hanger up there.

$10,000 fine immediately.

Jail time if you continue doing it.

So they've got some real teeth in addition to revocation of your privileges and so on and so forth.

But we don't meet that classification.

I'll let Corey jump in for just a minute before you continue.

Yeah, so airport security is very lightly regulated by the FAA at non-139 airports.

The FAA clearly states that you have to have a secure airport, and they do not define how.

We do have procedures in place, you know, two written warnings followed by action.

Um I've typically been able to have conversations with people and it improves and we move forward, and then things get better for a time and things kind of get worse, and we're in a period of things being noticeably worse.

Um I sent out a notice to all airport users reminding them of these rules and regulations just recently.

I think I speak for the entire board when I say your personal safety is our number one priority.

So please just continue on.

Note the facts as well as you can and the time and report that and let us work on it.

The other thing I don't know, this might be a question for council, uh or perhaps for Supervisor Horton.

Uh I don't know if the city uh can do anything to help us in that regard.

Can they add any teeth to uh unauthorized access to the airport?

Is there any comment on I can comment on that a little bit?

Um this can end up being a trespassing incident.

All of our rules and regulations are rules and regulations, they're not law.

So the driving rules and regulations, they're not in Title 19.

We have the ability to have rules and regulations, and we can do things like enforce access control, which can then be escalated to trespassing, and that's where we can actually take a legal action.

Um so there are some steps, but there's a lot of steps that have to happen before it becomes that.

Um Steve, if you have anything else to say about it.

Yeah, I would just add, um, we do have uh provision in Title 19 that says a violation of the provisions of Title 19 can be a misdemeanor.

In other words, it can be a criminal offense.

But keep in mind um to prosecute for a criminal offense, there's uh legal requirement that there be a mens rea, that there be an intent to violate the law.

And so that's how do you how do you establish intent?

And yeah, and that's a little bit difficult to establish.

My guess is the DA's office would not want to pursue that, but that doesn't mean we can't still do something about it.

But to answer your question, we don't have the teeth that uh Reno would have, nor would uh the Sheriff's Department ordinarily have to enforce you know traffic laws in Carson City.

Thank you.

Uh Tim, uh Tim Pulas, uh any comment?

No, I'm I'm thank you, Paul, for the updates.

I think that the airport has taken this under advisement and we'll continue to uh do our best to enforce and to monitor.

Thank you.

Well, thanks, Tim.

So I think what we need to continue to do uh is for this to remain on the front burner of the airport executive.

And if you think there are things that need to come before the board that we collectively can take a look at to strengthen our security and you know safety procedures at our gates, then please let us know, and we'll be happy to consider those.

And I'll speak on behalf of Corey.

I know that he's in motion on things, he's looking at different situations and analyzing what steps are next, but I know he's in motion on stuff.

Do our cameras at the gates um uh are they positioned such that they can read each license plate that goes through?

I shouldn't comment on the airport security procedures in a public meeting.

I will.

Okay.

Well, we got cameras at the gates.

I understand that, but maybe can you can we discuss that uh offline then?

Yes, and make sure that we're doing everything on our our end that we can to protect our tenants and the people lawfully using the airport.

Yeah, and I can comment on other questions, just specific questions about security cameras.

We shouldn't discuss.

I would recommend at this point that we uh urge you to do a review of the security protocols, policies and procedures and signage that's available, anything that you have, you should review that in-house with council, come back and look at the policy, and if it looks good, everything's great.

If you want to change it, bring it back to the board, and we can add some teeth here and there or whatever we can do to it.

But at this point, I think the smart thing to do is go ahead and do an internal review with you and Steve and see what you can come up with.

Sounds good.

Okay, Paul, anything else?

Nope.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thanks for being here, Paul.

Please turn your mic off.

Oh, before I move on, any other comments.

Please, sir.

State your name for us and turn your mic on, please.

Uh Tom Everly, uh, I own Hangar H4 over off of Bravo.

And I just had uh couple questions on uh maintenance and improvements of the taxiways.

I was wondering if there's any plans for uh restriping the taxiways, particularly Bravo, and also um the pavement next to the taxiways seems to be in less than optimum shape, and I was wondering if there's any plan on doing any repaving there or correct filling.

There's actually going to be some information about this in the engineers report.

So I think it's best to leave it to the engineers report.

Okay, there's definitely a plan.

I mean, everything on the airport uh we are continually continually looking continually looking at, and I know that some of the striping uh is degraded, some of that's on the taxi lanes, which are the responsibilities of the lessees, but uh we do have sorry the taxi lanes being between the buildings.

That's right.

Yeah, okay.

Yeah, that's I'm sure Corey will stick around after if you have questions.

You can probably give you some more detail.

Okay, great.

But the engineer will have information for you.

All right, perfect.

And it would be good to if you have a chance, you know, just maybe call Corey ahead of time, stop by the office and get a rundown on all of our airport capital improvement program and the plans that we have to keep our pavement in good shape and striped and that sort of thing.

We'd be happy to do that.

I'll do that, yeah.

In fact, we encourage it.

Okay, all right, appreciate it.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Any other members of the public who would like to comment?

Seeing none, we'll move on to item number F, Airport Engineers Report.

All right, so Brian Martinez Smallis, Wood Rogers for the record.

Um, so a couple uh items on the engineers report.

Um the RSA drainage and improvements project.

Uh that project is currently out to bid.

We have a pre-bid um a pre-bid meeting and site visit scheduled for Friday this week.

Um, and then uh bids will be opened uh shortly thereafter, and then we will work uh with the airport manager and the FAA to hopefully get that project awarded and out to construction.

Um we have the uh main apron rehab project and uh 2025 pavement preservation project.

There's an agenda on the item or on the meeting tonight to address that, so I'll leave that for that agendized item.

And then um upcoming projects.

I think one of these will address uh the public comment there.

Uh we have a uh pavement rehab project for the North Apron that uh will uh begin design this year for uh 27 construction.

Um, and then we also have design for taxiway bravo reconstruction, and that uh to the to the public comment.

Um that would include the taxiway pavement reconstruction and then obviously the striping that would need to be replaced for that.

Um so yeah, I can take any questions from there.

Thank you.

I knew we had things being planned here in the near term and the long term.

We always do, you know.

But uh appreciate that, Brian.

Thank you.

Any questions from the members?

Tim, Brian Stewart, Michaela, any questions?

No, sir.

All good, all good.

Okay, thank you, Brian.

Appreciate it.

Item number G, consent agenda.

Are the members okay with the consent agenda?

Are members calling in?

Are you okay with the consent agenda?

Yes.

Great.

Member Sutton, would you please make a motion to approve the consent agenda as written?

I make a motion to approve tonight's consent agenda as it is written.

Motion has been made and seconded.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries unanimously.

Thank you.

Item number H, public hearings.

Item number one for discussion and possible action.

Uh award and authorized execution of the FAA contract for AIP Grant 47, Maine Apron Pavement Preservation Project, and the airport-funded taxiway real rehabilitation project.

Uh Corey and Brian.

Okay, so this item, a request for proposals was issued March 18th, 2026 with bids opened on April 21st, 2026.

Five bids were received, and the Airport Engineering Consultant Wood Rogers reviewed the submissions and recommends awarding the contract to Sierra Nevada construction.

Approval this item will allow the project to proceed.

This item is a continuation from last month.

This originally had multiple options, and we were only able to award the options based off of funding availability, and it was determined that we did not have the funding availability, so this is only going to be awarding the base bid.

And if you all have any specific questions about the project, Brian is available to address those.

And this is the lowest bid for the taxpayers who may be listening in, right?

That's correct.

This is the lowest bid.

Okay.

Any questions from the members?

Members of the public who wish to comment on this agenda item.

Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the board.

If there is no further discussion, then we stand in need of a motion.

I move to award the base bid contract for the main apron pavement prevention project to Sierra Nevada construction in the amount of 184,462 dollars.

Thank you.

Motion has been made and is on the table.

Is there a second?

I will second the motion.

Any additional discussion?

Those calling in.

Saying none.

Call for the question.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Those opposed if there be any.

The motion carries unanimously.

Item number two for discussion of possible action.

Approve an extension to the agreement to extend time and avoid lease termination with Carson Tahoe Executive, CTE.

Corey.

Okay.

So this item is back in front of the board again.

This has been an ongoing returning item over time.

I'll kind of get into that a little bit.

Carson Tahoe executive was not the first owner of this leasehold, and the history got kind of goes back a ways.

So CTE has experienced delays with the most recent extension due to obligations with other projects.

They have made progress towards developing the parcels with preliminary layouts and designs.

They've also engaged uh Kimley Horn and Kaufman Associates to continue planning, prepare the FAA Form 7460-1 and submit a section 743 determination request.

They are requesting a 24-month extension to start construction.

To give you a little bit more history, this lease goes all the way back to 2008.

This was a part of a subdivision of parcels due to the runway realignment.

This was a really bad time for development in Carson City and pretty much all construction stopped at this time.

And the builder at the time did award them extended that the airport authority awarded them extended time for this.

Um awarded them extended time.

Um as long as the developers continue to demonstrate that they do intend on developing the property.

I do think we should award them additional time, but we need to define limits and put criteria on that.

Um, if another developer comes in and wants to develop this land, we need to have a mechanism to end this lease.

However, until that day comes, there's no loss for the airport to continue the lease.

So we are recommending awarding extended time, but it should be reasonable what the board decides on today.

Their request for 24 months is longer than we we've allowed in the past.

We reached we recently allowed it, we recently allowed an 18-month extension for another developer to begin construction.

So I think the board should consider uh 18 months versus the 24 months, but this is written the way it is today because that is their request for 24 months.

Um you also notice in the um award that they also put a limit of 12 months to come pro to complete construction.

So I think we should grant an extension to CTE for additional time.

Um but we need to have these limits clearly defined in the motion um so that they will have to bring it back with an explanation as to why in the future, and we have the ability to say no, uh, we're gonna award this land to someone else.

Um but as this time staff is recommending awarding an extension of up to 24 months for construction with a consideration that we've only approved up to 18 in the past, and then at 12 months to complete construction following that time period.

Thank you, Corey.

Uh Tim Pimel is uh are you in accordance with that recommendation?

Yes, I agree with Corey's recommendations fully.

Okay, thank you.

Any comments from the members on this agenda?

I'm I like to take into consideration the 18 months that we previously discussed.

What's the board's feeling?

Is there a policy in place that states what the extension can be?

Are there limits?

Do we have 12 months, 18 months, 24 months?

Is there anything on paper anywhere?

Just our discretion.

Uh the authority has not adopted a policy on that, but the last extension that was given to uh Carson Tower executive was for 18 months to complete all, well, it was actually to submit their plans um within uh within about seven months of when that we gave them the extension and then complete all the construction within 18 months after that.

Um, and that would have been completed by May 1st of this year.

Um, so I mean in the past there's at least precedent on this project that 18 months was an extension that was granted.

Um but we don't have a policy per se.

And there's there's there's no, there's no requirement that we have a policy.

It would be hard to come up with that.

I would assume there's no logic to have a set policy either.

Yeah, every project is different.

Right.

There's the precedent that's been set that we've allowed extensions whenever they are demonstrating forward progress, which they have done here by executing these agreements with the engineering firms.

Disadvantage to allowing 24 months over the 18 months.

I think so.

I mean, I agree with the uh with our chairman and with the recommendation of the airport manager.

Anything else from the members?

Nothing.

Members of the public who wish to comment on Carl here.

Oh, Carl.

Carl here.

Yeah, hi.

Sorry for for the late arrival, but I've been here for the whole discussion.

Thank you.

Um, just to clarify something that was mentioned in Corey's brief.

Um, just for the record, uh, there's reference to a lease going back to 2008.

Uh, just to clarify that that is not CTE though, is that correct?

That's correct.

Yeah.

Yes, that would have been to KCXP investments, uh Tom Gonzalez.

Um, and as Corey mentioned, the construction and the hangar market was flat back then, and so we gave them some leeway.

Um, and then when you know, I don't know how many years went by, 10 or 15 years went by, um, no, maybe not that long, uh, but yeah, it might have been 10 to 15 years, uh, we went to him and said, Hey, come on, other hangar projects are being planned and built.

Um, you need to move on this.

He committed to move forward.

Uh, we worked out some kind of time frame.

It was a number, I think it was less than 18 months, that he would get it going, and then ultimately he threw up his hands and said it's not really going forward, and then he sold and assigned the uh lease to Carson Tow executive, and in that assignment, they acknowledged that it was subject to them completing a project within a relatively short period of time.

Um the airport authority subsequently gave them the earlier um uh extension that I mentioned uh in my comments earlier of around 18 months, and that kind of brings us to today.

You know, construction should have started last month under that extension, but we don't have plans on file, so we're not at a construction.

Thanks for that, Steve.

Yeah, yeah.

I just wanted to just to have that clarified that uh good you know, it wasn't CTE going back all that direct all that uh but rather that uh the mention of Gonzalez and Gonzalez's handoff of that kind of was just talking about an example of precedent for granting extensions.

So thank you for the clarification.

Any further discussion from the members?

Seeing none members of the public who wish to comment on this agenda item, please come on up and punch the button and give us your name again.

Tom Everly uh hangar H4.

Where's that project located?

It's to the immediate west of uh the jet ranch hangar complex.

It's actually immediate west of Heritage Hangers, which is on Taxiway Charlie.

So if you look at the hangars that are on Taxiway Charlie from the intersection of Bravo going westbound, yeah, it's just the next basically the next uh piece of land beyond the last hangers on the left.

The triangle piece?

It's within the triangle, yes.

Within the triangle, yes, okay.

All right, thank you.

Thank you.

There you go.

Any other public comment.

Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the board.

Anything else from the members?

Well, would the board be willing to approve the 18 month extension?

Well, uh, you know part of my feeling on that is that it's taken us several years to get to the point um where we have uh uh I'll call it a letter of non-objection.

I don't know what the formal term is from the FAA on their uh through the fence property.

And that has caused some difficulty in allocating money for develop development because of that length of time.

Uh this property has a long history, most of it not with CTE, in which it was not developed.

And I feel like the 24 months is warranted, you know, because of those issues.

Well, this is the recommendation from the staff.

What's that?

This is the recommendation from staff.

Yes, that's right.

Yeah.

Yeah, the staff recommendation stands at 24 months, and our chairman concurs with that.

Uh as do I.

Um, so I guess at this point we stand in need of a motion.

I have a question.

Go ahead, Tim.

It's Brian.

Um that recommendation from the staff was with the caveat that we had um a way to kind of claw that back.

Is that my understanding correct?

My comments earlier were basically that the longest extension we've done for something like this was eighteen months, and this exceeds what we've approved in the past.

Um, however, they have demonstrated forward progress, and um as long as we have a mechanism in place to continue continue to revisit this so it doesn't last forever, and we have more importantly, if there's another party that wants to develop this land that is willing to do it, um, we have a mechanism in place to allow that to go forward.

So we need to have limitations on these approvals.

They shouldn't be uh unlimited forever.

Um we have a tool in our toolbox.

And I guess I can elaborate a little bit.

You know, this these limitations are really in place for that reason.

Uh we don't want someone to get a hold of airport land and sit on it forever and never develop whenever there's other parties that want to develop on the Carson City Airport.

We need to have a tool to say, okay, you're not doing this.

Somebody else wants to.

So we're going to make it to where this other party can come in.

In Carson City, we have a lot of other land available.

So we're not backed into that corner yet.

Um there's a lot of interest in develop on a lot of land.

There's other developers moving forward with projects.

This isn't hindering any of that progress going forward.

Um, they're currently playing paying lease rent on the property.

Yes.

Yes.

Okay, so the opportunity, the tool in the toolbox to revisit this is at the end of the extension.

Is that correct?

Correct.

Any further recommendations from council?

No, I was just gonna say the the extension we're talking about is an extension for not terminating the lease.

The authority had already voted to terminate the lease if KCXP didn't follow through on the extension that was granted to them, and then CTE took the lease subject to that condition.

So, if CTE, if if the authority grants uh an extension of whatever length uh this meeting and they don't meet it, uh the authorities in a position to terminate that lease.

That mechanism is still in place, Member Stewart.

I think they also paid a good deal of money for that assumption that would be a private transaction, not to us.

Okay, yeah, KCXP actually paid us, I believe it was $25,000 to get that extension.

Um I don't know what CTE paid K KCXP, but we're not a party to that transaction.

That's right.

I mean I know the amount, but I don't think it's my purview to disclose it, but it's significantly more than that.

Okay, thank you for the clarification.

Any other discussion from the members?

None from the public still.

Bring it back to the board.

Stand in need of a motion.

I make a motion that we approve the an extension to the agreement to extend the time and the lease termination with Carson Tahoe Executive LLC CTE for the 24 months, and the number of months to complete construction after that.

As we have it written out here, 12 months, we're okay with that.

Yeah, okay.

So that's to avoid lease termination with CTE for 24 months to start construction.

Uh 12 and 12 months to complete construction.

Is that right?

Correct.

The motion is written.

Is that correct?

Yes.

Uh so let's.

If you want to restate it, okay.

Do you have this?

No, I don't have that handy.

Apologize.

Let me read the motion as written.

This I move to approve an extension to the agreement to extend time and avoid lease termination with CTE for 24 months to start construction and 12 months to complete construction.

Thank you.

Do we have a second?

I will second that.

Motion has been made and seconded.

Is there any additional discussion from the members before we vote?

Saying none, call for the question, all in favor.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

None opposed.

The motion carries unanimously.

On to item number I, airport manager's report.

Okay, um.

So the SRE building is nearing completion.

We are they're working on the final punch list for that building.

Unfortunately, this list is drawing out way longer than I would like.

We did issue them a couple of deadlines.

Um they have met those deadlines so far, but this is kind of like a last ditch to try to get them to get this job done.

They're way behind schedule.

Um the quality of the work is also diminished.

Um it really seems like the subcontractors for this project are just coming in, doing things to check off a box and leaving.

Uh, very unfortunate uh the quality of work that's happening right now over there.

Um that being said, Rick and Morgan are both very capable people, and they are ready to start using that building.

Um they're pressuring me to kind of just get this project accepted and moved along, and they will just fix it themselves.

Um I asked them to prepare a list of specific problems that they've experienced at the end here that I'll present at the next board meeting.

Um, so I want to make clear our disappointment with how these little things, these little final little things are going.

Um, but we are getting close, and they are on schedule to kind of finish this up by the end of this month.

Um, so hopefully we will be able to start occupying the building very soon, and Rick and Morgan will go in and fix all these things that should have been done better.

Um we are very lucky to have two very talented and capable staff that can do a lot themselves.

Um there's been an increase in access control violations.

Um the comments that were made today uh were just some of the uh things that have happened, but there have unfortunately been more incidents than just that.

Um there have been actual trespassing incidents.

Uh some of these trespassing trespassing incidents were due to bad gate etiquette and people not following the airport rules and regulations at the gates.

Umtices have been sent out to all tenants, and written warnings have been sent out to the tenants who have actually were responsible for these violations.

Whenever I first started here, this sort of thing was a rampant problem at the airport.

Um it has drastically improved, as Paul mentioned earlier since then, and there's kind of been ups and downs of waves, and we're kind of in a low wave of the rules kind of not being followed as they should be.

Uh typically with communication and public outreach, things improve fairly quickly.

Um thing that we've implemented within the past year is our administrative assistant in the office actually reads a pre-written and specific briefing to anyone getting an access card that highlights the big problems.

Um so everyone getting or renewing an access card is getting read this information, and that has proven to be very good with the newer access card holders, uh, but the typical violators are actually the uh more older long-term users.

Um, I get about access control enforcement are actually the opposite of what we heard today, that we're too strict, and that stems from the fact that this airport once had no fence.

There was a time not that long ago where there was no access control, and those airport users are still here.

Uh whenever we start cracking down on these sort of things, they get really upset and um make sure that I think that's one of the things that I was gonna bring up.

You know, for I've been in Carson City since 1959, and for decades, you just drive on and off the airport.

And that was sort of the mindset.

I'm not saying it's right, but that was the mindset.

Now we're trying to change that mindset and enforce this, and so.

Yeah.

And uh I think over time there needs to be thought into our rules and regulations and how they're written and how we're doing this enforcement.

And um board should kind of come to a consensus on where we want that to be.

You know, should we be as at the same level of a 139 airport where we're finding people ten thousand dollars or not?

And um, where should that be?

And um I will work with Steve on our internal review to kind of decide where that should fall and where we where that should be.

Initially, when I first started here, I started with enforcing the rules as a written, which wasn't being done.

And uh we're there now, um, with these rules being enforced as written.

Um and we've seen that huge improvement.

Um, you know, the question is gonna be, well, what what's next?

Do we do we continue to down this road and hope that through enforcement of the rules as they're written, we'll spread across the airport and enforce uh a culture of better gate etiquette, or do we slam the hammer down and uh change those regulations to be more strict.

Um, and we will just Steve and I will we'll hit on that with our internal review.

Um, I think it's always best to try to educate rather than violate if we can.

You know, get uh voluntary compliance through education, rather than to having to revoke someone's driving privileges, which uh actually we have done in the past.

Yes.

For behavior inconsistent with those privileges.

Yes.

Yeah, and that's important.

I'm glad you brought that up because uh in the past these sort of things weren't even enforced at all, and we clearly have a record now that we are enforcing these rules and regulations and we're seeing the improvement from that.

Um we're you know, we'll do our internal review and kind of determine where we want to fall with that enforcement level.

And um if we feel like we should change the rules and regulations to be more strict, then we'll present that.

But I think that's gonna take some thought and some com conversations with some airport users.

Um hopefully we'll get some feedback from some of the people that are violating the regulations still and see why are they doing this.

The the education component has been there now for a few years.

The notices to the airport users have have been there.

The um briefing now, which is more recent, ha is there.

Um why is this happening?

Um, and what do we need to do next to tighten it up?

And I mentioned the trespassing incident.

There there was a runway incursion that was also due to um access control compliance.

Um different type of issue than what we've talked about so far.

Um, but every runway incursion that I've seen has stemmed from access control violations.

That's always where it starts.

There's only been one runway incursion in the past five years, which it tends to be about one per year, that was caused by something other than an access control violation.

And most people, once you explain that to them where the what the risk actually is and what causes these runway incursions, they're like, oh okay, uh maybe they should take this more seriously.

Um so we're gonna continue to look at this and see if we should make any changes.

Um I'll get some feedback from Steve and our current procedures and see where where's education not uh where where's the limit of that?

Where is that gonna max out and we have to start taking more of a strict enforcement position?

Um but we'll Stephen and I will we'll get to that.

Tim, do you have anything to add on this?

Well, um, no, I think that we're handling things in a professional manner.

Uh, you know, as some of the board members know, there's lots of airports as Corey mentioned, particularly the Reno State Airport that has no gate access whatsoever and similar kinds of activities, which just blows me away how here is the s you know, operated by the city of Reno, and uh they don't take that serious at all, and we're quite the opposite.

So, you know, it's kind of interesting to see how airports are run throughout the country.

Um I'm very pleased with our approach of trying to listen to our users and manage our violators.

So at this point I'm supporting the go forward suggestions.

Is it 9 30 on the morning for you, Tim?

Correct, and it's tomorrow for you.

So I'm glad I'm not paying for the phone call.

We're grateful that he joined us.

Anyway, go ahead, Corey, continue.

Um, so we are approaching the end of the fiscal year getting ready for our audit period to start, and um one of the things that we are implementing this year is a software program called debt book, and this is actually proven to be way more work than I thought it was going to be uh to get this system implemented, but we're on track to have it implemented by the end of this month.

Um I have a meeting with them at the last week of this month to review any final things to get that implemented.

Um that will help with our findings and also with the cost of our audit, because historically our auditor has had to do a lot of the work this software does manually, and they've started to charge us for that, which they didn't charge for initially.

Um so this should reduce our cost and have better uh audit results.

Um but it's really been one heck of a project.

Um we're expecting construction to begin for the Eagle Valley Airport development um as soon as they get their final approval.

Um my understanding is they're only waiting on one final thing.

They've already gotten their building permits and we should see start moving uh very soon.

Um they were thinking that construction would start prior to the fourth of July, but I'm not sure if they're still on that schedule or not.

We'll see.

But it should be soon.

Um I attended a Western Nevada Development District board meeting um earlier this week.

Uh I like to do these public outreach things to make sure the public is aware of the uh importance of their airports and to help these communities understand that they have these valuable valuable assets available to them and how to better utilize them.

Um those efforts have really paid off as they're all talking about airports now, so um we should see some growth across the state of Nevada, um, which is good for the state.

Um airports are not just playgrounds for rich people, they're an economic tool for these local communities, and um hopefully they will better utilize them by looking at the success story that is Carson City Airport, how good of a job Carson has done of utilizing the airport.

Um we have our fuel flowage numbers, these uh are accurate up through April, but we're lacking information for May.

Um last month we were only accurate through February, so we've got a little bit more information there.

Um and our airport operations numbers are also there.

And that is all that I have for the manager's report.

I know I I keep asking, but uh any word on our night minimums.

So there were uh we may have talked about this last month, but there was a flight inspection done of the approach and we were very hopeful that it was related.

It was not related.

It was just a regular inspection.

Um and I asked for an update and that's all they gave me.

That it was not related and that it's still in the queue.

Well, so one more year we hope that before the snow flies we have night minimums here.

Yeah.

Okay.

We'll see.

All right, thank you, Corey.

Uh item number J, legal counsel's report.

Uh Steve Takis Legal Counsel, I have nothing to report.

Thank you.

Treasurer's report, item K.

Yep.

Uh, did we bypass the cons consent agenda item number one?

Okay.

Did we make an action on it?

What's that?

Did we make action on the consent agenda to approve the budget amendment?

Yes.

A motion was made, seconded, and it was passed.

A vote was taken.

And I don't have anything to report.

I think we're moving along quite well.

Okay.

Reports from authority members and non-agendized items.

Nothing.

Any additional public comment on agendized or non-agendized items?

Seeing none.

Agenda items for the next uh regular meeting from anybody.

No.

I have a question on Robert's rules of orders.

You know, for years we used to get um a motion and a second on adjournment.

Then we qu we quit doing that.

And on the agenda it says action on adjournment.

So uh I should have hauled the book out with me and read it, but if we're okay then, and there's nothing else, then we are adjourned.