>> BALDWIN COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
The Baldwin County Board of Commissioners finally took action Tuesday night on the airport issue that has been lingering for weeks.
The project that has dominated the discussion and led to two delays in votes was the proposed construction of two hangers at the Baldwin County Regional Airport. The hangers would have been constructed on what is referred to as the east apron, directly across Lakeshore Circle from a residential neighborhood.
Twice the commissioners tabled voting on the annual update of the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) due to the controversy that has arisen when residents learned of the county’s plans. Some commissioners at the last two meetings had given the impression they might vote in favor of removing that project from the CIP.
Tuesday night’s vote showed that four commissioners were willing to reverse the direction the county had been taking as well as forfeit reimbursement of close to $100,000 for work already done. Board members Sammy Hall, Johnny Westmoreland, Kendrick Butts, and Emily Davis voted to take the east apron project out of the CIP, effectively killing it for the foreseeable future. Ironically, Henry Craig, in whose district the airport is located, was the lone commissioner willing to go forward with the project.
County Manager Carlos Tobar began discussion on the agenda item with a brief report. He gave commissioners two CIP options, one with the east apron project and the other without. Airport Advisory Committee Chairman Jim Wolfgang reported that the volunteer committee stood by its previous recommendation to proceed with the east apron project.
Seven nearby residents then addressed the commissioners, and Rich Bilz took issue with Wolfgang’s statements.
He read the minutes from another meeting of the advisory committee, in April of 2022.
“The airport advisory committee recommends that the county consider the lower ramp concept as the most feasible path for future hanger expansion.’ In their own words,” he said. “They had a meeting. What has changed since then? Why is the east apron more feasible?”
Bilz answered his own questions, asserting the belief that “it was cheap, it was the fastest, and we had someone who wanted It badly”.
Following the comments from the residents, Hall wasted no time.
“I’d like to make a motion that we approve option two, which does not include the east apron, and that no further action will be taken on the east apron during this CIP.” Westmoreland seconded the motion.
Craig spoke in opposition to that motion and talked about how much he had heard of the importance of economic development. He added that decisions of the Board of Commissioners make some people happy, some mad. He also noted that the group had wanted an environmental assessment. That assessment was now part of the plan, Craig said.
“You got what you wanted; I’m concerned now that as we seek this, there’s potential for this same group, or a future group to go against the lower (ramp) project. In that case,” he asserted, “the county loses a great opportunity for development.”
Craig referred to the discussion about the increased presence of jets.
“There’s not going to be a bunch of jets,” he said. “In fact, the jets are coming anyway. Because whether you approve the hanger or not, there’s going to be that same jet somewhere on the airport. And, to imagine there’s going to be this huge number of jets because there’s this one hanger on the east end, or another hanger on the west end, or another hanger on the lower ramp is all conjecture. It’s emotion rather than fact.”
Hall responded quickly. “I believe I was elected by the people to control government, not the other way around,” he said. “So, I’m not willing to run over people because off something that’s supposedly economic development. That one little piece of property out there where that hanger possibly would be built is not going to change economic development.’
Westmoreland concurred with Hall.
“We’ve had the community come before us. We’ve heard you. We’ve listened. We haven’t heard anybody else,” said Westmoreland.
Following that vote, Hall made a motion for a plan to be developed to replace the trees that were cut on the property line of the airport abutting Lakeshore Circle, and that it be done by the end of the year. The board unanimously approved that action.
Following the Oct. 17 meeting when the CIP vote was tabled for the second time, contact was made with a Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) representative. He was asked three questions, and Tobar read those questions and answers at the outset Tuesday night.
One was whether the county would be reimbursed for site work on the east apron if that project was removed from the CIP.
“No,” a GDOT official wrote. ”However, reimbursement would be eligible when the department reviews and provides signature approval of an environmental document.”
Baldwin County’s removal of the project from the CIP assures that no such document will be submitted for approval.