I see that the airport has been given approval to borrow 7 million to overhaul the airport. Money will go towards redoing the terminal, repaving the access road and completely replacing the runway. I wonder what that means for travellers, especially the work on the runway.
work on the runway normally occurs during the slack time when there are no flights or late at night
Or overnight … is what they told me happened last time there was runway work & I had to fly out.
The work on the runway and terminal will mean a couple of things for air travelers and City taxpayers:
- The City will continue to have a functioning airport. When the tarmac falls apart, planes quit landing at your airport. If this happened, Prince Rupert would be less desirable for people to move to and fewer businesses would locate here.
- Air travelers will not have to drive to Terrace to catch a flight. Now that we have our own WalMart, the incentive to drive to Terrace during the ‘good’ months has probably lessened.
- City taxpayer will have to continue to partially subsidize the Airport Ferry (perhaps someday passenger levels will return to the levels of the glory days).
- Air travelers can expect a pretty good hike in the local airport fee because the airport society will need to raise fees in order to pay for the improvements.
Improvements to the airport will be great for the Prince Rupert economy. Looking forward to seeing the improvements next year when I visit.
Funding for the airport is a sensible decision, but it is hard to understand why the council felt it necessary to discuss and vote on the issue in secrecy prior to the public meeting where the decision was ratified.
According to a recent op-ed It became apparent to Black Press reporter Shaun Thomas that the funding had already been approved at the earlier closed meeting although the airport was not on the agenda for that meeting < thenorthernview.com/opinion/221329881.html >.
The council can discuss certain topics in closed meetings but they have to pass a resolution citing authority under the Community Charter for doing so < bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws … #section90 >. Whether the public has been properly excluded from a meeting or not is the difference between a closed meeting and a secret meeting. It is at least questionable whether loan funding for airport improvements can be discussed in a closed meeting.
An announcement was made that the city manager had been authorized to sign an agreement with the airport, although the bylaw authorizing the funding on which the agreement is premised had not been passed. Airport representatives had to be reminded that a valid bylaw had not been passed. Bylaws are not valid under the Community Charter unless passed in public < bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws … #section89 >.
Since the funding involves loan funding to the City, elector approval may be required. < thenorthernview.com/news/221330461.html >. That would seem to provide even more reason for a full discussion in public, rather than literally going through the motions to ratify a decision that had already been made without the public being present.
Avoiding public scrutiny and discussion, even when the public is supportive (probably overwhelmingly in this instance), seems to be such a deeply ingrained habit with this council.
Does the tax payer/traveller really want to be on the hook for these improvements?..ypr has some of the highest landing fees in BC. And what for?..a ferry ride to the tune of about $800k per year…a shitty decripted bus ride…the possibility of spending 6.5hrs on the above modes of transport and sitting next to over priced vending machines that only take old coinage, then to be told that the flight is cancelled and call some number to rebook your flight…?
do we need a modern earthquake proof facility that has limited use?..where are big business…first nations groups that believe in the airport for prosperity at on this subject?
personally i think the operation of an airport on a secluded island is cost prohibitve…compared to the alternatives…
the airport ferry was launched in 1970 or 73…whats the repacement cost?..again prohibitive…
there was talk years ago of a bridge, and i used to think that was malarky…now i wish 25yrs later that it would of happened…more housing and development on digby/metlakatla…
just my two cents…for what they are worth.