image description
A study group has been digging into the management and finances of the airport to do a cost benefit analysis.

Pittsfield Airport Study Group Questions FAA Compliance With Westwood Leases

By Andy McKeeveriBerkshires Staff
Print Story | Email Story

Ann Dobrowolski and Janis Akerstrom of the city's Office of Community Development presented what they found from 30 years ago on the Westwood Center.
PITTSFIELD, Mass. — The Airport Commission receives only $3,000 a year from the seven businesses at the Westwood Center.
 
In total, there is $20,312 generated in land leases from the park but 85 percent of that goes to the Pittsfield Economic Development Corp., which developed the park in tandem with the city's Office of Community Development.
 
With the money being funneled to an outside agency, officials fear that the airport has been out of compliance with Federal Aviation Administration regulations requiring all revenue from airport property be invested back into the airport.
 
"The two $1 leases, I think may have to go to court because the FAA considers that as subsidizing the local government instead of revenue for the airport," Airport Manager Robert Snuck said.
 
Ann Dobrowolski is a community development specialist in the city's Office of Community Development as well as the clerk for PERC. She recently tracked down what she could of the history of the park. 
 
"It was developed during the 1980s when the Airport Commission declared some of the land on Barker Road as surplus property," Dobrowolski said, adding that 30 acres were carved out. "The city's community development office and PERC were designated as developers of the park." 
 
The city and PERC used federal funds from the Department of Housing and Urban Development's Community Development Block Grant program to build out the road, infrastructure, wetlands work, and plot out seven lots.
 
"The original intention was to develop the property, create building lots, and sell them so companies could build buildings on their own land," she said.
 
But, the state's aeronautics divisions didn't want the land to be sold. The land was purchased by the FAA for the use of the airport and state officials didn't want the city to just sell off the acreage. Instead, state officials crafted legislation to allow for 40-year leases.
 
The 40-year leases were significantly longer than typical but it was enough to allow a bank to feel secure enough to finance a company building on the land. But, the park still wasn't as attractive as envisioned. 
 
"It was challenging at the time, in the mid-1980s. The first two leases were set at a $1 per year rate because they needed to do that as an incentive to get the first tenants in the park," Dobrowloski said.
 
PERC had invested some $450,000 in developing the airport's land. Two appraisals were done determining that each lot was worth $1,000 per acre each year. An agreement was reached to escalate that by the consumer price index.
 
Since then, real estate values have far outpaced the consumer price index. Now, the city has seven lots leased - two of which are for $1 each - and takes in a total of $20,000.
 
"It is a leased commitment and the city can't break it," she said.
 
Because PERC invested the money and time to develop it, 85 percent of those revenues go back into PERC's programs while 15 percent goes to the Airport Commission. Snuck, however, says the FAA and the state never signed off on those leases. 
 
"The FAA would never approve a lease for $1 a year," Snuck said.
 
The parcels were bought by the FAA in 1971 and the FAA requires all revenues from airport property be used for either airport operations or capital expenses. Snuck said he did find a letter from the agency warning city officials to make sure all leases are approved by the various agencies or else future funding could be in jeopardy.
 
"There is no known FAA document that says this is OK, it leads me the believe there were questions," Airport Commission Chairman Chris Pedersen said.
 
Pedersen said he's read an array of documents keeping the various agencies in the loop about the progress. But, "all of that comes to an agreement that says we will submit to the FAA and then everything stops. I don't know what happens. The paperwork may be there and I'm hoping it is but it creates a question if it isn't." 
 
While the leases may seem to be under today's market value, former Ward 5 Councilor Jonathan Lothrop said the buildings at the Westwood Center generate $160,000 worth of taxes every year. While the city owns the land, the businesses own the buildings and pay property taxes on those and personal property tax — to the tunes of $129,522 for property tax and $30,568 for personal property tax.
 
"The airport is receiving more money from the city than it is generating," Lothrop said of the Westwood Center. "The money is the value of the property that is on those parcels and the personal property taxes."
 
But, of the total money generated from Westwood, the Airport Commission directly sees only a fraction of the income. The rest is sent to the city's general fund through taxes or PERC through the agreement.
 
Pedersen has no problems with the tax income going to city coffers instead of being directly given to the airport. But, he says he is worried that the FAA will find these leases and cut off or reduce funding for the airport. 

Airport Manager Robert Snuck is worried about the city's compliance with FAA regulations.

The airport runs on a deficit every year and the city allocates money in the budget to offset the overruns.  

Pedersen says his long-term goal is to make the airport self-sufficient so it doesn't need supplemental help from the city every year.

Lothrop said the airport's expenses are $191,717 per year.

The revenue is only $93,414 per year. This gives a deficit of $98,303.

However, the city sees revenues from the airport through property and personal property taxes. Between both Westwood and the airport, the city brings in $189,166 per year.
 
Added to the annual airport revenue, the Pittsfield Municipal Airport is responsible for $282,580 in revenues.
 
In 2010, 2011, and twice in 2014 debt was taken out for capital projects. Lothrop said the "high water mark" in annual payments to debt comes in 2017 with a bill of $175,662. That added to the expenses brings the total up to $367,380.
 
In all, it costs the city $84,800 a year to run the airport. 
 
"The only money I can find not captured here is the money for PERC," Lothrop said.
 
A recent Massachusetts Department of Transportation economic impact study shows the airport generates more than $30 million in economic activity in the region.
 
Ward 4 Councilor Christopher Connell, who was one of three councilors to call for a study group, says the revenues have stayed the same for the last five years while expenses have gone up. The annual expenses are up since 2011 by nearly $20,000 from $172,249 to $191,717. With more projects on the way, he expects to be paying more for debt as well.
 
"You have to build revenue," Connell said.
 
He said the airport is regional in nature and he is looking at ways to generate a user fee to help offset the annual cost the city is incurring.
 
The study commission has already taken a look at the various fees and gotten an overview of the operation. In the end, the group is only authorized to make recommendations to Mayor Linda Tyer about the management of the airport. 

Tags: FAA,   leasing,   PERC,   pittsfield airport,   

If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

Lanesborough Looks to the Future of Zoning Bylaws

By Breanna SteeleiBerkshires Staff

LANESBOROUGH, Mass. — The Planning Board is reviewing the town's zoning bylaws with an eye to amending zones to align with planning documents and projects. 

Members started at last week's meeting to at priority zoning projects that align with the Open Space and Recreation Plan and the Master Plan that was adopted last year. Earlier in the meeting, the board accepted the Berkshire Regional Planning Commission's draft of the OSRP, which the Select Board accepted late last month.

Town planner Andrew Groff informed the board of upcoming projects that will need to be looked at for zoning purposes to try and stay ahead of the bylaws that aligned in both the OSRP and Master Plan.

"Principally, would be going back and thinking about this idea of a mixed-use zoning district for the northern part of town that's responsive to the growth of outdoor recreation as it is really an industry. So you've got Shaker Ridge, you've got the folks at Donnybrook that proposes a glamping resort, Ramble Wild, and Brodie Mountain just over the town line in New Ashford with some new ownership and expanded interest in some development there, so that's one item that's called for in both."

Groff also explained they need to look into agriculture zones to help local farmers 

"Seeing if we can't do something to better support our farms because we have a couple great little farm clusters in Lanesborough. You know, zoning for agriculture is pretty expansive in Massachusetts. The exemption for agriculture is pretty wise, but we want to take a closer look and talk to some of our farmers and figure out there's some tweaks we can do that would make their lives easier."

He also brought up how they can help fix the zoning bylaws around the lake that are nonconforming and want to look into grant funding to help.

"Work that's going to be done to further protect Pontoosuc Lake, and we have a lot in our master plan regarding the zoning issues on Pontoosuc from the issue that you had mentioned to me, bringing back the citizens who were concerned about building heights down there, but you know, more fundamentally identified in the master plan is the problems with how everything is basically nonconforming. The zoning doesn't conform to what the actual built environment is. That's something we probably want to look into talking with folks in the community planning office," he said.

Groff mentioned there is a ballot question that, if it passes, would mean changing zoning regarding public water and sewer, and affect properties near the lake. 

"There is going to be on the ballot in November a question that will essentially require any community in Massachusetts that has built an environment that's on public water/sewer, you're going to have to reduce your lot sizes to 5,000 square feet. So I feel like if that passes, that has massive implications for that part of town. So, just another one to put out there, but maybe we want to wait to really tackle that with some grant funding once we know what the Legislature's done."

Chair Leanne Yinger said she lives in that area and it already seems very congested, meaning that the passage of the ballot question could have big implications.

She also mentioned another implication for the health of the lake she would like to see happen.

"I would like to see us ban pesticides and people treating their lawns," she said. "Part of the problem of the health of the lake is that when I say that out loud, and I'm saying it out loud to anybody who will listen to me, it is not a popular thing to say. But it is killing the lake."

Yinger said she would like to clarify who governs the sewer system around Pontoosuc Lake, noting the new owner of a friend's house needed to purchase access to the sewer from a private party. Groff said he couldn't remember if it is water district or town, but that there is something "funky" about the governance over there.

"I need to understand what that looks like, because the way it came down was interesting. The line comes in from Pittsfield, but there are people claiming that they have rights to it because they bought into it originally. I just want to understand what that's like and who's saying you're in charge with it, because it seems to me that that's a town-managed situation," Yinger said.

View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories