Cell Tower Company Leaving North Adams Airport on Hold
NORTH ADAMS, Mass. — The Airport Commission wants to meet with the city's law firm to discuss its contract with Diamond Communications, which has not acted on its lease agreement in two years.
"I think we need a lawyer here to see what we can do and what we can't do," Airport Commissioner William Hooper said Tuesday.
The airport accepted a bid from Diamond in 2024 to install a cellular tower on the airport campus. Diamond offered a $30,000-a-year bid with a scheduled 2.5 percent annual increase. Terms included a $100,000 bonus and a percentage of the tower's gross revenue if it is fully leased out.
But no work has started, and now, Diamond wants a nine-month extension.
Last month, the commission did not act on a lease extension, which triggered an automatic 90-day due diligence extension built into the contract. That extension expires in about 60 days.
Grant Coordinator Thomas Peterson said he was in contact with city solicitor KP Law, specifically the attorney who worked on the original contract alongside Katherine Eade, a former city employee and interim airport manager. Peterson reported back that Diamond was awaiting funding to start the project.
Peterson said he asked KP Law if Diamond was stalling. The firm indicated that it didn't seem to be the case, pointing to telecommunication project delays nationwide.
"Everywhere they are seeing telecommunication leases being extended because there are funding issues, turnover in personnel, and companies are having a hard time figuring out what is best for them," he said.
Hooper did not flat-out oppose the extension, but felt any extension — especially one nearly a year long — required a good-faith gesture.
"Skin in the game ... yes, we are willing to extend, but because that extension stops us from doing whatever we want with that land, there is a price," he said. "Is it $1, is it $500, is it $1,000? I don't know if that has any merit ... but that is a long time to say we can't do anything with that land ... And there is a price for that."
The commission did not discuss hard numbers, though figures between $5,000 and $10,000 were mentioned. Hooper added that there is still time under the current extension to see how the company reacts before the lease completely expires.
"We can ask. It never hurts to ask," Hooper said. "If they are not willing to do that, then it informs the commission of their intent and whether or not the city should go back out again. I don't want to be unduly hard."
Commissioner Dean Bullett felt a nine-month extension was too long, even with compensation.
Peterson was hesitant to try to reopen a closed contract. He noted that Diamond had already indicated it was not prepared to offer the city additional money.
Two years ago, a competing bid offered substantially less money, but promised payment upfront. Airport user Mike Milazzo suggested contacting that bidder again, but the commission preferred to focus on the active agreement.
Commissioners still had questions about the contract and struggled to navigate its dense legal language. Bullett questioned how the company could turn a profit given its initial proposal, noting his understanding that Diamond could simply walk away without consequence.
"They can string us along until the last second," he said. "And the terms just seem strange."
The commission ended the meeting with more questions than answers and requested a meeting with a KP Law representative. Because the discussion will involve contract terms and potential strategy, it will likely take place in executive session.
Tags: airport commission,
