While allowing for the possibility of a viable alternate plan emerging, the Marion City Council voted unanimously Thursday, March 6 to initiate the process of closing the sole runway at the Marion Municipal Airport – which would lead to the closure of the airport itself.
The city had issued a request for proposals to purchase the runway on Feb. 7, with a minimum purchase price of $875,000 and a deadline of March 3, but the deadline passed with no proposals being submitted, city manager Ryan Waller said.
The plan calls for the runway to be closed by June 30, marking the latest step in a years-long process of evaluating the city’s relationship with the airport.
PREVIOUS COVERAGE (story continues below):
City of Marion seeks to sell runway at Marion Municipal Airport
Several community members spoke passionately against the council’s plans to close the runway, noting the airport’s importance as a community asset and a primary resource for private pilots and flight students. The airport is currently used frequently for flight training and agricultural spraying operations, among other uses.
The decision comes after an extensive review process that began in November 2021, when city officials met with officials from LuxAir Aviation to negotiate new lease terms for the airport and address long-term cost concerns.
The Marion airport is unique in Iowa in that it’s owned as part of a public-private partnership. LuxAir, a private firm, purchased most of the airport property in June 2015 and is responsible for daily fixed base operator (FBO) operations, but the city purchased the airport’s runway and FBO building for $1.5 million.
The council approved a new lease agreement with LuxAir in April 2022, providing for annual payments, creating safety inspection requirements, and setting a one-year process for an Airport Visioning Team (AVT) to research a potential operating structure for the city’s future involvement in the airport.
The visioning team, comprised of residents, pilots, members of the Marion Municipal Airport Committee, and two council members, met eight times and submitted their findings to the full council, indicating that an operating budget for the airport would be “break even at best” and provided analysis of the financial impact of future runway ownership on Marion taxpayers, Mr. Waller said, noting that the airport does not qualify for federal funding due to its proximity to the Eastern Iowa Airport in Cedar Rapids.
“The only funding outside of taxpayer Marion taxpayer dollars could be a competitive grant program run through the state of Iowa,” Mr. Waller said. “Its annual appropriation is about $3 million, but that’s competitive for all airports across the state.”
The committee also conducted surveys with residents and business leaders to gauge the airport’s community importance as compared with other priorities.
“The results of that were no clear, compelling need for business use of the airport,” Mr. Waller said.
The council reached a consensus in February 2024 to exit the airport’s runway ownership, and at that time, LuxAir officials said they would be interested in purchasing the runway from the city. LuxAir and city officials met eight times to discuss options, but the city rejected two proposals from LuxAir – one for the city to donate the runway to LuxAir, the other for the city to continue to assume financial risk and liability for the airport’s operations – and provided “a few counter-offers.”
“To date, the city has spent over $4.5 million, but again, does not have a sustainable revenue stream to offset those costs and to continue operations,” Mr. Waller said.
Though the RFP’s March 3 deadline passed with no proposals, Mr. Waller noted that an offer was received by email early March 6, just hours before the council meeting. “Given the timing, it has not been reviewed to determine if it would meet the requirements of the RFP,” Mr. Waller said.
Before the council’s vote, council members stressed that if new, viable options emerge before the closure date, the decision to close the runway could be revisited.
“Even if we initiate these procedures, there’s a number of steps involved,” said council member Steve Jensen, who served on the airport visioning team. “And personally, I feel that if we were to receive a viable proposal, that we still have an opportunity to maybe make some changes in either the timeline and/or what we do with the runway.”
Responding to some residents’ concerns that the process was pursued hastily and without adequate community input, council member Randy Strnad said all AVT meetings on the subject over the past year have been public, with published minutes available.
“When a runway is owned by a municipality, we are under different governances and laws that we must maintain, uphold, and we have to bring into the municipality’s processes,” he said. “The approach, the landing zones, all of those things are dealt with differently underneath the ownership of a municipality. So the conversations have always been, what can we do to keep the airport open? Unfortunately, we’ve gotten to the point where we as a city can no longer keep the runway.”
Council member Sara Mentzer said the city has spent nearly four years debating the airport’s future, involving more discussion than any other single city issue.
“It was never looked at as ‘we need to close this,’” she said. “It has been three and a half years of trying to find a way to keep it open, trying to find solutions and partners. It’s a conundrum of a setup because of the structure of it. It is not to be found anywhere else. It’s not private. It’s not public. We’re next to a large airport which keeps us from federal grants. We understand the dedicated folks who are utilizing the airport and the potential for it. We can see it. The problem is, things are just not lining up on how they can work, and we keep trying to find a way to make them work … it has never been our intention that we just wanted to close it. It’s not a set piece, and the conversation is still open if things come forward.”
