2026-09-17 - City Council Work Session
Summary
Built from the official minutes.
- Work session 4:39-5:51 PM; six members present (Councilmember OD Harris absent), Mayor Hartke presiding.
- Airport Runway Extension Ordinance: staff presented findings from Airport Community Impact Study and requested Council direction on path forward. Split vote with no consensus: three members (Ellis, Hawkins, staff) favored amending ordinance to remove bond election requirement; two members (Orlando, Poston) wanted options further studied; one member (Harris, absent) wanted all options studied. Existing ordinance remains in place; staff directed to return with options for general (non-bond) election and unchanged option (ordinance amendment without election).
- 307 resident responses at events: 74% support runway extension, 4% oppose, 21% want more information; support rose with more information provided.
- Extension needed due to Arizona heat (hot air thinner, reduces lift, requires longer runway for takeoff) not aircraft growth; current users limited on hottest days (June-August); about four months per year aircraft avoid airport.
- No new land required; pavement and weight limits unchanged (remain 30,000 lb. single-wheel); noise contours stay south of Germann Road; does not bring airline service or change airport role/mission.
- Total project cost $7.143 million: design/engineering $637,000, environmental review $506,000, construction $5.605 million, contingency $395,000. FAA share 91.06%, ADOT 4.47%, City about 4.47% (typically from airport revenues like fuel sales and hangar leases, not property taxes).
- Economic impact: current 569 jobs, $150.2M economic output, $40.9M wages, $1.97M state/local tax revenue; growth scenario with extension 977 jobs, $221.5M economic output, $76.4M wages, $3.54M tax revenue ($181,000 to city).
- Waiting costs: summer fuel sales decline June-July-August; 10+ airport operators annually contact airport, first question is runway length; construction escalation 3.6% per year (~$213,000/year delay).
Airport Runway Extension Ordinance
Positions:
- Councilmember Ellis: favors amending ordinance (Option 2); lives under flight path; expressed that a vote should not be a threat to acting; highlighted cost savings from avoiding bond election.
- Councilmember Orlando: wanted general (non-bond) election option studied; objected to sending issue to staff before all members heard; expressed importance of public trust based on airport's history.
- Councilmember Hawkins: prefers Option 2; airport conducted extensive public outreach; time and cost savings from avoiding bond election, net benefit to airport noise.
- Councilmember Harris: absent; had indicated desire for all options studied.
- Councilmember Poston: wanted every path studied; noted FAA input covers design not whether to build; expressed concerns about positive bias in public opinion gathered at airport events.
- Mayor Hartke: favors Option 2 (amending ordinance); noted public has entrusted Council to make and amend ordinances.
- Vice Mayor Encinas: supports airport as economic driver; acknowledged Chandler changed since 1989 ordinance but underlying trust unchanged; believes additional public buy-in necessary; supports Option 1 (bond election).
Options discussed:
- Option 1: Keep Ordinance 3888, move to bond election. Election cost ~$500,000 (county election costs + informational pamphlet), city construction delay cost $630,000 (from delay alone). Earliest authorization May 18, July 20, or November 2, 2027.
- Option 2: Amend Ordinance 3888 to remove bond-election requirement, keep protections (length cap, footprint limit, aircraft limits). Election cost none. City construction costs baseline. Total additional city cost $319,000. Earliest authorization: seek federal funding immediately after Council action. Four-five years federal review with formal comment periods. Could strengthen protections: runway cap 5,550 feet, accredited public engagement beyond FAA process, no airport growth beyond existing property, aircraft weight/wingspan limits kept if consistent with FAA grant obligations, public hearing and noise analysis before any future runway change, annual noise report to Council, implementation of Council-approved Airport Master Plan.
Outcome: No consensus reached. Existing Ordinance 3888 remains. City Attorney Deryck R. Lavelle noted decisions made based on present members while quorum exists. Staff directed to bring back options for general election (non-bond) ordinance, ordinance removing election requirement, and unchanged option, with costs and timelines for each.