Authority members reviewed a draft memorandum of understanding (MOU) regarding a federal VOR facility adjacent to the airport and discussed implications for future runway work.

The board was presented with an MOU that the staff described as favoring federal control of the VOR and placing maintenance responsibilities with the federal government, while leaving certain routine maintenance (for example, grounds upkeep) to local parties. Members expressed concern that the memorandum language was one‑sided and asked counsel to review wording before finalizing any document.

Why it matters: the airport's long‑term layout, including the feasibility of a second runway, can be constrained by federally owned navigation aids. Board members said that if the authority decided to pursue a second runway, they would likely bear costs to relocate obstructions or otherwise mitigate conflicts if the FAA does not fund the project.

Key points from discussion
- Staff and members said the FAA has signaled it would not provide funding for a proposed runway of the scale the authority has in mind; in that case the authority would effectively be building a runway that the FAA would not fund.
- The VOR is a federal facility and, as staff noted, the FAA has been decommissioning some VORs over time; speakers cited an example of a VOR removed from nearby property more than a decade earlier that nevertheless remains in place in some adjacent locations. Board members asked whether the authority should proactively notify FAA about the airport's layout plans so those plans are reviewed during FAA's airport layout plan process.
- Staff said the airport layout plan currently under review shows the proposed additional runway and that the FAA facilities review during that process should identify conflicts and mitigation steps; board members asked staff to set up a virtual meeting with the airport consultant and FAA representatives when FAA offices resume regular staffing.

Outcome
No formal vote was taken; board members directed staff to contact FAA, arrange a consultative meeting with the airport consultant and the planner, and request revisions to MOU language if necessary to reflect the authority's planning intent.

Ending
The authority asked counsel to review the MOU language for balance and asked staff to pursue an early conversation with FAA and the airport consultant to clarify how the VOR and the airport layout plan will be reconciled during FAA's review process.