The Kalispell City Council has decided to put closing the city airport to a council vote on July 5.

That was the conclusion of a council work session Thursday night on the South Kalispell Urban Renewal Plan

Council discussion on Thursday circled mainly around closure of Kalispell City Airport, one of five options provided in the plan put together by CTA Architects Engineers.

In addition to dealing with the airport, the plan provides a wish list of proposed South Kalispell projects, such as a dog park.

No option presents an inexpensive route to proceeding with or without the airport. Council members described the option to close the airport as the “elephant in the room” that should be addressed before considering any other projects.

“I think we could sit here and talk about it for 50 years and still be where we are now,” council member Phil Guiffrida said. “Is this airport a duplication of services? In my mind, it absolutely is. There are several airports in the valley.”

The main challenge to closing the facility is the cost of buying out current airport leaseholders.

Closing the airport initially was estimated to cost $2.8 million, a figure later raised to $3.1 million.

According to CTA’s report, closing the airport is $1.7 million less expensive than continuing airport operations as they are, but would require $2.2 million more in up-front costs. The potential upside to closing the airport is the potential for economic development in the area, possibly creating an increased tax base and job pool for South Kalispell.

Council member Kari Gabriel opposed airport closure, citing the uncertainty in the cost of closing out leases. She also opposed making a decision without Mayor Mark Johnson and council member Wayne Saverud.

“I would like to see the exact figures on every single lease and the cost to close it or the cost to keep it open,” Gabriel said. “I can’t vote on something that could be $2 million but could also be $8 million.”

Thursday’s council workshop attracted about 20 people, although only one person spoke during the public comment period. Jeff Zauner, a member of the city’s Urban Renewal Agency that examined the overall plan, warned the council that the cost and timeline of closing the airport might exceed all predictions.

Zauner suggested an alternative to closing the airport: Restructure the leases to zero cost for leaseholders and require them to pay for the maintenance and upkeep of the airport. The same lease structure is used for the golf course in city limits, Zauner said, and that approach could avoid a long drawn-out legal battle for the city.

“You think these guys are going to go quietly?” Zauner asked. “You’re going to be responsible to the taxpayers if you’re over the $3 million threshold.”

“You’re stuck with a tough decision. I’m glad I’m not sitting in those chairs,” said Zauner, a former City Council member.

At the end of the meeting, the council appeared split on the decision to close the airport but agreed to bring it to a vote during the first council meeting in July.

Reporter Seaborn Larson may be reached at 758-4441 or by email at slarson@dailyinterlake.com.