Controversy over potential expansion at the Ravalli County Airport is decades old. Things appeared to be moving forward in January of 2016 when the Ravalli County Commissioners approved an Environmental Assessment that presented a preferred option for construction of a 5,200 foot long, 75 foot wide runway extending 1,550 feet further to the north of the existing runway and 400 feet to the east.
That process was put on hold, however, when the citizen’s group, Informing Citizens About Airport Runway Extension (ICAARE) filed a lawsuit challenging the decision. During that public process ICAARE had advocated for a scaled down option with a shorter runway extension and argued that the longer runway proposal was not needed or wanted by the community. They maintain the decision process was flawed. That litigation is currently under appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals 9th Circuit. The County Commissioners and ICAARE are currently involved in non-binding mediation efforts in relation to the case.
In the meantime, a major issue was raised mid-summer that threatens to stymie the approved runway extension plan. The approved plan and its 5,200-foot runway requires the purchase of about 126 acres of land north of the airport owned by Harold Mildenberger.
Mildenberger notified the County Commissioners in a letter dated May 24, 2017 but marked received by the county on July 12, 2017, stating, “In an effort to keep the heritage of the historic Stock Farm intact, I have made a final decision not to sell the land necessary for the large expansion of the airport.”
He indicated that he was in favor of runway extension, but not in the configuration being proposed.
“This decision is final and is in no way a negotiating tactic,” he wrote. “The land is not for sale, period. Please do not approve any pre-acquisition activities e.g. surveyors, appraisers, etc. that would require access to my property. We will not allow appraisers or other such personnel on the property.”
This letter was followed up by another a few months later, from both Harold and Brad Mildenberger, making an offer of an alternative solution to the approved airport extension plan.
In the letter dated October 19, 2017, the men state that they have been working on “an acceptable solution that could be a win win for the aviators and the people of this county with a less invasive intrusion into the historic Stock Farm.”
The Mildenbergers propose a runway length of 4,500 to 4,600 feet in length located 45 to 90 feet east of the existing runway. The new runway would be extended northward into property owned by the Mildenbergers. They agreed to grant an aviation easement to the north up to 400 feet additional to the current easement, but not to exceed the Stock Farm Road and permission to cut cottonwood trees and remove stumps from the Stock Farm Road as needed.
“Time is of the essence,” they wrote. “This offer is revocable in whole after 180 days from October 20, 2017 unless a reasonable defined agreement has been reached. As an additional consideration to help all involved, we are willing to donate the land portion only of eight acres that we believe to have a value of plus or minus $160,000 to the county to put towards the matching funds and perpetuate this forward with all the above stipulations starting with number one.”
“Once again,” the letter concludes, “we are in favor of a safer expanded airport, just not in the present approved configuration.”
The Ravalli County Commissioners took no action in response to the proposal. But an agenda item was recently posted for a short time before being removed indicating a discussion would be held concerning potential condemnation proceedings to acquire the 126 acres of land needed for the approved runway extension plans.
When contacted by the Bitterroot Star about the agenda item, Commission Chairman Greg Chilcott said that, after further discussion with legal counsel and other commissioners, the consensus emerged to postpone any discussions of the issue. He said at this time they were in a holding pattern on the issue as mediation continues with ICAARE over their pending litigation.