Riverton City Council debates potential storage fee for county emergency management medical supply trailers

(Riverton, WY) – The Riverton City Council is weighing whether to charge the Fremont County Emergency Management Agency a fee to store three mass incident response medical supply trailers within the the secured perimeter at Central Wyoming Regional Airport. 

The 10-foot, single-axle trailers are currently being stored at the Fremont County maintenance shop on Airport Road, in a “pretty poor location” that is often blocked by other vehicles, Riverton Public Works Director Brendan Thoman explained during a council meeting Tuesday.

The current location can also be “snowed in,” Thoman and Airport Manager Bruce Ransom said in a staff memo, and it’s “not well known in order to access in an immediate need.”

“FCEMA would like an accessible as well as secure location to park (the) trailers,” the memo states. “For accessibility and proper location, they would like to house them closer to (the) airport.”

The airport offers a “secure” storage area that is “centrally located” and “accessible to ground as well as air operations,” the memo notes. 

It’s also already “cleared of snow throughout the winter to keep these trailers accessible, (so) they could be hooked onto at any point,” Thoman said. 

“No financial cost would be associated with this MOU,” the staff memo states. “The city would need to do nothing further, other than grant the use of the airport premises for this.”

Fee?

According to the agreement the council considered this week, the trailers would be stored at the airport “at no financial cost to Fremont County Emergency Management” – a prospect Councilmember Karen Johnson questioned.

“(It’s) not that I’m opposed to having this stuff readily available – but I do start to wonder when we are going to start charging at the airport, for anything,” she said, pointing out that customer parking is currently free at CWRA, and terminal advertising fees are “minimal.” 

“I just get frustrated with everything being done as a courtesy up there, and then we have no money to continue commercial air service,” Johnson said. “If we want to keep commercial air service here, then we need to start looking at charging. … We have to rethink our generosity in everything that we do. (So) I think that we need to consider a fee to park that stuff – especially when the county yard is less than a quarter mile down the road.”

She made a motion to charge FCEMA $19 per square foot annually for use of a 200 square foot pad at the airport – a fee that would amount to $3,800 per year.

That total represents “less than half of a percent of the airport budget,” Councilmember Eric Carr pointed out, commenting that “there’s a huge difference between fiscal responsibility and pettiness.”

“I don’t disagree (that) we need to look at all sources of revenue for the airport,” Carr said. “But let’s look at the studies that have been done through the Airport Board. They consciously think about how (revenues) impact future funding.”

He was referring to earlier comments from City Administrator Kyle Butterfield, who explained that, based on federal guidelines, “if you utilize certain aspects of your airport to generate revenue, you cannot receive federal grant dollars to support (them).”

For example, Butterfield said, the city would not have been eligible for the “significant” federal grant it recently received to help refurbish the airport parking lot if usage fees had been in place there.

However, other federal grants require the airport to “try to be as self-sustaining as possible,” Butterfield said, noting that the city currently generates roughly $300,000 a year from lease fees, landing fees and other fees charged at the facility.

“That still doesn’t cover the entirety of airport operations,” Butterfield noted. “So I believe it is valuable to look at areas where we can increase revenue – and you have an Airport Board that would be, I think, willing to look at that and work with you as a council.”

Tabled

After hearing the feedback from staff and other council members, Johnson decided to rescind her proposal to charge FCEMA a storage fee.

Instead, she made a motion to table the agreement with FCEMA “until we get some additional information.”

“If (the FCEMA fee) were to hinder federal funding, I understand taking that back,” she explained. “(But) I don’t care if it’s $5 or $5,000 – when it comes to spending other people’s money, we should look at everything. …

“I don’t find that fiscal pettiness. I find that as really looking into how we can fund things appropriately.”

The motion to table passed 4-3, with Mayor Tim Hancock breaking the tie by voting “ay” along with Johnson and Councilmembers Karla Borders and Rebecca Pierson-Lewis. 

“I want to look at this a little bit more and see if it’s feasible or makes sense to charge,” Hancock said. “So I will vote ‘ay’ to table this … until our next meeting. And then we’ll discuss (it) more.”

Carr and Councilmembers Mike Bailey and Kyle Larson voted against the motion to table.

Earlier, Bailey expressed his opinion that the council should approve the agreement with FCEMA and then direct the Airport Board to review “other revenue opportunities.”

Larson said he supported the agreement as presented because “this is a specific situation” that “benefits” the community by ensuring that the mass incident response trailers are accessible in case of emergency.

Butterfield noted that, if the council does modify the proposed agreement, it will go back to FCEMA for review, and the agency will have the opportunity to accept or reject the changes.

They could also come back with a counteroffer, Hancock said.