Public-Private partnerships are an opportunity to enhance investment in airports. Many airports, particularly those in rural areas, are struggling to stay alive. For example, since 2005 Washington State has lost three public use airports because of financial issues. Other public use airports in the State are threatened by development and other issues, including the cost of maintaining the facility. Airparks are a special case of public-private partnership arrangements. You might broaden the debate in a very productive manner by looking at other examples of successful public-private partnerships that have brought great benefit to the community. For example, Federal highways are a recognized economic engine that has brought great wealth to all communities and all States in the US. Public money invested in freeways and highways, with opportunities for access to private lands is the keystone of economic success. How are airports different? Why is it “OK” for a US highway to provide access to a private residential development, but not an airport? Why is public investment in this situation considered “good”, but with an airport “bad”?

An aspect of TTF operations that is being colored by the residential airpark debate is that of industrial or business development association with private holdings adjacent to publicly owned airports. Clearly there is great potential for private investors to assist with developing and maintaining public use airports. As pointed out on your website, considerations for security, equitable distribution of costs and benefits, and other factors are all easily addressed.
John Townsley