HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-03-05-HFAC-rpt.pdf Iv :
NT.
-2.
3/s/80
As Chairman of the Hanscom Field Advisory Committee I have been asked to
speak for the Boards of Selectmen of the Towns of Bedford, Concord, Lexington and
Lincoln who have each approved the form of the substitute bill which you have before
you.
In 1975 Governor Sargent appointed a Task Force of citizens from these four
communities to work with Massport in developing a Master Plan for Hanscom Field. This
plan took the form of a series of Oicy statements which incorporate community
expectations as well as Massport needs for future operation and development at the
field. The Master Plan pledged continued community input to decisions at Hanscom
through the establishment of an advisory group, appointed by the Towns of Bedford,
Concord, Lexington and Lincoln. This group has been working with Massport on
implementation of the Master Plan for the past two years.
The purpose of the bill before you is to give legal status to this informal
arrangement. We feel such legal status is both necessary and appropriate. All
other publicly helAgeneral aviation airports in the Commonwealth are controlled by
the community in which they are sited, and, therefore, reflect the goals of those
communities. We are not asking for such full control . Rather we ask you, through
passage of this bill , to create a permanent commission of community interests (not
subject to termination by policy changes at Massport) which would work with Massport
on implementation of the 1978 Master Plan and which would also assure that the
guaranteesprovided in that Plan could not be altered without full public debate
and consent of the communities.
The bill as approved by the Selectmen is in three parts:
1.) A preamble which sets forth in more detail the reasons for creating
such a commission;
2. ) Section I - which deals with the composition of the Commission and
the appointing powers. Looking for balance and depth on the commission, there are
seats for designees of the four towns, citizen groups concerned with aviationand
similar areawide groups, and other affected towns as well as users and businesses at
Hanscom. The group would have a membership of between 11-16 members. Concord has
suggested that an Executive Committee mechanism might be necessary for a group of
this size. Approval of at least a majority of the four Boards would be necessary
to ratify an appointment.
w a..,
3.) Section II deals with the responsibilities of the Commission. In
addition to the current duties of the Advisory Committee, i.e. , to review and react
to decisions outlined in the Master Plan and to be an information conduit between
Massport and the communities, we would add approval power over proposed Massport
projects not covered by policies in the Master Plan or over any changes or additions
to the Master Plan. Concord has suggested that the language of Item 3 be clarified
and thus read, "to grant or deny approval " The reasoning for this additional
responsibility is that the Master Plan now reflects an agreement made between
Massport and the communities on the operation and future of Hanscom Field. Any
changes or additions to such an agreement should go through the same process of
public scrutiny and joint decision making.
The four towns in which Hanscom Field is situated fully understand its
importance as a regional transportation facility. They have worked responsibly
with Massport in the past five years to develop a working plan for the airport
which allows for appropriate development without undue impact to these historic
communities -- which are also an asset to the Commonwealth.
We ask you to codify the working arrangement we have developed to maintain
the airport and the communities to the benefit of the Commonwealth.