A transfer of management is coming to the Merritt airport, but it likely won’t take off without a fight.

After its application to renew the hangar land premise lease was denied by council earlier this year, the Merritt Flying Club is now having its 25-year lease of the airport terminal building terminated as well. 

City of Merritt chief administrative officer Allan Chabot told the Herald the city has filed an application to the Supreme Court for an order for possession of the hangar building at the airport.

Merritt Flying Club president Tom Fox said the club will not hand over possession of the hangar building without compensation.

City of Merritt financial services manager Ken Ostraat said the city is not obligated to compensate the club for the building as it isn’t a provision of the now-expired lease.

The City of Merritt is taking over operations of the airport from the Merritt Flying Club after a report submitted to council back in May claimed the non-profit group owed the city about $42,000 in unpaid fees and utilities.

Council decided not to renew the flying club’s hangar land premise lease, on which the club’s hangar building resides.

In a closed meeting, city staff was then directed by council to terminate the 25-year lease the flying club has for the airport terminal building, Chabot told the Herald.

Ostraat said the flying club defaulted on the terminal building lease when they did not pay the city for the utilities the club is said to owe.

Fox said his club does not owe the city money, and the city’s claims of unpaid utility bills on the part of the club are false.

Chabot said the flying club will be required to vacate the terminal building by the end of this month, and the city will assume control of it November 1.

Chabot told the Herald it’s the city’s expectation the club will vacate the building and no longer have any rights to use it, but that doesn’t preclude the city from allowing the club to use the facility on an intermittent basis in the future.

Fox said the club has a lawyer involved in this dispute, and isn’t sure if they will vacate the terminal building at the end of the month as they still have questions concerning their club room in that building.

Since the report came out in the spring, the amount of money the flying club owes the city has been adjusted. Where the initial report stated the club owed the city about $16,400 in unpaid utilities and fees for its terminal building premise lease, the final number will be about $8,000.

Chabot said the club was credited $135 per month, which a previous city council had agreed to pay them as a maintenance assistance cost. That totalled $2,430 for an 18-month period. The amount owed in utility fees was also adjusted after Chabot corrected discrepancies surrounding water and sewer bills.

The utility bills the club owes for the terminal building now are comprised primarily from garbage services, Chabot said.

As for monies owed to the city for the hangar building, which totalled a little more than $25,500 in the report, Chabot said those figures are believed to be accurate, but the city isn’t actively seeking out those bills. He said the city is focused on taking possession of the hangar building.

The city hasn’t made any plans for a new manager of the airport yet, Chabot said.

The flying club still has the company Graham Helicopters operating out of the hangar building, which itself was in contravention of the expired hangar land premise lease, the city says.

However, no operations manual exists for the airport nor does any operational agreement.

Historically, city council has managed the airport through committees and by having its chief administrative officer deal directly with the Merritt Flying Club.

Various incarnations of committees made a “loose” arrangement regarding who was responsible for the operation of the airport, but no formal, written agreement has ever been in place with the flying club, City of Merritt public works manager Shawn Boven said.

Fox said the flying club has been managing the airport for free for decades, which has probably saved taxpayers “hundreds of thousands of dollars in expenses” over the years as opposed to having civic employees manage the airport.