Archived Story

Facts must overcome plans, ideas

Published 9:18am Friday, June 21, 2013

When it comes to plotting a course for the future, facts must always drive decisions and predetermined plans of action can lead to dangerous pitfalls.

If the county is not careful that may be the case with the push to convert the Lawrence County Airpark in Chesapeake into a commercial or retail development.

The Tribune has long supported the county commissioners’ efforts to consider every option for economic development of this property and others.

As this situation has continued it seems that commission president Bill Pratt remains too focused on what he had hoped to do instead of acknowledging the reality of the situation.

The recent response from the FAA seemed fairly clear when it comes to these plans, essentially saying that not only would the county be liable for the nearly $1 million it received in grant funding, but also that no proceeds from the sale of the airport could ever go back to the county.

Couple that with the fact that it would be almost impossible to develop a new airport in the county if this one closed — leaving Lawrence as the only one of 88 counties in Ohio without at least a shared airport — and the reality is this project should likely be grounded.

It was an idea worth pursuing but, based on the current information, it simply does not look to be possible.

And that’s OK.

Now it’s time to move on to other things. If the commissioners and Pratt want to lead the way on economic development, why not get involved with promoting the former Kmart site?

Since most of the infrastructure is already in place it would likely be cheaper to develop anyway and the center has a better location on U.S. 52.

Nothing is wrong with considering all options, but our leaders must make sure they don’t make up their minds in advance because that often leads to poor decisions.


The Tribune believes it is possible for people with a variety of points of view to discuss issues in a civil manner and will remove comments that, in our opinion, foster incivility. We want to encourage an open exchange of information and ideas. Responsibility for what is posted or contributed to this site is the sole responsibility of each user. By contributing to this website, you agree not to post any defamatory, abusive, harassing, obscene, sexual, threatening or illegal material, or any other material that infringes on the ability of others to enjoy this site, or that infringes on the rights of others. Any user who feels that a contribution to this website is a violation of these terms of use is encouraged to email, or click the "report comment" link that is on all comments. We reserve the right to remove messages that violate these terms of use and we will make every effort to do so — within a reasonable time frame — if we determine that removal is necessary.

  • mikehaney

    Agree with article!
    Also, liked your comment Poor Richard.

    (Report comment)

  • Poor Richard

    Good opinion! and I agree with the IT, I think that Commissioner Pratt was trying to do the right thing but with little to no research. It seems the commissioner did realize how little the airport is used for business ventures, learned about the FAA funding, and what local citizens think of the airport so it was not a waste of time to go thru the decision making process.

    To remain an airport takes us back to the ‘land taking’ for expansion. Maybe the commissioners should talk to the FAA about this situation since that agency created the need, maybe they could make suggestions on a resolution. It might not be a bad idea either to talk to the attorney general or the governors minions since the governor has a lot of things in place to further economic development. I find it very hard to believe there isn’t some legal loophole somewhere the county can jump thru.

    Conducting a economic feasibility study for the airport might be a good use of the $100,000.

    (Report comment)

Editor's Picks