Naples airport, city remain at impasse over control

The Naples City Council and Naples Airport Authority remained at an impasse after their second joint meeting earlier this month, making litigation increasingly likely if they cannot resolve their dispute through the Chapter 164 conflict resolution process. 

The dispute stems from House Bill 4005, which shifts the selection of airport commissioners from City Council appointments to elections by voters in the City of Naples and Collier County. 

City Council argues the new state law frustrates the purpose of the 99-year lease agreement between the city and the Naples Airport Authority and constitutes a breach of that lease. 

At the first joint meeting in June, the City Council proposed creating a new dependent special district to oversee the airport while allowing the current NAA members to serve the remainder of their terms. 

Officials also questioned the proposed ordinance requiring City Council approval for airport development projects and whether the Federal Aviation Administration would allow the city to become the airport’s sponsor. The Naples Airport Authority is currently the FAA-recognized sponsor responsible for operating the airport and meeting federal grant obligations. 

City Attorney Matthew McConnell said FAA officials told him any sponsorship transfer must be voluntary and comply with federal regulations. Before an application could be submitted, both the City Council and the airport authority would have to sign an Assignment and Assumption Agreement. The FAA must determine that the city is legally, financially and operationally capable of assuming the airport’s federal obligations while continuing to operate it as a public airport. 

However, during the July meeting, Naples Airport Authority Chair Terry Cavanaugh and most NAA members opposed the City Council’s proposal to return the authority to a dependent special district, saying House Bill 4005 made the authority an independent special district and that they must comply with state law. Member John Crees was absent, while Member Ralph Alberto expressed a different view. 

“We cannot legally agree to take any action that dissolves the authority or compromises its powers under state law without permission of the state Legislature because the Enabling Act, as modified by House Bill 4005, governs everything the authority does,” Cavanaugh said. “It would be inappropriate for us to take any position on the law that is now the foundation for our very existence.” 

Alberto said he supports the concept of the city becoming the airport’s sponsor because the city owns the land and should play a greater role in the airport’s operation. 

The Naples Airport Authority voted 3-1 to reject the City Council’s proposal for the city to become the airport’s sponsor, making future litigation more likely. The City of Naples has already filed a lawsuit against the airport authority but agreed to hold off on moving forward while the two sides participated in the Chapter 164 conflict resolution process and prepare for potential mediation. 

Lease proposal draws criticism 

When renegotiating the lease agreement, City Attorney Matthew McConnell drafted a proposed lease before the July meeting. When reviewing the proposed terms, Cavanaugh said the document did not reflect previous recommendations or concerns from the NAA, and viewed it as a one-sided proposal that would give the city complete control over the airport. He also raised concerns about federal preemption, which means federal laws and regulations take priority over local rules when the two conflict, particularly regarding FAA requirements for airport operations. 

McConnell responded that the NAA’s attorneys had the opportunity to propose their own lease terms and said his role was to represent the city’s interests, making the lease terms intentionally reflective of the city’s position.  

Though NAA member Michelle Arnold understood that viewpoint, she said she believes the City Council and NAA are attempting to negotiate in good faith and that the authority’s perspectives should be reflected in the proposed lease terms. 

“It’s not as if you all weren’t aware of what our concerns were,” Arnold said. “If we wanted to do this with some expediency, I think our considerations should have been included in this draft.” 

Preemption debate takes center stage 

NAA aviation attorney Peter Kirsch raised concerns that the proposed lease would give the city control over airport land-use decisions, could conflict with federal preemption rules and needed clarification on whether airport authority-owned equipment would transfer to the city at the end of the lease. 

Aviation attorney Steven M. Taber, brought in by McConnell, said federal preemption applies to areas such as airspace and aviation safety but does not automatically prevent the city from regulating land-use issues such as zoning and building codes. 

Kirsch believes the disagreement is not over basic regulations but over where to draw the line on airport land-use decisions. He said the proposed ordinance was intended to create a practical process for determining when city authority applies rather than resolving every dispute through lawyers or courts. 

Kirsch recommended that he, Taber and the other attorneys work together to develop clearer lease terms that address both sides’ concerns.  

The groups agreed to reconvene for another joint meeting at 9 a.m. July 20 at Naples City Hall, where they will review revised lease terms and continue discussions on resolving the dispute.