Humboldt County Grand Jury
• 2024-2025
• Agency Response
Wings Over Humboldt County,*
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 12 findings
F1
Creating a Department of Aviation has improved operations and management, thus providing greater opportunity for growth and revenue. Agree.
No recommendations for this finding
F2
Aviation management and staff are well qualified and experienced, ensuring that facilities and operations are maintained for public safety. Agree.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
is in the process of being implemented. Recommendations numbered 1, 4, 5 and 6 will not be implemented. Date: Oct. 21, 2025 Signed: Michelle Bushnell, Chair Humboldt County Board of Supervisors Number of pages attached: 6 COUNTY OF HUMBOLDT COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE 825 Fifth St., Eureka, CA 95501 707-445-7266 [email protected] e of the INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO "WINGS OVER HUMBOLDT COUNTY, CHARTING A NEW COURSE FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF AVAITION" DATE: OCT. 21, 2025 In the Grand Jury Report, "Wings Over Humboldt County, Charting a New Course for the Department of Aviation," the Grand Jury has requested that the Board of Supervisors respond to Findings 1 through 12 and Recommendations 1 through 6. The County Administrative Office is proposing the following response as detailed below.
F3
Compliance with Federal Aviation Administration requirements is critical for the Department of Aviation to successfully opply for and receive grant funds to undertake major safety projects at all six airports. Partially agree. The County of Humboldt agrees that compliance with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements are critical for the county to successfully apply for and receive grand funds at most, but not all, of the county's airports. The Dinsmore and Kneeland airports do not receive FAA funding because they are not included in the FAA's National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems, which is a requirement for grant eligibility under its Airport Improvement Program.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
has been implemented.
F4
In 2024, the Department of Aviation was awarded Federal Aviation Administration grant funding of just under $1.9 million. This allowed the Department to make capital improvements at the airports in Rohnerville, Garberville and McKinleyville. Agree. The Department of Aviation received the following FAA grants totaling $1,893,844: $883,043 to reconstruct Taxiway A at the California Redwood Coast-Humboldt County Airport . (ACV) $404,489 to rehabilitate/reconfigure the terminal apron at ACV $359,275 to rehabilitate runway 11/29 at Rohnerville Airport (FOT) $247,037 to rehabilitate the runway, taxiway and apron at the Garberville Airport (O16)
No recommendations for this finding
F5
Commercial air service is currently available to the east and south. Establishing air service to the north would result in increased revenue because passengers would be less likely to start their journey at another airport. Agree.
No recommendations for this finding
F6
The Department of Aviation has been collaborating with Project SOAR (Sourcing Opportunities for Airport Revenues). This promotes economic development at the airports. (R1) Partially agree. The Department of Aviation's Project SOAR Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the County Administrative Office's Economic Development Division was not renewed in Fiscal Year (FY) 2024-25 and has not been renewed for FY 2025-26. The Department of Aviation and Economic Development Division are currently collaborating on how to best utilize the Project SOAR partnership for airport and air service recruitment related marketing.
No recommendations for this finding
F7
The focus of the current Aviation Advisory Committee has primarily been on airport operations. The committee could be better utilized by focusing on broader economic development. (R2) Agree.
No recommendations for this finding
F8
The Dinsmore landing strip is threatened by river encroachment. This necessitates constructing a dike to protect the runway or repurposing the site solely as a medivac heliport. (R3) Partially agree. As noted in Volaire's 2017 study, the Dinsmore Airport has physical challenges that will be exceptionally expensive to fix. The county agrees that the Van Duzen River is eating away at the south side of the Dinsmore Airport, threatening to take part of the runway with it. However, this area requires more extensive work than just constructing a dike. The area would need to be shored up and the runway would potentially need to be rebuilt over the long-term. In addition to its challenges with the river, the Dinsmore Airport is surrounded by large trees that continue to grow and block approaches to both ends of its runway. The airport also has significant rising terrain off the approach end of Runway 9, which requires pilots departing in a westerly direction to immediately turn and follow the Van Duzen riverbed to avoid the rising terrain. The Dinsmore Airport's current primary use is by medivac helicopters, so these challenges are not currently a significant issue, but they are an issue that requires monitoring.
No recommendations for this finding
F9
Landslides have shortened the effective length of the Kneeland landing strip. Restoration will require an environmental impact report and repairs likely costing millions of dollars. (R3) Agree. The 2017 Volaire study for Kneeland noted that a long-term fix to the runway deterioration will likely cost several million dollars, and it is unclear if the FAA would be willing to fund the fix. Kneeland's runway is crumbling as a large hill slides. The length of that runway has been reduced. Kneeland's main apron would be large enough, and sufficient, for it to remain open as a helicopter base. The runway does serve as an alternate airport for aircraft when coastal airports are fogged in. However, outside of inclement weather the runway is not needed for the majority of the aviation users.
No recommendations for this finding
F10
Murray Field Airport is below sea level and sinking. In the long term, the airport will need to be either closed or reconstructed; reconstruction would require obtaining a California Coastal Commission permit. (R3) Partially agree. The county agrees that Murray Field is built on wetlands, and it is one of the few airports in the United States to sit below sea level. Users of the airport, which is Humboldt County's busiest in terms of takeoffs and landings, report the runway is heaving, sinking and cracking as are the taxiways. In time, the runway will require a complete rebuild for it to remain safe. This information was also noted in the 2017 Volaire study. Part of the airport lies within the purview of the California Coastal Commission which could make runway reconstruction difficult environmentally. An upcoming Cal Trans study will provide the county with additional information related to sea level rise at Murray Field. Additionally, the Department of Aviation is anticipating approximately $3.5 million in FAA grant funding for projects at the Murray Field Airport, including repairs, rehabilitation or the installation of a Vertical Guidance System (PAPI-4), improvements to Runway 12/30 and Taxiway A, obstruction removal, hangar repairs, runway lighting system upgrades and perimeter fencing.
No recommendations for this finding
F11
Many of the 2017 Volaire report recommendations have been implemented, but several could still be implemented. Revisiting those recommendations would provide opportunities for expansion, commercial development, increased public safety, and increased revenues. (R4) Agree. Since the 2017 Volaire Study, the Department of Aviation has made significant progress on many important initiatives, including creating an Aviation Department, hiring a professional Airport Director, advancing air service development activities, establishing airport system lease rates, improving passenger vehicle parking at ACV and completing a solar power development project. Several projects are currently underway including restructuring the Aviation Advisory Committee, developing a standard air service incentive policy, exploring the possibility of opening a terminal restaurant at ACV, land and lease development, and further developing the airport's website. Some recommendations from the study still remain. These include, but are not limited to, further evaluating staffing levels, scheduling regular airport-tenant forums for general aviation, adopting formal vision, purpose and values statements, clarifying the role of Fly Humboldt (now Fly ACV), air cargo, vetting the hangar waiting list and developing a rental car service facility.
No recommendations for this finding
F12
Airport hangars and other infrastructure at the smaller airports are in disrepair due to long-term deferred maintenance. Delaying repairs accelerates damage and can significantly increose the final cost of repair, as well as foster dissatisfaction among hangar tenants. (R5, R6) Agree.
No recommendations for this finding
* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.