Galloway Landings air park back on Leighton’s agenda

Kate Scheltema points to the area of the air park in a meeting from 2017.

The continuing saga of the Galloway Landings air park issue is back on the agenda for the Leighton Township Board and the Planning Commission.

Kate Scheltema, co-owner of a horse farm next door, has been the main critic against Clark Galloway’s air park project that stirred a great deal of controversy five years ago. Though the matter was settled in the August 2018 primary election referendum, she appeared again before the Township Board Thursday evening.

Scheltema issued an invitation to township officials to come to her horse farm to watch a demonstration of what she deals with as a neighbor of the air park. She contended that some local officials attended a fly-in at Galloway Landings and now she wants equal time.

“I want you to see this from our perspective,” she told board members, saying she wanted them to witness the flight path, takeoff and landings at the air strip, which she maintains too often spook her horses and create unsafe conditions.

She even offered to have tacos and refreshments for those who show up.

Though Scheltema for many years has been a fierce critic of the air park, she insisted this time she just wants to generate some changes in the interests of safety.

“I’d like to make some impact about how we can get along” with Galloway and the air strip. “We’re just trying to show you we’re not exaggerating (about the dangers).”

Galloway earlier this year appeared before the Planning Commission and Township Board to see a longer runway, extended hours and paving it with asphalt. The matter was taken up at length at Wednesday night’s Planning Commission meeting with no decisions reached.

Township Supervisor Steve Wolbrink insisted he was at the fly-in as a representative of the Leighton Township Fire Department. He, Treasurer Jaci Bultsema and Clerk Rachel Fennema said no township business was conducted during the event. But he acknowledged he sent fellow board members invitations by e-mail to a social event.

Planning Commissioner Steve Shoemaker and Township Trustee John Hooker insisted they did not attend the fly-in at all.

The Township Board did not respond to Scheltema’s invitation, but Fennema indicated she would do more thinking about it.

“We’re starting to see a lot more traffic over the farm, the barn and pasture,” she told board members, adding she remains concerned about the planes agitating the horses and presenting a safety issue.

The Township Board then voted 4-0, with Leighton Supervisor Steve Deer abstaining because he’s Galloway’s partner, to proceed with the project. Opponents gathered enough signatures to take the issue before local voters.

Since the 2018 vote, there has not been any word of further issues — until Thursday night.

Scheltema insisted there is too much flight activity over her farm. She said she has contacted Galloway. Professional Code Inspections and police officers, but is not getting any relief.

In other business at Thursday night’s meeting, the Township Board:

  • Welcomed the three newest volunteer firefighters to the Leighton Township Fire Department, Brian Bollon, Thomas Himmelright and April Rogers (See Cover Photo).
  • Was told that Deputy Sheriff Scott Langlois soon will be promoted and will have to step down from covering Leighton Township. Wolbrink said there are six candidates for his replacement.
  • Received two complaints from customers of the Green Lake Sewer Authority, objecting to the increase in rates by $600 per year.
  • Learned from the building inspector’s report that there were four more building permits were issued in the township in June, bringing the year to date total to 26 at an average home value of $365,415.
  • Agreed to pay two workers $150 per person for a total of $600 for the Memorial Day installation and Labor Day removal of buoys at Green Lake.
  • Fielded a complaint about the sign at Green Lake using the word “sewer” rather than wastewater treatment facility. Wolbrink said, “That (sewer) is its legal name,” so he doubted the township could have the word removed. However, a meeting on the issue may be held next month.

Comments

No comments yet. Why don’t you start the discussion?

Leave a Reply