It is in the community’s best interest to acknowledge the airport is an asset to the community.
Because if we all acknowledge the airport is the asset (which it clearly is), then whatever proposals are made to replace the airport must offer MORE BENEFIT to the community.
By claiming the airport is a THREAT, one can get away with saying almost ANYTHING would be better.
At the end of the day, if something better can be put there, it needs to be sold on its merits, not on the basis of deliberate misinformation.
The destroy-the-airport stand is short-changing the people in this area. It threatens to eliminate a valuable and unique resource. The more intelligent and honest approach would be to propose the alternative and sell people on the merits of what would be built instead of telling us how bad continuing to have an airport here might be.
For the most part, this isn’t happening. Why? Perhaps it is because many of the proposals may not actually benefit the entire community more than having an airport.