July 9, 2026
604
To the Editor:
A recent community discussion about the Kincardine Municipal Airport generated more heat than light, and having accidentally started it, I'd like to state my position more carefully than a comment thread allows.
I am not against the airport. I am against operating any municipal asset at a permanent loss without a plan. Those are different things, and the difference matters as Kincardine council considers the airport's future.
First, some fairness to the airport's defenders. A recent video shared on Facebook showed an ORNGE aircraft arriving early one morning and departing about 40 minutes later for London with a patient aboard. That appears to be a genuine medical transfer out of our community, and the pilots who shared it were right to point to it. Our airport does serve that purpose.
But one flight is not a business case, and the municipality's own 2025 airport review supplies the fuller picture: a deficit of roughly $200,000 in 2024, a main runway needing an estimated $1-million or more in rehabilitation, and — per the Kincardine Airport Interest Group's own presentation to council — 39 ORNGE flights out of more than 3,700 total movements (only one per cent). The municipality's review also found the hospital helipad, not the airport, is ORNGE's primary facility in Kincardine.
The real question, then, is not "Airport: yes or no?" It is: "What would it take for this facility to stop costing the average taxpayer money while remaining available for the medical, corporate and recreational flying it serves today?"
Other Ontario municipalities have shown the way: landing and parking fees, market-rate hangar leases, expansion serviced by the users who benefit rather than the tax base, and capital contributions from major business users.
Kincardine has a head start. The Armow Community Benefits Fund already paid to extend the runway's life, and council has directed staff to explore partnership proposals for airport operations. I hope that process returns with a published cost-recovery target and annual public reporting of who actually uses the field.
To the airport's supporters, who backed the municipality's recent cost-saving staffing changes: we already agree the status quo needs work. The question I'd ask, in genuine good faith, is what the airport's users are prepared to contribute so taxpayers aren't carrying it alone. If we answer that well, Kincardine keeps its airport and sheds the deficit. Everybody wins.
Ali Shah
Kincardine
Related Stories
No related stories.