Court Opinion

ID: 9849655
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 04:43:38.238553+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:20:21.622325
License: Public Domain

Fontron, J.,
dissenting: I simply cannot swallow the proposition that raising wheat on 634.3 acres of land is incidental to the operation of a 1386 acre airport — especially when one of the tracts leased for wheat farming is 216.7 acres in area. When it is said that the wheat-farming operation on nearly one-half the area of the airport premises is not inconsistent with the exclusive operation of the airport facility as an airport, the logic of the reasoning entirely ■escapes me.
Nor can I ascribe any significance to the fact that the cities in ■question have not declared any portion of the 1386 acres unnecessary for airport purposes. Of course they haven’t! They receive the landlords’ share of the crop from almost half of those acres. Moreover, if action by municipal authorities is required to remove from the tax rolls, land which is leased for farming, the force of the statute will be greatly impaired.
Lack of time forbids further comment. I would reverse this case. Accordingly I must, with due deference, dissent.