Contractor says Albany airport expansion could reach $180M

A contractor working on the expansion of Albany International Airport alleges in a new court filing that the terminal overhaul was always likely to cost as much as $180 million, significantly higher than the $100 million figure long associated with the project, raising new questions about transparency, design management and the ultimate price tag facing public funders and travelers.

Amended lawsuit escalates dispute over terminal overhaul

The allegation about a potential $180 million cost ceiling appears in an amended complaint filed in New York State Supreme Court by Malta-based MLB Construction Services, the general contractor on major portions of the terminal modernization. The filing updates a lawsuit first brought in 2026 that already sought damages over alleged design flaws, delays and cost overruns tied to the work at Albany International Airport.

According to published coverage of the filing, MLB asserts that the Albany County Airport Authority knew during the bidding phase that the terminal expansion and renovation could ultimately reach a cost of about $180 million, nearly double the officially publicized $100 million construction budget. The complaint contends that this information was not fully reflected in bid documents provided to contractors, even as they were asked to commit to fixed-price work on a complex, multi-year build-out.

The legal action builds on an earlier lawsuit in which MLB sought at least $12 million in damages, arguing that pervasive design revisions and incomplete drawings caused cascading schedule disruptions soon after construction began. Reports indicate that the authority has rejected those claims and plans to contest the contractor’s latest allegations in court, setting up a protracted dispute alongside ongoing construction at the region’s primary commercial airport.

The airport authority’s position, as reflected in previous public statements, is that phasing and design refinement were integral to keeping the terminal operational around the clock during construction and that the authority does not agree with the contractor’s characterization of design quality or cost disclosure.

Project framed publicly as $100 million terminal expansion

Since its announcement, the terminal project at Albany International has frequently been described in public documents and on the airport’s own website as a $100 million main terminal expansion intended to ease pre-security congestion and refresh aging facilities. The work includes enlarging the departure hall, reconfiguring passenger screening areas, updating heating and cooling systems, and adding amenities such as a children’s play area and upgraded business spaces.

State and federal aid have been central to the funding structure. Public records show that the airport secured major support through New York’s Upstate Airport Economic Development and Revitalization Competition, as well as additional federal infrastructure funding, to help cover the terminal expansion’s construction costs. The authority’s capital planning documents also outline a broader multiyear program of airfield and terminal improvements funded through grants, passenger facility charges and airport revenues.

Financial reports from the Albany County Airport Authority in recent years reference a capital improvement program totaling around $180 million across the 2020 to 2024 period, encompassing multiple projects. The contractor’s new filing argues that the terminal expansion’s potential cost exposure should be viewed within that higher range and that the authority was aware of this context while structuring bid packages.

Public-facing descriptions, however, have continued to emphasize the $100 million figure for the main terminal project, a gap that now sits at the center of the legal clash between the authority and its construction partner.

Contractor alleges phasing and design masked full exposure

MLB’s amended complaint asserts that the airport authority divided the terminal modernization into four separate bid packages in a manner that obscured the overall cost and complexity of the work. The contractor, which reports indicate was awarded two of those packages, alleges that critical design details were still evolving when bids were solicited, contributing to a pattern of revisions after construction was underway.

According to summaries of the court filing, MLB claims it encountered extensive omissions, conflicts and gaps in design documents that forced substantial rework, delayed subsequent phases and increased labor and material costs. Change directives and revised drawings are said to have arrived in a way that disrupted planned workflows on an already congested construction site, where work had to be sequenced around active airline operations and passenger traffic.

The contractor frames these issues as evidence that the authority and its design team should have anticipated a much higher final cost for the full program of terminal changes than was reflected in the original procurement. The complaint contends that the bid packages were released prematurely and that the resulting inefficiencies have pushed the project closer to the $180 million level it claims was understood internally.

The airport authority has maintained in earlier responses that design refinement and schedule adjustments were normal for a large, phased construction effort at an operating airport and that it acted within its contractual rights in directing changes. The legal process is expected to examine to what extent cost and design risks were known and disclosed during bidding.

Implications for travelers, public funding and future upgrades

The cost dispute arrives at a time when Albany International continues to position itself as a growing regional hub serving northeastern New York and western New England. Passenger volumes have been recovering after the pandemic, and regional leaders have frequently cited the terminal expansion as a key investment to improve the traveler experience and support additional air service.

For travelers, the immediate impact remains limited to the construction environment itself, which has introduced temporary wayfinding changes and work zones inside and around the terminal. Longer term, however, questions over the project’s final price could influence how the authority balances airline fees, parking and concession revenues, and other charges that ultimately shape the cost of using the airport.

Publicly available financial reports show that the authority relies on a mix of operating revenues, state and federal grants, passenger facility charges and bond financing to support its capital program. Any divergence between early cost expectations and final expenditures on the terminal modernization could affect how future projects are planned and communicated, particularly if accompanied by heightened scrutiny from state overseers and local legislators.

The case is also being watched in the construction industry, where cost escalation, supply chain volatility and design complexity have complicated airport projects across the country. The Albany dispute highlights the risks that can emerge when large capital programs are fast-tracked to capture competitive funding or respond to rising demand, and it underscores how disagreements over what was known at bid time can spill into court long before the last construction fence comes down.

Albany’s capital program faces growing oversight spotlight

Beyond the courtroom, the allegations feed into a broader conversation about oversight of the Albany County Airport Authority and its long-range capital ambitions. In recent years, county legislators have debated governance, leadership changes and the scale of planned airport investments, including multi-year capital plans that extend well beyond the current terminal work.

Documents filed with state authorities describe an expansive pipeline of projects at Albany International, ranging from terminal modernization to airfield improvements and access upgrades. These plans are framed as essential to sustaining the airport’s role in the Capital Region economy, but they also require careful coordination of public grants, bond financing and operating revenues.

The suggestion in MLB’s complaint that the authority understated the potential full cost of the terminal expansion could add momentum to calls for more granular public reporting on project budgets, contingencies and risk management. Observers of the case note that, regardless of the lawsuit’s outcome, the dispute is likely to sharpen focus on how airport sponsors across New York structure and communicate large infrastructure programs that rely heavily on state and federal support.

As construction continues at Albany International, the legal and financial questions now surrounding its marquee terminal project will remain a key storyline for travelers, taxpayers and industry stakeholders watching how the region navigates the next phase of its airport modernization drive.

Times Union: Albany airport expansion price tag should have been $180 million, contractor alleges

Times Union: Albany airport contractor sues authority for $12M over delays

Albany International Airport: Terminal expansion project overview

Albany Business Review: Coverage of Albany International Airport construction and litigation