A coalition of flight schools, pilots, instructors and aviation businesses based at Falcon Field Airport in Mesa, Arizona, has issued a joint statement urging the Mesa City Council to reject a proposed landing-fee program that would apply to general aviation aircraft, including those used for flight training. City officials are reviewing a plan that includes a per-landing charge along with other potential increases to airport-related fees. The proposal is scheduled for discussion during a Mesa City Council study session on March 12, with a possible council vote expected March 23.
Stakeholders noted the frequency with which flight training operations conduct takeoffs and landings, even during a single lesson, which could drastically increase operating costs if a per-landing fee is adopted.
“A $30 per-landing fee at Falcon Field isn’t a small administrative change for a flight school,” Thrust Flight CEO Patrick Arnzen said. “Flight training is built around repeated takeoffs and landings so this kind of fee stacks up quickly and fundamentally changes the cost of training. Schools either have to raise costs to students, reduce activity or consider relocating. None of those outcomes are good for students or for Falcon Field’s long-term health.”
The statement, signed by representatives of several flight schools and aviation organizations operating at Falcon Field, said training activity supports airport-based businesses including maintenance providers, instructors and aircraft rental operations.
The group also raised questions about how a landing-fee system would be implemented and monitored at an airport with a high number of operations, adding that stakeholders have requested additional discussions with city officials regarding the proposal. A bill was introduced last month in Arizona that would prohibit the use of ADS-B data to calculate or collect landing fees or other charges.
“Falcon Field’s role in aviation training and local commerce is not incidental,” the statement said. “It’s one of the reasons the airport exists and it’s a major reason businesses and jobs are here.”
In addition to sometimes producing more economic damage than benefit, landing fees are a threat to aviation safety and the surrounding communities. They add stress to and complicate pilot decision-making. The best evidence of this is the number of NTSB reports of fuel exhaustion or other accident causes inspired by an attempt to save a few dollars by stretching endurance to reach a distant satellite airport with cheaper avgas or deciding to tanker fuel from a cheaper to higher priced locale.
So, this is like the Chicago supposed freeways with toll booths. Just really ugly. I avoid Chicago like the plague due to their supposed freeway toll booths. Very anti business. Which is a nearly daily problem, socialists ignoring the US Constitution Commerce Clause and 200 years of case law. No one gets to obstruct commerce. So, who ever is hurt the most, can probably get court relief by injecting the US Commerce Clause into this very unbusiness and illegal activity of charging landing fees.