AOPA said Thursday that it and two Arizona aviation groups have filed a rebuttal challenging the city of Mesa’s justification for landing fees at Falcon Field Airport. The Aug. 7 filing from AOPA, the Arizona Pilots Association and the Aviation Safety Advisory Group of Arizona is part of the FAA’s review of several Part 13 complaints over the fee program.
Groups Question Financial Analysis
The groups argue that Mesa did not establish that the fees were necessary, reasonable and nondiscriminatory before approving them in March. Their filing questions the city’s airport cost-center calculations and asks why federal funding was not considered for future projects. It also points to the city’s acknowledgment that flight-training operations do not significantly increase pavement costs.
“This failure suggests that the City’s motivation to impose those fees was, at least in part, to limit flight training operations and reduce noise complaints,” the groups wrote in the filing.
Airspace Effects Raised
The filing also challenges Mesa’s characterization of possible regional safety effects as speculative. About half of Falcon Field’s roughly 300,000 annual operations are associated with flight training. The groups argue that aircraft discouraged from operating at Falcon Field could instead move to other Phoenix-area airports and traffic patterns, congesting other, already busy airports.
Mesa City Council voted 6-1 in late July to postpone the landing fees for 90 days while outside counsel reviews the airport’s financial data and fee methodology. The city has maintained that its financial review supports the fees and says they are intended to cover airport operating, maintenance and improvement costs. Four Part 13 complaints concerning the program are currently before the FAA.
Fees Remain Delayed
Mesa’s landing fees remain on hold after the City Council voted July 27 to delay implementation for 90 days. The fees had been scheduled to take effect July 30, but the city’s outside counsel requested additional time to independently review the airport’s financial analysis and determine whether the existing fee structure should be retained or changed.
Despite the delay, city officials have indicated they still intend to implement landing fees. Councilwoman Alicia Goforth, who cast the only vote against the 90-day extension, said the additional review has not changed the city’s position.
“The city is still absolutely committed to the implementation of landing fees,” Goforth told KJZZ on Aug. 5. “However, I am not in support of additional time and extended delay.”
0 replies