Airport Economic Development Advisory Board - Regular Meeting

Necessarily part of the brain assurances, but there are definitely the FAA definitely has weighed in on fairness and equality, you know, on the airport tenants versus through the fence tenants. So in the past, we our our guidance has always been to try to align those two as much as possible. I'm not sure that that's part of the actual grant assurances. Like I said, I've memorized them all, but the FAA does or in the past, has waited on that.

I've just done some research and found out that, yes, some of them do have compliance grant compliance guidelines, something have you for the TTF agreements. Yeah. Also, do any of the airport people have deeded access?

I think I do. Yeah. Okay.

So that affects who you can and can't charge fees to.

Julian Mhmm. Thank you for setting that today. Mhmm. I think it probably would be helpful to everybody to kinda do a synopsis, kinda not that full blown report that we haven't seen. But, Mike, worthwhile for everybody if we kinda get a sense of what is everybody else doing. That's, like, what you said.

So, yeah,

wouldn't mind if you could come in with us.

So I can see here

for the full blown presentation. Excellent. Good. Let's get started. Up. Up. Up a second. Before we get to that Go ahead. Could we start with an examination of what our current expenditure are and our current prep? So eventually, we know where we're at, and then we start looking up what we need to do to the point where

we Sure. We can do either way. And

And I think the most that's gonna be

just the two most probably. Definitely. The one individualist here with us. So I think that's a great idea. Yeah. Because it gives us a baseline, and that's what I'm getting at is let's get a baseline. Yeah. See where we are, and that's part of where we are, and then kinda get a sense as to what are our options, because I think there's a lot of historical stuff. So, yeah, if you guys don't mind pivoting Yeah.

That would be good.

So if we could start with expenditures first. So there's two components to it. We've got the vector management contract. That's 240,000. 47?

$2.40. I think

it's $2.40, but we have it budgeted slightly higher. Mhmm.

And then we have the operating expenditures that's budgeted at $2.45.

Yep. So one thing that's worth mentioning is when I ran the numbers for this, these numbers are gonna look better than the numbers you'll have seen on the the quarterly reports for the airport fund. Jason, myself, and David and and Chris from Public Works met, a couple of weeks ago and kinda really hampered down on the the budget versus actual expenditures, for the airport fund. And and we were able able to make some some pretty drastic reductions, not reducing levels of service, just bringing, the budget in line with what was actually gonna be spent for 2026. So these numbers, right here in terms of expenses are, what what is currently budgeted in the draft 2026, a budget for expenses.

These numbers are you know, just to just to reiterate why those numbers are smaller than the ones you've been seeing for 2025 in the quarterly reports.

Okay. So my question about the the management contract, the February, is is that a fixed fee contract? So that's a lump sum, you know, paying that 100,000 on a monthly basis. Yep. Okay. So the the things that we have some variation in are the operating expenditures. So you Jason, you forecasted something much lower than what we had budgeted.

Yeah. So we originally, I used Walmart's budget because we didn't have a baseline because we had been managing the airport differently. So I used Walmart's budget originally. I had a forecast budget just roughly of 460 or 70,000, and then we, like, we came in, looked at what our actual numbers were coming in, and developed next year's. We can't we came in roughly a 175,000 lower than what was budgeted. So And do you

think that will hold year to year based on what you're seeing?

You know, we base these numbers on what we did last year, what we're forecasting next year. So I think these numbers are, not only, well, with an expectation, but there's probably a little you know, I mean, every every line item we took, we added a little bit just to make sure we have a little cushion. But I think even though we brought the number down pretty significantly, there's still a a substantial margin in most of those things.

Do

we have any risk of greater legal services to deal with

issues brought up by, I think, group that I think I think, you know, I don't wanna speak for the whole town, but I think there's always a chance that any entity within the town

There's really low legal fees for you.

Right now, yeah, you know, luckily, we're not involved in anything. Yeah. I hope that we're not anytime soon, but, historically, our legal services have been pretty reasonable. Obviously, this year, there is a little there is a little bit because we're negotiating some of the contracts with the building and stuff. So that that may actually wash out this year to be a little bit higher than normal, but we don't have all those concluded by next year.

What's part of con consultation? The $22.

Think that was based on some of the shoot. I can't remember. I think we I think we decided that was I mean, does that be a line item?

Todd and Chris had something for it. It's from the airport.

Is this the master plan up

are we

starting now? No.

I had something in my budget for that.

That was an

with vision.

No. That that would be part of the master plan.

Yeah. I I know Todd and or Dave mentioned to me what that '22 is for.

I just don't recall. Yeah. That actually, I don't think it was on our original before we met. So

So, Jason, for the next three years, you think that 384 to 400 is a pretty good number we can work to?

I you know, there's always unforecast, you know, taxiway could wash out or something, and, you know, there could be some kind of big event, but I feel like those numbers are pretty solid, you know, because we do most everything in house. So, we're in the control of those costs pretty well. So I would say yes. That's great. I mean, 4

3 eighty's on that and $4.80.

Yeah. And, you know, like you said, we based on Walmart, which is pretty comparable. They're they're over six. So I think the number came in after revenue was a 160,000 and a negative. Yeah.

So And I know Todd had done a lot of research about their reports to look at if it was a more traditional full time staff person, what would the salary benefits, training, travel, con conference, all that kind of stuff be, and it was less than what we have now? Or that would that was more than what we have now.

And do those projections include any of the work that you want to have done to eliminate people walking across the taxiway? All that is future grant stuff. That's all grant eligible. So the the one thing this does not include is any matching grant money, which is similar to the budget that we used as a kind of a boilerplate from Walmart. Their theirs was operating budget, and the grant stuff was a separate were separate line items.

Okay. So it's kind of a given that we will have to raise or or can we need to raise money to match the grants because we plan on getting grants.

Yes. Yes. Yes.

You're $3.47 200. That's what the s would there's nearly a x escalation.

Yeah. Actually, I don't know where the extra $7,200 is about. I don't know there's no escalator in. So Yeah. I I don't $2.45? It was $2.40. Think it's

just up by $2.40. $2.40.

Yeah. We can probably safely adjust that down to $2.40.

I mean, we got We every three years?

Yes. Yeah. That's extension's 3

and 32.

Yeah. 77 total. I mean, we can leave the 7,200, and they'll have a Christmas party if you want. Or not.

I don't know.

But maybe unless you guys got questions about the expenditures, let's go to revenue. So, you know, the big thing was what you're forecasting because the $2.40 is set, so it's the 245 and stuff that's kinda squishy. What's it really gonna be? And if you think it's gonna be a 100,000 less, then that's good news. Yep. We just need to make sure the next three years that it

Yeah. I agree. I mean, I think we're gonna this exercise will be yearly, obviously, because that's, you know, the budget cycle. But, you know, I look at the eleven years that we did under the old contract, and that's pretty consistent. You know, I mean, the cost with our own equipment, which we got state grants for and doing our own plowing and the you know, a lot of the bigger ticket items at Walmart and the other airports are subcontract services. So they're something out a lot of remotely, plowing, things like that. So that's where we're doing all that stuff in house, and I guess where a lot of savings are are at. So Yeah.

Yes. In terms of revenues, these are the budgeted numbers for 2025, and I kinda split for this exercise split into flat revenues, which you can basically interpret as revenues we don't have control over. So gas taxes, investment income, FBO fees, those are gonna be determined by other things, not the fee ordinance and the and the rental rates the council sets. So gas taxes, you got 8,400. Investment income is is small because there's not a lot of, you know, money and cash sitting in the in the airport fund.

So small amount there. And then FBO fees, you know, we're we're separately working through that that FBO agreement with Vector Air to to finalize the fees. Right now, it's set at 3,500 a month, which brings you to 42,000 a year. That's under

your current current current rental.

It's a temporary lease agreement. Yeah.

Yeah. Okay. But when when Jason finalizes an agreement with the town for the acquisition, if you will, the FBO, that will go away?

It'll go down. It'll go down. We'll have a land lease. It'll be a land lease under the property. So

But, presumably, Baki, you're you're can you scroll down just so we have what's coming up? Yep. Spoiler. Potentially, that would go into your land lease item, not necessarily. So Yeah. FBO fees. Right? Correct. Because we will be getting FBO fees at any moment. Mhmm. I say we. Right. We'll have

an FBL agreement, but it'll be ground lease revenue.

Mhmm.

Yeah. And then this next section is variable revenues, which is basically revenues we can, to some extent, control by setting different rates for fees or or rental lease rates. This isn't kinda how it looks in the budget, but this is kind of the easiest way to really break down break out all the separate lines of of what are the charges that the the town gets to set. So you've got, TTF is through the fence. So you got through the fence fees on the residential side, and then on the commercial side, you've got hangars.

The way the hangars are set up is we have 21 hangers. All of the hangers pay the standard $50 a month, and then there's the electric add on charge of $10 a month if they do get electric service, which is 11 out of the 21. You have nightly and monthly tie downs. These are the numbers, the totals from 2024. So those will these numbers, ninety and ninety nightly and two thirty five over the year monthly.

Those numbers will, you know, fluctuate and and change, but I think, you know, it provides us a good baseline. And then the fuel flowage fees, the baseline of 83,000 gallons of gasoline is also from 2024. And so the way this kind of is set up is these units are pretty much standard for for all of these for through the fence fees, commercial, through fuel flowage fees. We don't really get to control the units. The reason I kinda had this variable is because through the fence fee is residential.

Part of the the conversation that the council had and and this board has had and and will need to have is whether that's gonna be expanded to include all households or just the ones that have airplanes. Currently, it's just the ones that have airplanes, and that's 33. If it went up to all households, it'd be 55.

And how many households have taxiway access but no airplanes?

That's the remaining 22. Okay.

So, actually sorry. The 55 have deeded access. I think the number is, like, 40 that have actually approved access or something like that, roughly. There's there's about 15 homes that are buried deeper in the air park, and they've they have easements through other people's property, but they've not improved them. So actual hard asphalt

Mhmm.

Asphalt, whatever you wanna call some of the homeowner taxiways, I think the number's probably a little closer to 40.

Yeah. I think our reference was from the 2023 ABS plan, which was more like, do they have access to the runway

Right.

In some capacity.

Yeah. The number's 55.

If they were to sell their house

Mhmm.

Would that be a selling point to the buyer or what have you? Is that value?

They call it the same as, like, if you have a home on a beach, you paid a little on the beach. That was their analogy.

Mhmm. Lucky, the 21 hangers,

those are just the quarter. Correct.

Yep. That's correct.

So that $50, is that based on square footage footprint, or it's just the

I mean, basically, the the tee hangers take up the same square footage as a tie down. So based off tie down, the size of the tie down.

So an interesting point on the Port a port ones is that if you go on to the Jeffco site for Rocky Mountain, they have port a ports as well. They're paying a monthly fee, and I forget the number exactly. But He has that.

Oh, is it? This is monthly. Yeah. So just to be clear, $600, this is year it's a little confusing, so that's my my apologies. $600.25 for the through defense fees, those are annual. 50 and 10, those are monthly amounts. And then, obviously, $10 per night, $50 is monthly, and then the fuel flow, which is per gallon of gasoline.

Okay. You've got the the actuals. Okay. Yep. And then the $2.35 monthly tie downs, that's That was how many total we had across the entirety of 2024.

That's 235 paid months.

Paid Yep. Yeah. Yep. Yeah. Okay. Right. So if you add

At a rate of 50 Divided by

12, that's normally Yeah.

On average. Okay.

It's about, like, 20 planes.

Right.

Yeah. Like, 19 and a half. There's Yeah. There's one.

There is one. There's the one the one

that's There's no lanes. Yeah. There is actually one half airplane.

So then just to continue. So right. So this is the current situation up here at the top. And then I kind of put together three scenarios, Not you know, the the first scenario is is pretty straightforward. It's kinda just taking the recommendations from that 2023 ABS study and kind of and just doing that.

So we have, we go up to all 55 houses on the, through the fence residential. We go up to a thousand dollars, which was the amount they recommended. On the commercial side, right, we're just multiplying. So a thousand dollars over 600, 10 sixths, you know, five thirds, multiply that by 25¢, and that's how you get 42¢. So just a proportional increase on both the residential and commercial sides.

Hangers, they said they estimated that, I believe, it was, like, $30.30 cents a a square foot or or right around there or or $33 and 50¢ a square foot, I think. I I don't remember exactly the math, but it was per year. And then I estimated our hangars at about 750 square feet, and that's how you get 225, which is slightly below market looking at the other comparative hangars, but those hangars are some of those hangers are bigger, and some of them are are probably nicer than the hangers we have. The same proportional increase is made to, the electric add on fee. Right?

So just multiplying, you know, $2.25 above, you know, over the increase over 50, do the same thing. And from 10, and that's how you get 45. The same increase is made to to ten and fifty to get $13 nightly and $65 monthly, and then just a a small increase to the fuel flowage fees. So that, and then just, to clarify over here. Right.

So what I did is I took total expenses that we have, take out the the flat revenues, and that's kind of your if if the rep if the airport generated $326,000 a year, it would be revenue neutral without, you know, the town being involved whatsoever. So then just over here, we're adding up these variable revenues and then getting the the net Yeah. Set that the the airport's operating at. So you can see right now, it's about 227,000. Under scenario one, it's it's much better, but still at a 107,000.

Scenario two was kind of my attempt to be a little bit more mild with the the changes and not not as severe. So scenario two isn't kind of as scientific of just taking a model. It's kinda just me playing around a little bit. So we go $2,000, but we don't increase the rates on the additional homes. We do a slight increase, but not as significant on the the through defense fee commercially.

I chose 36¢ because that was kind of the highest ground lease rate I was getting, talking to, other airports. 200 instead of $2.25, so slightly less on the the hangar rates and then also on the electric. Don't change the tie down fees and don't change the fuel flowage. So still making some changes, but not as severe, not as significant. Might be more palatable for the community. That, you know, obviously, has a still has a positive effect, but it's not as significant. Right? It's a $151,000, in terms of the the deficit. Scenario three, you know, I don't I don't want anybody who's watching this meeting or

anyone at the board to think

that scenario three is a realistic thing that we would ever propose or or seriously think about doing. It was just kind of my question of if we wanted to, you know, turn the airport revenue neutral tomorrow by just changing fee structures, what might that look like? And I think the answer pretty clearly looking at it is that it's not possible. It's not economically feasible. What I did is everybody's paying residential through the fence fees.

Those go up to 1,500. Commercial gets the proportional increase up to 63¢ a square foot annually. The rentals the the rental rate for per month for the hangar standard goes to $3.75. With electric, you're up for at $4.50. A bigger increase to the tie down fees, 15 and 75, and then a a substantial jump on the the fuel flowage fees to 12 you know, 4¢, a 50% increase up to to 12¢. And that gets us right around revenue neutral. It was revenue neutral before I, you know, took $7,000 out of the the budget expense. So Now we're making money. Now we're making a little bit

of that. $7,000.

Yeah. $7,000. You can can throw your Christmas party every year.

I knew it was

gonna stay in some of them.

And so those are kind of the scenarios that I've already prepared, and then I threw in this kind of new scenario. And, basically, you all can talk and discuss and say, hey. Can we can we look at change this, change that, and and set the rates, and and I'll just plug in the numbers, and we can see what it looks like.

Alright. So let's hit the pause button on that. Does anybody have any questions so far? You got does that answer your question, Adish? You know,

I mean, this this is excellent. I do have questions of Jason on the commercial side.

So do I.

I'm not on the board, but I have one for Locky too. Okay. You go first. We didn't talk about the server lock, but it might not be a part of this. And if it is, tell me. But the potential for do hangers in that ground lease and how that Yeah.

Not not part of this, but I think that's really, really good to think about is and that's why scenario three isn't serious. We shouldn't be thinking about, let's get the the airport to revenue neutral. But if we get the airport to a a deficit of 100 in the 100 to 150,000 range or even less, I think it's very reasonable to expect additional ground rent from new hangar development to to come in and kind of and really close that that gap.

And the the new Nassar development's gonna be a pretty significant Right. Addition. So

this

presumes everything's static other than other than the rates change. Absolutely.

And the new Nassar project, if you look at current, the second column, which is a 188,000, the new Nassar is about a 175,000. So think maybe, like, 40 to 45 k coming in from Nassar. Right.

At current rate.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. We can I can we can run some scenarios if you want to of in looking at what the defense fees might be if we have more square footage?

Yeah. I think we do that after we have a little discussion. Absolutely. We wanna kinda live this where we are. Your commercial questions.

So I'd like to get in the weeds a little bit on the commercial side of things and maybe just take you know, look at the Schofield Barracks, then look at the buildings that are across the creek, and then maybe talk about next stuff. And I'd like to understand how you have determined the cost for these guys. I'm gonna take Odyssey as an example. So Odyssey is operating a dozen airplanes now. They have their own fuel, so they're not buying any fuel from the airport. They have a hangar over there with their own maintenance. What are we charging Odyssey?

Yeah. So per ordinance, it's square foot under hanger. We I mean, I haven't actually talked about this. You know? And this is really not that far. We've gone in these weeks before. So, and it actually applies somewhat to the homeowner side too, you know, where everybody's paying $600. But, I mean, if you got a big enough hangar, you could have three to four planes. And so you're impacting the airport. To your point, Odyssey's impacting the airport more than just their square footage. So but per ordinance, the ordinance says your commercial through the fence is based on the square footage of your banger space on the roof.

If the admins was, like, very old, can we change it? That's what I

wanna You can jump. We can't

change it.

No. You know? No. The

I think that's that's the hold on a second.

You can just indulge me here because I wanna make sure we're on track. I'll talk more right now about where we are because we're absolutely gonna get into that and a bunch of the other ones in terms of where we wanna go. K? But I just wanna finish, if you would, just finish what we're talking about in terms of where we are specifically with that chart. We'll get to Odyssey because there's a lot to talk about Odyssey in terms of prospective potential.

But I just want to stay on track to make sure we got you know, we have a limited amount of time. I wanna make sure we stay on task here so that we can get to where we wanna be. So if you don't mind, we'll continue just about where we are. And he has a very relevant question, which is where we are. If you would book bring that back up Mhmm. Commercial side of it has a 100 and has $47,187. You wanna know as do I. What is that comprised of?

Yes.

Exactly. Yes. Yeah. Yeah.

So Schofield is probably the biggest single payer. I don't have the numbers in front of me.

So Schofield was Schofield is currently 26,000 a year. Yep.

And then I got a question

on that. Yeah. So we're there's a 100 acres over there, and we're getting 26,000 a year?

Yep. So if you just if you figure out the ordinance, you if you go on Google Earth, draw a square around each of the three buildings, and you get the square footage, you multiply that by the current rate, which is 25¢ per square foot.

We change the ordinance or if they change the ordinance to each hangar phase, the three defense ring, whatever that that current $600 and whatever it's gonna be?

Well, so you if you change it from 25 to 30, you're just gonna take well, Schofield owns all those hangars, and so he's he's the customer. In that case, we don't bill all each 100 hangars. We bill Schofield because he owns them all, and he pays it. So if we raise it to 30¢, 35, whatever the number is, we would just multiply it in square footage. And that what do

we talk about? It's a 104,000 square feet.

So you're just gonna take

a 5¢ a square is 26,000. And the sheet I kinda handed out here had some some kind of assumptions. So going from 25¢ to 37¢ would generate an additional 12,480 per year.

I guess

Just on that

I'm trying to make the equivalence in my mind here. On the homeowner side, it's $600 per hangar. Let's say, if we applied the same to Schofield, a 100 hangars, that's $60,000, and we're currently getting 26. So we're getting a little over a third of what the homeowners are paying for a hangar. And it seems to me that we ought to equate that a little better.

Yeah. I mean, I don't disagree with that.

The ordinance drives it.

Yeah. The ordinance drives it. And if you if you look at comps, that commercial rate is pretty comparable with other airports. So but but well, at the time it was written. You know, I I there's definitely room for increasing it.

You know, I think the commercial and the residential are treated as two different things for a reason. You know, I mean, if you look at the Schofield hangers and you look at your hanger, I mean, you got a much nicer hanger. There's value added to your home. There's all kinds of things.

Big property tax.

Yeah. Exactly. Exactly. And Schofield, they they pay, significant property tax as well, but they treat them differently, and I think that's pretty standard across the board. I do think there's an argument that we could look at the residential side and apply the square footage with some type of a minimum or something like that.

No. I'm not suggesting we bring down the residential. I didn't use

Well, no. Mean, as far as trying to make it equal, I think

it's saying if I'm looking at Schofield Right. Which are hangers. Right. You know, maybe we get some sort of. So, anyway, that's a thought that we need to

Understood. Yeah.

Keep out there. So Dick Johnson just upgraded the building there. It used to be a hangar. Now I think it's gonna store classic

He's had cars in it for ever since he bought it.

We how does that happen?

So, again, you know, the one of the issues I've always had with the ordinance for a couple reasons. One, we don't get any revenue on his his building because he's not using that for an aircraft. So the ordinance is written as a use fee. So if you don't use the access, he does for his other hangar. But if you don't use it for that building, if you don't even if even if you didn't have an airplane in your hangar, but you had your friends come over and taxi across the fence, technically, by ordinance, you should have.

But for people that don't have airplanes currently, they did not have to pay that fee. It makes it difficult to police. I mean, it's easier for me because I know a lot of the residents that have airplanes don't have airplanes. It was almost impossible for the town before we did it to police. I mean, they were collecting seven of the 33 because they didn't know who had them and who didn't wanna have them. And when the town would come and knock on the door and wanna go look in their hangar, but a lot of people really wanted to let them in.

Mhmm.

So we we've been able to capture most of that, if not all of that revenue. But to your point

Dick's new building has a hangar door in it.

Yep.

It could be used as a hangar.

It could be.

He selected to put cars in there. Yep. And we don't get to generate any fee

outs. Correct.

And I personally, from a policing standpoint, you know, or from a I don't know if I say policing because I'm not replacing anything. But from a collection standpoint, I see that as a building that has access, and I see that as a building that should have to pay.

It's no different than his house.

Right. Yeah. But if you didn't have a if you didn't have an airplane at your house, I you don't have

to pay that fee current. It's it's a use fee. So But there's there's some inequalities here based on the way it's currently structured. I think part of what we're talking about here is fees, but it sounds to me that a lot of this stuff doesn't happen without the ordinance being restructured or changed. Because Problem that we face now. It's fun if it does. Let's take let's take Schofield, for instance. There's a 100 hangars. They're all paying. They don't all contain working airplanes.

Correct. So they're paying even if they're storing their RV. Right. And then if you take it then to Nassar's Building, of which I reside in, I pay in my little office that has no insurance associated with it. I pay a proportional share of the fee, which is now $15,000. There are, in fact, a number of businesses that pitch the Fed, if you will, in terms of paying fees where that was kinda driven down. They don't pay they being the HOA, of which I remember, we don't pay a full rate of fifth 25¢ per square foot

Yeah. To my point. Unit. Yeah. To my point because it is a use fee.

Yeah. So when we originally started negotiating with the flight park, you know, per the per ordinance, they should only have any any building any square footage that has an airplane in it should pay. So we started negotiating with the HOA. We started really getting off into the weeds saying, well, if I've got a building and I've got an airplane in it, but I got a machine that's bolted to the ground where I can't put an airplane in that corner, and so therefore, even though I've got a 7,500 square foot hangar, I can maybe only fit one because I've bolted this to the ground and built this in there. So we got way off into the weeds, and there's no way for me to walk into each one of those buildings with a tape measure every year and figure out what square footage is being used for.

So we just came up with the percentage based on the number of units that we knew were exclusively aviation, and then I think we added a percentage to that. And we agreed on 15,000. I personally would like to just see the ordinance. All those buildings have access, you know, whether they're

Potential access.

Yeah. So whether they're using it right now or they're not, I think they should pay it. I'm just feeling They move out, someone moves in, and they bring in an aviation business. And, you know, it's

This is a tough one. And, Jason, I agree with you, but we also count that we're a 23,000,000 economic engine for the community.

Right.

And part of that is the people in those buildings making that happen. Even though they may not have an airplane, they may may not be paying a fee to the airport.

Yeah. They they actually

Aviation oriented companies making that happen.

I I, actually, I I would agree with might as well. The reason our economic impact went down this year versus the last economic impact study was they were including all the businesses that were in the flight park. The new consultants went in and actually scrutinized those businesses, and they ruled out the businesses that are not aviation related. So our our economic impact went from 30 something million to 20 something million.

But your point being is those are all hangars. Yep. They all have access to the runway. Yep.

And in my mind, I mean, I've I've always used this dumb example. I used to live in neighborhood in Walmart, and we had a fee for the swimming pool and the clubhouse that I never dipped my toe in, but I paid a $180 a month for the access the access to it. And when I sold my house, you know, I had a picture of the clubhouse and the swimming pool that our advertising manager for the home, which is what everybody who owns a home on the airpark is gonna do the Hasshanger and direct access, and that's what everybody in the flight park is gonna do when they sell it. It's gonna be a you know, it's gonna be a commercial building with airport access, and some people are gonna see a lot of value in airport access. And so my mind you know?

And maybe I'm know, in my mind, if I go by when I talk to my wife and buying a house on the airport, it's already look. You can I can find 50 golf course homes or neighborhoods in the state of Colorado? I can I can maybe even find a few that are on lakes? Other than Minnesota, I can find them you start talking airport access. Now you've only got three in the metro area, and, really, one or two, if you include so, mean, you're talking about a very exclusive amenity. That's my point.

So So you're what you're you're saying is we should think of it more in terms of similar to an HOA fee where you pay for the amenities that are available whether you use them oral

or not. Mhmm.

So so everybody pays essentially the same amount for an HOA fee.

Are you saying benefiting from it. So That

is correct.

So here's what I would suggest everybody because I think all of these conversations are predicated on the idea that an ordinance would replace the current one, whatever that means. Okay? But I would suggest in all of our discussions moving forward that we think of this in terms of the assumption that the ordinance must be will be changed. How that mean what that means, we don't know yet. We don't know what ultimately we will recommend to the council in terms of changing the ordinance. And I think part of what we come up with ultimately beyond this will sort of dictate what we think the ordinance would would be.

Right? Right.

So I would just kinda keep our minds wide open because there's a lot of even this this brief conversation that we've had so far digging into the weeds, we are aware that there's some inequities, and there's probably a lot of different ways that we might attack this in terms of the possible in my words here, I don't even wanna say proposals because we can't propose at this point. But I think we should keep that in our heads that we're gonna have to do some figuring here to get to it.

And and I would say this too. There there's there's also been the idea floated out there that for the people that don't have airplanes currently that aren't paying the fee, okay. That's fine. Maybe you own that building for twenty years and you never have an airplane in it. But if you sell it and someone wants to come in and get access, there's a possibility that they've gotta back pay that. That's in one other way, probably less popular in my mind. That's a lot harder to rate. That's a hard Yeah. Think that's a hard one to But that's you know, I think the people that would argue that they don't use the airport and they shouldn't have to pay the fee, I I say you're gonna get the advantage when you sell your building of that, and if you're gonna realize that increase in property value because you have access.

I understand that. There's two houses for sale on the airport right now. If you read the listing, they both tout that they have Of course. Runway access even though neither one has a hangar. To the airport is a little sketchy for both, but that's how they're being marketed. So let's go to Nassar's because I I understand what's going on with Odyssey. I understand what's happening with Dick Chen. I understand what's going on with the hangars to the north, whatever you call those. We've talked about Schofield Barracks. So just for my information, I know you're deep into it, tell me how the NASA thing works.

Yeah. I mean, so it's it's commercial through the fence. In theory, we should go in there with tape measures and open every door and find out if they got an airplane in there. The HOA was reading the ordinance and interpreting it very, literally and making the argument that if they had a great big building and they only had one airplane because they are also industrial and maybe half of their building is got machinery in it. And so we were just getting in the weeds on that, to the point where, it was it was very contentious at one point.

And so we just came in. We actually the HOA came back and said, hey. We've got this many airplanes right now and this many units that are dedicated to, aircraft, and we agreed on a number, which was $15,000, which at the time was by square footage quite a bit more than the number of airplanes that were being stored there. So I would like that's why this you know, the a potential change in the ordinance that just said, hey. You have access, and this is your square footage It makes the whole makes a lot of this go away because then you don't have to go in and figure out whether they've got an airplane in there.

Maybe they've got a 7,500 square foot unit, and they've got one airplane in there. And they would argue, well, I shouldn't have to pay for all 7,500 square foot because in that particular development, it's, like, industrial and aviation. So they are allowed to have other things in their buildings, And they might argue, well, I just stuffed my one little airplane in there, but I got 7,500 square feet. I shouldn't have to pay for all that square footage.

They rented it because that kind of square footage was so much cheaper than off airport.

Who knows? Yeah. I I would I don't know. I would argue I

don't think Store storage space is just unbelievably expensive.

So, again, just trying get my head around. How much square footage does NASA have in the Hanger Space total?

I don't have that number at all.

And And how much are

we We have 50 Does he have 50,000 square feet? We're actually charging for 10,000 square feet because the other forty's got machinery

in it.

It's not I think for clarity, it's good to understand, first and foremost, when the arrangement for the $15,000 was agreed to. Was that under the developer's control or under the HOA's control?

That that negotiation happened with HOA.

Okay. Now the the thing that happens with $15,000 of which, again, I am a member of, that $15,000, that agreed amount price, then gets distributed by a square footage price of what your footprint is of your unit, whether you have a hanger in it or not. So the people that do there's a guy down on the end. All he stores is cars. He doesn't have an airplane.

It's not set up for an airplane. In the end, he still pays a proportional share based on his footprint of that $15,000 just like I pay mine's an office, two floors, 1,250 square foot footprint. I pay the through the fence fee portion of that $15,000 agreed upon price even though I don't have access to a hangar. Don't never will. It's just that 1,250 square feet amounts to a proportion of my HOA dues.

It is part of that 15,000. So I'll give you I'm the Schofield scenario, but it's not. Schofield is an actual price based on square footage. Masters is an I don't even wanna say Masters. Flight Business Park is a a negotiated, if you will, about that is in fact applied to a square footage. Again, lining up the scenarios even more.

Well, I just did a rough calculation at that at that 15,000, that 60,000 square feet that we're charging for. I just subtracted the hangars that I know very specifically have airplanes in them, and I come up with roughly 40,000 square feet of hangar. So we're charging for 60. As far as I know, there's about 40,000 that are being actually utilized as hangar tenants. And that was what that was what we did.

We went through, and we we pointed at hangars that we knew were hangars. And then we just said, okay. This is how many, and then we just came up with a percentage. And so far, I mean, most of those units has there's been one or two that have gone from light industrial to hangar. But even though even with that, I think we're still collecting more than the actual square footage.

We and we had the HOA come back and say, hey. We think 15,000 is too much. And we went through this whole thing. We had a couple of employee numbers from the airport come back and say, you know, I think we should and I'm like, are we really gonna go and measure every building, every year, every you know? Again, this is where an ordinance where it just says you have access, and this is you know, if there is three or 400,000 square feet, this is where it would be much easier. Would, a, it would generate a lot more revenue, but, b, it would be a lot more cleaner.

Well, what kind of impact would that have on the flight business park if we said, okay. There's 60,000 square feet of potential hangar space.

So much we're charging for now.

How much is it? Is there a 100,000 square feet?

I think there I think it's a new development, which is pretty close.

I think it's it's

Well, no.

I I think they're they're pretty close to the same, but I I wanna say it's 350,000 square feet.

The new one's a 175.

I was gonna say a 100.

I just measured the existing phase one that's already built, and it's about a 115,000. Okay.

So is that hangar and office space? Yeah. Total building footprint.

Total building. Okay. Okay.

But, like, you have an office that has no way to utilize the hangar that's behind you?

That is correct. The hangar behind me is a separate unit. I mean, I got in I know this because I used to store my airplane in there, but that can hold five airplanes with no problem.

But And that's where

it's a much larger space. So he's 75 by a 100, was it is that a hanger? Yep. So that's 75 by a 100. They're paying a larger portion of that $15,000 per year by virtue of there's more space. It's a much bigger space than mine, obviously. So see where I'm going with it? It's it it's very it's very convoluted. I think it all needs to be kind of washed out, addressed, and dealt with both on a fee structure point of view and from an ordinance point of

view, but we can't talk about the ordinance right now. You know, just from a progression standpoint, we started with the HOA in eliminating the office space because, obviously, you can't store an airplane. So Mhmm. We took square footage, and you can actually pretty easily on Google Earth and see the office is separate from the the total square footage, and we took that total square footage. And then we came up with a percentage of units that we thought were reasonably and it turns out the the first row that's up against the road, almost none of those have actually been utilized because of the way he built the doors.

They're two fifty foot garage doors with a big swing deal in the middle. Now, I don't think there's a single one of those units that's being used for aviation. And at the time of the negotiations, it was pretty won't say it was pretty clear that those units weren't popular with the people that were that had airplanes. And so that's where it kinda that's the evolution of the $15,000. And today, I mean, just by the numbers I do account, I pretty much know every unit that has an airplane in it. I think we're getting easily more than $15,000. We're we're getting probably $15,000 for what maybe should only be $12,000 worth of actual true square footage.

Should we change the ordinance? You said there's a 115,000 square feet at 85 square foot. We are beginning $30,000 up Great.

Yep. Instead of 15. Yep. Alright. To move this along, can you present those numbers that you sent?

Well, I can do all

the work, man. Sorry.

I'm just here for fun. I like

you guys.

Can you use present? I've got

one much for both.

No. I'll I'll phrase it this way. This gentleman here emailed to us a bunch of documents. That's liaising right now.

Yes.

So per his liaising, he sent a bunch of documents to us, one

of them

including an analysis of what some of the other airports charging for some of these things that we're talking about. I'm like

Let me pull that up.

Just because I'm ignorant. Is what percentage of the land that commercial buildings are on is land owned by the town? It's airport land.

Zero commercial? Zero. It's all private ground.

Yeah. It's all through the fence.

The only stuff on the town property is the box hangers that are per hangar.

Well, a little not.

That'd be okay. Portal. Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah.

I I won't bother you all going through the whole presentation, which is basically just this information, but slightly visually nicer. So, yeah, I talked to Jason, and I think, you know, Longmont, Boulder, and and Greeley Well, they're kind of the the most comparable. Rocky Mountain is is kind of a whole different beast in terms of the size of the airport and how much traffic happens. So looked at these three, kinda talked to to pip staff there to try and get these numbers. As you can see, our current we currently have the 25¢, which is that for the, you know, through the fence fee per square foot, and that's annual.

And then nobody else really said explicitly this is their through the fence number, but they gave me their their ground lease numbers, which they should be the same. That's kind of the the FAA grant assurances. You gotta charge people the same whether they're on the airport or they're off. So they're they're extremely comparable. Longmont is was at 36¢ a square foot annually. Really well is at 32¢. Boulder, I this is empty in the version you guys saw because I just got the information back today. And it was just one example, and it was at 68¢ a square foot, which is pretty high. So I get the impression that they they have different leases with different tenants. They just they just don't have much.

Yeah. And and they don't have much much going on. Anyways, that's another note. I put it on all the sides of this presentation. I talked to the airport managers at all three of these airports. Every single one made it very clear when they talked to me, don't take these numbers at face value. We're about to go through a fee study. And not I'm not kidding you. Every single every single person I talked to was, hey. These numbers are about to change for us as well. And and probably, you know, they didn't say it explicitly, but you can take it as granted the numbers will be going up, not down.

So these will be more baseline?

Yeah. These are kinda like, we're, you know, we're five to ten years behind, and they're maybe three to five years behind. And and so the numbers are are gonna probably be going up across the board. And I think, you know, if we were to come back and look at these numbers in summer of of next year, they they might look very different.

I just talked to the Greeley guy on Monday. Mhmm. And he told me they were at 35¢ a square foot.

Got it.

Yeah. So but yeah. Look. It's it's all in flux. So they're they're looking at it too. K. And they don't have through the fence. Yep. So it's just ground lease.

I think Walmart I think Boulder has very little. Rocky Mountain Metro has none, although they're not in there. It really has none. So through the fence, we are unique in that we have quite a bit more through the fence.

Yep. These are those are really just their ground lease rates. They're not through the fence. Yeah.

Jeffco's the same way. Right?

This guy's

Jeffco right now, I they talked to me. They said they're at 75¢ a square foot, but their facilities are

Much different. Light years ahead of where Twenty four hours. So they

have ILS.

A bunch of ILS approaches.

Lighting them

a lot.

That's different. Yep.

Yeah. Hanger leases prices. I estimated ours based on 750 square feet being at 7¢ a square foot monthly. Longmont said they don't have their own hangers. Boulder and Greeley have a couple, you know, different hangers of different sizes, and some have slightly different amenities. Like, you know, you've got your corner units on tee hangers that are gonna be bigger than than all the other ones. So the sizes are a little different. The timeline's a little different, but they average right around 30¢ a square foot plus kinda plus or minus. And that was, you know, in line with what was being recommended by the ABS study from 2023. Nightly monthly tie downs, you can see them there.

$5 and $40 at Longmont, 5 to 8 and 40 at Boulder, and then 5 and 65 at Greeley Weld. So we're we're more in line on the on the tie down front. And then fuel flowage, 7¢ a gallon for us, 6¢ at Greeley Weld and Longmont, and then up to 10¢ at Boulder. Real quick, Jason.

We're at 25¢ a square foot. Monthly tie down is $50. However, long months at 36¢ a square foot, their monthly tie down is $40. How does that equate given is it an ordinance restriction that we're facing again, or does the FAA kind of dictate how you arrive at it?

Again, I mean, I don't think the FAA has any hard rules. There just has to be some kind of, you know, mean

that you can

Yeah. That you can justify.

You know

what mean? When you look at the $50 and then you look at the $600 It's hard, fast calculation. Right. Yeah. I just I think you

got a lot of space.

Who's that? Longmont. Mhmm. Well, Longmont's got a lot more there. Yeah.

Well, their individual tied down spaces are gonna be the same size. And so, yeah, I you know, you know, the assumption is and this is, again, you know, where we can get off in the weeds pretty quick. But the assumption is you got one tie down spot, and that one airplane is impacting the airport to some degree. And then you got residential through the through the fence, and that's one airplane that's you know, I mean, we've even had people argue, hey. The the residential shouldn't be as much because the people in the tie downs get plowed out. Like, well, we're plowing the airport. They just happen to be on the airport. You know? Right. Like, well, we should get plowed out over here. I'm like, well, we can't drive on by the property and

The town plows Walters Drive in our HOA where you're about to

Right.

They don't plow Barry Place.

Right.

We tried to get the town to do it. They're like, we ain't doing it. We can't do it. Don't even ask. Right. But Walters is right there, so you gotta slosh through my street to get to Walters, which is the main. It's a constant thing.

Yeah. Well, I mean, we've had, you know, some resident well, they get they get three tied on ropes. Mean, well, here's three ropes. You know? I know. You You know? So I I mean, the the minutiae of all this stuff, you know, I think the bigger ones are Odyssey, you know, where Odyssey's got 15 planes, and they're paying through the fence even though, you know, they've got a bunch on property that are not in hangars right now. And so I think those are probably the bigger fish to fry. You know what mean? But we get off on them. So to answer your original question, there just has to be some attempt to try to make sure that we're not overly charging somebody, you

know, descript discriminating. But comprehensive in

our approach. Yeah. Right.

Think it it's very easy to write like, make the arguments and justify it. Right? Like, you could say the hangar lease should be the same as the tie down because it's just a spot to put your plane, but you'd much rather have your plane inside than outside of a tarmac. So that's why the hangar cost more, and the hangar might have office space and electricity and all these. Right? So that's why your your hangar lease rate doesn't need to be the same as your your monthly tie down rate.

But that hangar lease is an actual hangar at Greeley and Boulder where the Erie one There's

a there's a ground.

Just a land lease. So yeah. And that's why it's so much less. Right. They they own the physical structure. Yeah. Just lease the ground. The other ones, they're is is different. I think that's where the disparity there is.

Yeah. So, we're arguing, I'm not sure they own those t hangers and maybe some upper five or 600.

Greeley's got some hybrids. They've got covered tie downs.

Yeah. They're But all of shelters.

All of the structures at Greeley Airport are on town on the top, unlike Erie where many of the structures, particularly on the East Side, are not on town owned property. So we have a unique dynamic at at Erie that really does that.

Yeah. We have, yeah, we have a a much a much bigger through the fence. And and then the unique part of the the even more unique part of it is not many airports that are federally funded have an airport component. There are others out there, but the the residential portion of it

is very unique. You know? So So we have commercial through the fence. We have Residential. And we have residential through the fence. So Yeah. And that's what makes us unique. Alright. If we can keep going, so we're we're already at hours to do our beauty.

No. This is the this is the the data that I have. Okay. Yeah.

Alright. So maybe and I'm open to suggestions. Maybe what we do next is kinda compartmentalize like we just did officially. What are we looking at? We're looking at commercial. We're looking at residential. We're looking at potential because right now, the only potential ground lease or realized ground lease is the porta ports. Right. And, presumably, if you're successful in acquiring the building, if that happens, then there would be a ground lease component to that. And you'd be subject or your business would be subject as a tenant to the same structure.

Lease rate.

Right. So I think maybe we break it down into components, which are commercial through the fence, ground leases, residential through the fence, and then the folks like Odyssey, they they're all completely separate animal that's unique, but absolutely, positively needs to be So unless you all have suggestions of, maybe we move forward. That way, I

think that's right. That's Laffy, you had the previous analysis where you looked at three scenarios. Could you write that down? Yeah. Because I think that's where Paul's going. You know, he kinda got a broke out. You know, so we we can kinda play around the numbers and the scenarios, but it's the change in the ordinance.

Like, I think there's a couple components. Right? You know, do we want do do we look at, you know, is it just gonna continue to be a use fee? So if you've got an airplane, you pay it, or if you have access, you pay it. I think that's one component.

The rate is obviously a low hanging fruit to where we can just adjust the rate, whatever the appropriate rates are. And my suggestion would be we put an escalator in there so that we're not back here, you know, ten years from now trying to re you know, it I mean, it's been at 600 for, I believe I I wanna say fifteen years. And I I mean, I've been I've seen it go from two to four to six, you know, in thirty years. So I I feel like if we've had escalator in here, we'd probably be sitting you know, if we started at two, we had some CPI adjustment or something like that. We might be sitting at a, you know, eight or nine.

In, like Yeah. Every three years. We have for the number of years. But

yeah. It it we wouldn't we would we we might have something that's more appropriate, and we would have been generating more revenue. You know, I think so I think there's you know, do we do we wanna look at hanger, no hanger, or access? Do we wanna raise the fees and then or adjust the fees? Do we wanna put escalator in there? And then I think the third component is more development, you know, more hangars that we can charge these land leases to, you know, on airport.

Let's just make sure that and this is for you, Julian. Mhmm. I wanna make sure what we don't do is is cross over the line here in terms of this group discussing too much the ordinance. Okay.

Well, I think that all of this conversation is part of the ordinance. Like, a lot of the things Laki's talking about about, let's say, a few defense and residential of 33 or 55, that's part of the ordinance.

So you don't see if there's a problem in the terms of this at the end to talk about that as well. I hope not. Right. No. That's great.

There's two there's two different pieces to this. Maybe even three if you consider that. When we this when this body commonly referenced the ordinance, we think of, like, the adopting airport fund ordinance. That's a separate chapter municipal code that created the fund. Within the code, there's another section of, had the code up, chapter seven, which is the chapter two seven one through the fence access licenses permits. That's part of the code, so that is the ordinance. And amending that whole chapter two seven one is part of the code, so any changes to that text would be the Of course,

the change of the ordinance.

But Mhmm.

Yes. We're hoping to get more than just that change of ordinance, but that's separate Mhmm. As it relates to the fund.

For sure. And so that part of how we enforce through the fence fees, commercial rates, if it's the whole building, is it who has a plane, etcetera, that that changes more within that text of the ordinance, the enforcement of it. The rates themselves is part of the annual fee schedule that's adopted as part of the budget. So it's two separate piece. The just changing the numbers, that's the fee schedule of what Lockheys got up. How we enforce that fee or how we impose that fee and on whom is the ordinance.

Right. So given that, group number one, which is an easy one, is ground leases within the confines of the airport itself. Right? If you're gonna have a building in even future hangars, the Porta Port Hangars, the FDO Building. It's a pretty straightforward deal. Whatever the fee associated with ground leases is determined at,

that's gonna

dictate what it is. Right? And I'm like, okay. Move on to the next portion.

I'll say typically too, this is part of the negotiations we're doing with the FBO ground lease is because you've got a hangar, because it's got a door, because you you can't park right in front of it because so, typically, it's the footprint of the building.

In the airport.

And yeah. So it's usually a 115% is the normal. So you gotta All 100.

It

it well, it doesn't you you know, I mean, I I suppose you could you could carve out the piece, but, typically, it's another 15% in front of the building because you gotta be able to pull your airplane out. So you're you're occupying not just the building footprint, but the the space in front of it for your airplane. So Right.

So in the instance of a port a port, you're not pulling the plane out the back. Right. And in the instance of the FBO, there's the west side of the FBO. It's like, well, it's dirt and gravel, and not gonna put the plane

But on the hangar door side, right, we're constantly putting airplanes up there, and so that's that's where the 15%, which is what I've I've I've typically seen.

15% of the total square footage? Yep. Of the footprint.

Yeah. So your land leases

square 100 square feet, you're gonna get a 115 that you're charged for.

Exactly. Okay.

He's good with that. Yeah. So so the the fixed fee for ground leases, there's not a whole lot to do. Not a whole to discuss. Yeah. I mean What is the fee going to be?

Change the rate. Yeah.

The rate would determine it. It's pretty straightforward. We don't have to.

I think it I think one of the things that's happening now, and, I mean, this is just food for thought, but we are negotiating probably the first new land lease as part of this building deal.

Oh, yeah. There are parts you're gonna follow.

Well, That's right. It's gonna it's gonna the benchmark. It's gonna set you back to

It's gonna set the precedents for any new hangars. The t hangars are on a month to month land lease. It's pretty basic. It was drafted, you know, thirty years ago.

Well right. And we've I don't think any of us would suggest that we could be in and body up that at this point.

Just saying, you know, I I think there's gonna be a lot of terms that are gonna be negotiated in our land lease that will affect future development of that. You know? Because they should be the land lease. And as far as term Should be a guide. Yeah. Yeah. There should be it's

The rates on the porta ports couldn't be changed because they're under a contract.

Well, they're they're month to month lease.

Month month. Change them. Yeah.

It is just follow every role. So

but, you know, like, if if we settle on a thirty year land lease for the FBO Building, that's probably gonna be the standard for any new hangar development that comes in. Well, I think I always go back to the very

first resolution that we passed as being members of the board was to negotiate his contract that he has splitting it out. And as part of that, initiate a long term lease for the tenant, if you will, of the h of the FBO. We've always suggested it be I don't remember at least twenty years or because otherwise, the business owner can't really that wanted to come in and build hangers as a developer, the guy that's been here. He doesn't have a turn. He or she doesn't have turn long term ground lease.

They're not even doing.

They start getting a loan loan money on it. It's gonna be

They always work on it.

Even on twenty year, think twenties looks pretty light. They have 20 up before when they you you'll buy you'll buy a hangar. You you're seven years into it. There's thirteen years left on it. Somebody wants to come in and buy it. You know, a a commercial building lease is twenty years. So now they can't even get reasonable financing on it. So there either needs to be provisions in the land lease to renegotiate it with the new tenant, or there needs to be it needs to be a long enough land lease that you know? There's I've I've seen buildings at Boulder that had five years left in their land lease that no one would touch. Yeah.

That no one would buy them. The the people that own them wanna sell them, and who's gonna buy it with only five years left on it, and Boulder decided. And that's why they have a lot of their that's why they own a lot of them. They just wanna run out, and there's usually usually a revisionary clause in the land lease that says, at the end of the term, we can either renegotiate a new land lease or we get the building. Have a nice day.

Alright. So there's two components, I think. We get the low hanging fruit, the fee schedule. Right. We can make some recommendations today on the fee schedule based on this study that we'll. The not so low hanging fruit is the code, the ordinance, that we need to discuss more and how we get more equity with what's going on out there than we currently have. Great. Right. And then so I think we can do something fairly soon to help with our financial situation. I would But it's gonna take a little more work and time to do the other piece.

And the difference between user access is that

Yeah.

One of those two fees or or or one of those two parts, or is that a third part?

That's a question.

Yeah.

If I understand rephrase it.

If we change from use fees based on use to fees based on access, does that fall into one of those two discussions, or

is that No. I think correct me if I'm wrong or anybody disagrees. I think you have to look at both because certain certain go back to Odyssey. That's more of a use because they have ten, fifteen airplanes, and they're only paying one through the fence fee. You all are in agreement. That's absurd. And they've got access for all of them. That is correct. Yeah. However, you go over to your side of the equation where you live, both of you, I think that's a little bit different because different.

But I think it's a little bit different because you all are residents. You own the property. You may or may not have a hangar. You may or may not have direct access, but you're not running a business either.

But they have value based on the fact that

they have access. I understand that. And but part of the thing too is some of the residents have a building that has direct access to the runway. They keep their airplane there, but then they rent the space to another airplane that has nothing to do with them. It's just either a friend, a buddy, or whatever. And now that person has through the fence access that they don't pay for. Right. I think this is all what we need to think about. That's completely different than a strictly for use scenario that Odyssey has. They're running the business.

They're running I'm against the for use. I I think it should be based on access. Just like paying for the pool and the the clubhouse in Mon Ambu. It's there. You you use it as value when you try to sell your home, etcetera.

I think you guys agree on that. I think he what he's saying is, you know, how does it work out on the homeowner side if you've got one airplane that's your own and you're renting out another space, you're paying the one through the fence. There was a provision at one time in a previous version of the ordinance

32.

Where the it was $2.50 a year if you had your own personal aircraft in there. But if you were subleasing to other people, there was a four it was four or five. I feel like I was the only person paying it, but definitely

It's not definitely leasing out. I think there are different categories, if you will. Yeah. And a fee would be applied based on category.

Yeah.

Simply saying And the the other question that

I have is does a resident would they be expected to pay the same level as Odyssey in as as simplest terms? Well, I don't know the answer either. This is what we're here for. This is what we need to hash out. Odyssey is commercial. Exactly. That's part of what I'm getting at.

Maybe maybe we could just focus on just the airport, right, and the fee structure. And and I think a baseline, you know, like, I put in here, okay. You have a home with a plane. It's this price. Each additional is an additional thing. Right. And then if you have a lot that has access, then that's another number.

So you capture some of that. Sure. Absolutely.

So I I would just recommend to, like, obviously, you know, you know, hash it out, figure it out, think about where you wanna go. I would just say for for my sake, for Jason's sake is is do think about the administrative burden of the way you structure it. That's right. Does Jason now have to go knocking on doors and saying, hey. Do you have two airplanes in there, three airplanes in there, or or, you know, is he hiding in the bushes with binoculars? Yeah. Trying to figure out Right. Oh.

There there is it safe to say, Jason, though, that as the airport manager, you all know what airplanes are stationed there? Well, it

was my you know, but but let's keep in mind, I mean, that was so when we took over management of the airport, there were only seven through the fence fees being collected on the residential side, and that's because the airport manager in that situation

What's that do?

Well Didn't know. Yeah. He didn't know. I mean, you might have someone who's not an airplane person. Yeah. He might I just happen to know everybody that lives pretty much on the airpark, and I do I am there all the time, and I do know the different types. And so it is much it was much more difficult. I mean, at the time, it was Jody Lambert that was trying to keep track of it, and he just came out once a week, and he doesn't know who has a point. And they would send out, mail to all the homeowners, and they'd say, Mark here if you got an airplane. No.

I don't have one, and nobody you know? Meanwhile, I just sit over there and, you know, like, every day, you know, I know who's I know who hasn't. But so I agree. I I agree with your recommendation. I agree. I I from the beginning, you know, from an administrative standpoint, which is better than policing and all that stuff. I don't wanna be the police, but Yeah. From an administrative standpoint, it's a lot easier to go. You have you have improved access to the you can go out your back door, open your hanger door. You don't have an airplane.

So you're you need a category, and that's what you're obligated to.

Yeah. Exactly. You you fall in this box. We're gonna charge you this much. I I don't disagree that if maybe you have access, but it's unimproved, maybe that's it's at a different level. But there's 55 homes that have ease easement access to the airport. You could conceivably categorize each one of those homes as improved access, maybe easement access. One of

the recommendations from the ABS study, think, is very helpful with administrative and policing, is instead of the town airport manager going door to door collecting a $600 check from 33 homes, is that the actual HOA takes the steps to be fully incorporated, recognized by the state, has all the right documentation, whatever, and that the HOA is the repository of the fee from all 33

They pay like they pay like Schofield.

They pay directly to the HOA, and then the HOA writes one check to that

They like Works. Flight Works. Yeah.

Yeah. You know, I I read that in the study. You know, that was a resident of the airport. That ship has sailed.

Mhmm.

There is no There is no HOA that couldn't exist in the vehicle structure pretty well. And, you know, if that had been done in 1978, maybe it would've worked. But to try to get everybody that lives in an airpark now to agree on an HOA structure that does exactly what you just mentioned, I don't see that happen.

So I think I think

that would be when that door is open versus There's lot of Let's find a new way to achieve what we need to achieve.

Probably try it.

And and maybe a simpler one is you have access. You're using it. This this one. And you don't you have access, but you're not using it. And that kinda simplifies things. You're not trying to count airplanes.

But is anybody that has access not using it for?

Yeah. Yes.

No. In reality, if you have the access, you're using it for value of your home. Oh, for value

of home.

You're potentially you have the ability to rent out space. Yes. You are using that access. You can't just ignore that you're Right.

I think we're all saying the same thing, and that is speech, but everybody pay at the airport pays a baseline amount. And if you are using that access, you're gonna pay more. And if you are using that access and you rent space out to yet another airplane, there's, like, a third tier that you're going to be expected to pay. Is that what I'm hearing or no?

I think so. So there's there's houses that have no hangar but have deeded access.

Yeah.

So they get when they can you know, they pay $500. And then there's people that have hangars with an airplane in it. They pay a thousand dollars. And then there are people that have a hangar that has multiple airplanes in it that they are renting out, and that is happening on the airport. Yep. Even though it's not supposed to be, it's happening. Do they pay a thousand dollars plus $2.50 for each airplane they have

in there

or something like that? They should.

Yeah. I mean It might be more complicated to administer.

But the I I agree with

the concept. Can say it's not legal for you to rent out that space and that access without charging through the front street.

Yeah. I mean, you know, I want people to utilize their hangars to the maximum ability they can. You know, if they can have four airplanes in there and generate some revenue, I'm all for that. But I think there needs to be some equity here on how we charge them with the food defense.

Well, right, because I I'll give you an example. I rented from Scott Delaize for a period of time. He had his hangar in there.

His airplane in the second year. He had your buy it. And he was probably paying one thing.

I was paying him $700 a

month to put my plane in there.

You're paying him in one month what his access fee was for the whole year?

Well yeah. So so there's a balance between what you're saying is, yeah, you should pay extra because you're now receiving revenue. But never in a million years would I go to Scott or any other homeowner that has the ability to rent it out and say, you need to be paying $700 more per year or even $600 or, you know, the the equivalent of what he's getting every month. That is ludicrous because you essentially drive away the incentive for

Yeah. Let let's face it.

Mhmm. When I have my airplane and now I lease my I lease a hangar from someone else at the

airport, k, What am I doing when I

need fuel in my airplane? I'm not leaving. No. I'm taxiing across the way, and I'm buying at the fuel farm so the town receives the revenue. We don't wanna drive people away from here. Right.

We wanna have an economic situation. Personal. But so you were with Scott. He was charging 7. I don't know if he was paying two, three of fencing ringets. No. Now you're down at ODEP. Does ODEP pay He pays it through the He sends

it through the fence. Plus just one. Now I'm the only airplane in there now, which is happy times for me. Yeah.

But had two airplanes in there. He'd still won't be

Under the current scenario, which I think we're all in agreement to. You're not saying much. I'm curious as to where you are.

Being all that's great.

If you were paying if you're

a resident of the air park, and I'm really interested in where you are with respect to what we're talking about because you live there, and you you have a lot of residents on your side that you talk to. And, you know, I'm curious to be facing our we're gonna face a revolt no matter what. Mhmm. K? But let's face it. I don't like paying $700 a month to put my plane inside.

K? You know, we're not

gonna face revolt changing the current fee. I think most of us that live over there that are paying $600 know it needs people. And I've talked to my neighbors to all of their planes and cars, and then we talk thousand dollars, $1,200 is what it should be. I don't think that creates any. Where we're really gonna struggle is when we go from 33 to 55 and then start trying to change these other things. That's when these guys are gonna have people down at city hall saying this is bullshit.

So, you know The 33

to 55, what are you talking what are referring

The 55,000.

The ones that aren't using the access. Right.

And I think I think you're probably to get some consternation if you go to them and say, well, look. If you're renting your hanger out for somebody to somebody else, there's a fee associated with that too, but it's more than a thousand dollars if that's where it ends up being.

Paul, I'll say we've we've always since 2023, when we completed the the big executive document with ABS, our steps have always been kinda one, two, three. Get the manager contract done first, Get the FBO agreement done second. Still underway. Right. Once those two priorities are handled, then let's start the engagement on the fees conversation.

That's right.

We're not done with the FBO yet. We also recognize and I think this is direct from counsel, but endorsed by me, Todd, Malcolm, and others. I don't believe any member of council, sorry, Neil, wants to bring forward an an ordinance amendment at council meeting without any engagement whatsoever. I think there there has always been an assumed level of engagement with the Airpark, with NASA, with whomever before pushing out any kind of ordinance amendment fee schedule, whatever, to roll out an updated fee schedule. Because of, like you mentioned, the sensitivity around fees and who's getting charged and what.

This is an advisory body that makes advisory recommendations to that body, but, ultimately, it's their decision to make. And they work they represent the residents because they're elected by the residents, not you guys.

Correct. Correct. And and I would have anticipated that any of what you just said would be rolled out as part of YOLO's representation of the channel.

For sure.

Yeah. We we could opine and discuss and recommend all we want, but really in the cramp.

So you guys have a way of engaging, like, just, you know, the air park presence Sure. Over just the commercial side? Or

We could do open houses, public forums, send out mailings, online media, whatever kind of stuff. We have communications teams that do all that all day every day.

Which you should do and you will

do. Yeah.

Yeah. That's what I'm hearing.

Surveys, whatever. That kind stuff.

And it's important that everybody listening on to this understands that that Yeah. We're not trying to pull a fast one. That's the way it should happen. We don't have any control. Yeah. I think

for you, it's about, like, coming up with whatever is a reasonable amount and convincing and education and outreaches all up to Sure. Start. His body is like the brain.

If we if we take the posture that the FAA does of what is fair is fair for everybody, then that's a good place to start the argument. You know? If if one person is being charged through the defense fees, then everybody is charged through the fence fees.

Agree with that. Yeah.

Think I think everybody and I don't see it as everybody should pay. I think everyone should support the airport in a way that's fair and equitable to each one of those. But it's fair to say.

A good point, wouldn't it?

So the new scenario table is blank.

Yeah. Yeah. It's 08:00.

Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah. Again, we're not gonna make any decisions. This is a session to get all the information, and then we can have further discussions about in terms, okay. This is what we got. This is what we talked about. We we have an understanding of where we are. I think we have a really good understanding in terms of the airpark with respect to potential structure, possibly three. Right? Everybody's cool with that?

Alright. So then I think we move we move we've covered two now. We've kinda figured out what we need to know. But now let's move to, I'm gonna say, commercial, but then I'm gonna, again, keep the specific scenario, like, I don't wanna be beating the crap out of Odyssey, but kinda treat them as a little bit separate or subset of commercial. Yeah. Does that make sense?

Is that what you just call it on residential? Yeah. Residential and nonresidential. You know?

Well, but, yes, but, again,

you have

and this is I wanna make sure everybody understand where I'm coming from and it and it's an agreement with me here or not. But you have nonresidential flight airpark that is businesses that have access to the airport if they will have a plane and wanna you utilize that. But then you have a nonresidential like Odyssey that is running a business. It is essentially the equivalent of a flight school where they don't have just one airplane or two. They got 10, and that's different than the commercial operations that

are The really the unique component of Odyssey is they have a lot of airplanes that are not on your roof. If they just had a big giant hangar and all their planes were in the hangar, we would just be drawing a big square around it and charging them better to the

Under the current rules, but I don't think that should stay. I really don't. I don't know what you all think.

I think it makes

entity that's housing whether they're inside or outside that has 10 airplanes and they're running a business, they have access to the runway, and they're using it more than everybody else.

I agree, but I I think that's that's why the square footage is there. Right? Like, you you you have a bigger hangar. You have more potential to store more airplanes, and therefore so the unique part about, in my mind, about Odyssey is they have a lot of airplanes, and they're not under roof. If they just have a big giant hangar, they'd be paying a lot more through defense fees because we we calculate all under roof. So if they could if they could jam all their airplanes current rules. But but I'm saying so to my point, like, you know, their hangar's only this big if it's three airplanes. They've got 15. If they had a hangar big enough for 15 airplanes, they would be paying three or four five times more than they're paying that one through defense fees.

But they effectively have a big hangar. They just decided not to put a roof over capital.

Actually It's

not Utah. It's not Utah. Yeah.

They've been they wanted to build more hangar space, but they can't because of the floodplain. Yes. That's why there's a bunch of spots in there that are designated originally to build hangars. And they'd like to do more, but they can't.

It was the question. Could we change the ordinance to include kind of, like, the effective area that they're actually utilizing title space?

I mean, you know, it could be

Yeah. But you just said earlier that you think there should be a per use.

Per use are also the the parking there. Correct? Like, they're not parking outside of so they're using it. No. I I

I said they're impacting the airport more than their through the fence fee represents. We all agree with that. My point was is that the the unique part about Odyssey is that they just don't have a big enough building. If they could stuff all those planes in the hangar, they would be paying more through the fence fee, which would offset their use of it. So if they could fit all well, they got 10 airplanes sitting outside. They built a much bigger hangar. There'd be a much bigger square foot. They'd pay 25¢ a square foot times a three times bigger building. And then as far as equity goes, in my mind, it makes sense. It's no different than Schofield having a 100,000 square feet and being able to put a 100 airplanes in there.

It's a square footage. So the biggest so that's the all I'm saying is that's the unique aspect of Odyssey is they don't have they're the only through the fence operator that has a bunch of airplanes sitting outside and and are crossing and coming back and forth. And not using your fuel.

Correct.

But they're they they well, they haven't.

I think and I think that's a mistake.

Yeah. Do they fail

My opinion, I think.

They can't really I

agree that Not really. The all the airplanes that are sitting outside, the fact that there's not additional fees that are that are administered to them is not fair.