Airport Economic Development Advisory Board - Regular Meeting

K. Calling to order the 12/18/2025 meeting of the Erie Airport Economic Development Advisory Board. Roll call. Michael Bowden. Here. Kevin Kane has informed me he's not coming. Emmett Dowling. Here. Paul Weth Dowling is here. Andrew McCutland. Here. Martin. Here. Jennifer Webb. Excellent.

Has everybody got a copy of the agenda? Questions, comments, motion to approve. Second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Excellent. Does everybody have copies of their has seen the September meeting minutes? October. September and October listed? September, we've already gone over before, but October. K. Any questions regarding those minutes? Motion to approve? I move. Second. All in favor? I. Opposed? So minutes from October 16.

Oh, yeah. Sorry. We'll do that as soon as we're over. Thank you very much for that.

Because it's not listed.

Oh, you got me all flustered here. October 16, Bennett. Everybody seen it. Motion to approve of in favor? So moved. Second. Favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? K. We're gonna stop right there and have the pledge of allegiance. Sure. You could start us off. Yeah.

I'd be happy to. It was the flag in there. It's beyond. Alright.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of

The United States Of America and to the republic for which it stands, one one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Sure. Okay. Let's go. Get on the vote.

Okay. We see anybody. Nobody can do public comment through that. All in person. No. This is no one here.

Alright. We had, like what was it? Like, 15 people in here last time. I mean, it was most I'd ever seen.

There's quite a few.

Yeah. Did anyone offer an explanation of why there were so many people last time? I think the Colorado

Pilots Association put up notice about the meeting because what was going to

be discussed of interest is Did they comment,

or did they just kinda hang out?

No. No. They wanted

to comment. They do a sign in sheet and ask them if they want to. All those seats were pretty much full. I think we had some over there too. We had to pull in other chairs. Nobody come in, but we sent in.

Is it possibly from the new group that's forming? It's got Possibly. And just a late form.

There was nothing on the sign in sheet that indicated that the any of them represented that group.

They seem to be Who they got? Clandestine.

I think there was one lady that was from Compass, and she was the only yeah. But she didn't say she was with that group, but she

said We decided.

Had Airport's too noisy.

Yeah. Yeah.

Give me a little guidance here in terms of this way. For your letter? Yeah.

I think as part of your report fee conversation, if you wanna make sure that everybody agrees with that perspective, you can, by motion, ask if it's okay that everybody sign it.

Yeah. So one of the things I wanna do as part of the fees was landing fees. And I drafted this just short one pager, the undersigned individuals as members of the Erie Airport Economic Development Advisory Board, affix our signatures below in opposition to the town of Erie implementing aircraft landing fees at the Erie Municipal Airport. K? Absolutely. Before we go any further,

set it aside here and make sure everybody has an opportunity to

opine, make a comment towards this. Because if there is no opposition to this from anybody or even if you are opposed to it, we'll pass it around, and then you would sign it, and then he would take it with the truck.

We had a unanimous decision in the previous meeting. A

Public record. Yeah. Already.

We already.

Yeah. We got seven zero.

I'll add that the AOPA magazine that came out yesterday. There's an article that it talks about the landing fees, and there's legislation being introduced to congress that will forbid the use of ADS B for collecting fees. Is that right? So that's in process right now.

That's a good development. Yep.

So, chair, can I interject? Absolutely. So one of the challenges that I think any of us in the elected official, capacity is that we've got to, keep some level of communication going from the residents, many of whom would love the airport shut down, and the economics of the airport, right, the subsidies of the airport, which have come into play in I don't know how long it's been, but a number of years ago. Right? That's a a theme out there.

And so if the airport advisory board, the economic board isn't okay with those fees, then there's gotta be something else that you guys bring to the table that we can have that conversation. Otherwise, I am concerned that the group that is anti airport will start to get legs. And it'll start to get legs because you're feeding them information that they can go to the populace, right, the mass of people and to say, look. The airport is not self sufficient. The airport, advisory board will not allow fees.

The touch and go, which is, you know, I think the biggest issue that I hear hear about. I'm sure Brandon hears about it as well. And so how do you do that so it doesn't just look like the airport advisory board is just, hey. Everything pro airport, but there isn't the balance out there.

I would say sit tight, mister mayor. Alright. So

that that's what this meeting is what it's about.

It's about okay. We will wanted to get this over just so we have it memorialized in terms of our positions relating to.

It may be better no matter what you have with the fees just to stay neutral on that because you're gonna feed the anti airport group a document that basically says, we don't wanna do this. And they'll they'll latch on to it. That's all I'm saying. I'm talking about the politics.

We we will be running PR campaigns via a booth in Eartown activities and things. Yeah. Specifically on education of why the airport even exists, what it benefits the community, and we can absolutely have literature that answers all these kind of questions. Okay. Just

putting it out there.

I think I'm

good. By the way, I'm pro airport.

I have no dog in the fight to show you the airport. I know the FAA rules. There's nothing No. We we have to address that, Drew.

There's no question

about

that.

Exact. I'm coming just because I'm gonna hear it from both sides. Yep.

Alright. Let's think we're going in the right Alright.

Let's let's

We've all talked considerably about this amongst ourselves. Granted, these signatures in the end only mean this is what we think. It's just an advisory board.

Yeah.

Ultimately, it's up to you all. But I think after you see this, I think you'll have a different view of what's going on. I really do.

Alright. Let's go for it.

But in addition to the landing fees topic, we probably need to do some type of public explanation of why we are not in favor of a road going through here. Yeah. Neither neither am I.

Yeah. You're lunchtime.

So Not on the agenda, folks. Yep.

Okay. Is

there okay. Is there time at the end, after we're done with the agenda? I just I just wanna address that one point so it does need to yeah.

I think so. Okay. Yeah. Okay. For the, know, the public and for you, we've had a number of study sessions, thank you, to discuss this very subject.

Think we've put a lot of effort into it, and everybody that's here knows that I've reached out to them individually, one on one, to have a discussion with them, get their input in terms of where we're at, where we think we need to go. For your own benefit, it included this gentleman here and town staff. I covered as many as I could in the last two weeks. It was pretty brutal in terms of the time commitment. I got some beers out of it, but that was good.

We started off with a framework. Thank you, Lyle, who did his first cut of it. And I know a lot of you it's repetitive because I've done this spiel to every one of you, but it's primarily for your benefit. What we've discovered is there's a number of issues relating to this particular subject and I tried to outline it on this summary if everybody doesn't have a copy of it. For most of you, it'll be repetitive.

Okay? There were a number of things that came up and seem to flush out, and that is, number one, the square footage rate that is currently by code 25¢ per square foot. How that's measured is kinda different depending upon what category you fall in. The 25¢ is too low. In some of our studies and our meetings, particularly for some of the stuff that you've provided and what was provided in the consultant's report.

I forget what the name of the consultant was. ABS. ABS. They did a survey of some of the lease rates and whatnot. This seems to be competitive at 36¢. Where the council ends up in terms of those rates depends, obviously, on them, but it's not the most expensive rate. It's not the cheapest rate. The bottom line is the 25¢ rate is way too low, and it has been in there way too long and has never been adjusted. But it's by code. So it's up to you all to change it.

To adjust it. That is correct. Is there a list of the comparative airports

and the rates?

We could get that to you. We've had it in

the past. The I've got Rocky Mountain. It's right here. And theirs really varies from, you know, 30¢ a square foot to market rate. Yeah. That's all it's So, basically, whatever they choose to charge, and it's it's quite high.

Do you have, like, Boulder, Longmont?

Gree Greeley Greeley is currently moving to

39, I thought you said.

Was it 39? Yeah. And Greeley is, you know, quite a bit out.

And you've done just ask that because the more information we have to say, hey. We've done due diligence, and we've looked at other airports. And that helps us make the changes.

We've looked at all

of them.

And that's the data we've used. So, yes, that it's available. I wasn't sure that you all have.

Oh, if you remember a couple meetings, you're locked. You did

a whole slide deck comparing everyone around us.

That's right. Mhmm. So, yeah, there's plenty of information to support any arguments that we have. I'm gonna work just from the top down and start with tie down fees. The current rate for tie down fees at Erie is $50 a month. Correct. The tie down rate at Rocky Mountain National at Rocky Mountain Metropolitan Airport is moving to $223.96 January 1 for an airworthy aircraft

and $500 per month if they're not airworthy.

Catch that. It's significant. So they charge almost double to tie an airplane down for a plane that doesn't fly.

Yeah. They don't wanna sell Right.

That well, it's kinda like a car in the neighborhood. Right? If it's, lost, and they're working on it for

Yeah.

That's exactly right. So we are not recommending at this point to take that step, but what we are recommending is that a minimum amount of $100 per month for tie downs at Erie for an airplane regardless of whether they fly or not.

Do we have other tie down comparisons? Or, Lucky, were you able to do that for other airports?

Let me double check.

And so I asked that question because once again, us making code changes, you know, how do we all hold a straight face?

No. No.

And so if if Rocky Mountain is charging $202.20, why wouldn't we charge 200? Or you know, that that's the type of question we'll get.

I think Do you have more services available Correct. At the airport? Quite a bit more. They have a tower. They have a precision approach for aircraft there. They have three runways.

Take the time. But does that directly translate to the tie down fees? Do people pay more to tie down because of those things?

It's a little bit of a I I mean, they're just trying to maximize their revenue, and they've got I don't know. They probably have 75 to a 100 tie down spots. Yeah. And maybe half of them are taken by rental fleet.

Entirely commercial. So

but they're they are they are aiming to be a commercial airport.

Got it. And so what we're gonna be looking at is, alright, is the airport bringing in as much revenue as they can, you know, in the business model, right, to to get the subsidy as low as possible. And I want that. I think you ultimately should want that because then it takes one of the pressure points off of the whole debate. Yep. Right? If we're if we're putting money into the airport at the expense of the police or parks or whatever, you know, you choose your general fund favorite topic, it puts fuel into the into the group that That is correct.

You know, fight. And our goal, and I think we can prove it, is to

A few months ago, we did have this handout in Lucky, I don't know if you made this

or not, but it says advanced brand, long month, was $40 a month for tie down. Boulder was $40 a month for Tietown. So so it it would

be the 15. We're going to a 100.

Greeley was 65. The biggest thing just to remember from when I pulled those numbers is every single airport manager that I talked to said they were also going through a fee study, and their prices were gonna be going up in the next year.

Yeah. And I I think when we all talked about this, including you, it hasn't been addressed in so long Yeah. Sure. That we we realized that the jump, although it may deserve to be higher, that jump now is indeed to be happening so fast, so soon. So we're trying to balance between where we have been for way too long, where we think it should be eventually given the market rate. I don't think we really know what is the market rate for Erie for tie downs. We know that it's right now, it's too low.

Do we what's the demand for our tie downs? Do we use them all?

We don't use them all. I I would say most of the people that are tied down want a hanger, so there's more demand for hangers.

Yeah. Okay.

But what you'll find is you'll have people who don't wanna pay the $230.96, which is a weird number or whatever, but but still live in Westminster, Broomfield in that area, don't wanna pay that much. Erie is seven miles. So they'd rather tie down. So if we find a lot of our tie down customers are people that don't wanna pay the exorbitant fee over there, but still want their airplane close enough to the house. And so that's that's why I feel, in my opinion, you know, just one person speaking, you know, raising it to a 100 is not you know, raising it to 200, now you're just gonna go, well, let's go to the airport with a bigger runway and other stuff.

It's not a big enough. But if I can if I can drive it five miles north instead of five miles south to get to my airplane and pay half as much. But I but I will tell you, I I think most of the people that are tied down would like to have a hangar, and that's part of the RFP that we're looking without. So

K. Centennial is 200 to 400, and other airports are 75 to one fifty. Yeah.

I think the real ones, at least like, that tells me if you were gonna have a conversation with greater public, it's like Boulder and Longmont are probably the ones in the Longmont's

in the process of doing a rate study, and I think they'll probably end up in the $100 rate. Yeah. That's Yeah. My gut feeling talking to the airport manager.

Would you agree for comparison purposes if you were gonna list these airports? Longmont would be almost equivalent with Erie.

Oh, yeah.

We we have a similar is below Erie.

Yeah. No much from approach at Boulder. Right. High winds, a lot of, you know, glider activity, which tends to very comparable. Right. Same size runway, similar type of kind

of Right. That's kinda how we all kind of viewed it. How do we fit into the general vicinity?

And I think our public would accept that. Right? If we said, hey. We're competitive with Longmont. It'd be hard to dispute that.

It would be to dispute that. That is correct. We don't compete with Rocky Mountain, but we're not trying to.

Yeah. Yeah. Okay.

Okay. Now we have the issue of porta ports. Do you know what the porta ports are?

Not off the top of my head. I really

know when you start to Yeah.

Jimmy. Wait. Just this beside his FBO building, there's a bunch of old Ricky looking

Oh, yeah. Yeah.

They have trailer hitches.

Yeah. Ricky. Literally. So you

could hook them up to a trailer.

They're gonna go drag. Yeah. But they didn't blow away glass.

They don't blow away. They every day

they come in, they're still there. They're still there. So those are all independently owned. They sit on the airport grounds, and they pay a monthly lease for that ground lease. It is a month to month lease. They're there as long as grease for them to stay.

How many are out there? 20. 20.

17. And there's two different sizes. So at my request, he had one of his folks kindly go and measure the square footage, both things two sizes. They're eight sixty or a 75 square feet. You said 20, so there's what is it? Of those if there's 11, there's only 10 of the smaller ones. Should those numbers be adjusted? And if so, we should do that now.

So the the 21 is

count them. How much for how long?

What do you mean?

Well, I'm I'm So right now, they're paying $600 a year for $50 a month. Okay. So where am I seeing that? I guess I'm missing Type a

860 square feet. Yep. I'm gonna get to that in a second because if you do 25¢ or even 36¢ per square foot for a yearly lease, it comes out to, like, $25 a month if you're measuring it as a strict ground lease.

And shouldn't that be higher than the tie downs?

Yes. That's where we're

going. Okay.

So what we discovered that given that, we think because now you're a tie down with a roof, essentially. So we kinda came up with the idea that they're really for these smaller hangers and up to a certain size, there should be a minimum. And at this point in the spreadsheet, the smaller type, we match that with the tie downs at a 100, $100 a month minimum. K. For the larger ones, a 75, square feet would be a 125. Right?

And I just got I guess count number is 21. So that number is right.

That number ten and eleven is correct? Yeah. Mhmm. Right. So then we went a step further because we had in one of our study sessions, someone presented us a proposal just because we asked them for 40 by 45 individual box hangers that would each hold one airplane. Those are 40 by 45. I forget what the square footage is. But based on conversations with Jason here, when you think of the square footage of a hangar, it's the foot. But, traditionally, like he says, you add 15% because there needs to be an apron on the front of the thing with concrete, and that's where the plane's pulled in and go out. You're never going to build another hanger there.

Otherwise, it renders the the door useless. So for every square footage footprint, adding 15% on a 40 by 45 banger comes out to 2,070 square feet as an example. I put this in there as of just a kind of a, what if, but that 2,070 square feet still comes in below a $100 a month on a ground lease. So you

still put a minimum in?

And we put that minimum in at a 150. Well, why? Why is it more? Well, these are presumably hangers that will be built.

And you can't drag them away. Well and you're

gonna have a, say, a twenty year ground lease with a ten year, you know, re renewal. Yeah. So they're permanent. Well, that permanency should cost you a little or so we pegged it at a 150.

And do we know have electricity also. Right?

What's that?

That going to be nice because they're brand new, and they probably will have electric

To be determined because we're not in

the area. But, lucky, if you would do me a favor and on the new hangars, just put the number 10 like I had in there before. And presumably, if you have 10 hangars, what are you gonna have in it? 10 airplane. Yep. So if you would put the 10 on the airplanes, that would be great. Jason One thing we need to

look at, though, is under

the RFP that I saw, unless it's changed, we're displacing the port hangers with the new hangers.

But they may be Again, that's

we relocate those hangers, we lose the revenue that you're showing up here.

Correct. Correct. We need to And I think try

to find a place to relocate them if we can.

Or give them first right of refusal on something that's coming into the place. I mean You're so far from that.

If you're gonna relocate 20 at a 100 a month with 20 at a 150 a month, that's a net positive. And I agree with you. Like, I don't I don't I've never wanted to be the one to evict, and I do kinda some days wish they would just blow away. I'm like, you know, wouldn't wouldn't be my problem. But the but the the biggest problem right now is there's only five or six airworthy aircraft in those.

And so for them to go away and, you know, they've they've been a lot of them have been subleased for years, and people have just subleased them on top of subleasing on top of subleasing. I've gone to a few of the people that have airplanes in those hangars and said so the way it typically works is when you if you have, say, a developer comes in and builds two rows of hangers and they put in the apron around it, there's an HOA or the developer agrees to maintain the the asphalt. They agree to do the snow removal. They agree to do stuff like that. I've had the conversation with a couple of people that have, the hoarder ports about if they wanna be relocated or if they wanna stay on the airport, they need to, one, put an airport the airplane in every one of those hangars, and, two, do something about the the maintenance around them.

So why not and I don't know if we can do this legally, but could we change the code to say that these types of hangars have to have an airplane

in them? Yes.

Actually Yes.

The the grand assurances we take from the FAA whether we promise to the FAA, that you have to have airplanes and hangars. And correct me if I'm wrong. So that's just been a difficult point for other airports to enforce. They've been in the same boat, but, ultimately, that's that's what is supposed to happen.

Do we have anything in our code?

I'm looking to right, Julian. Do you know if we have anything in our code to force that today even if it's not being enforced? Do we have I can check. Our code in that section hasn't been updated in a very long time.

I don't believe so.

I don't think so, but we are But you guys would be supportive if We are right.

On the section. It's 100%.

The existing lease agreements have some it's kind of vague language about requiring an airworthy aircraft that makes enforcement difficult. I've been working with our airport attorney, and what we're planning to do is once we get the FBO agreement with Vector finalized, then the town so the current existing ground lease is unclear, the terms with with Vector. And so it's kind of unclear whether the town or Vector owns the land underneath the underneath those porta forts and who would be the enforcing those contracts. So our intention is once we get the new FBO agreement with Vector signed, which will clarify that the town owns and manages the ground underneath the porta forts, we'll redo the contracts with the town instead of with Vector Air. And as part of those redone contracts, we'll have a better enforcement mechanism for ensuring that the they maintain an airworthy aircraft in there.

And as part of those discussions, we'll figure out how we wanna go about enforcing that decision. But just so you know, no. That is something that we're working on.

Okay. Perfect. That's right in line with what we're

And then I've heard the is it the Schofield Hangars, the the ones that are further to the south? I hear the same argument being made. There's a lot of them without planes in them.

Yeah. But the difference is these these porta ports, they sit on airport town owned property. And that's the by that property with a lot that is a fact case with a lot

of them.

Could we still force that because it's airport usage? That it's it's

a it's a zoning question. But Yeah. I think you probably could Right. Look into it for sure.

You know? And we we've sort of addressed that as well. So Well, you'll see. Okay. So I can't say you'll see.

It's really hard for us to approve sort ofs.

Yeah. No. No. No. You'll tell me what I mean by sort of when we get there. Alright. Okay? But I wanna go through this because there is a logical transition from top to bottom. Okay. So we're gonna talk about the FBO, which is this gentleman's home. Okay? Home being business. He has 14,950 square feet calculated, and that his footprint plus 15%. Obviously, he's got a big hangar. That's a big footprint on terms of the apron, but that's what we came up with.

And at 36¢, that comes out to $5,382 per year. Granted, he's way over the minimum. So the mid the for per square foot lease rate is a minimum of a 150 for the square footage price, whichever is greater, k, when calculated against the square footage at 36¢.

So if I'm speaking to the public again, that seems really low. Does it seem really low?

I mean, it's

I mean, I know it'd be a great deal for you.

It's it's comparable, and that that was actually what town councils proposed, so a 115%. Actually, they did a 100% originally, and I said, look. It should be a 115% because we have tarmac space around it. But

k. And how does that compare to, like, Longmont?

It's almost identical. Yeah. They got a price per square foot. They have a they have a much smaller FBO building, but it's a 115% of that square footage. Does it leak?

Supposedly. Yeah. You got it. Yeah. Supposedly ours doesn't.

At least I'm aware of it.

Yeah. So I appreciate it.

Matters to me. Yeah. Yep.

Yeah. That's like the flat tire. It's only flat on the bottom. Yeah. It's leaking in that one spot.

But that is just the cost of the land and structure, so it's not like I'm renting the building for $5,000. Yeah. It's the cost of land beneath it. You know, I've rented I've owned hangars at other airports, you know, a 70 a a 7,000 square foot hangar at at Spaceport, which is from Front Range was, like, $2,800 a year. So yep.

Good. Yeah. I'm following. Okay. Now I'm gonna pivot.

K? Because as part of our discussions and our part of it discussing landing fees and whatnot, we are recommending that the town adopt fee called referenced as a aircraft access fee. Basically, what we're talking about is if you have an airplane, airworthy or not, that is based in Erie Airport, you're gonna pay a yearly fee to be there. Doesn't matter how many times you take off, doesn't matter how many times you land, doesn't matter where your plane is, whether it's in a private hangar, commercial hangar, Schofield hangar, tie down, whatever,

started with a price of $800 a year. And that was based on

market demand comparable, if you will, to the $800 starting off with the airpark. But we had to come up with a number to begin with, and this is where we started. And so it'll be the same question. How does it compare to the surrounding airports? And it doesn't because, apparently, no one else is doing.

No. And nobody else has an air park.

So we think So you're talking

about everybody in the air park too? Everybody. Yeah. Everybody on the air the industry. You Airports, Goldfield, NASA. But if you have an airplane, you know, Scott's got his hangar with a couple airplanes in it. So you apply there. Yep. Yep. So what we're

So now here is

we do pay the through the fence fee, which we're currently paying. Now we're gonna add this other fee for each airplane. So if Scott has two airplanes, he pays 800 times two.

Which which I think addresses why because you're looking at me, you're going, hey. Jason's got seven airplanes that he runs in and out. That's the next number down. So on top of my land lease, I would pay for the seven airplanes, which utilize the airport, an additional $5,600 a year. How do

you think it's gonna be accepted by the airport residents? I'm asking more just But you got too excited. Right?

You would ask these two folks because they live there.

Yeah. In general. Right?

Yeah. I I think in general, the airport folks wanna pay their fair share, they know $600 a month right now is not a fair share. It needs to increase.

This is a new twist.

And how is it gonna be accepted? I'm not sure. Okay. The numbers that you're seeing up here, I'll just go to the bottom line. We're trying to get revenue neutral.

I think which I'd love to hear because then that's Not

even political Sure. Sort of label. It's a big step in one single year. Yeah. My

in my case, I spent, you know, $600 for a through

the fence. Now I'm gonna spend $800 for my airplane plus $800 for my through the fence. I'm going from 600 to 1,600. And that's gonna be a big nut for a lot of people. Yeah. And so I

think we need to talk about that more maybe when we get to

the end of what Paul has to go through.

Sure. So is this only for, residents of the airport that have planes, or does it for if you have a hangar or if you're just in

the airport?

It's worth to kinda segue into the next statement.

I think I think if you I think a better way to call it is if you're if you have a base aircraft or each base aircraft. That's what I'm saying. At the Erie Airport. So I have seven base airplanes. So I pay seven based aircraft fees.

And Scott has one, two. He has one. He kinda leases that whatever. He's got two planes in there.

Those those planes live at the Erie Airport, then he's gonna pay two. Okay.

And if you have a hangar, so I think of Tom Van Moon's, you know, home former home on Doris' home. There's a hangar out there, but no airplane in it.

Correct. Because So so that doesn't let me step into that to give you that explanation because part of what the debate was amongst all of us in terms of because what we found out in our early discussions about this was there's some some confusion, and it gets convoluted between the discussions about residents who have hangars that may have space for three planes as opposed to where I keep my plane right now in a residence. I rent it from them. It'll only take one plane. The whole thing that happened is it gets confusing and it gets convoluted because it ended up charging someone more at the airport if they had an asset that would contain more than one airplane.

Well, why should they have to pay more? They shouldn't. Okay? And part of what we came up with was and I used the examples. I keep my plane at a resident at the airport. Currently, they pay $600. They have decided to rent that hangar out to me. I pay them a monthly fee. That is off the books. It's not part of this discussion.

But they still they have to pay the 600. They pay the

600. But they just not own an airplane. I do. In this scenario, I would pay the $800, whatever the fee was, to base my airplane here. Now we'll go to Scott. Scott has a hangar. Same thing. Only his hangar will hold two airplanes. He also owns it. He would have to pay the fee, whatever that is. He would also have to pay because he bases an airplane that he owns. If he wanted to put another airplane in there, he would not be assessed secondary fee. The person who puts the airplane in there that rents it from him, they would pay the fee themselves because they have an airplane based at the airport. And it's scalable. So if you I know there's residents.

I don't know who they are in particular. There are some that have airplanes. Actually, the hangar right next to Dick Johnson's son, that hangar at that house right next to ODEP's will hold three, four airports easily. So how do you enforce this? Well, we talked about that, and we're like, how do you enforce this? Is this enforceable? Someone would have to administer that. Well, your airport administrator would take that on. You're walk around and No.

But we we Yeah. Well, it helps that I'm there almost every day. Mean, literally, I could probably sit here and write down the n number of every airplane that's in the airpark. It's, you know, it's a proximity thing. It would be a difficult administration if you weren't at the airport every day. And I know previous to our management of the airport, when there was, more of a town staff management arrangement, only seven of the 35 through the fence fees were getting administered when we took over. So it is it is but I would say that's a challenge at every airport. I mean, if So just

okay. Yeah.

You know

what I mean?

Like, the year like, the year where the airplane, Like, when when we when I when I had a hanger over at Front Range Yeah. They had to come in and make sure that we had an airworthy airplane in there.

It's almost like code enforcement.

Yes. Also there any adjustment for ultralights since they have much smaller footprint than airplane, but they are an airplane?

I think that's something to consider because we haven't really thought about it, to be honest with you.

Yeah. I I don't I don't know. K.

I think there are hand of Montana. If you have an airplane based in the state of Montana and you register it, you get a, like, a sticker that you would put on the back of your car. Looks like your car Yeah. Above your snowmobile and everything. You gotta put another one on. We're suggesting that you would implement something like that, administered by the airport manager, and you would see if that sticker is current sticker. And quite frankly, we believe that if somebody at the airport was paid this money and they see another airplane going by there all the time and they don't have a snicker, they're gonna end up being self employed.

Yeah. That always gets a little dicey, but I understand. Yeah. And it's the HOA issue. Right? The the one neighbor tell anyway. Yeah. So I bet in there that gets

It's a rare.

A little bit crazy.

So what about all the all the other properties in the air park that could have airplanes but don't have airplanes? Is there any kind of fee on them for having the ability to you're a part of that community?

Glad you asked. Glad you asked. So It

wasn't a setup. I'm totally

hanging on.

So as we come to find out, the airpark, for instance, they kinda have three categories of Residence. Residents. K. The first category is those like Scott, like him, who have a hangar that faces the taxiway. It's right out their backyard. Boom. Here we go. See

you later.

To fly. Well, they're all

there to fly that have access to it, but it's the access is category, though. That that's one category. There's another category where they also wanna fly. There may be a hangar on their property. But in order to get to the taxiway, they have easements that allow them to run their airplane between two houses. They have access, but it's not as convenient or across the road or whatever. Correct. Correct. We have those in a category where the fee that is determined for the direct access would potentially be 40% of the fee for those who don't have direct access. They have access, but not direct access.

Now there's a third category of homes at the airport, and those are homes that just happen to be there. They don't have hangars. They don't fly planes. They don't have access. They can't get to the runway. They're not flying homes. But we propose they pay nothing. And in that category, what's the percentage that are in the folks like yourself that have a plane, easy access, those that have a plane, but they they've gotta go it's harder to get to believe that there's approximately a 120 homes at the airpark. 55 of them that have access. About thirty thirty three of them have direct access. 22 of them have deeded access.

So 55 have no access or no plane?

No 55 could potentially have access, but a lot of them have easements, and they would have to clear trees. And, I mean It's not likely.

They bought the homes, so they

have the homes out there for just to be honest.

On paper, they have access, but do they realistically we would have to spend a lot of money to actually get there. There's about 32 or maybe 35 that have what I would call improved access. And some of those so by ordinance right now, if those people don't have an airplane, don't have anybody to visit them with an airplane and never have an airplane go through the through the fence ever, by that ordinance, those people don't pay any fee. Alright. So, hypothetically, just so I make sure

I understand this, what happens if one day you decide you don't wanna fly anymore? You get rid of your plane. Do you still pay the fee, or because you don't have a plane anymore? Under the current ordinance, you wouldn't. It's a use fee. Right? In the new ordinance closing What?

I would still pay the through the fence because I have a hangar Yeah. On the runway. Even if my airplane goes away, so I don't pay the $800. Interesting. But I think once you pay the 800, right, you don't get a rebate on that. That's

But not Yeah.

The next year, I wouldn't have

to pay

because I don't wanna.

So I'd have to see the numbers down, you know, into more detail. But in essence, over time, the airpark could turn into just a residential, and then there wouldn't be enough fees coming in

across the demand or

that, like, the property you were having.

No. The the philosophy is you have a home at the airpark similar to you have a business in Nassar's development because of the asset having potential access to an airport, it's worth more.

Yeah. My my hope is that this drives people to the airport for for flying. Yeah. The English is driving them

away. Yes. Yeah. Yes.

You know, one of the

They ask for money to live there because it's about flying. Right.

Yes. Then maybe you'll fly, and that's what

we want. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

Or if you don't and don't like the fees, you might move out, and the next guy that moves in does want to.

Right. And so right. And the just the pure supply and demand, is there an argument to be made that everybody pays a fee of some sort and those that really aren't flying, is does that become a disincentive for them to basically stay there and perhaps sell it to somebody who does wanna be there and pay that fee? That's correct. Yeah. Think any any anybody What? 30 or so through the fence fees? Right? It's right

around 30 out of potentially maybe, you know, thirty five and forty.

What we're suggesting is there's gonna be twenty, twenty five people out there that are gonna

be hit with fee that they haven't been paying.

Yeah. You know, the the the argument is

kinda unknown on whether there's big flow back or

they're like, we get it.

Well, that was recommended in the ABS report from a couple years ago that the town completed. It's kind of the beachfront property argument. Yeah. Pay to live on the beach. Whether you use it or not, you still pay for the value. I like that argument because I think most people can get their head around it pretty easily. But

And I never used the rec center.

Thanks for helping pay for it.

Bitch doesn't have to pay.

No. I mean, it's it's

an option. I may change my mind. I've used it before. I don't use it now. But it's an amenity that's there.

One more year, and it's paid off, so you won't be paying for that one anymore.

I I I always I always argue, you know, because I've had people come to me and go, what? You know, I I don't have an airplane, so I shouldn't have to pay the fee. I'm like, yeah. But when you go to sell your property, the first line on every property Yeah. That has airport access.

Airport access. Airport home. Airport hangar home. Airport That's Julian's point. Right?

The East. It's a street. But

they'll have a house right off the fairway that if they sold it, that's for a premium. Yeah.

All the do have things in April. Golf, but I have Right. Yeah.

Okay. Moving forward. Yeah. Now we get to some of the other types of hangers and fees. So it's not set different fees. It's the same fees, just different applications because the scenario is a little different. Try counting hangers, which is Scofield. They have a 100 hangers. Presumably, every single we're gonna make the presumption that the 100 hangars have a 100 airplanes in them. We all know that's not the case.

We wish it was different. We think it might change. But, presumably, you could have a 100 hangars with a 100 airplanes at $800. And then the through defense fee, they have a 104,000 square feet of the footprint. Now this is a little different than airport land because we're not adding 15%. It's their private property. They can decide whatever they're gonna do in terms of what's around it. That's really their deal. But the footprint is a 104,000 square feet at the 36¢ per square foot, it comes out to 37,440. Now what they're paying now, Jason, is 23,000 and change. Yeah. Yeah. 20. Yeah. 26.

Alright. A lot of concern had been had been put forth. Well, that seems like a huge amount of junk.

It's not.

Because you have to break it down according to each individual who has a hanger. So the differential, if you look at it as 37,440 But what do they pay now, Jason? 23 thousands of land?

20 or 26? 26,000.

The difference of $11,444 per year. $440 per year divided by a 100 hangers. So a $114 per year divided by twelve months. $9 and 50 Well,

civilians, the coffee in civilians, the Schofield folks been paying $260 a month. The airport residents have been paying $600 a month.

Yeah. So something's wrong with that. One of

the issues I have with this proposal in regards to Schofield is basing it on a square foot cost. I I would like to see equity between what the airport residents are paying and what the Schofield hangars are paying. So we got the $800 per airplane. That's equivalent.

Right.

On the hangars itself, I think they gotta pay the same thing that a airport resident pays.

Technically, they're both on private property, and they're both operating hangar with plane. And

Exactly. There's no difference between my hangar with an airplane in it and the Schofield Hangar with an airplane.

Well, I think there is fundamental, but I hear what you're saying.

One's a private business.

One is a commercial entity that's making money on the airport and airplanes. I hear what you're saying. I don't know the answer to it right now. That's what we're hearing. I mean, it's private property.

I don't know why they wouldn't pay the same as an airport resident.

Yeah. So that's why my brain's working as well. Why why if there's a way to legally make the fees the same, seems like we should. The only distinction is it's a private business versus on the airport grounds. Right? Is that am I understanding that right?

I mean, it it's the biggest difference is zone it's zoned. Right? You got residential zoning versus, you know, air portion. Right? The end of the day, you're storing you're storing I understand what you're saying. You're storing that one airplane.

Yeah. The fee should be set on the function, not on the zoning or

Well, that's So how would you how would you, at this point, suggest that you reach parity?

Well, I think if we're gonna charge the airport residents $800 through the fence, that each hangar at Schofield should pay $800 through the fence.

And Schofield can absolutely pass that on too?

Yes. And if they don't have airplanes in there but we say you have to have an airplane in there. Yeah. I mean, it's then then it actually, I think, creates the right incentives for the landlord to do the right thing that generates enough revenue to help keep the airport sustainable.

The aircraft owner is would be paying that fee to use that taxiway to get into the airport and take off.

I've had that conversation with the Scofields. I rent three of their hangars. And, you know, they're like I mean, they've been they've been there for years. Right? And, oh, you know, we can't raise. I don't wanna stick my foot in my mouth and say, you know, you're paying me I'm sure you're charging me $2.50 a month. I would pay 5. Yeah. Because hangar space is that valuable. And Yeah.

Yeah. So they've been around long enough, and they probably don't really care. It's kinda like having a rental home and, you know, you make enough money to pay for it. You don't wanna go through the hassle of raising rents or Yeah.

Upsetting everybody. And then

But yeah. And it doesn't bother them because they cover expenses and

all that. So given what you're suggesting, it would equate given the $800. We'll just use $800 because that's what we've got in here now. So whether it ends up being $800 or not is up. I don't wanna go there. Right. But what you're saying is since you are a but you have a home with a hangar that holds one or two airplanes.

Right. You know? I don't know how many airplanes are in there,

but I got I got But this

is my question and not this one. Well, I know what your point is, but Scofield, what you're suggesting, and I'm not disputing it or debating against it, Scofield's hangar would then pay $80,000. Is that what you're saying?

That's

right. If it was $800 Yep. It would be $80,000. But that's easy for Scofield because it's one hangar, one airplane. There's not more than one that would fit in there. K. Well, let's go to

Well, some of those hangars have two airplanes in.

They're designed for two or it's somehow they get two? Like, know they get two.

Okay. Okay. But but again So this is kinda where I'm going. I'm sort of playing devil's advocate, and now we're going to, let's do the prop shop first. He does not pay. He pays through the fence as a business. He does not have an airplane, but he rents the space to someone else. How many airplanes could he get in there? It depends upon the size.

Right now, he's got two p c twelves, but he could probably put 10 Cirrus. Cirrus.

Or So he we'd get 10 times $800 for 10 airplanes made in our engine.

So if he if he puts ultralights in there, he could go 20, and then you're gonna charge him 20. I I mean

Now let's go to your hangar Yeah. Where you keep the Pilatus and his Cirrus and the other Cirrus and the Champ. Now there's also cars in there. There's also a pilot lounge. You could fit more than you have in there. Right. So how do you how do you do that? Like I said, I'm punching holes in this because we gotta be able to defend what it is that you're suggesting. I hear what you're saying.

I I do see. But I don't

know how to get in.

I I think conversations with my neighbors, and when they find out that Schofield's been paying way less than what they've been paying, they're shocked. It's like, why?

I'm like, I don't I get it. I understand. But now the question is is it and I I see there's a fundamental difference between a private home I'm trying to avoid because it what's good for the goose is good for the gander scenario, and, you know, it may come back to, well, wait a minute. You have a hangar at your house that has three potential spaces, and you're gonna pay more just like Schofield. So what I'm gonna throw out there is it make is it reasonable because you're a private entity.

They are not. They are a commercial entity. Should we consider a through the fence fee rate that is different from a lease rate because they should pay a higher rate as a commercial entity that gets them closer to where you guys are? I don't know. I'm just throwing that up.

Yeah. I'm sorry. I I just think that it should be parody, from in now, and I don't know if it should be done on plane or square footage or

Yeah. You gotta have an objective. Plus.

Yeah. Prove this. You got a

100 private planes over there, not one commercial business. It's a 100 private planes. Say that again. I didn't You've got a 100 private planes using the airport over there, and it's Scope. And and it should be chart the the fee should be passed on to them. The fact that it's on

Well, the but keep your keep your syntax correct because they have a 100 private planes potentially, but we are talking two different things here. We're talking an aircraft based at the airport. Right. Yeah. But now we're talking about

Square foot.

Square foot.

To the

An asset fee for access to the airport. I thought

it was based on airplanes.

So that's what we were talking. Yeah.

But it But it I think too We're talking about

shouldn't be. We're talking about on this side, aircraft. But over here, we're talking about storage. The two are different. And I how many planes could you put in your hangar?

I don't have a hangar. I rent one at Schofield, and there's only room for one.

Right. So she has a residence. She has access should she want to keep a plane there at her house, but she doesn't because she doesn't have a hangar.

Yeah. Okay. So but but you would in the air park, you would fall under that third category where you don't have access, so you wouldn't pay No.

She does have access. She doesn't have a structure.

So you so in that instance, you you're

Yeah. She's working on it.

The fence, but you're not you're not paying the

The airplane fee. Airplane fee. The fixed airplane fee. Okay.

She She would. She would. Yeah. I'm sorry. She's Okay. She also pays the Okay. Alright. Like I pay at ODEP's.

Okay. Okay.

I don't know the structure. He they pay that, but I pay the base fee, which would be let's just say it's gonna be $800. I would pay $800. I also pay rent to the homeowner to keep my plane out there.

It seems like if we're leasing these buildings, we should do it on square foot, and that puts the pressure then on the landlord to get planes in there. We don't have to go around counting planes. It's just

I think that's that's always been the reason why the commercial side has been more like that. And the the you know, I wasn't the the ordinance has been this way since day one. The fees have changed. They were 200 per resident, and then they went to 4, and then they 6.

I think some new ones, though, is you're not leasing land.

Yeah. But you're leasing capacity.

Capacity. Yeah. That's

But it's like in Schofield. Right?

It's you get city land that you're gonna lease to them to use.

But they they have their

own land. Yeah. They're private. Their function is the same as their park residence. That's where I'm struggling with. Well, why isn't there parity?

There should be parity. So if you're if you're talking about

What model Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. To get parity.

I agree with you. There should be parity. I I Mhmm.

As I just mentioned, there's a 100 hangers over there. Each one of them wanna pay $800 through

the Exactly. Not worried about whether there's a plane or not

or a square foot cost.

Alright. Sorry. I missed that.

Because you know this one's

a plane. I mean, you

could do it on Square Foot, but it'd be

the same thing. It just Alright. So let's let's take another example.

Sorry. Could I I didn't quite get so I'm sorry.

Could you explain that again? Because I didn't

you're you're saying So Schofield has a 100 hangars total.

Right.

K. So what we're proposing is there's a 100 airplanes over there. Those owners of those airplanes pay $800 per airplane. Jerry Scofield owns the 100 hangars that these people keep their airplanes in. So Jerry Scofield would then pay $800 per t hangar for a through the fence fee. So 800 per year times a 100 is $80,000.

Okay.

It's a big jump for them. I'm not Yeah. Okay. Okay. This is a huge jump for them. But what this does, it gets you the equivalency between Airpark resident and Scofield.

So Okay. Well, I think I think that's the simplest example because Scofield's hangars are all they own one airplane. Right. So in a case where the prop shop could hold 10 small airplanes or 20 really small airplanes or two great big airplanes, what's the number? That's why the square footage model in a in a situation where you have a bigger bigger building makes more sense. You go, look.

No. Why not just figure the square footage out of a Schofield hangar, and we say that is that's the baseline, and it's $800 for that square footage. And then you just apply the equivalent square footage to these bigger hangars, and you come up with whatever the fee is. Basically, what the ordinance goes down.

A 104,000 square feet. So a 100 hangars. It's a 40 square feet per hangar.

So that would get parody just in a different way. How do you get there?

Well, you'd have to charge 80¢ a square foot.

Right. If they're to get the 800, bucks. Yeah. So now we're at a 80¢ per square foot through the fence fee, not 36¢. But if that's what

it takes to get parity with what the residents of the airport are complaining, it seems like that's an equitable thing.

You can always do a 36 in a square foot or a minimum of.

Eight Well, I think I think yeah. One thing believe it or not, what I'm saying hold on just a second, then it will go to you. Believe it or not, what I'm saying is I think a commercial entity doesn't necessarily equate or need parity to a resident someplace. Quite frankly, I think residents, commercial. Because the commercial entity is making money by virtue of having access to the airport. So Scofield should be paying more than 800 or they pay less?

But it's the people that are storing their plane and flying in and out, not just Schofield, the commercial owner of that building. There's a 100 people using the airport. 100 planes.

They would pay under this Right. They would pay an aircraft basing fee. Yes. Now let's go to behind my office. I'm sorry. We're not gonna go there. We're gonna go to no.

Continue. Go ahead.

Behind my office is one of NASA's biggest buildings, and right now, he owns it with two other partners. 75 by a 100, I know for a fact that it will hold five airplanes, if not more, because I used to keep my plane there as well. What's he gonna pay? $40,000?

Well, I mean, right now, it's just a negotiated fee. Right?

Well, that we're not there yet. Let's not talk about that. Let's just presume it was going to be what we're talking about. That aircraft hangar will hold five planes minimum, probably more.

Yeah. So I I don't know

if I'm missing 4,000. Maybe it is a square foot cost, 4,000 plus per airplane. Well, I

don't know either. This is why we're so

So there's gotta be professional companies that do this for a living. Right? That config I mean, we're debating on how to get parity. We're debating on how much square foot price, and they're kinda looking at Julian at this point. It seems to me if we gave them guidance on what we're what your guys are trying to do, what ultimately myself and the council will have to approve, it seems to me if the input comes in and you give that to companies that do this for a living, they can come back and say, if you want parity, then this is how we would do it. And does that pass the straight face test for being competitive with other airports and all that? I'll make one comment on that.

We had a gentleman in the airpark that was a that still is a consultant, and we've had this discussion a similar discussion about rates and what's equal. And the challenge is two things. One, not many public airports have a red residential component. K. So a lot of the consultants that you're gonna find out there are not gonna there's not gonna be a lot of comps. Like, that's the one difference between us and Longmont.

That's the there's no gonna be a comp there. Perfect.

And so that's one difficulty. The second is then you start going into the weeds where it's okay. You got the commercial side. It even got to the point. Alright. We're gonna charge a fee for how how much of the taxiway they use, how far they have to taxi to get to the end of the roadway. I mean, there's so many different things, and we're kinda getting into some of these tonight that, you know, you know, how do you how do you make this equal? Alright. Well, this airplane weighs 15,000 pounds, and I got one that weighs 10, you know, a thousand pounds. And I'm not beating up the concrete in a thousand pound airplane, but the 10,000 pounds.

Like your dump truck on the roads. Yes. And it just kinda that's where at least some of the conversations with that was a consultant. That's that's where it went really quickly. I'm not saying there's not someone who out there who couldn't figure it out, but it's challenging for this airport in particular, mostly because of the residential component and not having a lot of comps out there. If we didn't have residential, we we just go go to Longmont. Go to Longmont charges this much. You know, they're gonna do a rate study, and they're just gonna run around and figure out what's the difference. From the

parity side of it, if you figured out the commercial side and found out what was competitive, then it seems to me you could just extrapolate that out to the residential side and to say, we're charging this because it's equitable to the commercial side. Yeah. And, honestly, the way the rates are today started with

the tie downs. Tie downs are 50. That's six 100. Then the residents because we didn't you know, there wasn't an auditing system. They were 600, so they're paying the same as the tie down. And then but the commercial side has always had a price per square foot. So in I'm trying to think right now per square foot, whether or not it's pretty equitable.

Well, I think it goes back to this 80¢ per square foot if you're trying to get parity with the residents using the Scope Hill anchors. Right? Anyway, I know we're deep into the details here, but it's helping me get my head around it.

There's actually some precedents out here. I just used AI to ask some of these questions, and it says that there as far as the FAA funding goes, there's a concept of an aeronautical user, and it applies to the classification of airpark residents as well as nonaeronautical users like businesses, storage, etcetera. Right? So there's things we can learn about how this has been done in other places.

Yes, sir. Yeah.

I I don't know if it's a problem necessarily, but I was just gonna say it it seems strange to have a through the fence fee commercial square foot rate that is higher than your ground lease rate because the ground lease, you get the land and the access to the airport. Proximity. But through the fence fee, you're just getting the access to the airport, and and you're presumably paying rent somewhere else for the land or, you know, it was privately purchased land. So it feels like you shouldn't be going higher for the through the fence fees than what your ground lease rate is for a similar use.

So here's the reason I had. The the I think the the substantial counterargument is that you're less restricted when you are a private entity or off airport grounds. You're yes. You get the land, but also all of the oversight that comes with being on airport property. I I think it's the counterargument in why you see the demand different. So I think this model better matches demand and what people pay elsewhere. I totally understand the the argument that you are getting an additional benefit being a ground lease that isn't captured in that, cost. In

airports, there's been some airports. Montrose was an example where they had an FBO that was a through the fence operating FBO, and they had an FBO that was on the airport. Well, because the airport was able to say, hey. You're on the airport. We want you to have $10,000,000 worth of liability insurance, this, that, and this to be on our property. The through the fence operator didn't have to have those requirements. So the the EFA looked at it and said, not fair. You know? Is there not fair advantage for the through the fence operator? And so they they generally frown on competing businesses that compete through the fence. You know? So if you have a maintenance shop through the fence versus a maintenance shop on the airport, they frown on that because the the ability to regulate beyond airport. So So

the FAA generally supports actually a higher through defense fee than the ground lease rate?

The they actually my my what they did up in Montrose is they just told the airport they had to shut the FBI down, and they couldn't have a through the fence operator. So they they just don't like the the dichotomy of the Gotcha. I think it's the preference. One way to get to parity.

Let me pause this. And I'm concerned about what you're saying, and I and I'm gonna talk about both of yours because you're somewhat different. Are we thinking about this backwards? And instead of trying to get the through the fence feed people to reach where you are, maybe we get you all to reach where through the fence is. And it kinda addresses both of you separately.

You, in this scenario, Jennifer, would pay a aircraft based fee like everybody else. You keep your airplane across the way at Scofield. K? They pay a through the fence fee based on whatever rate it is. You do not have a hangar.

In a through the fence fee scenario that's based on square footage, you would pay nothing. You, sir, have a hangar that has the potential to who knows how many airplanes, and this is my concern is somebody shoves a bunch of airplanes in there, they pack them in, well, then they're gonna be paying more. Well, then I won't put so many. But should the residents pay a through the fence fee based on a square footage price of the asset, which is the hangar that is there? People that have a big hangar, they would pay more.

People that have a smaller hangar would pay less. People that don't have a hangar, they pay nothing. You reach parity because it's based on the asset size, not just a flat fee that is the asset, and maybe that's where we're kinda making this mistake. In front

of administration standpoint, that's easy because you just go on Google Earth and you go, how big is the hanger? It can hold.

Or you you do a one time. It's like you're not gonna change your hanger size at any time. Right? It is what it is. But you wouldn't pay a fee based on the through the fence square footage rate, not on your home, but on the storage capacity of your hanger.

So someone like Scott who can probably get I don't know.

Can you get three planes? No. He could get two.

Well, arguably, like you said, if he took out his little kid in the office, he'd probably get a third spin.

Well, that's a very valid point. That's right.

So,

yeah, you've been there.

I know you've been there. So you see the size of it, essentially. Maybe that's the maybe that's the answer to this is you do reach parity because you're measuring the cost the same way.

Yeah. I guess some counter I'd have to do is in my hangar, I utilize a small footprint for my airplane. I utilize the rest of it for other functions. Hear you. But then does that go back to you're living on the beach and you have all the you have the potential in that larger hangar to get the value of the beach.

Yeah. I'm willing to pay for the value of the beach. I just want others to pay for the value. Yes.

Yeah. And

I hear you. Yep. And then given that scenario where you're measuring, what about the people who have a hangar, have accents, but it's not direct?

I think you've tried to address it up here by having a

60% reduction for these folks. K.

There there are there are a couple people that tie in on airplanes on the property. Like, Alex McColl, he's got property. He's got access. No hangar. Right? It's not that much different from her if she decided Jennifer decided that she wanted to keep her plane outside in front of her house. She wouldn't pay a through the fence fee, would she? But she would pay an aircraft base fee.

So what I want to do, if you're asking my personal opinion

Absolutely.

I wanna preserve my access that's guaranteed to me and my deed. Sure. I want that. And and if that is a state of feds fee, I will pay it because I wanna preserve that access always, which guaranteed to me and my deed.

Yeah. I don't I but my personal opinion is that if if you pay a fee or you don't pay a fee, I don't think your access is ever in jeopardy. It's just not possible.

But do you pay a fee because you have the access? That's the beachfront Right. Argument, which means then you would be putting fees on the homes that don't have airplanes or because they and there are all the deeds. I'm assuming all the deeds at the airport have access.

No. Many of them many of

them don't have reasonable access.

They don't. Some of them don't have a document that says they're entitled to deeded access.

So maybe that's what the line is drawn. If your deed says you have access, then you have value that's on your property, and you should probably pay something for that value.

Do we do we treat that scenario like we do the on airport access where there's a minimum? If you don't have a hangar, there's a minimum access fee. I mean, through the fence fee. But if you have a hangar, there's a there's a measured fee treated just like we did with the portables. I

think you might wanna try

to work through the rest of this. Sure. A little bit of time we got left.

Yep. A lot of

details we need to

work on. Yeah. So we got hung up on Tri County Hangars Flight Business Park. That's Nassar's phase 1.

Are all the fees on these other ones the way you have it set up here, are they all basically the same?

They're all basically the same. However, I wanna talk about Flight Business Park because the current arrangement with Flight Business Park Phase 1, which is where I am and all the other hangars are, that was a negotiated rate with the HOA and the airport. It's $15,000. And which should it be? It should be according to my calculations, it should be

By ordinance by ordinance, it should be less than $15,000.

K. Because you But we're talking about a higher rate now.

It it what what you're depicting is square footage the airport units that are capable of storing airplanes. Correct.

So that number the the number of a 120,000 is probably not complete you know, totally accurate. That's the number we have. And if it was based on a 120,000 square feet, it would be 43,200.

And he's paying 15, but by ordinance, he can make the argument that it should be less?

No. By ordinance, we would make the argument that negotiated amounts really aren't fair and shouldn't be allowed.

Well, the the issue was the issue was was the administration. You got 40 buildings or 50 buildings over there, and then it got into with the HOA. You know, half my building is a machine shop, but I got my one airplane in there. We got into this whole some of the weeds we're getting into tonight. And so, ultimately, we figured out what how many square foot were definitely air aircraft use. And we actually rounded up to a number where we just said, look. We're gonna agree on this. By ordinance, it's a use fee. So there was a building right right on the end of one of the corners of one of original buildings was a welding shop six months ago. Now it's an airplane there. So now now it's Yeah.

This is why I don't know if it should be the fee should be based on whether there's an airplane there. It's almost like there's the we go back to this beachfront. You have access. Whether you use it for access to the beachfront doesn't matter because you have access.

If you allow me to change the ordinance, that's what I would do. Yeah. That's I mean

I'm sorry. Missed it.

I agree. But it's like we're good. This kinda is where we're at. Yeah. We were saying if you have a plane, you're gonna pay a fee. If you have an asset, you're gonna pay a fee. There's two structures of fees, and one solves the issue of, well, why am I paying because I don't have an airplane?

It's not what you're paying for. You're paying for the

absence of the have the fees separated out between based aircraft. Said that you was like, yeah.

I would pay that because it's in my deed, and I I get value for that. Right. And I think that, you know, like Brandon and myself, when we're trying to, you know, publicly say, this is why we're doing this, it's easier for us to explain that and to, you know, make it equitable across the line and get the support to do it. Yeah.

Your talking points have to make sense to the people who are listening to you. Otherwise, you're

You you know, the welder is always the best example. They just he he he never by by ordinance, he never would would have had to pay a fee. But he moved out, and he charged a premium. And he he didn't ever advertise a welding shop. He advertised hanger size. I got a got a premium for it. And so yeah.

And and then for those that will push back from the airport, I think their argument becomes weaker because it's it's saying, well, hold it. You have a value here. Whether you use it for that or not isn't isn't what we're

debating. Correct.

Okay. And the people who do use it will pay

a base aircraft fee. So Right. There's two types of fees. So There's the asset fee, and there's the aircraft based fee. Alright. Days proposed is a 137,000 square feet. We just assumed that maybe they would have five airplanes.

And all of it's in there now.

Well, the approved site plan for the phase two proposed is a 171,000 square feet for all five buildings. I don't know if you were using a different rate for that one.

But is that footprint or an or two story square footage? That's footprint. It is.

Mhmm.

Alright. So it would be considerably different.

I just looking at the approved site plan from Nassau, it's five buildings. Four thirty seven five. One's 21. So all in, all five is one seventy. Okay.

Perfect.

No. And I think that

are these are sorry. These are hangars and offices. Correct. The the square footage is both.

Yeah. Because it occupies space, and it can't be used for anything else. So it's used for that. And I think if you're looking at the thing there Mhmm. Each one of those units building has six hangar six units.

Six units. Except for the one on the end.