Aviation groups continue to push back on Van Nuys landing fee

AOPA, along with CalPilots, the National Business Aviation Association, NATA (formerly known as the National Air Transportation Association), Vertical Aviation International, and the Experimental Aircraft Association continues to push back against Los Angeles World Airports (LAWA) over a new landing fee at Van Nuys Airport, arguing that the proposal was built on flawed methodology and a lack of transparency.

Despite the coalition’s repeated requests for a collaborative process to develop a landing fee structure that complies with FAA grant assurances and industry best practices, LAWA refused the group's requests for virtual meetings and instead forced all communications to be conducted through written correspondence. In the letter to LAWA, the group called the current 35-day review period a "fraction of the already-insufficient time provided earlier this year" and requested a formal meeting in early January.

The coalition raised several red flags regarding LAWA's financial justifications. The associations pointed out that fee estimates have fluctuated wildly, jumping from a proposed $8.20 per 1,000 pounds in March to $14.18 by November, a 72.9-percent increase that pilot advocates found "deeply suspicious."

In its January 14 response, LAWA defended its proposal, claiming that the landing fee is reasonable and complies with federal obligations to make Van Nuys Airport self-sustaining. While LAWA claims a much higher fee is needed, the agency will begin charging a fee of $6.44 per 1,000 pounds for the remainder of the fiscal year to align with the current fee at Los Angeles International Airport . LAWA states that its 18-month consultation process has met FAA requirements, even if it has not resulted in an agreement with all users.

The coalition alleges that the methodology behind these landing fees is "incomplete and flawed," noting missing budgetary information and the absence of a comprehensive financial view of the airport’s revenues and expenses. There are also concerns that the fees may potentially violate the federal Airport Noise and Capacity Act by intending to discourage operations.

Another pain point in the negotiations is LAWA’s decision to calculate the need for landing fees based on a deficit in the airport's budget line, rather than looking at the airport's total profitability. In their December letter, the aviation associations argued that while the LAWA budget itself may show an alleged deficit, Van Nuys Airport remains profitable.

Besides the concern for a lack of financial clarity and flawed methodological justifications, another issue raised by the aviation community is the environmental impact of potential diversion of transient aircraft to other regional airports with lower fees or no fees, or to Los Angeles International.

The letter specifically noted that LAWA has discontinued "reliever fee" transfers from Los Angeles International to Van Nuys without analyzing the consequences. Although not mandated, reliever fee transfers are common in multi-airport systems, and are encouraged by the FAA, to ensure that reliever airports can fulfill their purposes. In response, LAWA said that it "believes" that the imposition of a landing fee at VNY would not shift general aviation operations to LAX.

Furthering the tension, BOAC sought to delegate its authority to the airport manager to make and enforce rules governing city-owned airports. Central to this delegation is a dispute over the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); BOAC's draft resolution asserts this action is exempt under Los Angeles City CEQA Guidelines. The aviation associations, however, argue this exemption is legally deficient, claiming that the diversion of aircraft to surrounding regional airports creates a significant effect on the environment that necessitates formal review.

"AOPA is working with fellow national associations, local pilots, and other stakeholders to ensure that our members' voices are heard on this crucial issue" Leon Jackler, AOPA vice president of airports and state advocacy, said. "The imposition of landing fees at Van Nuys will create an unfair and unreasonable financial burden on pilots, and hurt the local community by decreasing utilization of this iconic airport. Furthermore, it will likely divert traffic to outlying airports that may be less well equipped to accommodate it and create the potential of a slippery slope of increasing fees bearing little relation to the operating costs imposed on airports."

In a January 21 letter to LAWA, the coalition urged BOAC to delay its approval of landing fees for another six months, citing that “LAWA staff still has not properly engaged with stakeholders, and the rates methodology continues to be incomplete and contains major flaws."

Ultimately, BOAC chose not to follow the associations' recommendation to delay the vote and engage in further discussions. Instead, the board unanimously passed the landing fee provision, with fee collection now officially slated to begin in March.

The coalition plans to focus its efforts on working with LAWA staff to refine the fee calculation methodology and come to a more agreeable rate structure going forward.

Under the current proposal, LAWA has confirmed that aircraft based at Van Nuys will be exempt from the new landing fees; however, national aviation organizations argue that LAWA has not adequately addressed the specific definition of a based tenant, leaving open potential impacts on fractional ownership and others.