At the June 3rd City Council meeting, we learned that Longmont’s airport (LMO) is in a dire financial condition. Flight schools from other airports dominate the use of LMO infrastructure for profit-making operations, at no cost to them. Council asked City staff for the airport’s financial information to determine whether landing fees should be charged to airplane owners using our infrastructure, and what the budget impact would be.

Airport Director Levi Brown told the Council the airport is projected to run an operating budget deficit of $60,650 every year for the next 10 years. He also mentioned the budget deficit “does not include full reimbursement of administrative costs in [the] general fund.” What that cryptic statement means is taxpayers are paying 50% of Director Brown’s salary every year through the administrative transfer fee, which comes
from the general fund, due to the lack of revenue coming into the airport. City staff later stated that 50% of the administrative transfer fee in 2025 was $86,877, and the annual deficit could increase to $165,000 per year if the salary subsidy was removed.

The City Manager also stated the budget deficit “does not include the capital needs of the airport.” He admitted the airport does not even generate enough revenue to cover the 5% matching funds for an FAA grant to pave the dirt road around the west side of the airport. Vehicles traveling on that dirt road bring debris onto taxiways, which creates a safety issue, but they can’t afford to fix it. As he put it: “the reason why we have only
one person at the airport is because we don’t have enough funding.”

Any responsible airport director, when faced with this stark financial underperformance, would aggressively seek all options for increased revenues to bring the budget into the black, including reserves for capital improvements. What the Council got instead was suggestions to do nothing. Director Brown, who is a former flight instructor for one of the foreign flight schools that dominates LMO infrastructure, suggested the Council could consider a landing fee ordinance that exempts planes weighing less than 12,500 pounds, like some other cities have done. Of the 58,991 landings in 2024, 58,593 were by planes weighing less than 12,500 pounds. Flight schools use planes almost exclusively in that category. So, according to Director Brown, Council should enact a landing fee ordinance that exempts 99.3% of all landings! What airport director would suggest such a non-sensical plan to address the financial shortfalls of the airport? Only one who is loyal to the flight schools.

Director Brown also claimed the main nationwide landing fee vendor, Vector Airport Systems, “[is] moving away from charging fees on lower weight aircraft” (meaning flight school aircraft). When asked in an open records request for the contact information of the person at Vector who made the statement, Director Brown refused to provide that information, and referred to the Vector website. A list of Vector’s 97 PLANEPASS ™
clients, with links to every airport’s website showing their landing fees, is readily available for Council to compare options. Most are general aviation airports similar to LMO, and many charge landing fees for all planes, usually based on weight categories at graduated rates. The Vector website says it collects $55 million a year in aircraft fees and boasts a 99.6% collection rate. This is obviously another misleading attempt at dissuading the Council from charging landing fees to flight schools.

The FAA requires grant recipient airports to be as self-sustaining as possible. This airport is losing money year-after-year, and relies on taxpayer subsidies and FAA grants that come with onerous conditions to fill the gap. That needs to stop and landing fees are a reasonable step to achieve a self-sustaining airport. In January, I joined a group of concerned citizens in presenting a landing fee proposal showing an average weight-
based landing fee of $7-10 per landing could generate enough annual revenue to fix the budget deficit and help wean the airport off the burdensome FAA grant subsidies. The City should follow that course, and remind the Airport Director who he works for.

Dan Leftwich is an attorney living in Longmont.

Want to See What Flight Activity Looks Like at Longmont?

Ever wondered how many operations are happening at Longmont, and what types of aircraft are flying? 

These public dashboards give you a clearer view into flight operations, aircraft trends, touch-and-go activity, and nighttime compliance. They're designed to support informed conversations and make data accessible to everyone.

Explore the dashboards here:
Longmont: https://superiorairtracker.com/airports/KLMO
Or find it anytime under the “Airports” tab at https://superiorairtracker.com

We are residents of Longmont and nearby Boulder County, writing to address the implementation of landing fees at Vance Brand Airport (LMO) in Longmont. These fees are essential to the airport's economic sustainability, and they play a critical role in safeguarding the health, safety, and welfare of Longmont residents. This memo outlines the economic benefits and broader public welfare considerations that support the introduction of landing fees.

Landing fees can help make the airport a self-sustaining operation. They can provide income and budget support for manager salaries, airport maintenance and operations, monitoring software, and data systems. Additionally, these fees can accelerate the transition to unleaded fuel by funding the operations, systems, and processes necessary to establish this new fuel as the standard.

For these reasons, many airports around the country have implemented landing fees through systematic, non-discriminatory process, with some partnering with companies that manage the fee collections for local airports.
But first, let’s look at the current data for Vance Brand Airport.

See entire letter here.

We are residents of Longmont and nearby Boulder County, writing to address the presence of lead in our communities being spewed by planes practicing touch-and-go operations at Vance Brand Airport (LMO) in Longmont.

Fine particle exhaust from piston-engine planes using leaded aviation fuel – “avgas” – doing touch-and-go operations and low pattern overflights over Longmont and Boulder County residential and sensitive environmental areas are causing harm to public health and safety.

The flight school takeover of Longmont has intensified the public nuisance that Boulder County had already sued Jefferson County to prevent.

It has been further established that leaded aviation fuel has a distinct "fingerprint," allowing the source of the lead to be identified and the increased harm to children from the rise in touch-and-go operations to be quantified.

We recognize the urgent need for leadership, and the Longmont City Council must take all necessary actions to reduce leaded avgas pollution from aircraft operating at Vance Brand Airport (LMO).

See rest of letter here.