Vance Brand Airport, the Longmont Landing Fee Revival, and the Municipal Math That Could Chase Pilots Away From the Airports That Need Them Most

The Longmont, Colorado city council has directed staff to develop a new fee structure for Vance Brand Airport (KVBM), with landing fees as a primary revenue target. No fees have been implemented yet, but the directive moves the proposal from political conversation into the rate-development phase - meaning actual numbers are being drafted now.

What’s Happening at Vance Brand Airport

Vance Brand sits at approximately 5,050 feet MSL with a primary runway of about 4,800 feet, serving the Longmont community, the broader Front Range, student pilots, and everyday general aviation traffic. This is not the first time Longmont has raised the landing fee question. The debate has surfaced before without resolution, but this cycle carries enough political momentum to have crossed into the staff-work stage. A formal proposal is coming.

The Federal Strings Attached to Airport Funding

Most general aviation airports - including many municipal fields - have accepted funding through the FAA’s Airport Improvement Program (AIP). That funding comes with 39 grant assurances: binding conditions that govern how the airport operates for the life of the grant, typically 20 years from the date of each award.

Grant Assurance #22 is the critical one here. It requires airports to make facilities available to all aeronautical users on fair and reasonable terms, without unjust discrimination. The FAA does not categorically prohibit landing fees, but it does scrutinize fee structures at federally obligated airports and has authority to pursue compliance action if fees are found to be unjust or effectively discriminatory. A fee structure developed without careful attention to these assurances could create a legal exposure the city isn’t anticipating.

Why Landing Fees Tend to Backfire at Small GA Airports

The revenue math city councils apply to landing fees is straightforward: multiply current operations by the proposed fee rate and add a line to the budget. The problem is that operations don’t stay constant once a fee appears.

Pilots are adaptive. A cross-country fuel stop, a training cross-country waypoint, or a practice approach destination gets reconsidered the moment a fee enters the calculation. For Vance Brand specifically, the Front Range offers meaningful alternatives - Rocky Mountain Metropolitan Airport in Broomfield, Fort Collins-Loveland, and Boulder Municipal are all within range. That competitive landscape makes price sensitivity real and traffic diversion likely.

The revenue lost to diverted traffic isn’t limited to the fee itself. Fuel sales, tie-down revenue, FBO services, and terminal commerce all follow the airplane. Airports with genuine market power - a reliever field with no practical alternative, or a unique destination - can absorb that dynamic. A community GA airport in a competitive regional market typically cannot.

Why This Matters for Flight Training

Flight training operations represent a significant share of activity at airports like Vance Brand. Student pilots on cross-country training legs and aircraft doing pattern work for practice approaches are exactly the traffic most likely to reroute when a fee appears. At a time when flight schools are already struggling with instructor shortages and cost pressures, adding friction to training access at a local airport compounds a pipeline problem the industry can’t afford to ignore.

Better Revenue Options the Council Should Consider

Landing fees are not the only path to improved airport revenue. Several mechanisms have worked at comparable GA airports without deterring traffic:

Hangar development generates long-term, stable revenue. Waiting lists for T-hangars at well-run GA airports run years long in many markets, indicating genuine unmet demand. Fuel flowage fees - charges collected from FBOs based on fuel volume sold - capture revenue from existing traffic without taxing individual operations. Self-serve fuel has helped some airports recover fuel revenue previously lost to off-airport purchases. Non-aeronautical land development on airport property, where FAA rules and local zoning allow, is another avenue.

None of these solutions are as administratively simple as issuing landing fee invoices. All of them require planning, capital, and time. None of them risk driving away the users the airport depends on.

The Fuel Tax Argument Pilots Keep Making

GA pilots already contribute to the national airport system through the federal fuel tax on aviation gasoline, which flows into the Airport and Airway Trust Fund and finances the AIP grants that built or improved many of these facilities. Layering a landing fee on top of that existing contribution is a double-dip the GA community has objected to consistently - and reasonably.

The counterpoint from city finance offices is valid: federal grant dollars don’t cover day-to-day operational costs. Staffing, snow removal, ground maintenance, and security fall on the local budget continuously, while AIP funding arrives episodically. That’s a genuine fiscal problem. It just may not have the solution that fits most neatly into a budget spreadsheet.

When and How to Engage

The staff development phase - which is underway now - is the most effective time for the pilot community to participate. Once a fee schedule is published and presented for a vote, the political momentum is harder to reverse. Before that point, individual voices carry real weight.

Pilots who use Vance Brand or live in the Longmont area should:

• Check the City of Longmont’s public meeting calendar and find the airport advisory board schedule
• Attend meetings in person and present a calm, factual case covering traffic impact, economic activity, and alternative revenue models
• Contact AOPA’s airport advocacy team at aopa.org, which has a dedicated section with templates and talking points for exactly this type of local engagement

A council member who hears from multiple pilots in their district about downstream economic effects is going to factor that into their vote. Elected officials respond to informed, local voices - and pilots tend to be exactly that when they choose to engage.

About Vance Brand

The airport is named for Vance DeVoe Brand, the Longmont-born astronaut who flew on Apollo-Soyuz and two Space Shuttle missions, logging approximately 246 hours in space. The airport bearing his name has been part of Colorado’s GA infrastructure for decades, serving students, private operators, and the broader Front Range community.

Key Takeaways

• Longmont’s city council has directed staff to develop landing fees for Vance Brand Airport; no fees are in effect yet, but a formal proposal is in progress
• Grant Assurance #22 requires federally funded airports to offer access on fair and reasonable terms - a fee structure developed carelessly could trigger FAA scrutiny
• Landing fees at competitive GA airports typically reduce traffic enough to offset or erase the projected revenue gain through lost fuel sales, FBO revenue, and ancillary commerce
• The Front Range offers pilots multiple alternative airports, making Vance Brand’s traffic base genuinely price-sensitive
• The staff development phase happening now is the highest-leverage window for pilot community engagement - AOPA’s airport advocacy resources at aopa.org are a practical starting point