Letter: Airport consultants not giving South Lake Tahoe City Council a clear picture

Members of the Lake Tahoe Community,

We want to make you aware of an issue of concern for the entire Tahoe basin community. There is an ongoing discussion at the South Lake Tahoe City Council about the South Lake Tahoe Airport‘s financial position, the fee structure for users and tenants, and its ability to provide for future capital expenditures. The Council believes that they understand the airport and its finances through reports from its consultant. Unfortunately, the information they provided has not painted a complete picture and the Council has ignored some of the consultant’s critical recommendations to the detriment of the airport’s users and the community.

We want to assure the public that the users are fully aware of the issues, understand the sensitivity of the public regarding sources of funds being used at the airport, and have attempted to engage the Council and staff in constructive dialogue to address the future needs of the airport. Our goal is a self-sufficient airport funded through a responsible and efficient management model that collects the revenues due it and charges reasonable, sustainable fees.

Here are some facts for you to consider:

- The airport, according to a recent study, has an economic impact on the South Lake Tahoe area of over $20 million and supports 215 jobs.

- The Airport Enterprise Fund, at last report, had an unrestricted balance of $2,150,000. The airport is in no danger of “going broke” and can handle significant capital expenditures on its own if the City Council chooses to utilize the available funds.

- It is important for the public to understand that at a recent Council meeting, it declared the South Lake Tahoe Airport to be a piece of “critical infrastructure” for the community.

- The City Hall, located at and a tenant of the airport, paid less in rent in 2022 than the cost of “janitorial, custodial, and utilities” that the city did not pay but forced the airport users (tenants and visiting aircraft) to cover. This was reported by the city for Fiscal Year 2021 as $221,000 in their annual report and was paid by the airport users, not the city.

- Last year, City Hall experienced Zero Snow Days (days lost due to the inability of employees to reach City Hall due to impassible roads) but the airport was closed for almost 4 weeks due to snow on the airfield. The city failed to keep the airport open as they are contractually required to do because they did not prioritize plowing the runways.

- The city has adopted fees on the users for 1) hangar rent, and 2) landing fees that include rate increases of 100%. At the same time, the airport receives ZERO revenue from aircraft parking fees, ramp fees, ramp space leased to the Fixed Base Operator (an airport-based service business), and only 75% of the landing fees the Council just voted to increase. These are irresponsible management practices on the part of the City Council.

- The City is under Federal Obligation to operate the airport for the next 20 years.

The picture this paints is a City Council that has an agenda that is less than supportive of the airport despite its positive impact on the community. In aviation, we use the saying “they are stepping over dollars to pick up dimes”. The airport generates significant revenue for the city, state, and federal governments through Personal Property, Possessory Interest, Sales, and Gasoline Taxes. The Council has shown little understanding of how an airport runs and even less of how it is financed. Despite detailed input from the hangar tenants and airport businesses, they refuse to hear the user’s concerns and or act in a fiscally responsible manner. Some of the changes the Council has proposed will affect visitors to the area who are discouraged from landing at the airport due to high fees and instead will use alternate landing sites like Minden Tahoe Airport resulting in additional lost revenue to the airport and the city.

The users have repeatedly asked the Council to pause and reconsider their actions to no avail. It appears the Council is opposed to reasonable, measured, and balanced fee increases combined with revenue enhancements that benefit the long-term future of the airport. Most importantly, they are unwilling to act responsibly and pay their own way when it comes to the cost of leasing space at the airport. They think their “free ride” is something they are owed. It is not!

- Douglas Rice
Regional Vice-President - California Pilots Association (CalPilots)