The Topic Is Legislating Long-Term Tenant Leases at U.S. Airports ...

… and the good news is that airports and fixed base operators are at least talking about it face to face. This development follows a June 15th roundtable hosted by Congressman Tom Petri (R-WI), Chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Aviation, which focused on how best to facilitate and encourage private sector investment in airports. That meeting was initiated by the General Aviation Infrastructure and Investment Coalition (GAIIC), which is made up of Atlantic Aviation, Landmark Aviation, Ross Aviation, Signature Flight Support, TAC Air, and the National Air Transportation Association. Also in attendance at the Capitol Hill meeting were representatives for the American Association of Airport Executives (AAAE) and Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA). Ultimately, the GAIIC would like to see long-term leases legislated for U.S. airports. In a previous blog (June 1) on this topic, I questioned how such a proposal ever got to the Hill and suggested that dialog between the two groups might be a better step. Turns out, members of the Subcommittee had a similar viewpoint and directed airports and FBOs to ratchet up discussions between the two sides. And that’s what is happening. This week, at the invitation of ACI-NA, FBO representatives and some 20 airports got together in Cincinnati during the Small Airports Conference held there. Comments ACI-NA’s Deborah McElroy, “We invited representatives from the coalition to come and talk to our airport directors about their issues and to let them hear our issues. It was a very productive discussion. We talked about their concerns about being able to finance infrastructure with long-term leases. “Our point again is we don’t believe legislation is necessary to address what at its core is a commercial relationship between airports and FBOs.” Regarding the Washington roundtable,  NATA’s Eric Byer relates, “Mr. Petri strongly encouraged the airport groups to sit down with us over the next few weeks to talk about the long-term lease issue. I think there’s a definite understanding, almost agreement, that if you’re going to bring private capital to the table and build a new hangar or terminal or whatever, there has to be some length of lease to it. You just can’t depreciate your value over a five-year period. “There’s definitely some willingness to work on that angle.” Adds McElroy, “We’ve agreed to continue to talk about other opportunities and forums where we can continue the discussion. We’re talking about, what’s the right next step? “I would emphasize we aren’t negotiating on any legislative proposal that would basically take away an airport’s proprietor rights. That said, we think there’s value in talking about concerns, to talk about other ways we can address the issue.” The irony in this discussion is that NATA is led by a former Republican Congressman, Jim Coyne, who is well known for not being a fan of big government or of government interfering in the business of commerce. Congress certainly has a role when it comes to safety and infrastructure funding. One has to question whether we really want it mandating the business of airports anymore than it already does. A better approach might be to get the TRB’s Airport Cooperative Research Program to conduct a study, and perhaps come up with an array of best practices. ACRP is putting out some good stuff, and its approach is to involve industry stakeholders who ultimately help create the guidance documents it issues. It should be noted that AAAE declined to comment on the issue. Thanks for reading. jfi