Extracted text (via pymupdf)
27904 characters
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
COUNCIL MINUTES
March 12, 2026
The City Council of the City of Mesa met in the Study Session room at City Hall, 20 East Main Street, on
March 12, 2026, at 7:31 a.m.
COUNCIL PRESENT
COUNCIL ABSENT
OFFICERS PRESENT
Mark Freeman
Scott Somers
Rich Adams
Jennifer Duff
Alicia Goforth
Francisco Heredia
Dorean Taylor
None
Scott Butler
Holly Moseley
Jim Smith
Mayor Freeman conducted a roll call.
1-a.
Hear a presentation, discuss, and provide a recommendation on the proposed fees and charges
for the Falcon Field department.
Falcon Field Airport Director Corinne Nystrom introduced Office of Management and Budget
Assistant Director Sam Schultz and Jill Owen, attorney and partner with Snell & Wilmer, and
displayed a PowerPoint presentation. (See Attachment 1)
City Attorney Jim Smith advised that the proposed Falcon Field fees and charges are strictly for
financial sustainability, not for reducing noise, limiting flight traffic, or favoring/discriminating
against any airport users. He emphasized that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) rates
and charges policy does not allow fees to be used for those purposes.
Mayor Freeman noted that Falcon Field operates as one of the City’s enterprise funds, meaning
its financial health must be reviewed annually. He thanked staff and specifically recognized
Councilmember Goforth for leading analysis efforts related to the airport.
Mr. Schultz explained that Falcon Field, an enterprise fund, is expected to function as a self-
sustaining fund, similar to a business, without additional contributions.
Ms. Nystrom reviewed the purpose statement and the primary sources of revenue for Falcon Field
Airport that are not related to grants. She indicated that the airport’s main revenue sources are
ground lease rents and city-owned hangar/tie-down rentals. She emphasized that fuel flowage
fees generate about $340,000 annually, but the amount is not enough to fully support the airfield
cost center. (See Pages 2 and 3 of Attachment 1)
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Page 2
In response to a question posed by Councilmember Goforth, Ms. Nystrom replied that fuel flowage
fees are based on the amount of fuel that is delivered to the airport to be sold later.
Ms. Nystrom explained that FAA Grant Assurance #24 requires airports receiving federal or state
capital improvement funds to maintain a fee and rental structure that keeps the airport as self-
sustaining as possible. She noted that since 2006, the Airport Enterprise Fund has remained
balanced due to several factors, including a one-time $4.6 million land sale, along with
conservative budgeting and spending practices; however, rising costs have forced the airport to
defer maintenance and capital improvement projects, especially airfield and facility upkeep. (See
Page 4 of Attachment 1)
Responding to a question from Councilmember Goforth, Ms. Nystrom provided examples of some
of the projects that have been deferred due to lack of funds, such as signage improvements,
landscaping along Falcon Drive, pavement maintenance, and repairs to city-owned hangars. She
explained that many hangars date back to the 1980s and now show significant wear, including
oxidized paint and exposed metal. She stressed that additional revenue is needed to preserve
these assets.
Ms. Nystrom reviewed Falcon Field Airport’s financial status, noting that currently the airport is
self-sustaining, but current revenue levels will not support future needs. She indicated inflation
and sharply rising capital improvement costs since 2021 have significantly reduced the amount
of maintenance the airport can afford. She warned that without increased revenue, the airport will
quickly fall behind on critical infrastructure upkeep. (See Page 5 of Attachment 1)
In response to a question from Councilmember Duff, Ms. Nystrom explained that after a financial
review last year, the airport increased hangar and tie-down rents by 10% to enable coverage of
their own costs. She noted that staff embarked on notifying tenants that recommended rate
increases will be proposed over the next several years, if necessary, to become financially self-
sustaining.
Ms. Nystrom presented a photo of Echo Ramp as an example of pavement conditions in serious
need of repair. She cautioned that continued neglect will eventually require a full reconstruction.
(See Page 6 of Attachment 1)
Responding to multiple questions from Councilmember Adams, Ms. Nystrom reported that the
Echo Ramp has gone unmaintained for six or seven years due to lack of funding. She confirmed
that if crack filling and seal coating are not performed every four to five years, the pavement will
deteriorate to the point where a complete reconstruction is required, which is significantly more
expensive. She added that at least one additional crack fill and seal coat treatment will be needed
before federal or state grant funding may be requested.
In response to multiple questions posed by Councilmember Taylor, Ms. Nystrom explained that
the pavement is heaving and the main cause of deterioration is weather-related expansion and
not the weight of the aircraft.
Ms. Nystrom identified the approach to address the airport’s funding shortfall and discussed the
cost for ongoing pavement maintenance over the next eight years. She highlighted what the FAA
and State grants cover regarding major capital improvements and ongoing pavement
maintenance. (See Pages 7 and 8 of Attachment 1)
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Page 3
In response to multiple questions posed by Councilmember Goforth, Ms. Nystrom answered that
a pavement reconstruction can last 15 to 20 years or longer if properly maintained. She indicated
that after reconstruction, pavement conditions can exceed the FAA’s minimum pavement
condition index (PCI) threshold of 70, and with regular upkeep, the pavement lifespan could
potentially extend to 30 years.
Ms. Nystrom explained that since costs have risen significantly, the airport began exploring a
financial cost center approach in 2024, supported by the FAA, which divides the airport into
sections with the goal of making each area self-sustaining. She said the Council approved the
first step of this approach in 2025 by implementing an 8% fee increase for city-owned hangars
and tie-downs to begin moving those areas toward financial self-sufficiency. She discussed the
current proposed rate increases for the airport’s hangars and tie-downs and described what the
rate increases will cover. (See Pages 9 through 11 of Attachment 1)
Responding to a question from Councilmember Duff, Ms. Nystrom replied that the current cost for
an open tie-down is $55 per month.
In response to a question posed by Mayor Freeman, Ms. Nystrom answered that the City’s fees
are generally in line with rates at other airports.
Responding to multiple questions from Councilmember Taylor, Ms. Nystrom described the
components of a well-maintained tie-down area. She emphasized that the tie-down system is
designed to keep aircraft securely in place and prevent them from being blown across the runway
during storms or high winds.
Ms. Nystrom stated that the Airfield Cost Center is expected to be the most difficult to make self-
sustaining due to its limited revenue sources, relying mainly on fuel flowage fees, and listed its
costly operational areas. She reported that the Airfield Cost Center is projected to cost
approximately $2.4 million this fiscal year, while expected revenue is only about $374,300,
creating a $2 million shortfall. She indicated that after reviewing various options and comparing
practices at other airports, staff recommended a gradual increase in the Avgas fuel flowage fee
from $0.14 to $0.15 per gallon. She commented that this increase alone will not close the gap,
and staff also proposed implementing landing fees as an additional revenue source to help reduce
the deficit and move the airfield toward financial sustainability. (See Pages 12 and 13 of
Attachment 1)
In response to a question posed by Mayor Freeman, Ms. Nystrom replied that the closest airports
to Falcon Field for fuel would be Mesa Gateway, Chandler Municipal, and Scottsdale.
Responding to a question from Councilmember Adams, Ms. Nystrom confirmed that included in
the $2.4 million expenses for the Airfield Cost Center is the cost of a specialty fire apparatus along
with six firefighters, who must be FAA certified as aircraft rescue firefighters with ongoing training
requirements.
Mr. Schultz clarified that the fire truck was originally funded through a general obligation bond,
and staffing levels were based on providing coverage during tower operating hours.
Ms. Nystrom added that the firefighters are stationed at the airport 24 hours a day to respond to
incidents at any time. She noted that Falcon Field is a general aviation airport and is not required
by the FAA to have aircraft rescue firefighting coverage, but the City Council chose to provide the
service. She noted that last year, Falcon Field had 80 incidents at the airport.
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Page 4
City Manager Scott Butler commented that while the City is not required to provide the aircraft
rescue firefighting service, the City values the service as critical for the safety of residents.
Responding to multiple questions from Vice Mayor Somers, Ms. Nystrom acknowledged that there
is a risk of losing business if rates are increased too much. She emphasized that having fuel
available is critical for those who choose to be at Falcon Field Airport. She stated that Falcon
Field only has one full-service fixed base operator (FBO) and if we do not remain competitive,
aircraft may go to other airports to refuel which could put the Falcon Field FBO out of business,
resulting in even larger operational issues for Falcon Field.
In response to multiple questions from Councilmember Goforth, Ms. Nystrom replied that there
are other general aviation airports that are fuel providers and collect more revenue from fuel;
however, Falcon Field Airport does not generate a large amount of revenue from fuel, and incurs
operating costs related to staffing and fuel tanks to comply with all environmental requirements.
Responding to multiple questions posed by Mayor Freeman, Ms. Nystrom explained that doubling
the fuel flowage fees to generate more revenue would likely be unreasonable since the FBO
would need to pass the added cost onto customers. She confirmed that Falcon’s fuel prices
remain competitive, and their FBO closely monitors nearby airport prices and intentionally keeps
fuel one to two cents lower than competitors to attract people to Falcon Field.
In response to a question from Councilmember Goforth, Mr. Schultz replied that even if the airport
doubled its current fuel flowage fee revenue from about $374,000 to roughly $750,000, it would
still not generate enough money for the airport to be financially self-sustaining.
Councilmember Taylor commented that it is financially unwise to rely on a single source of
revenue and depending only on fuel fees creates risk. She noted if fuel sales were disrupted, the
airport would lose a major source of income, so revenue should come from multiple streams.
Ms. Nystrom reviewed the methodology and factors considered for determining the proposed
landing fees to make the cost center financially self-sustaining. She pointed out that since there
is no standard landing fee model for general aviation airports, Falcon Field had to create a
structure that best fits its own needs without driving customers away. (See Page14 of Attachment
1)
Vice Mayor Somers commented that Mesa Gateway is not a general aviation airport, but rather a
regional airport with different types of operations.
Ms. Nystrom highlighted the proposed landing fees for Council consideration and explained the
proposed landing fee exemptions. She mentioned that Falcon Field currently has approximately
877 based aircraft. (See Pages 15 through 17 of Attachment 1)
Discussion ensued regarding exempt classifications, specifically those related to firefighter rescue
aircraft, aircraft being sold under contract, and other types of tenants at Falcon Field.
Ms. Nystrom provided an overview of the financial forecast without the implementation of
increased rent, hangars, tie-downs, and landing fees. She reported that without the increase in
fees, Falcon Field’s ending fund balance would decline sharply, and by Fiscal Year (FY) 28/29
the airport would no longer be operating as financially self-sustaining, due to rising capital
improvements costs, grant projects, and pavement maintenance. She compared a financial
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Page 5
forecast if the fees are approved by Council that shows the airport would avoid a deficit and
maintain a healthy reserve balance, while still complying with FAA guidance against excessive
surplus funds. (See Pages 18 and 19 of Attachment 1)
In response to a question from Councilmember Adams, Mr. Schultz explained that the City uses
the Western Consumer Price Index (CPI) for inflation assumptions in the forecast. He emphasized
that costs have risen significantly from about $800,000 to approximately $1.4 million annually.
Responding to multiple questions posed by Councilmember Duff, Ms. Nystrom said that the line
items for project costs on the financial spreadsheets reflect airport-funded costs only based on
the maintenance and CIP and exclude outside funds on both financial spreadsheets.
In response to multiple questions posed by Councilmember Duff, Ms. Nystrom explained that the
airport’s goal is to maintain at least $2.5 million in ending fund balance. She noted that fees and
charges will be reviewed on an annual basis to determine if fees can remain the same or need to
be increased.
Responding to a question from Councilmember Taylor, Mr. Schultz defined the term for “transfer
out,” on the financial spreadsheets, represents Falcon Field’s contributions towards savings for
retiree medical benefits. He added that the contributions are made into the reserve fund.
Discussion ensued regarding public outreach efforts and feedback, the impact of deferring
projects, the City’s philosophy towards enterprise funds, and the management of collecting
landing fees.
In response to multiple questions from Mayor Freeman, Ms. Owen explained that the FAA
requires airfield fees to be fair and reasonable and not unjustly discriminatory, as well as
supported by the rate base. She mentioned that during previous discussions, the FAA did not
express concerns and recognized that comparing fees among general aviation airports is difficult
as each airport is unique. She clarified that if fees are challenged, the FAA would conduct an
independent review with comparisons across the country.
Responding to multiple questions posed by Councilmember Duff, Mr. Schultz discussed how the
revenues and expenses will be tracked for each cost center within its activity, and where funds
will be deposited to ensure that activities are self-sustaining. He confirmed that this structure will
allow the City to evaluate over time what is working and where adjustments may be needed.
In response to multiple questions from Councilmember Taylor, Ms. Nystrom stated that the airport
would hire a third-party company to handle fee collections, accounting and collection
enforcement, since the City lacks the software and staffing capacity to manage the process
internally. She added that this practice is common in many airports and emphasized that the third-
party company costs are factored into the Airfield Cost Center projections based on estimates
from similar airports.
Councilmember Goforth thanked Ms. Nystrom and staff for their work and emphasized that
discussions about Falcon Field’s financial sustainability have been ongoing since at least 2023.
She supported the cost-center approach, stating that airport users, not the general public, should
pay for the costs of the specific services and the cost to maintain those areas. She added that
while she had previously preferred a faster move toward full cost recovery, the Council chose
gradual increases to allow users time to adjust. She noted strong public support for this self-
sustaining model and stressed that fees will be reviewed annually for necessity and adequacy
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Page 6
and highlighted that all hangars and tie-downs are currently occupied with a waiting list in place.
She said that her residents appreciate the City’s philosophy of a self-sustaining asset. She
suggested that the Council move forward with the staff proposal to a vote of the Council on March
23, 2026.
Mr. Smith reassured the Council that the proposed landing fee has been extensively reviewed by
a full team and complies with FAA regulations. He pointed out that although the fee may be
somewhat higher than other general aviation airports, many municipalities subsidize their airports
despite the fact that the FAA has a regulation on being self-sustaining. He emphasized that the
City is prepared to defend the fee if challenged, and highlighted that Ms. Owen was brought in to
provide an independent legal review.
Councilmember Taylor thanked staff for taking the time to carefully evaluate the proposal and
involve outside experts, stressing that the City is acting in the best interest of the public and
working to prevent taxpayers from bearing future costs.
Ms. Nystrom added that Falcon Field is at a critical turning point and remains an important
economic asset to the City. She stated that the need to keep the airport well-maintained,
customer-service focused, and attractive to businesses and tenants will require changes moving
forward.
Mayor Freeman stated if the proposed fees and charges are approved by City Council, they will
be effective May 1, 2026.
Mayor Freeman thanked staff for the presentation.
1-b.
Appointments to various boards and committees.
It was moved by Councilmember Adams, seconded by Councilmember Duff, that the Council
concur with the Mayor’s recommendations and the appointments be confirmed. (See Attachment
2)
Upon tabulation of votes, it showed:
AYES – Freeman–Somers–Adams–Duff–Goforth–Heredia–Taylor
NAYS – None
Carried unanimously.
2.
Current events summary including meetings and conferences attended.
Mayor Freeman and Councilmembers highlighted the events, meetings, and conferences recently
attended.
3.
Scheduling of meetings.
City Manager Scott Butler stated that the schedule of meetings is as follows:
Thursday, March 19, 2026, 7:30 a.m. – Community and Cultural Development Committee meeting
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Page 7
4.
Adjournment.
Without objection, the Study Session adjourned at 9:13 a.m.
____________________________________
MARK FREEMAN, MAYOR
ATTEST:
_______________________________
HOLLY MOSELEY, CITY CLERK
I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Study Session
of the City Council of Mesa, Arizona, held on the 12th day of March 2026. I further certify that the meeting
was duly called and held and that a quorum was present.
_______________________________
HOLLY MOSELEY, CITY CLERK
lr
(Attachments – 1)
Falcon Field Airport Update
Corinne Nystrom, A.A.E.
Airport Director
March 5, 2026
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 1 of 21
Falcon Field Airport Purpose Statement
Falcon Field Airport exists to:
• Operate a safe, reliable and well-maintained airfield
• Provide customer-centered aviation
• Foster positive community relationships
• Drive a sustainable aviation ecosystem, fuel capital investment, and
expand premiere workforce opportunities
• Realize the City’s vision of a safe, fiscally responsible, quality development
and thriving community of jobs and prosperity.
2
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 2 of 21
Primary Sources of Airport Revenue
Primary Sources of Airport Revenue - Current (Non-Grant)
• Ground Lease Rent
• City-Owned Hangar, Tiedown, Storage Room Rent
• Fuel Flowage Fees
• City-Owned Itinerant Aircraft Tiedowns
• Rental Car Concession Fees
• Miscellaneous: Gate Access Cards, Ground Lease Transaction Fees,
Hangar/Tiedown Transfer Fees
3
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 3 of 21
The Need to Be Financially Self-Sustaining
• FAA Grant Assurance #24 – Maintain a fee & rental structure
for facilities & services which will make the airport as self-sustaining as
possible
• Since 2006, Airport Enterprise Fund has had a balanced budget due to:
- One-time $4.6 million net proceeds from sale of land in 2006
- Revenues collected from tenants and users
- Conservative budgeting and spending practices
- Deferred capital improvement projects
- Deferred maintenance on airfield pavement & City-owned facilities
4
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 4 of 21
Falcon Field’s Current Financial Picture
Looking forward, the Airport Enterprise Fund is not financially
sustainable due to:
- General inflation
- Beginning in 2020, capital improvement costs began increasing
substantially and continue to increase
Result:
- Paying more and getting less
- Gradually falling behind on required maintenance & repair, including
airfield pavement & City-owned facilities maintenance
5
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 5 of 21
Echo Ramp – February 2026
6
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 6 of 21
Actions Already Taken to Address the Approaching
Shortfall
• Cut back on non-grant capital improvement projects
• Taking the “Band-Aid Approach” to maintain pavements – we repair
the pavement in the worst condition with what money we have to
work with
• Eventually complete re-construction of pavements will be needed if
Pavement Condition Index (PCI) falls below 50
• Estimated cost for on-going pavement maintenance is $5.75
million/year ($46 million over next 8 years) to bring all airport
pavements to the FAA’s recommended 70 PCI.
7
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 7 of 21
Can Federal & State Grants Be Used to Cover Costs?
• FAA & State grants help with some of the capital improvements and
pavement reconstruction, but the FAA will not pay for ongoing pavement
maintenance (i.e. crack fill/seal coat)
• State has some funds available for pavement maintenance, but they
determine which airports get these funds, when, and the area of
pavement for which funds will be spent (usually runways/taxiways)
• Several necessary Airport capital improvements rank too low on the FAA’s
and ADOT’s lists to receive funding, such as pavement reconstruction in
the City-owned hangar areas
8
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 8 of 21
Cost Center Analysis Timeline
• In 2024, conversations began to convert to the Cost Center Approach
- City-Owned Hangars/Tiedowns
- Airfield
- Ground Leases
• Each Cost Center should be financially self-sustaining
• August 2025 – City-Owned Hangars/Tiedowns – 8% rent increase
approved
9
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 9 of 21
Proposed Fee Increase
City-Owned Hangars
- Ongoing pavement maintenance costs
- Complete cane bolt installation on all hangars – 3 more years
- Place funds in capital reserve to re-paint the hangars to extend
their lives – approximately $ 2 million
- Recommendation: 10% rental rate increase
10
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 10 of 21
Proposed Fee Increase
City-Owned Tiedowns
- Currently charging 55% of what is needed to be financially self-
sustaining
Recommendation:
- 23% rental rate increase for open tiedowns
- 11% rental rate increase for covered tiedowns
11
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 11 of 21
Airfield Cost Center
• Airfield Cost Center
- Pavement maintenance (runways/taxiways, non-exclusive ramps)
- Airfield lighting
- Aircraft landing aids (PAPIs/REILS)
- Safety areas
- Utilities
- Perimeter fence/gates
- Aircraft rescue firefighting services
- Terminal building/Airport maintenance facility
- Airport personnel
- Airfield equipment
- Airport’s portion of FAA & State grant projects
12
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 12 of 21
Airfield Cost Center Costs
• Estimated FY2025-26 Airfield Cost Center Cost: $2,410,432
• Estimated FY2025-26 Airfield Cost Center Revenues: $374,300
• Airfield Cost Center Without Landing Fees
- Estimated Shortfall: $2,036,132
• Recommendation:
- Increase avgas fuel flowage fee from $.14 to $.15 per gallon
- Landing fees
13
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 13 of 21
• Methodology Used:
1) Determined amount of revenue needed to make the Airfield Cost
Center financially self-sustaining
2) FAA requires that fees must be reasonable and not unjustly
discriminatory
- General aviation landing fees charged at other airports
3) Account for 10% reduction in aircraft landings (some customers may
choose to use other airports)
Landing Fee Methodology
14
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 14 of 21
• Based Fixed Wing Aircraft
≤ 6,000 lbs. MLW
$20.35
> 6,000 lbs. MLW
$3.40/1,000 lbs.
• Itinerant Fixed Wing Aircraft
≤ 6,000 lbs. MLW
$24.35
>6,000 lbs. MLW
$4.10/1,000 lbs.
• Based Rotorcraft, Drones, & eVTOL
$12.60
• Itinerant Rotorcraft, Drones, & eVTOL
$17.60
Proposed Landing Fees
15
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 15 of 21
• Based aircraft – first 10 landings per month
• Rotorcraft, drones, eVTOL landing on exclusive use ramps
• Declared emergency landings (FAA Alert I, II, or III)
• All but one rotorcraft landing during continuous training & testing session in fixed
location or while moving in the training/testing traffic pattern or while moving
between training/testing ramp and a private ramp
• Aircraft owned by government agencies (federal, state, local, political
subdivisions, federally-approved foreign governments)
Proposed Landing Fee Exemptions
16
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 16 of 21
• Aircraft under contract for sale to a government agency (certain restrictions
apply)
• Aircraft owned by based tenants as part of production flight testing prior to
delivery to end-use customer
• Flights conducted in support of government functions (public safety, search &
rescue, disaster response, infrastructure protection, & emergency operations)
• Special events sponsored by the City of Mesa
• Flights for medical purposes (transporting patients, blood, or organs) & animal
rescue purposes
Proposed Landing Fee Exemptions
17
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 17 of 21
Financial Forecast If Fees Remain the Same
18
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 18 of 21
Financial Forecast If Landing Fees & Other Fee
Adjustments are Approved
Total Fiscal Impact = $2,894,770
19
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 19 of 21
Next Steps
• City Council to consider proposed Fees and Charges
amendments on March 23, 2026
• If approved by City Council, the Fees and Charges will be
effective May 1, 2026
20
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 20 of 21
Thank you
Questions?
21
Study Session
March 12, 2026
Attachment 1
Page 21 of 21