The Lake Havasu City Council voted 7-0 Tuesday to decline a professional services agreement with Vector Airport Systems LLC to collect municipal airport landing fees, after extended public comment from pilots, airport tenants and council members who said relying on ADS‑B tracking for billing would risk safety and local business.

City officials said the council could still pursue landing fees later through the city’s regular master fee schedule, but the agreement under consideration would have contracted an outside company to identify and bill aircraft detected by automatic dependent surveillance‑broadcast, or ADS‑B.

Council member Jim Dolan moved to not approve the contract; Council member David Diaz seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. “This is a safety issue,” Dolan said during debate, arguing that pilots could simply turn off ADS‑B to avoid bills and thereby make the airport’s traffic picture less visible. “I am 100% against this.”

Airport manager Rob Kane told the council the fee in current practice is $1.50 per 1,000 pounds of maximum landing weight and that, under the city’s recent sample period, automatic collection at that rate would have generated about $18,000 in operating revenue over a 12‑month period. Kane said the city would likely consider fee adjustments later in the normal master fee schedule process that could raise revenue further.

Multiple pilots and airport tenants urged the council to reject Vector’s approach during a public hearing. Bradley Pinnell, a pilot who said he flies Cessna aircraft, described how Safford, Ariz., had used Vector and later abandoned the system after operator and user backlash. “Vector has a reputation in this country of overbilling, finding phantom bills,” Pinnell said. Flight instructor Brian Schultz told the council ADS‑B was a safety tool, not a billing mechanism and that delayed bills would leave users with a “bad taste.”

Several speakers described operational and economic effects. Randy Peterson said airports tracked by Vector had been avoided by pilots, and Rob Colby, a local user, said the real revenue opportunity at the airport was hangar construction rather than automated billing. "If you guys want to make money, build hangars," Colby said.

Council members repeatedly distinguished the contract decision from the broader question of whether the city should charge landing fees at all. Mayor Cal Sheehy said if the council wanted landing‑fee revenue it should be established through the city’s master fee schedule rather than through an outside company’s automated data‑mining approach. Council member Diaz thanked residents and pilots for attending and said the public testimony helped inform the vote.

The public testimony also referenced pending federal legislation that would limit or ban use of ADS‑B data for billing; council members and pilots noted that work at the congressional level was under way and that several aviation stakeholders oppose monetizing ADS‑B. Kane acknowledged the council could pursue other revenue options but said the Vector proposal was presented to implement automatic collection rather than change the fee itself.

Outcome: The council’s vote blocked the Vector contract. Staff and council said they would address any future landing‑fee proposals in the master fee schedule process and continue to explore other revenue options for airport maintenance, including hangars and fuel‑based agreements.