Lately, a lot of us who live around Falcon Field have been labeled as “NIMBYs” or “Karens” for raising concerns or supporting landing fees. It’s a catchy line, but it’s worth stepping back and asking a simple question: who is actually saying “not in my backyard”? Because if you really look at it, both sides are asking for something to not happen in their backyard, just in different ways.

Residents are essentially saying, “We’re seeing changes in how the airport is being used, and we’d like those impacts to be managed responsibly.” Pilots and aviation groups, on the other hand, are saying, “Don’t add fees, don’t change anything, don’t increase costs, and don’t alter how operations work.” If we’re being honest, that’s also a version of “not in my backyard.”

Most homeowners around the airport knew an airport was there when they moved in, and many had no issues for years, even decades. They’re not asking for the airport to be shut down. What they’re reacting to is a noticeable shift in the scale and repetition of activity, something that feels very different from how things operated in the past. That’s not “NIMBY”, that’s responding to change over time.

On the flip side, aviation groups are pushing hard against landing fees, any added costs, and any operational changes. You’ll hear things like “this will destroy aviation,” “this will hurt safety,” or “this will drive everyone away.” At the same time, you’ll also hear “nothing will change, costs will just be passed on.” Those two arguments don’t exactly line up, and it highlights how much of this comes down to perspective.

And here’s the reality, every time someone in aviation points a finger at a homeowner and calls them a “NIMBY” or a “Karen,” there are three fingers pointing right back at them. Because saying “don’t charge fees here,” “don’t change anything here,” and “don’t increase costs here” is also protecting your own backyard, it’s just coming from a different angle.

This conversation also isn’t about doing nothing or shutting anything down. Homeowners are actively pushing for solutions, including strengthening the Fly Friendly program and implementing clearer, enforceable minimum standards for SASOs, also known as flight schools, to create more accountability in how operations are conducted. That’s about managing activity responsibly, not eliminating it.

At its core, this debate isn’t really aviation versus residents, it’s about how things are managed and who pays. Landing fees, from the homeowner perspective, are strictly about financial responsibility. Many residents don’t use the airport at all and don’t believe they should be paying for the wear and tear on a system they don’t use, especially when they feel that high-frequency training activity is placing increasing demands on that system and impacting the airspace above their homes.

Residents are saying that if the airport is structured to support itself, then users should carry more of that cost. Pilots are saying costs should stay as low as possible and changes should be minimized. Both positions are predictable, and both are human.

So who’s the “Karen”? Honestly, probably a little bit of everyone. Homeowners don’t want increasing impacts in their backyard, and pilots don’t want increasing costs in theirs. The difference is that one side is asking for financial accountability and structured management, while the other is pushing to keep the status quo as much as possible.

At the end of the day, labels like “NIMBY” or “Karen” don’t solve anything. This isn’t about shutting down an airport or being anti-aviation, it’s about how growth is managed, how costs are shared, and how the system works going forward. And if we’re being honest, everyone involved is just trying to protect what they believe is reasonable in their own backyard.

See everyone on Monday!!