Forums: Skydiving: General Skydiving Discussions:
Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight

 

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 Next page Last page  View All

stratostar  (Student)

Nov 15, 2012, 6:30 AM
Post #76 of 109 (2485 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight [In reply to] Can't Post

http://www.thecreswellchronicle.com/...y.cfm?story_no=10806

Safe to assume the extenuation of the time delay is due to the new & pending PLA standards to be issued in AC 150/5300-13. CrazyPirate


stratostar  (Student)

Jan 29, 2013, 12:45 PM
Post #77 of 109 (2388 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
http://www.thecreswellchronicle.com/...y.cfm?story_no=10806

Safe to assume the extenuation of the time delay is due to the new & pending PLA standards to be issued in AC 150/5300-13. CrazyPirate

Headline read to the story linked above: FAA postpones skydiving decision until Feb. 2013

Yep.... going out on a limb here and I'm going to state on the record what I think is about to happen. But before do that.... Let me go on the record for the "posting police" and state once again that:

Quote:
(I'm not speaking for USPA, the FAA or any other person in the industry, I'm posting my personal thoughts on the matter. I could be wrong, no one appointed me the guru of airport access issues!)

This PLA will be issued in February of 2013, yep next month! That is as long as the legal dept @ FAA signs off on the drafted addendum to AC 5300-13. That would clear the way for this to become factual and the new standards..... Why would I think such is pending?

1. I have a open part 13 case and I have regular contact with the FAA in regards to my case... ( I hold their feet to the fire) 2. Because of my pending case, I have become rather studied in the rules, law, and pending changes and how those changes could help or hurt my case. Now, why did I link the news story above? As I understand it, when you file a part 16 formal complaint the FAA is required under law to process the case in a timely manner, I recall reading 120 days. The whole Creswell fight is over the landing area, same as in a number of other pending cases that are all hold up on this PLA bullshit.

Based on my research and communication about my case, I strongly believe that we will see that PLA draft come out of FAA legal in the next month, provided they don't mandate changes to what ever they are getting ready to send our way.... the drafted document that is currently under review. And let's not forget that the public comments were closed a long time ago.

As long as no changes are needed, we will see that come out.... NEXT month.... also leading me to believe such is true, is the extension on the part 16 in Creswell Oregon linked above. Now if we see another story come out about another extending of the Creswell case, then it's safe to think they are still working it or they wouldn't be seeking to extend the time. They will not rule on that case or any case till this PLA crap is issued.

Hope you all get UR seat belts on the ride is about to get bumpy!


(This post was edited by stratostar on Jan 29, 2013, 1:41 PM)


stratostar  (Student)

Feb 6, 2013, 6:20 AM
Post #78 of 109 (2266 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight [In reply to] Can't Post

This video of the former mayor running his mouth is to classic to not have on this thread. Now you see the stupidity in action and this will help explain why access fights take so long.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvYyQ5hQTS0


normiss  (D 28356)

Feb 6, 2013, 6:42 AM
Post #79 of 109 (2255 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight [In reply to] Can't Post

Sounds like they don't want their grant monies.
Crazy


stratostar  (Student)

Feb 6, 2013, 6:45 AM
Post #80 of 109 (2252 views)
Shortcut
Re: [normiss] Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight [In reply to] Can't Post

It's an older video from a few yrs back, but now you can clearly see the morons at the helm in action.... yea they voted to spend 100K to hire a lawyer to tell the FAA to fuck off. Now the pending PLA shit is about to rock their world. At least there is a new mayor in town now and he is pro small business and skydiving.


Xitesmai  (Student)

Feb 6, 2013, 7:47 AM
Post #81 of 109 (2228 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight [In reply to] Can't Post

It seems strange that the city would spend over $125,000 to fight this, rather than issue a temporary use permit for the former ODOT land, than they have been using from 1999 to 2006.

Definitely another agenda going on here.

Hopefully a decision will be made soon, and access rights will be stronger for DZs across the country.


skyjumpenfool  (Student)

Feb 6, 2013, 1:33 PM
Post #82 of 109 (2170 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
This video of the former mayor running his mouth is to classic to not have on this thread. Now you see the stupidity in action and this will help explain why access fights take so long.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvYyQ5hQTS0

Mayor Hooker... "The FAA does not control, opperate or mannage the airport, the city does!"
Did he really say that? Cool This guy should have stuck to the "family" business.


Iago  (D License)

Feb 6, 2013, 4:43 PM
Post #83 of 109 (2108 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
It's an older video from a few yrs back, but now you can clearly see the morons at the helm in action.... yea they voted to spend 100K to hire a lawyer to tell the FAA to fuck off. Now the pending PLA shit is about to rock their world. At least there is a new mayor in town now and he is pro small business and skydiving.

Here's another one from a year ago. Not skydiving related but the former mayor definitely comes off as a bully by blackballing one of the council members off all the city committees.

http://www.youtube.comwatch?v=BJaeS0q5iFw


theonlyski  (D License)

Feb 6, 2013, 6:33 PM
Post #84 of 109 (2076 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Iago] Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
It's an older video from a few yrs back, but now you can clearly see the morons at the helm in action.... yea they voted to spend 100K to hire a lawyer to tell the FAA to fuck off. Now the pending PLA shit is about to rock their world. At least there is a new mayor in town now and he is pro small business and skydiving.

Here's another one from a year ago. Not skydiving related but the former mayor definitely comes off as a bully by blackballing one of the council members off all the city committees.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJaeS0q5iFw

Clicky fixed.


grimmie  (D 18890)

Feb 6, 2013, 7:18 PM
Post #85 of 109 (2063 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skyjumpenfool] Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
This video of the former mayor running his mouth is to classic to not have on this thread. Now you see the stupidity in action and this will help explain why access fights take so long.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvYyQ5hQTS0

Mayor Hooker... "The FAA does not control, opperate or mannage the airport, the city does!"
Did he really say that? Cool This guy should have stuck to the "family" business.

He's mostly correct. The FAA allows sponsors to operate, manage and control their airport however they want as long as they follow the Airport Compliance Manual. The FAA also does not act on issues until a Part 13 is started. That is an informal process. A Part 16 then becomes the real deal and subjective to the ADO's interpretation. Thus, we as skydivers face long odds at some airports for access because of the system. A Part 16 hearing can cost $20,000 or more for the DZO. A sponsor can find many ways to try and keep us off the airport that was made for public use. Guys like the mayor exist in a lot of places.Mad


stratostar  (Student)

Feb 6, 2013, 9:15 PM
Post #86 of 109 (2039 views)
Shortcut
Re: [grimmie] Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Thus, we as skydivers face long odds at some airports for access because of the system. A Part 16 hearing can cost $20,000 or more for the DZO. A sponsor can find many ways to try and keep us off the airport that was made for public use. Guys like the mayor exist in a lot of places.Mad

Oh but did you not get the memo...... the PLA standards are going to solve all these problems.Laugh


(This post was edited by stratostar on Feb 6, 2013, 9:16 PM)


stratostar  (Student)

Aug 17, 2013, 7:14 AM
Post #87 of 109 (1828 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight [In reply to] Can't Post

This case is damn near 9 yrs old! Many of you have not clue what all is involved with an airport access fight. This win is huge for the area and for skydiving as a whole. Please now go out and support that dz and make some skydives! And while you are in town, be sure to fill up the gas tank, buy some food and no matter what, make sure you let the business folks know that is skydiver money being spent there.

Carry on....

http://lanetoday.com/...th-eugene-skydivers/


(This post was edited by stratostar on Aug 17, 2013, 7:14 AM)


JerryBaumchen  (D 1543)

Aug 17, 2013, 11:33 AM
Post #88 of 109 (1744 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight [In reply to] Can't Post

Hi strat,

Thanks for the update. Glad to see some common sense getting into the discussion.

I would not have settled for $50k.

JerryBaumchen


wolfriverjoe  (A 50013)

Aug 17, 2013, 12:53 PM
Post #89 of 109 (1698 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight [In reply to] Can't Post

The one thing that is a shame is that the taxpayers will foot the bill.
I wish there was a way that the idiots who were responsible for causing the issue could be somehow held responsible for the outcome (financially).

But that won't happen.

It's good to see it turn out this way. I know that it doesn't always.


BigMikeH77  (B 39490)

Aug 17, 2013, 1:00 PM
Post #90 of 109 (1696 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight [In reply to] Can't Post

I do recall reading the part 16 complaint and thinking "Gee, those guys are getting screwed".. I'm REALLY happy to hear they will (presumably) start up again soon. I'd love to see the pacific northwest!


JerryBaumchen  (D 1543)

Aug 17, 2013, 1:21 PM
Post #91 of 109 (1673 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight [In reply to] Can't Post

Hi strat,

One additional thought.

Quote:
This win is huge for the area and for skydiving as a whole.

Actually, I do not agree. It was a settlement not a judicial determination. It cannot be used in court as a prior ruling.

But yes, it is a win for the area.

JerryBaumchen


grimmie  (D 18890)

Aug 17, 2013, 1:29 PM
Post #92 of 109 (1665 views)
Shortcut
Re: [JerryBaumchen] Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight [In reply to] Can't Post

Something doesn't smell right with that article.
Where was the DZO interview after the meeting?
No mention of the pending FAA Part 16?
And what is up with the county requiring some sort of permitting process?
I doubt that a $50K settlement would legal fees the DZO has incurred.
I would like to hear from the DZO what is really going on.

I don't think we have heard the end of this. IMHO


stratostar  (Student)

Aug 17, 2013, 5:28 PM
Post #93 of 109 (1580 views)
Shortcut
Re: [grimmie] Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight [In reply to] Can't Post

I agree 100%! However I think it is a major step in the right direction. This story just says the city agreed to settle the law suit the dzo filed for 750K. There is no word on the part 16, that was an open and pending case. I too would like to see a FAA ruling. All that a side, Mr. A.J. O'Connell & I have talked, he emailed back when I sent comments into the city counsel via the city website, right after they voted to hire a lawyer out of Denver Co. A.J. was the only one who voted no and he was the only smart one, he got pissed off about the wasteful spending fighting this and went to work. He asked a lot of questions about airport access fights across the USA, he is on the skydivers side here and he fully understood the city was not in compliance and acting retarded wasting thousands of tax payer monies. So I still think it a major win over all and it's still case that in the end still proves airport sponsors will be in the end held to the grant funding contracts they sign. Other wise there would have been no pressure to settle. Additional newly elected city counsel members were informed as to the real truth, is my understanding and they then voted wisely.

Let us not forget the PLA is still pending, but I hear it has gone back to the legal dept but is still a pending issue
"soon" to show up. (soon) define FAA's version of "soon".


(This post was edited by stratostar on Aug 17, 2013, 5:32 PM)


stratostar  (Student)

Aug 18, 2013, 7:47 AM
Post #94 of 109 (1470 views)
Shortcut
Re: [grimmie] Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight [In reply to] Can't Post

This might help to clear up some questions as to where all this came from.... and help provide more info.

http://www.registerguard.com/...ion-council.html.csp

http://www.registerguard.com/...uncil-cross.html.csp


Ronn

Aug 27, 2013, 11:43 AM
Post #95 of 109 (1279 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight [In reply to] Can't Post

Update to the Eugene Skydivers airport access fight.


(This post was edited by Ronn on Aug 27, 2013, 11:44 AM)
Attachments: Eugene Skydiver Press Release-5.pdf (89.6 KB)


JerryBaumchen  (D 1543)

Sep 10, 2013, 10:55 AM
Post #96 of 109 (1127 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight [In reply to] Can't Post

Hi strat,

I saw this in today's newspaper:

http://www.heraldnet.com/...dispute-nears-accord

The one thing that is simply not true is this:

"The airfield is one of Oregon's busiest general aviation airports."

Aviation was nearly dead at Creswell until the skydivers arrived.

JerryBaumchen


gorillaparks

Dec 24, 2013, 8:06 AM
Post #97 of 109 (919 views)
Shortcut
Re: [JerryBaumchen] Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight [In reply to] Can't Post

So, it looks like there is jumping here! I am a fun jumper recently moved to Eugene. What is the best way to get loads together? Do you guys coordinate to get the plane up? I'd like to make some jumps asap:)


SEREJumper  (D 29555)

Dec 24, 2013, 12:12 PM
Post #98 of 109 (852 views)
Shortcut
Re: [gorillaparks] Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight [In reply to] Can't Post

How about call them?

http://eugeneskydivers.com/


ChrisD  (No License)

Feb 3, 2014, 9:48 AM
Post #99 of 109 (653 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight [In reply to] Can't Post

And todays (2/3/14) response about mediation is:

http://www.mediation.com/...creswell-oregon.aspx

If you don't want to click here is the jist of it:

"Mediation Over Skydiving Hits Snags in Creswell Oregon
Monday, February, 3, 2014
In Creswell Oregon, there has been a long running dispute over whether Eugene Skydivers should be able to skydive near Hobby Field. Originally, the skydiving club's owner, Urban Moore, had filed a complaint against the city with the Federal Aviation Administration. On suggestion from an anonymous email, Moore decided to pursue mediation with the city.
The City Council Balks at Civil Mediation
Due to the complaint with the FAA, Creswell's City Council is not agreeing to enter mediation with Mr. Moore. The basic argument is that they are too busy preparing for the litigation to concern themselves with mediation. If Mr. Moore drops the complaint with the FAA, they would agree to the civil mediation.
Moore has yet to agree to drop the complaint. From his perspective, the city council should be able to handle both litigation and mediation, and compares it to walking and chewing gum. Moore said that he would agree to drop the complaint if some kind of compromise is worked out. This dispute has been deadlocked this way for the past 6 years.
Trust Is the Issue in This Government Mediation
The primary snag in this mediation is that neither party is truly acting in good faith. Neither side trusts the other, and the process of entering mediation itself needs to be mediated. This dispute has already been plagued by complaints, responses, counter responses and lawsuits.
Of course, distrust is often an issue with mediation, and it isn't even necessary that the parties act fully in good faith. However, to get to a resolution, there has to be an olive branch somewhere. Already, some of the Council members are pushing for agreeing to the mediation, arguing that it would save the city from spending the $100,000 allotted for the litigation."


The thing is this is over 3 years old, but the way the opposition has the web site set up it list's this as "new" news. This to me speaks volumes about the people opposing the access and how they operate. Old news really, but create a little derision and public sympathy by implying that both sides won't come to the table???
Is this a shitty technique or am I missing something again?

C

(On another note can someone tell me who Amy Aul is???)


(This post was edited by ChrisD on Feb 3, 2014, 10:13 AM)


BigMikeH77  (B 39490)

Feb 3, 2014, 11:07 AM
Post #100 of 109 (603 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ChrisD] Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight [In reply to] Can't Post

It's clear that the city of Creswell wants off the hook - and that is understandable because IIRC there have already been Part 16 proceedings that favoured Eugene Skydivers.

Last I heard there was speculation of an unknown settlement (although it was estimated at the relatively small amount of $50,000) that Creswell would pay to Eugene Skydivers to cover lost revenues, legal expenses, etc., and that settlement amount was clearly lower than what E.S. could have sought.

Alas, it seems as though this is not the case now. Creswell won't come to the mediation table with any sort of active litigation in progress. That, IMO, is the only thing that fails to display good faith. Eugene Skydivers shouldn't be expected to withdraw their complaint just for the opportunity to negotiate with a city that obviously doesn't want to negotiate.

Creswell economically discriminated against the dropzone. Now it's simply an issue of getting them to eat lima beans. The longer they drag this out the worse it will taste.

All this from the outside looking in though... Just my opinion.


First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Skydiving : General Skydiving Discussions

 


Search for (options)