0
stratostar

Longmont City Council will take up skydiving noise

Recommended Posts

Great post BigMike. We (including the FAA, courts and airport patrons) would all be better off if those people on this dumb ass witch hunt would just take their ball, shut the fuck up, and go home. :S
"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stratostar


I wonder if the DZ could counter-sue for Harassment? It sounds like a handful of people are behind the complaints, have misrepresented the facts to federal agencies and are basically stalking the DZ and its operations. Some of the information they come by could only be available if they're monitoring the tower frequencies at the airport. If you're stalking anyone at that level, there's something seriously wrong with you. It'd be nice if they could be stuck with a bill for the resources they've been wasting.
I'm trying to teach myself how to set things on fire with my mind. Hey... is it hot in here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dwhenline

Wish I was a lawyer, so I could help them counter sue
lawyers get expensive and that maybe just what the group is hoping for.



That's their obvious intent. Hopefully Mile Hi has access to the USPA airport access fund.
I'm trying to teach myself how to set things on fire with my mind. Hey... is it hot in here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FlyingRhenquest

***Wish I was a lawyer, so I could help them counter sue
lawyers get expensive and that maybe just what the group is hoping for.



That's their obvious intent. Hopefully Mile Hi has access to the USPA airport access fund.

Not really an airport access issue.

Just about the definition of a nuisance suit, hopefully airport and city officials will back Mile-Hi skydiving without any problems, since they did things like measure the noise level.

Yes asking for attorneys fees is the most appropriate remedy.
"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The article mentions nothing of the jurisdiction of the suit. Are we talking about Longmont Municipal Court, Boulder County District, what?

I wager that the petition is dismissed by a magistrate before anyone sees the inside of a courtroom.

I also hope that Gibby leveraged her house to pay for her own legal fees.. That way when the respondent is awarded legal expenses, she can move to a cardbord box alongside the South Platte and see what REAL noise and nuisances are out there, and see how REALLY rude and obnoxious people are.

Bottom line here, this is CQS last stand and they want to go out guns blazing and then continue to ocmplain how they were disenfranchised by "the man" and "the system" that is forcing them all to live in the agony of constant droning (which is quieter than a normal conversation and even birds chirping)

Came across this little ditty which reminds me of the CQS bunch..lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My thoughts are to go for way more than legal costs. Go for the "slander, liable and loss of business" as well. I doubt CQS has bought insurance to protect its officers in case someone sues the organization. Also, the DZ should sue the individuals involved in the CQS group, since three have complained so adamantly to the city about the legal activity at the airport.

The wild thing is that CQS is giving the DZ great free publicity and actually increasing their business. Which increases the number of jumps, which increases the number of loads....

Too bad CQS can't take a page form its own book and STFU.

top
Jump more, post less!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have a lot to say about the potentially libelous behaviour of CQS, but in case MHSC decides to pursue any kind of counterclaim I feel it best to not make a comment about it here on the board.

I just want MHSC to continue to be the active part of the community that they are, and for the CQS goons to move on. Literally.. MOVE on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Hopefully Mile Hi has access to the USPA airport access fund.



Please go take the time to educate yourself on how that works. And for those USPA leaders who read here, see how fucked up that shit is, that for yrs our members are not clearly educated on how that funding program works, O' yea that's right, too busy paying for that PR firm for it's work generating fluffy feel good bits crap reporting and VERY little if any $$$ on real advocacy.

FYI, that fund is only for select cases and not just any old little legal issue that comes along.
you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the FAA has already, on several occasions even, determined that there are no safety issues on which to base a restriction of skydiving operations at KLMO. I believe that the Longmont airport advisory board knows this and has seen how costly dealing with a part 16 will be in the long run (case in point, recent settlement with Eugene Skydivers) and wants nothing to do with any of it.

The USPA AAD, from what I've read in past cases, has done a good job setting precedents that provide defense for future cases. This, as stated above, also acts as a deterrant to local city/county boards who think it might just be easier to restrict/shut down a DZ just to quell the ignorant fury of a very vocal few.

That being said, no I have not heard of the AAD fund being used for cases which do not involve BOTH the FAA and a DZ being denied access - But I'm just a low number new guy.

The AAD fund is not an unlimited resource. I hope that this case DOESN'T involve access issues in the future so that the funds which ARE there can be used for a cause greater than one which our favourite Gunbarrell resident has championed.

CQS has already wasted everyone's time, and that's permissable in the weird world of small town politics. But start wasting people's money, and it won't last long.

But I digress. Are you suggesting that USPA clarify for everyone what the AAD fund is for? I don't see anything wrong with that. But let's not get too upset because someone doesn't full on understand.:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

In 2010, for example, the airport received 488 calls complaining about Mile-Hi; according to airport records, 332 of them came from three people.



What Top and others have said! USPA, if you're listening.... It's time to jump into the deep end. This would be a good place to spend some of my dues. B|
Birdshit & Fools Productions

"Son, only two things fall from the sky."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stratostar

Quote

Hopefully Mile Hi has access to the USPA airport access fund.



Please go take the time to educate yourself on how that works. And for those USPA leaders who read here, see how fucked up that shit is, that for yrs our members are not clearly educated on how that funding program works, O' yea that's right, too busy paying for that PR firm for it's work generating fluffy feel good bits crap reporting and VERY little if any $$$ on real advocacy.

FYI, that fund is only for select cases and not just any old little legal issue that comes along.



CQS attacked airport access first. That didn't work too well.

I contributed to the airport access fund this year and plan to do the same next year. How about you?
I'm trying to teach myself how to set things on fire with my mind. Hey... is it hot in here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

CQS attacked airport access first. That didn't work too well.

I contributed to the airport access fund this year and plan to do the same next year. How about you?



So you think that AAD fund had anything to do with keeping CQS from getting any where for the last two yrs? ROFLMAO

Yea that is a good one. Had nothing to do with it at all! The federal aviation laws is what stopped them and will stop them again, not the tiny minor threat of the USPA AAD fund.... LOL

You did, good for you, feel free to again, no one is stopping you. Did I and would I.... nope not now and most likely never will because that fund does little, it's a drop of water in a vast ocean, (those I know who did get funding said it was helpful to them, what few there are) and because I don't agree with how OUR due monies is wasted on other pet projects that have little to do with true advocacy and keeping skydivers protected to use FFA's.
you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0