0
stratostar

Know your rights - Federal Funded Airports and Access issues

Recommended Posts

Given all of that, Skydive Lake Tahoe was closed by the Douglas County Commissioner (Douglas County, Nevada). I searched the net for any articles pertaining to this action an could find nothing. Anyone know what happened that resulted in the closure of this DZ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Litigation costs a LOT of money

Yep, and nearly every town that doesn't want a DZ has more citizens than USPA has members.

We can't fight them by suing them all, there are too many towns. The carrot is going to have to be the first choice as often as possible. And if we keep feeding them carrots periodically it's even better; that way they remember the last feeding whenever someone gets pissed.

Wendy P.
There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The USPA members would be better served if USPA would spend more of it's time & money spent on the PR firm to promote the touchy feel goodie stories about the "hero's" and get a better job of educating & advocacy with more joint efforts with groups like the AOPA getting done would do more to help solve the problem on a national level.

There are lots of skydiving operations on airports where no is getting a hard time and the airports are happy to accommodate an approved use. It's only a few retards who need getting a clue to the point it has to be forced on them, don't help matters when DZO's who are also FBO's talk shit about the sport to airport sponsors, can't comp's in the area.
you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chatham skydiving operation has FAA blessing - Sep 19, 2013


http://www.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20130920/NEWS/309200320


Skydiving concerns neighbors in Chatham - Sep 28, 2013

http://www.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20131009/NEWS/310090330 )


Chatham selectmen say no to skydiving
FAA response up in the air -4 hours ago 10-14-13


http://www.wickedlocal.com/orleans/topstories/x1843605720/Chatham-selectmen-say-no-to-skydiving

CHATHAM —


With hundreds of pages of documentation and the preponderance of 500 e-mails pointing out problems with Skydive Cape Cod, the board of selectmen agreed the business was an affront to the town’s tranquility. They also decided what to do about it.
“I do think it has had a negative impact on the neighborhood and the discourse in town. I do think it is a problem and it needs to be addressed,” said Selectman Florence Seldin of the skydiving company that has operated at the municipal airport for several years. “I would vote to eliminate it. I don’t think of it as a safe operation.”

Seldin suggested the town not renew the three-year contract with the company when it ends in November, and although the majority of the board agreed with that in theory, they wanted to see if the town could work with the Federal Aviation Administration first.
Representatives from the FAA has said in the past that skydiving was a protected activity at airports and the millions of dollars the town receives to fund the airport would be cut off if it was prohibited.

Although concerned with the potential loss of hundreds of thousands of federal dollars a year, Selectman Sean Summers said his primary interest was there was a large segment of the community who were upset with the operation and it was the responsibility of elected officials to act on their behalf. This was not a vocal minority, he said.

Still, board members said it was wiser to work with the FAA and try to convince federal officials that skydiving – not just Skydive Cape Cod – was incompatible with the community. They plan to bring a number of arguments to the fore, including how – unlike other spots – the airport was ringed with neighborhoods and the town’s ongoing work to create a vibrant village center in West Chatham, where the airport is located.
They recognize their chances may be slim.

“I don’t see a lot of light at the end of that tunnel,” Town Counsel Jay Talerman told the board.
He also said there is a clause in the contract – which is actually a subcontract between the skydiving company and Cape Cod Flying Circus that runs the airport for the town – that provides an out if there are demonstrable safety concerns. However, Talerman added, so far there have been no issues at Chatham Airport that would rise to level of being able to “void” the contract.
So, while the board reached out to the FAA, they wanted to work on a new contract that would address some of the problems residents had with the company or any company that would respond to a request for proposals. When Skydive Cape Cod came to Chatham there was another company waiting in the wings.

“[The contract] can be much more detailed and much more protective,” said Seldin.
Some audience members had ideas on what that contract should stipulate. Although resident Jane Wilson is favor of eliminating skydiving at the airport all together, she did suggest safeguards that were required in Great Britain. Some of the policies in place across the pond include grounding operations in high winds, having additional testing for pilots and having a $7.5 million insurance policy to cover people on the ground.
Her husband, Tom, said skydiving had virtually no oversight and that recommendations from the National Transportation Safety Board suggested more extensive jump plane maintenance and pilot training, but those recommendations weren’t enacted by the FAA.
“In [NTSB’s] view it is not safe enough for Chatham,” he said. “Do what is right for your citizens and your tourists, put safety first.”
Talerman said the board could look at limiting the frequency of flights, but had to walk a fine line, as the FAA wouldn’t allow an artificially low number that would put the operation out of business.

Airport manager Tim Howard of Cape Cod Flying Circus said that the next contract, which needs to be signed off by the town manager and airport commission, could include issues that residents raised. One of those issues would be reporting when an empty parachute was released or cut loose because a problem arises. He also said airport staff had already asked Skydive Cape Cod to report when it had an offsite landing of a jumper for safety reasons – which happened at a local golf course. State and federal regulations do not require skydive companies to report empty chutes or off-site landings.

Although willing to take on the FAA for constituents the board wasn’t exactly comfortable with the role they were assuming.
“It goes against my grain,” said Summers, who is usually a strong voice for business and property rights. He said if a neighbor put a floodlight in their yard and a slew of neighbors complained the board would be hard-pressed to get involved. He said the owner of the skydiving company, Jim Mendoca, was acting within the law and trying to run a successful business. Summers sympathized with that, but said that business was upsetting a great number of taxpayers.

Other selectmen had similar concerns.

“I don’t think any of us is inclined to put a stranglehold on free commerce and businesses in this town,” said Selectman Len Sussman.
Similar to the meetings held over the summer on the skydive operation, Tuesday’s meeting drew a crowd of folks who wanted it shut down. As in the past they cited safety concerns as well as problems with noise from the continuous flights.
“The board of selectmen have the right, need and responsibility to not create a new contract with Skydive Cape Cod,” said resident Dennis Glover.
Paula Lofgren, a neighbor of the airport who has spent nearly a year bringing forward concerns she has about the skydiving operation, said after the meeting that she was “profoundly grateful” to the board of selectmen.
“I want to thank them not only for the time and effort they have taken this past year but also recognize the work ahead of them going forward with this issue,” she said.
you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yea it is. And that is one of the main reason I take the time to post the media and additional info over the last few yrs as a couple of national cases play & played out. Some are still pending & we are still waiting on the "PLA"..... LOL

Many people think with the win in Santa Clara County or Cresswell Ore. that the war is won. When in fact those are just a couple battles. As long as people have been having fun jumping out of planes, there been some assholes trying to keep everyone else from having a good time.

Case in point of wackadoo's who don't get it : https://www.facebook.com/pages/Citizens-For-Quiet-Skies/213188222077598

So you keep these nut case and plain stupid non aviation general public people in mind..... the next time you hear about those in our own ranks talking bogus lies and bullshit in order to play politics and cause harm to other dz's. We have enough problem children to deal with trying to shut down our industry and cause harm, we don't need any internal help, we get more then enough of that with mad skillz kiddies.
you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2018/feb/06/lawrence-city-commission-votes-allow-skydiving-cit/

So it only took almost ten years, it is right in line with other prior cases taking many years to reach a favorable vote. While the City Commission was a vote for a win there are still many unresolved issues the City staff was ordered to correct. That same city staff has a long history of non compliance.

When I first made this thread in an attempt to not only wrap my head around the complex and confusing FAA regulations and grant assurances, but to educate skydivers. Too many times we see lots skydivers wanting USPA AAD fund money for fighting for having their home DZ kicked off an airport or a start up dz banned. Many skydivers totally don't understand how any of this works, nor do they take the time to truly learn.

It's not a item worth their time to understand until they get the boot or refused access. The other reason I started this thread was some what a test of the info I got out of USPA's office of Government Relations and the process of the proceeding down the path first hand, and documenting it so others could see the hassle and complexity involved in seeing it through to the end. The amount of time and money it takes to pull it off.

Most successful cases that have been won were at a high cost to the DZO in lawyer fees and in some cases loss of income. Some I've heard of losing their homes and divorce as well. And having now completed my own journey down that rough ass road, I can fully report that in fact this is not for weary or weak minded. You better be ready for the long haul and hope you got a lot of money to burn!

I was able to do it without (for the most part) a lawyer. It was persistence and remaining pissed off, not taking no or putting up with lies like" we called the FAA and there is no usable air space in this county". I lost a lot of battles, but in the end won the war.

So all these years later the original posts have many now non working links because the FAA guidance has been changed or updated. However the over all idea is still the same and good use of google you can find the newest version of the FAA guidance. You can also get a good start via USPA's website. The key is doing your homework and become an expert in FAA guidance manual 5190-6b and the additional advisory circulars. You also need to know your FAR's and USPA BSR's.

Good luck you'll need it and a large bank account and a whole lot of time!

P.S. Don't call me, call Randy O....:P
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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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