0
TomSpoon

St Mary's Ga Airport Authority issues stop and desist to The Jumping Place

Recommended Posts

I've heard that the St Mary's Ga Airport Authority BOD has issued a stop and desist order against The Jumping Place DZ at 4J6.

The DZO, Cathy Kloess has been at odds with the board over their trying to impose unreasonable fee's on the business.
http://www.tribune-georgian.com/articles/2012/03/23/news/top_stories/1topstory3.23.txt

The Federal governments Airport financial assistance program prohibits discrimination against all aviation users by any airport that has taken federal dollars and requires any fees they may charge to be fair and reasonable.
http://www.faa.gov/airports/aip/grant_assurances/

The St Marys airport Authority Board is now saying that the airport is too small for skydiving, that "runways are considered obstacles" and the The Jumping Place should cease operations.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EiQJ12ysV5k

It is no secret that many on the airport board want St Mary's airport closed and moved and some feel that having a successful business there does not fit in with their plans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I've heard that the St Mary's Ga Airport Authority BOD has issued a stop and desist order against The Jumping Place DZ at 4J6.

The DZO, Cathy Kloess has been at odds with the board over their trying to impose unreasonable fee's on the business.
http://www.tribune-georgian.com/articles/2012/03/23/news/top_stories/1topstory3.23.txt

The Federal governments Airport financial assistance program prohibits discrimination against all aviation users by any airport that has taken federal dollars and requires any fees they may charge to be fair and reasonable.
http://www.faa.gov/airports/aip/grant_assurances/

The St Marys airport Authority Board is now saying that the airport is too small for skydiving, that "runways are considered obstacles" and the The Jumping Place should cease operations.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EiQJ12ysV5k



H Mr Spoon

Sorry to hear and watch the "Good old boys" on another airport board trying to shut down another DZ.

IMO the board is trying the same tactics that a lot of other boards have used in the past. Safety. Insurance premiums etc.

The lack of space for the DZ at the at the airport was a new one for me, due to the hundreds of acres avalaible on the airport. The board is really grasping at straws with that one.:S

I'm sure there wll be plenty of meetings, discussions etc:( but I think the FAA will finally rule n the DZ's favor.:)
Good luck
R.I.P.;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes the board is now using the safety argument after trying for years to impose unfair and unreasonable fees.

While what fee's are fair and reasonable are somewhat subjective, airport access and the suitability for skydiving is not.

I understand the USPA is now involved.
http://www.uspa.org/AboutSkydiving/FAAUSPA/AirportAccess/tabid/211/Default.aspx

Hopefully we will get some return on are USPA dues here.

We all have a dog in this race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

While what fee's are fair and reasonable are somewhat subjective, airport access and the suitability for skydiving is not.



Unfortunately, at the moment, suitability for skydiving is incredibly subjective.

The bad news is that this sort of subjectivity, what constitutes a safe and efficient use of an airfield for skydiving, is all over the place across the country. There really isn't a formal standard on a national level that holds all airport sponsors to the same standards.

The good news is that the FAA, with the help of USPA, especially Ed Scott and Randy Ottinger, are in the process of correcting this problem.

The better news, for you in St Mary's, after watching the youtube video, is that your in the right, and eventually, you will be vindicated in this process. The reason being is that only the FAA, not the Airport Board can make safety assessments. And while I am not part of the FAA, I have done tandems and AFF jumps for Cathy last summer there, and I can assure you that the large main landing area is more than suitable for landing parachutes. And even the PLA next to the tent is suitable, but what the airport board seems to be arguing is whether or not object free areas are suitable, and they most certainly are, as parachutists are not objects.

For anyone that knows me well, they know that Mary and I have been in a 4+ year airport access issue in Gilford, NH, and I have repeatedly advocated at every level of the FAA, reaching direct correspondences with (then) Chief Administrator Randy Babbitt. I have over 100 emails sent and received within the FAA, all the while patiently and methodically documenting every injustice (as I foresaw them) implemented by the local government bodies I was working with. Today, I am happy to say that "Skydive Laconia" helped spark a national dialogue on both sides of the table. Our airport access rights versus the opposing opinions of airport sponsors that would prefer to keep us out.

The details are exhausting, and there isn't enough bandwidth here on DZ.com....lol, but for anyone with three days of down time, and an interest in an intense airport access dialogue that is going on 4+ years, have a look here:

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=3

Scroll down till you see "Skydive Laconia?" and click on that link. Before you click, notice the 61,000+ page views and the 548 posts to the topic in comparison to practically every other post on the board.......

I'm not on here as much as used to be due to my schedule, but some day I hope to be able to share all the effort that went to working with the FAA and USPA's amazing assistance, that brought us to where we are today with this project.

The Skydive Laconia story is about to write it's final chapter in 2012, and either way, whether we win access to the airport, or are by some random chance the airport is found to be unsuitable for skydiving, we will know either way that the answer is fair, impartial and completely unbiased. It took 4+ years to get to this point, but the journey was a valuable one.

The upside though, is that there are airports out there that do want skydiving, so despite the odds, if anyone wants to open a dropzone, just keep your spirits up and be resilient.

Skydive Laconia took a toll on us, that's for sure. We are both mentally and physically exhausted. But we never gave up. Never backed down.

Today, while we wait for Skydive Laconia to play it's final round in this process I am happy to report that just 16 weeks ago, we found another dropzone, one with a fair and supportive airport commission, an excited airport manager and welcoming community. With all the we learned from Skydive Laconia, the process here ran smooth and efficiently, and what will be pretty much 20 weeks to the day I first set foot on the airport, we are planning to sign our lease and opening our doors.

Perfect fits are out there.

And for those fits that aren't perfect, if your in the right, keep fighting for due process and moving forward, eventually the finish line will be crossed.

Sorry for the marathon post, this issue is just really important to me.

Cathy & Co, I wish you the best of luck and if I can do anything to help you, you know where to find me, jus down the road in Deland.
Namaste,
Tom Noonan

www.everest-skydive.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If anyone is interested in St Mary's Ga's dirty laundry here you go.I'm sure it's much more complicated than this but here is what Ive gathered from researching the internet.

http://www.topix.com/forum/city/st-marys-ga/TVKSEJJ00B40194VD

Apparently the St Mary's GA City Council wants to line their pockets with Federal dollars to build a new airport.

The original ST Mary's Airport Authority board did not see that as a good idea so they sued to determine who had control of the airport, the Airport Authority or The City Council.

The City Council won the suit and than fired most of the airport authority board and replaced them with members who would do their bidding.

The Jumping Place is caught up in this because successful business on the field does not fit in with their argument that the airport is not viable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Based on the offensive PM's I've gotten from TomSpoon (who should know better), I can assume Skydive St Mary's WAS the place where unlicensed pilots were doing illegal maintenance to their airplanes, that resulted in an emergency situation. I can't remember if it resulted in a crash or not.

My next question is to what degree this is affecting the airport attempting to evict them.

Anyone know?


From: TomSpoon

Date Sent:
Apr 15, 2012, 9:03 PM
You're good at making enemies.

Why don't you just stick to jacking off to porn you fucking looser.
__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We were jumping all weekend. the board tried to over step thier bounds. the faa told them different. runways arnt obsticals. cathey isnt perfect but then who is? jeff stanford the guy who sells gas on the airfield has a son on the authority board. a blatant conflict of intrest. they have a vendetta against cathey, nothing more. they want to shut down the airport and develope the land because most of them would make a fortune. its an assualt on skydivers and our way of life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The vitriol I've gotten from Tom is really surprising, and the latest stream is completely over the top. I had thought he was a pretty stand-up guy, but I guess I was wrong. It's really just a distraction, because this thread shouldn't be about me or him.

I do think I asked a valid question. I've seen DZ's get run off of airports before, and there's sometimes a second story that isn't being told. Is there one here?

_Am
__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The vitriol I've gotten from Tom is really surprising, and the latest stream is completely over the top. I had thought he was a pretty stand-up guy, but I guess I was wrong. It's really just a distraction, because this thread shouldn't be about me or him.

I do think I asked a valid question. I've seen DZ's get run off of airports before, and there's sometimes a second story that isn't being told. Is there one here?

_Am



AM

Your remark about the mechanical issue at the DZ is very old news, your post was off topic, and a troll.

Mr Spoon is a standup GuyB| This time your got lucky with your troll and Mr Spoon took the bait, [:/]

There's lots of isssues that have occured at DZ's in the past that most people of honor don't talk about B|.

Your trolling in this thread exposes you for what you are.[:/]
One Jump Wonder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


There's lots of issues that have occurred at DZ's in the past that most people of honor don't talk about B|.


/B|

I disagree. Issues should be discussed, not hidden. Particularly safety issues and maintenance issues are safety issues.

Personally, I prefer to know what I'm walking into and I'd be not-so-happy to find out that safety issues were being hidden from me.

You may recall the discussion about Bill Dauss and his problems with the FAA.
My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

why anybody would call out someone by name in this forum is beyond me.



Just one example....
Would you like to know that the kennel you will be leaving your dog at has a long history of animal abuse?
Why not?

The thread is about The Jumping Place. Was the call-out about someone there?
My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now, I don't know much more than you on the issue being discussed... But yes, Cathy did MX on an aircraft without an A&P and yes, that aircraft had an issue. To the best of my recollection, she replaced a carb heat cable and it later broke causing her to have a crash due to carb ice. The regulations on what MX a pilot can perform was part of the problem... Again IIRC, a pilot is allowed to inspect and lubricate a cable, but not replace it. I believe she went to inspect and re-lube and decided to replace it... Again, I don't remember.

That being said, while your question had some validity.... And Spoons responses (if true) are uncalled for... It is still bad form to take personal messages and post them without permission.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I totally agree with you. Issues like that need to be brought forward so everyone knows about it, but there is a difference between having an intelligent conversation and taking verbal jabs just to get under someone else’s’ skin. What happened in the past had nothing to do with what the original post was about. It was about an out of control airport authority board. Has anyone ever heard of a runway being considered an obstacle? The FAA doesn’t and neither does the USPA, but low and behold the genius’s on the St Mary’s airport authority board do. I know firsthand Cathy isn’t perfect, but neither am I or anyone else. But it’s a risk I’m willing to take every time I get into her plane or anyone else’s for that matter. The FAA has been at that DZ a few times and so has Jim Crouch and neither of them have ever showed any concern over the lack of obstacle free landing area. The chair of the board is the son of Jeff Stanford the one who sells fuel on the field that none of the pilots buy because it’s over priced. The engineer that did the study that the board used to site the lack of obstacle free landing area is the same engineer who was hired to move the airfield. It’s a big mess brought upon by people who only car about their own pocketbook. And yes Cathy was named in one of the ealier posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

That being said, while your question had some validity.... And Spoons responses (if true) are uncalled for... It is still bad form to take personal messages and post them without permission.



I disagree here Ron. People need to understand that nothing about posting anything anywhere in cyber space is "Personal". If you say something stupid anywhere in cyber space, it can and probably will be used against you. It makes us think twice before typing negative comments. Maybe, that's a good thing. :)
I follow these access threads closely. Because I've seen friends fighting to open DZ's where I may, someday, want to jump. As a skydiving community, let's keep our eye on the ball. B|
Birdshit & Fools Productions

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I disagree here Ron. People need to understand that nothing about posting anything anywhere in cyber space is "Personal". If you say something stupid anywhere in cyber space, it can and probably will be used against you. It makes us think twice before typing negative comments.



Still does not change the fact that it is considered poor form in most forums.

Breaking the 'code' of keeping private messages private will actually stop a lot of communication. I have had people contact me via PM to ask me questions they would be embarrassed to ask in person. I have had people give me information for me to post via PM that they could not post because of fear of retribution.

Quote

As a skydiving community, let's keep our eye on the ball.



Yes, and posting a vitriolic PM is just distracting from the point.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

but there is a difference between having an intelligent conversation and taking verbal jabs just to get under someone else’s’ skin.


Yes. Yes. Agreed!
My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's no secret that their was a crash at St Mary's several years ago. I think someone posted a link to that thread.

It happened, Cathy took her lumps from the feds and its done.

This thread is about skydivers access to a public airport.

If you are going to use the argument that a plane crash is a reason to deny access to an airport you would have to close half the Drop zones in the country and Delta Airlines would not be allowed to serve Atlanta. Dallas or Detroit,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A history of safety violations (not just a crash, but one due to maintenance issue and a pilot that flew with an aircraft that was clearly not airworthy) could explain why an airport group might want to kick someone off and in no way is it going to help your cause.

For the record, I support the DZ being allowed to run. But you are not helping your cause with your aggressive posting style.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

no way is it going to help your cause.

But you are not helping your cause with your aggressive posting style.



Airport access should not be just my cause. It should be every skydiver's cause.

You should learn what side your bread is buttered on.

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