Alert: Airport meeting Thu Oct 20, Concord

[aworldnervelink]

See the quoted message below. This is somewhat of a niche issue, but it is definitely freedom-related as no town should deny a building permit to a private landowner without a damn good reason. I'd be tickled if any other Porcs would be able to make it to this meeting and show their support. Thanks.

Hello again fellow NH Airmen,


As the President of AANH (Aviation Assoc. of New Hampshire), I'd like to alert you to an extremely important local aviation issue. We need your help.

Thursday October 20th is the day when we can make a difference in saving a New Hampshire airport. All it takes is for you to show up in Concord at 7:00 p.m. on Thursday and support the granting of a building permit for the construction of hangars to the airport owner Mr. Rymes.

Let me provide some background:
Hawthorne-Feather is a privately owned, public use airport. A study performed by the New Hampshire DOT - Division of Aeronautics, lists that Hawthorne-Feather is 1 of 5 (five!) of our open-to-the-public, private airports that are planning to sell in the next two years. The developers are drooling. And if they get hold of an airport, and build houses on the property, you know it will never, ever be returned to airport use.

The State study lists the reason Hawthorne-Feather is contemplating a sale as the fact that the owner is loosing money on the airport. (You can read the Summary of the state's report here : http://www.aanh.org/preservation/preservationgeneral/preservationgeneral.htm)

To at least break even he has to construct airport hangars to generate some rental income. For this he needs a building permit, which the Town of Deering has refused to grant for various reasons. There has been a few vocal local opponents at the town hearings, and it has been the usual: Emotional, ill informed, 'not-in-my-backyard' statements, which I was told even included the statement "If we let Hawthorne-Feather build hangars and expand, pretty soon we'll have DC-10's landing here."

As I said: ill informed. Most DC-10 pilots would have a slight problem with landing in a tight valley on a 3,260' x 75' strip. But I digress. The facts are that vocal opposition to the permit has squashed it's approval.

But now the issue has arrived in front of the DOT, Division of Aeronautics. They will hold a public hearing this Thursday October 20th at 7:00 p.m. at the New Hampshire Department of Transportation John O. Morton Building, Concord, NH (Room 114). Hopefully, with enough vocal support for the building permit, the State will grant the owner the right to construct his hangars, and therefore save the airport for the future.

AANH has taken up the cause to save NH's airports. This is the first direct test of you, NH's Airmen, and your desire to prevent another airport from disappearing from the system of airports that cover our state.

Our airports are part of NH's infrastructure.
- They provide easy access for rural resident into our national aviation transportation system,
- they enable high-value tourist to get easy access to our local towns,
- they provide emergency access in times of natural disasters,
- they are a place for medivac flights,
- they are used for training of our future pilots,
- they are a place for business,
- they are a source of jobs (aircraft mechanics, etc.).
The list goes on and on.

I hope you see the issue the way I see it. We need every airport. We want Hawthorne-Feather Airport to survive. We want this building permit to be granted.

Please show up Thursday and support the permit.


Sincerely yours,

Carsten Schanche
AANH President
www.aanh.org

[Pat McCotter]

Address of the building for your favorite mapping site:

New Hampshire Department of Transportation
John O. Morton Building Room 114
7 Hazen Drive
Concord, NH
03302-0483


PS: I'll be there.

[Kat Kanning]

Passed it on to a radio guy here in Keene who's into flying.

[polyanarch]

Would there be any shambling going on at this airport?

[Pat McCotter]

No security checks.

[JonM]

So this would be asking the state to override a local decision?

[KBCraig]

So this would be asking the state to override a local decision?

Gummint believes the decision-making is best, wherever it maximizes gummint control.

I see nothing wrong in appealing to whatever level of gummint will maximize freedom in a particular case, and keep the gummint out of private lives and free enterprise. That's why the Fort Trumbull folks appealed to the Supreme Court, and are trying to get the state to shut down NLDC. If you can use gummint against itself to increase your freedom, that's a good thing.

Kevin

[JonM]

That would be the ends justifying the means.

[aworldnervelink]

The AANH homepage says:

AANH has been alerted by Aeronautics to a meeting Oct. 20th, 7:00 p.m. in Concord (see address information below). The meeting is between the Town of Deering on one side, and the Division of Aeronautics with the airport owner on the other side. The meeting is open to the public.

It appears that the state is simply holding a discussion and supporting the case of the airport owner - they are not overruling anything.

[KBCraig]

That would be the ends justifying the means.

And so, the Kelo 7 should have limited themselves to the New London council, and eschewed higher levels of government?

Interesting line of thought.

[Russell Kanning]

The Kelo 7 would have been better off never appealing to any government at all...... the only reason they are still there is because they won't leave. They have lost every appeal to a governing body.

[JonM]

Well the Kelo 7 got all the way to the Supreme Court and as a result everyone has lost their right to own private property.  Now the upside of this is that it has pissed off a lot of people and laws are being put in place to protect private property, but there are already reports as posted here of corrupt governments grabbing land based on that decision.  It also showed us that the courts are not the battle ground in which to fight this sort of thing.

The best course of action for the airport would be get people to testify at the town of Deering's meetings to convince them to allow for the building permits.  If the state were to come in and override the town in the name of anti-liberty, you would rightly protest against it.  While the outcome is desirable perhaps to have the state override the town in the name of liberty, it sets a precedent which will more often than not be used in an anti-liberty manner.  Let the towns decide their fates, good or bad.  We want more local control, not less.

[Dreepa]

Well the Kelo 7 got all the way to the Supreme Court and as a result everyone has lost their right to own private property.?

But technically didn't the SC just say' let the states determine it'.  And CT is such a bumch of wimps that they talk about protecting property rights but they won't change any laws.

[polyanarch]

When it comes down to it,

Government = Theft

One can't expect thieves of any level to police themselves can you?

[JonM]

That all depends on whether you think the restrictions placed on the federal government via the ten amendments should also restrict the state governments. ?If so, then the Supreme Court ?said part of the 5th amendment is repealed in regards to states, but if they wish to re-enact it they can. ?If not, then the those horrible anti-liberty things states like to do that are against them are fine and the Kelo 7 never had a reason to go to court.