Winnipesaukee Forum - View Single Post

TheNoonans · 04-04-2011, 12:35 PM

Greetings to all,

I just returned from a skydiving trip and came across this article in the Citizen:

http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll...WS02/703249667

Apparently the Gilford Selectmen have voted not to endorse our proposal.

Mary and I find it curious for two reasons:

1) The current ADO review of the airfield is projected to be concluded in two weeks. Based on what has occurred within the FAA after that initial grossly erroneous report was published, it is our expectation that a fair, factual report will finally be issued that will find no reason for the landing area to be considered "objectionable". If the FAA finds no fault in our proposal, that is basically the last stall tactic that the LAA could throw in our way........

It is my guess that in an 11th hour strategy meeting behind closed doors, the idea came up to go the Selectmen and ask them to vote not to support us. I'm sure that request came with all sorts of horror stories of what skydiving was like 30 years ago. And the Selectmen voted to not support us.

This vote was done after we have had our proposal on the table for almost three years, so why now?

2) It was also made without any input from us the business owners. Why do you think that was? Perhaps the small group of people that don't want us there thought it would be easier to spread the fear if the Selectmen lacked the facts.

The point is this. Whether the Selectmen endorse us or not is not the issue. The issue is that they made a vote without any factual information. A vote that directly affects everyone of you in the community. We will bring jobs and $1,000,000 of economic stimulus to the area (and we can prove it). If I were a Selectman, even if I didn't like the idea and even if I was friends with the small group of residents of strong influence in the community that oppose us, I would still make sure I had every fact possible before voting on something that would affect my entire community. That did not occur. Does that concern anyone? It concerns me. Agreeing or disagreeing with our proposal is freedom of choice. They are elected officials, elected to vote their conscience to serve the community. I get that, and I respect that. But to vote on anything that will directly impact the financial future of the community without doing their due diligence is a questionable decision in my mind. What do you think?

selectmen@gilfordnh.org is their email address. I encourage you to write them. I'm not asking you to write them in support of us. We would be grateful if you did, but that's not what I'm asking. I'm asking you, the community they are elected to serve, to ask of your Selectmen how they justify voting on something they know nothing about, without hearing all sides of the story. If it was done with us, what other votes are being made that way? That's the issue that should concern us all.

Below is the email I sent to the Selectmen today:

Selectmen,

My name is Tom Noonan. My wife and I are the proposed business operators of Skydive Laconia. We read with great interest in the Citizen that the board recently voted not to endorse skydiving at the airport.

I am writing to inquire if the Selectmen have any interest in learning more about our business proposal and modern day skydiving operations. Selectman Hayes was quoted in the article citing a concern about the Fire Department's training facility. Modern parachutes have accuracy and directional control similar to aircraft, and pose no reasonable threat to the training facility, this is a quantifiable and provable fact. Certain people at the airport would like to lead you to believe otherwise, but there are no facts available to them to support their claim. Selectman Hayes is also quoted as saying he saw "several problems" with our proposal. We would very much like to meet with Selectman Hayes and the entire board to discuss any concerns that they may have with our proposal. We would also like to ask why we were not contacted to address any of their perceived problems?

The truth is, for three years, my wife and I have followed every protocol and step to bring a legal and viable business to the airport. Our business will infuse about a dozen new jobs in the town and about a $1,000,000 of economic impact to local Inns, Restaurants, and businesses. Selectman Hayes stated that our presence would affect the current businesses at the airport. The truth is, the airport is currently almost barren of businesses based on the current economy and the way the LAA rules over the airport. There are only two businesses on the airport at the moment, both long standing FBOs with flight schools. Thanks to federal funding and the LAA, they have the airport to themselves and want to keep it that way. That is where 99% of the minimal opposition to our business is coming from. Despite their claims, neither will be adversely affected by our business model. They are simply making uneducated claims based on what skydiving was thirty years ago, not what it is today. Your airport is designed to serve the community as a whole, not just those two business owners.

We understand our proposal is a classic case of NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) and that a select few people in town with positions of influence do not want us there. They have used every stall tactic available and now, as it seems the FAA will mostlikely issue a ruling in two weeks stating all of the "safety concerns" of the LAA are unfounded, they have turned to you to attempt to block us. Why else would the Selectmen choose now as the time to make such a vote on this issue as it has been on the table with the LAA for almost three years now?

It's a shame really. Not that you voted to oppose our operation, but that you did it without seeking out all of the available data. We are experts in our industry, and I can assure you a number of things:

1) The Laconia Municipal Airport is an ideal location in terms of size and air traffic to support a skydiving operation.
2) The current air traffic will not leave for other locations. (John Marriott's pilot will still fly his private jet into LCI if we are there.)
3) Student pilots will not be adversely at risk. Student training programs across the country operate at airports with skydiving operations and train students to safely fly at airports with parachutes.
4) Our business will bring 2000+ people to the area from April 1 - Oct 31st each season.
5) Our business will bring a dozen new jobs to the area and train locals to work anywhere in the world off season.
6) Despite the vocal minority, the vast majority of the community actually wants us at the airport. Please visit www.winnipesaukee.com and look under the General Discussions forum for "Skydive Laconia". It has been viewed over 20,000 times and 90% or more of the responses are positive.
7) The LAA has used "big government" bureaucracy to stall our proposal as long as possible and have been allowed to get away with it by the local FAA.
8) We have offered repeatedly to do demonstration skydives into the airport for the LAA and the community to illustrate how minimally intrusive our presence will be on the airfield. The LAA has flatly denied our request each time because they know as soon as the community sees how safe and accurate our parachutes are, the fear mongering will not hold any water any longer. If we do demonstration jumps, the LAA will no longer be able to cite "safety concerns" when we show the community there are none.

It is with all of that in mind, I would like to ask the Selectmen to consider the following:

The airport is intended to serve the community as a whole, not just a select few in a position of power and authority. As Selectmen, it is your duty to ensure that any decision that affects the community as a whole and it's economy, is reviewed to the fullest extent before issuing a ruling. I ask you to consider three requests:

1) Allow my wife and I an audience to address your concerns and allow us the opportunity to provide factual information to support our proposal.
2) Provide us a Town Hall open forum to address the community at large.
3) Allow us to make demonstration skydives onto the airport to illustrate how non-intrusive we really are. Invite current business owners in the area and airport business owners to observe.

If you do all of that, and then reach a conclusion as to whether or not you believe that we will be a good fit in the community, you will be serving the community as a whole. We humbly request that you consider that course of action.

Best regards,

Tom Noonan
Skydive Laconia

Lastly back to the thread: The "FAA" never issued a report saying the landing area was unsafe. A local branch of the FAA, called the "ADO" issued a report citing the landing area as "objectionable". Every line item used to find it objectionable was seen by "Higher Ups" within the FAA as being completely erroneous. The ADO, for reasons beyond my understanding, has elected to keep a grossly erroneous document in the public realm without issuing a retraction. I will post both the report and detail all of it's inaccuracies shortly. Suffice to say, the FAA at a Federal level is aware of all of this and we plan to take it to the top of that chain when this is over.

04-04-2011, 12:35 PM	#218
TheNoonans Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Daytona Beach, FL - Bedford, NH Posts: 136 Thanks: 0 Thanked 219 Times in 57 Posts	Skydive Laconia Greetings to all, I just returned from a skydiving trip and came across this article in the Citizen: http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll...WS02/703249667 Apparently the Gilford Selectmen have voted not to endorse our proposal. Mary and I find it curious for two reasons: 1) The current ADO review of the airfield is projected to be concluded in two weeks. Based on what has occurred within the FAA after that initial grossly erroneous report was published, it is our expectation that a fair, factual report will finally be issued that will find no reason for the landing area to be considered "objectionable". If the FAA finds no fault in our proposal, that is basically the last stall tactic that the LAA could throw in our way........ It is my guess that in an 11th hour strategy meeting behind closed doors, the idea came up to go the Selectmen and ask them to vote not to support us. I'm sure that request came with all sorts of horror stories of what skydiving was like 30 years ago. And the Selectmen voted to not support us. This vote was done after we have had our proposal on the table for almost three years, so why now? 2) It was also made without any input from us the business owners. Why do you think that was? Perhaps the small group of people that don't want us there thought it would be easier to spread the fear if the Selectmen lacked the facts. The point is this. Whether the Selectmen endorse us or not is not the issue. The issue is that they made a vote without any factual information. A vote that directly affects everyone of you in the community. We will bring jobs and $1,000,000 of economic stimulus to the area (and we can prove it). If I were a Selectman, even if I didn't like the idea and even if I was friends with the small group of residents of strong influence in the community that oppose us, I would still make sure I had every fact possible before voting on something that would affect my entire community. That did not occur. Does that concern anyone? It concerns me. Agreeing or disagreeing with our proposal is freedom of choice. They are elected officials, elected to vote their conscience to serve the community. I get that, and I respect that. But to vote on anything that will directly impact the financial future of the community without doing their due diligence is a questionable decision in my mind. What do you think? selectmen@gilfordnh.org is their email address. I encourage you to write them. I'm not asking you to write them in support of us. We would be grateful if you did, but that's not what I'm asking. I'm asking you, the community they are elected to serve, to ask of your Selectmen how they justify voting on something they know nothing about, without hearing all sides of the story. If it was done with us, what other votes are being made that way? That's the issue that should concern us all. Below is the email I sent to the Selectmen today: Selectmen, My name is Tom Noonan. My wife and I are the proposed business operators of Skydive Laconia. We read with great interest in the Citizen that the board recently voted not to endorse skydiving at the airport. I am writing to inquire if the Selectmen have any interest in learning more about our business proposal and modern day skydiving operations. Selectman Hayes was quoted in the article citing a concern about the Fire Department's training facility. Modern parachutes have accuracy and directional control similar to aircraft, and pose no reasonable threat to the training facility, this is a quantifiable and provable fact. Certain people at the airport would like to lead you to believe otherwise, but there are no facts available to them to support their claim. Selectman Hayes is also quoted as saying he saw "several problems" with our proposal. We would very much like to meet with Selectman Hayes and the entire board to discuss any concerns that they may have with our proposal. We would also like to ask why we were not contacted to address any of their perceived problems? The truth is, for three years, my wife and I have followed every protocol and step to bring a legal and viable business to the airport. Our business will infuse about a dozen new jobs in the town and about a $1,000,000 of economic impact to local Inns, Restaurants, and businesses. Selectman Hayes stated that our presence would affect the current businesses at the airport. The truth is, the airport is currently almost barren of businesses based on the current economy and the way the LAA rules over the airport. There are only two businesses on the airport at the moment, both long standing FBOs with flight schools. Thanks to federal funding and the LAA, they have the airport to themselves and want to keep it that way. That is where 99% of the minimal opposition to our business is coming from. Despite their claims, neither will be adversely affected by our business model. They are simply making uneducated claims based on what skydiving was thirty years ago, not what it is today. Your airport is designed to serve the community as a whole, not just those two business owners. We understand our proposal is a classic case of NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) and that a select few people in town with positions of influence do not want us there. They have used every stall tactic available and now, as it seems the FAA will mostlikely issue a ruling in two weeks stating all of the "safety concerns" of the LAA are unfounded, they have turned to you to attempt to block us. Why else would the Selectmen choose now as the time to make such a vote on this issue as it has been on the table with the LAA for almost three years now? It's a shame really. Not that you voted to oppose our operation, but that you did it without seeking out all of the available data. We are experts in our industry, and I can assure you a number of things: 1) The Laconia Municipal Airport is an ideal location in terms of size and air traffic to support a skydiving operation. 2) The current air traffic will not leave for other locations. (John Marriott's pilot will still fly his private jet into LCI if we are there.) 3) Student pilots will not be adversely at risk. Student training programs across the country operate at airports with skydiving operations and train students to safely fly at airports with parachutes. 4) Our business will bring 2000+ people to the area from April 1 - Oct 31st each season. 5) Our business will bring a dozen new jobs to the area and train locals to work anywhere in the world off season. 6) Despite the vocal minority, the vast majority of the community actually wants us at the airport. Please visit www.winnipesaukee.com and look under the General Discussions forum for "Skydive Laconia". It has been viewed over 20,000 times and 90% or more of the responses are positive. 7) The LAA has used "big government" bureaucracy to stall our proposal as long as possible and have been allowed to get away with it by the local FAA. 8) We have offered repeatedly to do demonstration skydives into the airport for the LAA and the community to illustrate how minimally intrusive our presence will be on the airfield. The LAA has flatly denied our request each time because they know as soon as the community sees how safe and accurate our parachutes are, the fear mongering will not hold any water any longer. If we do demonstration jumps, the LAA will no longer be able to cite "safety concerns" when we show the community there are none. It is with all of that in mind, I would like to ask the Selectmen to consider the following: The airport is intended to serve the community as a whole, not just a select few in a position of power and authority. As Selectmen, it is your duty to ensure that any decision that affects the community as a whole and it's economy, is reviewed to the fullest extent before issuing a ruling. I ask you to consider three requests: 1) Allow my wife and I an audience to address your concerns and allow us the opportunity to provide factual information to support our proposal. 2) Provide us a Town Hall open forum to address the community at large. 3) Allow us to make demonstration skydives onto the airport to illustrate how non-intrusive we really are. Invite current business owners in the area and airport business owners to observe. If you do all of that, and then reach a conclusion as to whether or not you believe that we will be a good fit in the community, you will be serving the community as a whole. We humbly request that you consider that course of action. Best regards, Tom Noonan Skydive Laconia Lastly back to the thread: The "FAA" never issued a report saying the landing area was unsafe. A local branch of the FAA, called the "ADO" issued a report citing the landing area as "objectionable". Every line item used to find it objectionable was seen by "Higher Ups" within the FAA as being completely erroneous. The ADO, for reasons beyond my understanding, has elected to keep a grossly erroneous document in the public realm without issuing a retraction. I will post both the report and detail all of it's inaccuracies shortly. Suffice to say, the FAA at a Federal level is aware of all of this and we plan to take it to the top of that chain when this is over.

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to TheNoonans For This Useful Post: