[TheNoonans]

Okay so last email to post today was the email I sent to the Mayor of Laconia and the Gilford Selectmen regarding the LAA and their actions regarding the back room politics that let to the Selectmen issuing a vote.

Mr Mayor and Selectmen,

The NHDOT Supervisor of Aeronautical Planning has forwarded me the LAA Enabling Legislation amended in 1999, it is the most current document the LAA operates from.

In the document section 13 it states:

II. After public hearing, any of the appointed members of the Authority may be removed by a majority vote of the appointive agency upon written findings of cause, including but not limited to inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance. The member of the Authority appointed by Belknap county commissioners and the member of the Authority appointed by the Gilford board of selectmen may be removed only by a majority vote of their respective agencies. The mayor of the city of Laconia may be removed from the Authority only through the vacancy of his or her office as mayor.

It is our position that practically every member of the LAA from the period of July 2008 onward has purposely set out to delay the resolution of our business proposal with the clear intent to be as inefficient as possible. Therefore subjecting practically every LAA member to being found guilty of inefficiency.

I would ask you in considering the responsibility, power and role of your position as Chairman, to individually interview each member of the LAA and ask them if they have ever conspired in part or in whole as a group to delay our proposal process. If the members possess any integrity at all, they will respond to you honestly. What you choose to do with that knowledge is up to you.

Regarding a charge of negligence of duty, section 13:9 states:

13:9 Declaration of Purpose. The establishment and maintenance of the airport authorized in section 8 is declared to be for public purposes as an aid to national and state defense and for the convenience of the public, and the Authority shall be regarded as performing a governmental function in carrying out the provisions of this act.

This requires each member to approach every proposal from an unbiased perspective and strive to promote every aeronautical activity that can be accommodated on the airport. The fact that the LAA disagreed with our proposal does not constitute a negligence of duty, but failing to consider the truthful, factual information provided to them in weighing their decisions does constitute negligence of duty. If answered truthfully, practically no one on the board would honestly say they acted and voted without personal bias and personal agenda. A skydiving operation can be supported on the airport, it's a provable, quantifiable fact. That the airport authority failed to consider those facts in it's decision making process constitutes a negligence of duty. Attempting to protect the interests of a select few people in the community when the clear majority of the community's best interests were neglected in this process also constitutes an egregious negligence of duty, as their biases and actions were down right flagrant. Refusal to consider valid, factual information in their review process is a clear case of negligence of duty. As an example outside our proposal, imagine what the impact on our legal system would be if jury's were allowed to rendered decisions without considering all of the facts introduced, using only the ones they wanted to consider?

Separately and most importantly, regarding the removal of authority members, Item 13, Section II states that any member of the board that is found to be malfeasant, can also be removed. While inefficiency and negligence of duty can be in part subjective, malfeasance is more clearly definable:

Malfeasance: "wrongdoing or improper or dishonest conduct, especially by a person who holds public office or a position of trust"

The act of providing our business plan to the Selectmen of Gilford without our knowledge or consent by any members of the airport authority is a clear case of malfeasance. That the act was then orchestrated to be put on the Gilford Selectmen's agenda and voted on with the clear intent to keep us uninformed of the meeting and the vote only goes to further support the seriousness of malfeasance charge.

The preceding information is clear, unbiased and definable as fact. What you, the Mayor of Laconia and the Chairman of the Airport Authority chooses to do with this information is up to you. If past precedence of your position is any indication, I suspect nothing will be done. It is with a small glimmer of hope however, I would like to think that this is an opportunity for the new Chairman of the Airport Authority to become the positive change that so many members of the community are pleading for, and return the airport and the LAA to what it was intended to be. An airport meant to serve the community as a whole. The truth is the vast majority of your residents have nothing but disdain for the LAA and the way it treats the community members and how they rule to suit their own biases and agendas. (I have personally witnessed a board member scream at a resident during a meeting over a question of vehicle access. In a calm manner the resident pilot repeated his question to the board member as he didn't understand the board member's answer and was point blank screamed at to stop talking by the board member.) Over the last three years I have spoken with countless local pilots, real estate owners, business owners and residents. And my conclusion based on personal experience, whether you choose to acknowledge it or not, is that the vast majority of the local community has no confidence in the airport authority or how the authority performs it's role. You will not hear that however, as these same people are fearful of going on record, less they find themselves the target of the LAA's ire. That is why you probably have not heard much, if any complaints from your community. Create an environment where your citizens can speak opening and honestly about their view of the LAA without fear or repercussion, and you will be in disbelief to the extent and depth that the disapproval really goes. That is fact, whether you choose to acknowledge it or remedy the situation is up to you.

In closing, I humbly request that the Chairman of the Airport Authority investigate the above allegations and consider removing any member from the board found guilty of violating the above expectations. The community will applaud you for it and it may very well be the first step in earning back the authority's trust and respect from the community.

Respectfully submitted,

Tom Noonan