Longmont City Council will take up skydiving noise

RiggerLee

Did she ever pay up?

Lee

/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4862028#4862028

Quote

Mile-Hi pilot Andrew Hill testified during the trial ( CQS vs. Mile-Hi Skydiving) that he was in the skydiving plane when Mile-Hi owner Frank Casares intentionally harassed our home

Why was Andrew Hill fired from Mile-Hi Skydiving? (Assumption on my part.)

Jumpdude

I'd still LOVE to see an F-18 make some low afterburner passes or SLOWWWW AV-8 Harrier passes by her house to show her how loud it could be and show her how to appreciate it for what it is rather than what it could be!!
Just sayin!

A number of us who live in Colorado and have MHS as our home DZ made several comments during the trial that derogatory comments about Kim, people threatening fly by's, etc. on DZ.com were not helping our case. This latest rant is about "bullies" threatening these sorts of things, false claims of it happening, etc. These sorts of comments are counter productive and feed right into her story.

For those of us who live in Colorado, please refrain from these sorts of statements. First amendment aside, such comments do more harm than good.

flyhi

Quote

Mile-Hi pilot Andrew Hill testified during the trial ( CQS vs. Mile-Hi Skydiving) that he was in the skydiving plane when Mile-Hi owner Frank Casares intentionally harassed our home

Why was Andrew Hill fired from Mile-Hi Skydiving? (Assumption on my part.)

Gear-up landing with one of MHS's King Airs.

JohnnyBoulder

***I'd still LOVE to see an F-18 make some low afterburner passes or SLOWWWW AV-8 Harrier passes by her house to show her how loud it could be and show her how to appreciate it for what it is rather than what it could be!!
Just sayin!

A number of us who live in Colorado and have MHS as our home DZ made several comments during the trial that derogatory comments about Kim, people threatening fly by's, etc. on DZ.com were not helping our case. This latest rant is about "bullies" threatening these sorts of things, false claims of it happening, etc. These sorts of comments are counter productive and feed right into her story.

For those of us who live in Colorado, please refrain from these sorts of statements. First amendment aside, such comments do more harm than good.

I don't know if it's still active but the "Citizens Against Citizens For Quiet Skies" facebook page is full of exactly what you're talking about and doesn't help the cause at all. Just a bunch of people talking trash and calling Kim a bitch/cunt/etc (at least when I left it couple years ago).

Rep Joe Neguse (D-Colorado) sponsored the Aircraft Noise Reduction Act.  The act would allow regulation of airport noise at the local level, reversing the policy of federal aviation regulation that has been in place since the 1920's.

Did Kim have something to do with this.

https://www.dailycamera.com/2019/12/12/congressman-neguse-introduces-aircraft-noise-reduction-act/

2 hours ago, Bigfalls said:

Rep Joe Neguse (D-Colorado) sponsored the Aircraft Noise Reduction Act.  The act would allow regulation of airport noise at the local level, reversing the policy of federal aviation regulation that has been in place since the 1920's.

Did Kim have something to do with this.

https://www.dailycamera.com/2019/12/12/congressman-neguse-introduces-aircraft-noise-reduction-act/

It appears that it would run into supremacy problems - local vs federal laws. Is there some reason why the local lawmakers would think that it would survive scrutiny? Is this just a gesture which they know will get slapped down as unconstitutional?

How do they think their law will be able to require "...federal funds cannot be withheld from an airport that chooses to locally regulate noise." ?

 

On 2/11/2020 at 1:45 PM, sundevil777 said:

It appears that it would run into supremacy problems - local vs federal laws. Is there some reason why the local lawmakers would think that it would survive scrutiny? Is this just a gesture which they know will get slapped down as unconstitutional?

How do they think their law will be able to require "...federal funds cannot be withheld from an airport that chooses to locally regulate noise." ?

Supremacy would only be an issue if a local gov passed a law that conflicts with fed law.  Here it would be a *Federal law* that explicitly gives local govs the right to pass laws regulating local noise beyond what Fed law does. So any local restrictions would not conflict with the federal law.

 

6 hours ago, Divalent said:

Supremacy would only be an issue if a local gov passed a law that conflicts with fed law.  Here it would be a *Federal law* that explicitly gives local govs the right to pass laws regulating local noise beyond what Fed law does. So any local restrictions would not conflict with the federal law.

 

Yes, of course, It is a proposed federal law.

So, if this law was passed, Minneapolis Residents could shut down MSP international airport because of noise?  I hope they think this thru.

 

6 hours ago, skyjumpenfool said:

So, if this law was passed, Minneapolis Residents could shut down MSP international airport because of noise?  I hope they think this thru.

 

If you read the story, it clearly mentions Denver International. 

Follow the bill here