FAA grants AOPA demand for investigation into Meigs closure

[Larry Dighera]

What do airmen feel the appropriate penalty might be?



http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2004/04-1-087x.html
FAA grants AOPA demand for investigation into Meigs closure

Feb. 11 — AOPA's claim that the city of Chicago violated federal law
and aviation regulations when it shut down Meigs Field last March has
merit, says the FAA, and will be investigated. AOPA filed a formal
complaint following the destruction of Meigs's runway on Mayor Richard
M. Daley's order, claiming the city failed to provide adequate notice,
as required by the FARs. The complaint will not result in the
airport's reopening but can lead to the mayor and the city being
punished for their actions.

"AOPA intends to push for the appropriate penalty to be imposed on the
city," said AOPA President Phil Boyer. "Mayor Daley and any other
state or local official who may want to follow Daley's lead must be
made to understand they cannot unilaterally change the National
Airspace System."

The manager of the FAA's Enforcement Division sent a letter of
response to AOPA's complaint against both the mayor and the city,
saying "reasonable grounds exist" to begin an informal investigation
into the allegations.

AOPA maintains that Daley and the city of Chicago violated both the
U.S. Code and Federal Aviation Regulations. The U.S. Code states that
an airport or landing area not involving the expenditure of federal
money may be altered substantially "only if the Administrator of the
Federal Aviation Administration is given reasonable prior notice, so
that the Administrator may provide advice on the effects" of the
alteration. In order for the administrator to carry out that
obligation, Federal Aviation Regulations state that anyone intending
to alter a runway, deactivate a runway or airport, or change the
status of an airport must submit notice of that intent at least 90
days prior to taking such action.

The FARs do provide for immediate emergency action, such as in the
case of national security, which was Daley's original claim. However,
even in the case of an emergency, if the airport has a charted
instrument approach, which Meigs Field did, a minimum of 30 days'
notice must be given.

....

[G.R. Patterson III]

Larry Dighera wrote:
>
> What do airmen feel the appropriate penalty might be?

A ban on holding any type of political post for the remainder of his life.

George Patterson
A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
you look forward to the trip.

[Teacherjh]

>> What do airmen feel the appropriate penalty might be?

Turn his house into a heliport.

Jose


--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[Bob Chilcoat]

Make him live in the derelict FBO through a Chicago winter without any
utilities.

Actually, I like George's suggestion better.

--
Bob (Chief Pilot, White Knuckle Airways)


"Teacherjh" > wrote in message
...
> >> What do airmen feel the appropriate penalty might be?
>
> Turn his house into a heliport.
>
> Jose
>
>
> --
> (for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[Big John]

Larry

Ban him from flying on any aircraft for 10 years. Let him ride the
bus.

Big John

On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 15:58:28 GMT, Larry Dighera >
wrote:

>
>What do airmen feel the appropriate penalty might be?
>
>
>
>http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2004/04-1-087x.html
>FAA grants AOPA demand for investigation into Meigs closure
>
>Feb. 11 — AOPA's claim that the city of Chicago violated federal law
>and aviation regulations when it shut down Meigs Field last March has
>merit, says the FAA, and will be investigated. AOPA filed a formal
>complaint following the destruction of Meigs's runway on Mayor Richard
>M. Daley's order, claiming the city failed to provide adequate notice,
>as required by the FARs. The complaint will not result in the
>airport's reopening but can lead to the mayor and the city being
>punished for their actions.
>
>"AOPA intends to push for the appropriate penalty to be imposed on the
>city," said AOPA President Phil Boyer. "Mayor Daley and any other
>state or local official who may want to follow Daley's lead must be
>made to understand they cannot unilaterally change the National
>Airspace System."
>
>The manager of the FAA's Enforcement Division sent a letter of
>response to AOPA's complaint against both the mayor and the city,
>saying "reasonable grounds exist" to begin an informal investigation
>into the allegations.
>
>AOPA maintains that Daley and the city of Chicago violated both the
>U.S. Code and Federal Aviation Regulations. The U.S. Code states that
>an airport or landing area not involving the expenditure of federal
>money may be altered substantially "only if the Administrator of the
>Federal Aviation Administration is given reasonable prior notice, so
>that the Administrator may provide advice on the effects" of the
>alteration. In order for the administrator to carry out that
>obligation, Federal Aviation Regulations state that anyone intending
>to alter a runway, deactivate a runway or airport, or change the
>status of an airport must submit notice of that intent at least 90
>days prior to taking such action.
>
>The FARs do provide for immediate emergency action, such as in the
>case of national security, which was Daley's original claim. However,
>even in the case of an emergency, if the airport has a charted
>instrument approach, which Meigs Field did, a minimum of 30 days'
>notice must be given.
>
>...
>

[Larry Dighera]

On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 16:05:13 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
> wrote in Message-Id:
>:

>
>
>Larry Dighera wrote:
>>
>> What do airmen feel the appropriate penalty might be?
>
>A ban on holding any type of political post for the remainder of his life.

He'd just run his wife as a candidate. But the penalty is to levied
against the city of Chicago if I'm not mistaken.

[Andrew Gideon]

Larry Dighera wrote:

> But the penalty is to levied
> against the city of Chicago if I'm not mistaken.

Fine the city all funds paid for Meigs over all time multiplied by some
"penalty clause" factor.

This would never happen again.

- Andrew

[G.R. Patterson III]

Larry Dighera wrote:
>
> But the penalty is to levied against the city of Chicago if I'm not mistaken.

You're probably right. AOPA talks about "the mayor and the city being punished",
but then talks about the "appropriate penalty to be imposed on the city".

George Patterson
A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
you look forward to the trip.

[Judah]

Bring a pair of Catterpillars to his house at 1am, and carve X's into his
driveway.

With the car in the garage.


Larry Dighera > wrote in
:

>
> What do airmen feel the appropriate penalty might be?
>

[R.Hubbell]

On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 15:58:28 GMT Larry Dighera > wrote:

>
> What do airmen feel the appropriate penalty might be?


Withhold all federal funds allocated to Chicago for any projects
for 5 years.

And divert all air traffic destined/departing O'hare to fly over his house.


R. Hubbell
>
>
>
> http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2004/04-1-087x.html
> FAA grants AOPA demand for investigation into Meigs closure
>
> Feb. 11 _ AOPA's claim that the city of Chicago violated federal law
> and aviation regulations when it shut down Meigs Field last March has
> merit, says the FAA, and will be investigated. AOPA filed a formal
> complaint following the destruction of Meigs's runway on Mayor Richard
> M. Daley's order, claiming the city failed to provide adequate notice,
> as required by the FARs. The complaint will not result in the
> airport's reopening but can lead to the mayor and the city being
> punished for their actions.
>
> "AOPA intends to push for the appropriate penalty to be imposed on the
> city," said AOPA President Phil Boyer. "Mayor Daley and any other
> state or local official who may want to follow Daley's lead must be
> made to understand they cannot unilaterally change the National
> Airspace System."
>
> The manager of the FAA's Enforcement Division sent a letter of
> response to AOPA's complaint against both the mayor and the city,
> saying "reasonable grounds exist" to begin an informal investigation
> into the allegations.
>
> AOPA maintains that Daley and the city of Chicago violated both the
> U.S. Code and Federal Aviation Regulations. The U.S. Code states that
> an airport or landing area not involving the expenditure of federal
> money may be altered substantially "only if the Administrator of the
> Federal Aviation Administration is given reasonable prior notice, so
> that the Administrator may provide advice on the effects" of the
> alteration. In order for the administrator to carry out that
> obligation, Federal Aviation Regulations state that anyone intending
> to alter a runway, deactivate a runway or airport, or change the
> status of an airport must submit notice of that intent at least 90
> days prior to taking such action.
>
> The FARs do provide for immediate emergency action, such as in the
> case of national security, which was Daley's original claim. However,
> even in the case of an emergency, if the airport has a charted
> instrument approach, which Meigs Field did, a minimum of 30 days'
> notice must be given.
>
> ...
>
>

[Sylvain]

Big John > wrote in message
> Ban him from flying on any aircraft for 10 years. Let him ride the
> bus.

that could already be arranged with a bit of self discipline
among pilots...

--Sylvain

[G.R. Patterson III]

Sylvain wrote:
>
> Big John > wrote in message
> > Ban him from flying on any aircraft for 10 years. Let him ride the
> > bus.
>
> that could already be arranged with a bit of self discipline
> among pilots...

I think it unlikely that any airline pilot will kiss his job goodbye by refusing
to fly Daley.

George Patterson
A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
you look forward to the trip.

[Andrew Gideon]

G.R. Patterson III wrote:


> I think it unlikely that any airline pilot will kiss his job goodbye by
> refusing to fly Daley.

Given his attitude towards aircraft and airports, he's unsafe around them.
Would you want him in the same airplane as you?

Who knows into what he'd carve his little 'X's.

- Andrew

[Big John]

George

No, No, No

You missunderstand.

FAA ground Daley from flying any time or any way or any place.

Jock wouldn't have anything to do with the rule making except to not
accept Daley as a passenger per FAA fiat.

Put him on a bus (and make him sit in the back).

Big John

On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:55:25 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
> wrote:

>
>
>Sylvain wrote:
>>
>> Big John > wrote in message
>> > Ban him from flying on any aircraft for 10 years. Let him ride the
>> > bus.
>>
>> that could already be arranged with a bit of self discipline
>> among pilots...
>
>I think it unlikely that any airline pilot will kiss his job goodbye by refusing
>to fly Daley.
>
>George Patterson
> A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
> you look forward to the trip.

[Dave Stadt]

"Andrew Gideon" > wrote in message
online.com...
> G.R. Patterson III wrote:
>
>
> > I think it unlikely that any airline pilot will kiss his job goodbye by
> > refusing to fly Daley.
>
> Given his attitude towards aircraft and airports, he's unsafe around them.
> Would you want him in the same airplane as you?

He is actually extremely pro avaition. It's only general aviation he
doesn't care for.

>
> Who knows into what he'd carve his little 'X's.
>
> - Andrew
>

[Cecil E. Chapman]

Take the "Mob Boss of The Month" award certificate away from him ... ;-)

--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures complete with pictures and text at:
www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -

> A ban on holding any type of political post for the remainder of his life.
>
> George Patterson
> A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way
that
> you look forward to the trip.

[Mike O'Malley]

"Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Andrew Gideon" > wrote in message
> online.com...
> > G.R. Patterson III wrote:
> >
> >
> > > I think it unlikely that any airline pilot will kiss his job goodbye by
> > > refusing to fly Daley.
> >
> > Given his attitude towards aircraft and airports, he's unsafe around them.
> > Would you want him in the same airplane as you?
>
> He is actually extremely pro avaition. It's only general aviation he
> doesn't care for.
>

No- he's pro Daley, that's it. He's for the O'Hare expansion because it means
more private bid city contrats for his cronies, more land for the city to annex,
and more money in his pocket. GA can't give him anything, and he can't extort
any money from them, so **** 'em, we don't want 'em in my city, and I'll use 'em
to make myself more of a populist.

[Dave Stadt]

"Mike O'Malley" > wrote in message
...
> "Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Andrew Gideon" > wrote in message
> > online.com...
> > > G.R. Patterson III wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > I think it unlikely that any airline pilot will kiss his job goodbye
by
> > > > refusing to fly Daley.
> > >
> > > Given his attitude towards aircraft and airports, he's unsafe around
them.
> > > Would you want him in the same airplane as you?
> >
> > He is actually extremely pro avaition. It's only general aviation he
> > doesn't care for.
> >
>
> No- he's pro Daley, that's it. He's for the O'Hare expansion because it
means
> more private bid city contrats for his cronies, more land for the city to
annex,
> and more money in his pocket. GA can't give him anything, and he can't
extort
> any money from them, so **** 'em, we don't want 'em in my city, and I'll
use 'em
> to make myself more of a populist.


Like I said..............

[Larry Dighera]

On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 16:41:17 -0500, Andrew Gideon >
wrote in Message-Id:
e.com>:

>Larry Dighera wrote:
>
>> But the penalty is to levied
>> against the city of Chicago if I'm not mistaken.
>
>Fine the city all funds paid for Meigs over all time multiplied by some
>"penalty clause" factor.
>
>This would never happen again.
>
> - Andrew



Unfortunately, it looks like the fine, _IF_ Daley is found guilty, is
going to be $1,100.00 per day. But the real question here is, why did
it take AOPA to demand FAA enforce the notice provision requirements?
Or, what prevented the FAA from imposing the mandated fine on Chicago
for Daily's hubris in the first place? Does the Chicago boss have the
Administrator under mob control?



-------------------------------------------------------------------
AVflash Volume 10, Number 08a -- February 16, 2004
-------------------------------------------------------------------


CHICAGO FACES LITTLE FINES FOR MEIGS
The city of Chicago could face almost $100,000 in fines for its sudden
closure of Meigs Field last March 30 but an incipient FAA
investigation won't bring the beloved airport back to life. As AVweb
told you last Thursday, the FAA has agreed (almost a year later) to an
investigation into the late-night destruction of Meigs' lone runway
while aircraft were parked on the ramp. The closure allegedly violated
notice provisions, which require an airport owner to provide at least
30 and up to 90 days of warning to the FAA that it intends to close an
airport. Mayor Richard Daley at midnight sent a battalion of heavy
equipment, under police guard, into the sealed-off airport and ordered
workmen to carve large X's out of the runway.
http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/200-full.html#186723

....CLOSURE NOTICE NOT SUPPLIED...
Soon after the excavators had done their work, the FAA acknowledged
that Daley had the legal right to close the airport. However, federal
law requires that an airport owner give at least 90 days of notice. In
an emergency, or for national security concerns, only 30 days of
notice is required if the airport has a published instrument approach,
which Meigs had. Chicago notified the FAA of Meigs' closure the day
after the runway was wrecked. If the FAA finds Chicago guilty, it can
fine the city $1,100 per day for anywhere from two to 90 days of
absent notice.
http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/200-full.html#186724

....FRIENDS LOOK FOR BRIGHT SIDE
Chicago officials have vigorously defended Meigs' closure and the
relatively small fine isn't going to change their minds on the future
of the airport. However, Meigs supporters did their best to draw what
encouragement they could from the announcement of the investigation.
"It's good there will be an investigation and the public will hear
about it," said Rachel Goodstein, president of Friends of Meigs (FOM).
The group also hopes the investigation will raise the profile of an
alternative plan they've devised for Meigs that would include a park
and an airport.
http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/200-full.html#186725