Pay FAA or cancel Airventure?

[Bill Greenwood]

Years ago the FAA mission did include promoting aviation, even private gen av like us, not just airline and corportate.

That part was removed, I think it was about 15 years ago and I wonder who was behind that .

Now safety is their only focus and of course it should be the main one.

[RV8505]

Some swaggering (insert favorite negative adjective here) in DC figures we're rich, adictied, and will do whatever we're told. I'd hate to miss my 36th convention, but enough is enough. All those planes converging on KOSH burn an incredible quantity of fuel and consume tires. Those items are taxed to fund ADAP, which has already been hijacked to fund the FAA, so we've already been paying the freight from the get-go. Then there is the vast economic impact to the state of WI and the aviation industry in general. I suggest we don't blink- if some holier than thou bureacrat wants to sign his name to the order that chokes the goose and stops the golden eggs, so be it. I suspect some big guns will be brought to bear and that will result one less burreaucrat in DC, and perhaps the FAA will get back to their charter of promoting aviation instead of this self-appointed task of taxing the biggest aviation event in the world out of existence. Then next year we can toast the departed bureaucrat year in Scholler when the convention resumes.

Sometimes I wonder if the plane I'm building will ever fly and if so how much time is remaining to fly it?

[vaflier]

I see Avweb is reporting that Pelton has agreed to pay the extortion to the FAA. I am dumbfounded and disgusted. If this is true then a great disservice has been done to all general aviation by our organization .

[58boner]

EAA leadership probably felt they had no choice considering the time frame involved.
I'm sure on the balance sheet it looked like a no brainer. Just take 500K off the top and were still well in the black. Just a good business decision and remember our organization is run by businessmen posing as passionate aviation proponents.
Not the other way around.
Like B.B. King said "The thrill is gone"

[FloridaJohn]

Now safety is their only focus and of course it should be the main one.

I'm not sure they even care about safety anymore. Apparently they are willing to forego safety for a little bit of money.

[vaflier]

I'm not sure they even care about safety anymore. Apparently they are willing to forego safety for a little bit of money.

I cannot say that safety is not a concern since it is truly bad for business so to speak to have safety become a problem. I fully understand that canceling the event for this year would be a tremendous income loss for the organization. At the same time I am gravely concerned that bending over on this issue will result in even worse to come. When do we stand together and say ENOUGH WE WILL NOT BE ROBBED BY OUR GOVERNMENT. Not standing up to the school bully results in getting your butt kicked forever and this is no different. Win or lose we MUST STAND AND FIGHT. we all know that the actions of the FAA are wrong and perhaps even illegal, if we fail to win this fight then we will suffer worse to come. If we take a stand and refuse to bow to our masters the cost will be great, but it will be worse if we do not. When Congress truly understands the costs of this action which will be many millions of dollars to many states and to the federal government, perhaps they will help the FAA rethink their actions. I wish we had a poll of all the membership to better understand what the members would like Mr Pelton and his staff to do. It would really be interesting to see what the majority really wants. I cannot believe that I am the only one who feels this way and this strongly about this issue. I truly hope that Avweb has printed bad info, but I fear it may be correct. Many have complained that this organization does not reflect their interests and opinions on various issues, There will never be a better time to speak out and be heard about a pivotal issue. SPEAK UP AND BE HEARD, LET OUR LEADERS KNOW WHAT WE WANT THEM TO DO. Agree with me or not , but please speak up. I do believe they will hear our voices.

Randy Powell

[Jim Rosenow]

vaflier... your post is clear, well-stated, and I'm sure expresses the opinion of others here, including myself.

I for one am in a holding pattern until Thursday. The letter that Congress sent to the FAA had a clear request for a response from the FAA by then. Depending on if there is one, and what it is, the next move in the game is played.

EAA staff is currently in the delicate position of anything they tell US on the forum regarding their strategy, they also inform the world.

Jim
EAA 64315

[Joe LaMantia]

Well, I get the point of just saying no, but we still do not have all the facts regarding this issue. Just what is the FAA going to do if we just say no we're not paying the fee? If you think that Jack hasn't considered this issue and hasn't had a discussion with legal advisors as well as the "bean counters" your dreaming! Yes, the impact on EAA's bottom line and paying the fee still keeps us in the black, and I would love to see a fight, but we need facts not just a knee jerk reaction. Congress stepped in to cover the contract towers for the remainder of this year, do you really think that their going to do that over $500K? They got the FAA to look for other areas to cut this years expenditures and this fee is one of the responses the FAA has decided to take. Assuming you could take this to the courts, I'd bet in the end you'd get a judgement against the FAA that this fee is in fact a tax and only congress can levy taxes. The reality is that AirVenture is only a month away and if they close the airport for a that week we're outa luck!

Joe

[scott f]

See below, stolen from another thread.....

If the EAA pays these guys now, they will never go away. Make no mistake, they are testing the EAA and other organizations to see if they will blink. This issue is way bigger and more important for GA than anything that could happen to this years AirVenture.

I am all for telling them - no thanks and watching them twist as to what to do with that. Do they have the stones to not provide the required safety services? I doubt it. But, we need to call them on this.

Are we AirVenture Inc or EAA that stands up for us little guys?

See below from other thread on how far this will go.

Some new information about the FAA's plans can be found here:

As Backlash Grows, FAA Is Planning 'Extensive' Special Event User Fees

From the article:

Apparently; the FAA is developing a "menu" for basic service fees that starts with events as simple as a grassroots airshow waiver (ostensibly to start at/or around $5000) and to increase as the FAA's role becomes more complex or develops outside "normal operations." Fall events such as the Reno Air Races (which don't require much in the way of FAA 'special' services and may, therefore, escape much of the extra costs), HAI and NBAA conventions are on the bubble... with the NBAA show seen as being particularly 'lucrative' in terms of the fees that FAA expects to levy against the event and the organization.


But... it doesn't stop there.

The FAA has a growing list of public events that require "extra surveillance and operation support" such as the Super Bowl (and smaller such bowl events), major car racing events such as the Indy 500, major golf events such as various PGA contests, horse-racing, the World Series, and more. ANN has been told that the FAA believes that it could eventually recoup between 20 and 30 million dollars with an aggressive push to make special operations "pay their share" (yes, that was actually said--ANN) of the special operations costs that the FAA (and the FAA alone) seems to think are now outside of their immediate responsibility to provide.

Camel's nose, indeed!

[Jeff Boatright]

This is just another example of why we have "problems" in congress. Both parties agreed to the "sequester" because they couldn't agree on what to "cut" and what to "fund". Our system is all about money, who pays and who benefits. Congress holds the purse strings and decides what to spend all revenues, there are no real trust funds just a big bucket called the US Treasury and Congress decides what to do with it every year. Yes, the President submits a budget, but it is always "amended" by Congress. Both parties have "earmarks" to satisfy the various "home crowds" and we all want to protect something. EAA and AOPA are just trying to protect there little corner and that is what the membership expects. Reality is slowly arriving, that we have changed the basis of this economy and can no longer hold the status quo. What is needed is a real agreement that has long-term positive impacts for the country as a whole. It's clearly not going to happen, so we get a whole lot of distractions over small things that don't have a big impact. This whole tower fee thing is a nit compared to what the challenge that we face. As far as the poll goes, I agree with Floatsflyer and I'm not voting.

Joe

I agree with Joe. Also, I have to ask: Given what I've read at these forums, many people here think that government spending should be curtailed a lot. Well, this is a perfect example of that. Airventure is already heavily subsidized by local and federal support, even if largely indirectly. Why should taxpayers in rural Kentucky or NYC or coastal Maine help foot the bill for what is basically a big party for a group of people who, compared to many in this nation, are doing fairly well financially? If you are one of those who goes around grousing about tax dollars being wasted, who says that we should ALL tighten our belts in a recession (as misguided as that is), then welcome to the reality that you've been whinging for. The pay-to-play Oshkosh tower imbroglio is EXACTLY what you have been demanding - you just wanted the goring to happen to someone else's ox, right?