Pay FAA or cancel Airventure?

[wa6ilt]

So what do you think is the right thing to do?

[Floatsflyer]

So what do you think is the right thing to do?

I think the right thing to do is not respond to this poll's drastic choices because it's premature. Lets first see the results of the political pressure placed on the Administrator today.

[Jim Rosenow]

I think the right thing to do is not respond to this poll's drastic choices because it's premature. Lets first see the results of the political pressure placed on the Administrator today.

Agreed, FF....in my opinion the poll is a bit premature.

I noticed neither of my Senators signed the letter to the Administrator. I will be sending a copy of it to them, and inquiring why not.

Jim

[wa6ilt]

FYI, AvWeb is already reporting EAA has caved in on paying.

[Jim Rosenow]

So what do you think is the right thing to do?

It saddened me when I was perusing the poll results to see that Jonathan Harger, who lists his occupation in his public forum profile as "Government Advocacy Specialist at EAA", has voted that we should "Pay. We have no choice". Understand that I support completely Mr. Hargers' right to have an opinion and vote in the poll as an EAA member, but that just made me go, "Hmmmmm".

[Hal Bryan]

I think the right thing to do is not respond to this poll's drastic choices because it's premature. Lets first see the results of the political pressure placed on the Administrator today.

I agree.


FYI, AvWeb is already reporting EAA has caved in on paying.

As I posted elsewhere earlier today, nobody has paid anybody at this point, and this situation is far, far from over. We have multiple tools left in our toolbox.


It saddened me when I was perusing the poll results to see that Jonathan Harger, who lists his occupation in his public forum profile as "Government Advocacy Specialist at EAA", has voted that we should "Pay. We have no choice". Understand that I support completely Mr. Hargers' right to have an opinion and vote in the poll as an EAA member, but that just made me go, "Hmmmmm".

Jonathan, like all of us on staff, is an EAA member. Like many of us, he was a member long before he started working here, and, as you correctly pointed out, he is completely entitled to his opinion, and to the right to express it here. I am completely confident in this case that that's all he was doing - expressing a personal opinion. I wouldn't be at all surprised if that opinion was tainted more than a little by the anger and frustration all of us are feeling because of this situation, but that...well, that's just my opinion.

Oshkosh will not be canceled, period. Whatever the short-term outcome of this move by the FAA, as I said: this is far, far from over.

If any of you really want to vote in a poll, why not go vote in this one?

http://www.thenorthwestern.com/poll/2013-06-05/7156221

[Joe LaMantia]

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
:P

[Jim Rosenow]

If any of you really want to vote in a poll, why not go vote in this one?

http://www.thenorthwestern.com/poll/2013-06-05/7156221

Done, Hal! Apparently not a hot button item locally with only 250 votes or so in the third day.

I also noticed this article while I was there that I thought others might find interesting....

http://www.thenorthwestern.com/article/20130605/OSH0101/306050459/Petri-FAA-may-lack-authority-charge-AirVenture-control-tower-staff

[scott f]

I think the idea of the poll was to give the EAA leadership an idea where the members stand as that should (well I would say must, but I will stick with should) be a BIG factor on where they go with this. This is a very polarizing issue for sure and i think they need gross idea on where people stand on this, so I would encourage people to take the poll.

Hal, my hat is off to you and Steve and everyone else there that is trying to navigate these waters. This whole short notice thing was designed to put you into a difficult, no win situation. For once, a government agency did something well for EAA can;t win here, Jack just needs to figure out how to lose less. The saddening part of this while thing is where is the outrage on the part of the EAA? I have seen some very calm, matter of fact news releases from Jack and others, but my friend, you are getting blackmailed. Where is your outrage? Where are you drawing the moral line in the sand? I know (trust me I do know) that some negotiations with the FAA need to be private if you have any hope of winning. But, sorry, you don't have any hope of changing the FAA's mind here, the Senate campaign will fail in this because there is no time for legislation before, no hope the President will sign it and people will soon forget after August.

So it comes down to this, the FAA has had the courage to put everything on the line. Does the EAA? If you don't you lose. Sure you have your "AirVenture" as normal, but you have set a precedent that will never be undone and you have proven to the FAA that the largest Experimental Lobbying organization and the second largest Aviation Lobbying group can easily be pushed around. That loss of reputation is unrecoverable. FAA has bet everything that you will go for the short term money - prove them wrong.

And look, I keep harping on this, but will say it again. Airventure is a nice vacation, but you are not Airventure inc. In my mind at least, EAA exists as an industry trade group to protect me from bad people. I pay a lot of money and volunteer a lot of time for you to protect me from said bad people. So I don;t want to speak for the guy that started it, but I think this poll is really about that question. Has EAA become Airventure Inc, with every other service subordinated to that function or is the EAA willing to take a hit on Airventure to protect those in general aviation? Stated differently - are we going to choose short term balance sheet health for long term damage to GA?

That is really what this poll is asking, what do the members value more? I think it is important that the leadership knows what the members think.

[Bill Greenwood]

Congress controls the FAA budget, and if EAA has enough allies in Congress then FAA can forgo this new charge that Congress did not authorize and which goes against the general sense of Congress re user fees. Both Bush and Obama administrations have asked for user fees and Congress has stood against them so far.

So, the EAA needs to do what any other group would do and demonstrate political power in this political battle.
Moral outrage by members on this forum or elsewhere directed at EAA leaders is not productive. .

They may also have their legal people take a look at if this is fair treatment across the board. Did the FAA charge the Republican Party for extra ATC services in conjunction with their national convention? How about the Superbowl or Kentucky Derby or any other big public event?
I'd guess that EAA has a good lawyer or two on staff and also many of our members may be attorneys, and even have some experience with this type of thing.

[Hal Bryan]

Thanks for your thoughtful contribution, Scott. Here are my thoughts in response to some of your points:


I think the idea of the poll was to give the EAA leadership an idea where the members stand as that should (well I would say must, but I will stick with should) be a BIG factor on where they go with this.

It must be, and it is.


Hal, my hat is off to you and Steve and everyone else there that is trying to navigate these waters. This whole short notice thing was designed to put you into a difficult, no win situation.

Comments like that are greatly appreciated by all of us - probably more than you know.


The saddening part of this while thing is where is the outrage on the part of the EAA?

If you could stop by our offices or, better still, the local watering hole (http://westendpizzaoshkosh.com/) just across the road this evening at about 6:00, you wouldn't need to ask that question, I promise...


But, sorry, you don't have any hope of changing the FAA's mind here, the Senate campaign will fail in this because there is no time for legislation before, no hope the President will sign it and people will soon forget after August.

We'll just agree to disagree there.


Airventure is a nice vacation, but you are not Airventure inc. In my mind at least, EAA exists as an industry trade group to protect me from bad people.

No, we're definitely not "AirVenture Inc." We are a membership organization, and Oshkosh is, at its core, our (to be crystal clear - I'm speaking as a member here when I say "our") annual convention.


Stated differently - are we going to choose short term balance sheet health for long term damage to GA?

No. Our focus is absolutely on the long term impact, and we hope everyone else's is as well. Regardless of the short-term outcome (and there are no foregone conclusions at this point) this is, as I've said and will keep saying, far from over.


That is really what this poll is asking, what do the members value more? I think it is important that the leadership knows what the members think.

While, as I said, like a couple of other members, I think the poll is premature, if I didn't support everyone's right to ask the questions and voice their opinions, I would have just removed it. Heck, if I didn't support those things, I wouldn't bother coming to work every day... Anyway, anyone who wants to vote, have at it! For those who don't and want to post or have already posted your reasons why, well...you guys have at it, too! :) That's why these forums exist.

[FloridaJohn]

I think this particular poll is flawed, because all the choices are "pay." Where is the option to not pay?

Even though when I really think about it, I find it hard to believe that EAA would accept the liability of any subsequent air accident if they didn't pay. That means they will be forced to pay what the FAA wants.

However, what I would really like to see is the EAA not pay at all. Not one cent. Call the FAA's bluff and see what happens. Is the FAA really willing to put lives in danger over this? I kinda believe that they are not, but even if they are, it would draw a really sharp dividing line on the purpose (or mission, some might say) of the FAA. And we would once and for all know where they stand regarding General Aviation.

But I know it will never happen, since EAA could be sued out of existence if an accident happens. The FAA can't no matter what happens. The EAA is really in a tough spot with this one and I really feel for the guys at EAA trying to work this out, especially in such a short time frame.

[RV8505]

Pay or quit are strong words. I wouldn't quit but they shouldn't pay it.

[RV8505]

Congress controls the FAA budget, and if EAA has enough allies in Congress then FAA can forgo this new charge that Congress did not authorize and which goes against the general sense of Congress re user fees. Both Bush and Obama administrations have asked for user fees and Congress has stood against them so far.

So, the EAA needs to do what any other group would do and demonstrate political power in this political battle.
Moral outrage by members on this forum or elsewhere directed at EAA leaders is not productive. .

They may also have their legal people take a look at if this is fair treatment across the board. Did the FAA charge the Republican Party for extra ATC services in conjunction with their national convention? How about the Superbowl or Kentucky Derby or any other big public event?
I'd guess that EAA has a good lawyer or two on staff and also many of our members may be attorneys, and even have some experience with this type of thing.

Sure as the sun comes up they didn't charge the Democrat party for their convention.

[scott f]

Hey just for the record - I was not asking where the moral outrage against the EAA leaders is. Heck, while I have not met Hal yet, I really enjoy working with these guys and all have my utmost respect, especially Shawn Elliot, whom I owe much too.

My moral outrage snippet was that I want to see the EAA express some of it publically. Heck, I want to see the theme of this years convention be FAA overreach - I want to see someone selling T-shirts with the acronym FUFAA :)

[Floatsflyer]

I want to see someone selling T-shirts with the acronym FUFAA :)


Don't be surprised if you see some opportunistic entrepreneur vendor doing just that. $15 a pop would sell quite a few I'm sure. We could wear them and march en masse to the FAA booth in the Federal Building. Ya baby, bring back the 60's!

[Bill Greenwood]

You can make a good T shirt which expresses displeasure with the FAA without being obscene or crude.

The best one I have seen was at the little shop in Denver at Centennial airport next to Denver Jet Center.
It listed the four forces acting on an airplane.
1. Lift, going up
2. Gravity, going down
3. Money, pulling forward
and 4. The FAA dragging rearward

[Bill Berson]

Pink T shirts?

[Joe LaMantia]

Hal,

What happens to AirVenture this year if we don't pay? Does the FAA close the tower? Assuming they did that, could we get enough volunteers to spot and control traffic at an "uncontrolled" airport? If this is blackmail, then we need a grass roots campaign to clear up the conflict regarding the FAA's mission. Clearly we would loose a lot in attendance at AirVenture which reduces EAA revenues. Given the short notice, it would seem that are options regarding this year are very limited. Either we pay or wind up with a greatly reduced AirVenture this year, if that happens I'd like to see all EAA members go on a one month fuel purchase boycott.

Joe
:confused:

[wa6ilt]

Done, Hal! Apparently not a hot button item locally with only 250 votes or so in the third day.

I also noticed this article while I was there that I thought others might find interesting....

http://www.thenorthwestern.com/article/20130605/OSH0101/306050459/Petri-FAA-may-lack-authority-charge-AirVenture-control-tower-staff

Also voted.

[Floatsflyer]

There are so many threads in 2 topic areas devoted to this subject now that I'm confused where I should post this. Anyway.....

I just received an email from Jack Pelton, in what is obviously a mass emailing from Membership Services, thanking me for my support for the Administrator pressure initiative. It even addressed me by my first name. I'm impressed, very nice touch EAA HQ to take the time to do this in light of the fact that time for you is very precious now and you have higher priorities to deal with.

I sent Jack a reply, I hope he receives it in some fashion.

[Hal Bryan]

Thanks for letting us know that it was appreciated. I guarantee you that Jack will see your reply.

[Hal Bryan]

Hal,

What happens to AirVenture this year if we don't pay? Does the FAA close the tower?

Hey, Joe - all I've got for you is a couple of apologies. First, I'm sorry that I didn't see and reply to this earlier - lots of traffic to keep up with today, as you can guess. As for your questions, here comes the second apology when I tell you I can't even speculate on those things at this point.

- Hal

[wa6ilt]

I think the idea of the poll was to give the EAA leadership an idea where the members stand as that should (well I would say must, but I will stick with should) be a BIG factor on where they go with this. This is a very polarizing issue for sure and i think they need gross idea on where people stand on this, so I would encourage people to take the poll.

Hal, my hat is off to you and Steve and everyone else there that is trying to navigate these waters. This whole short notice thing was designed to put you into a difficult, no win situation. For once, a government agency did something well for EAA can;t win here, Jack just needs to figure out how to lose less. The saddening part of this while thing is where is the outrage on the part of the EAA? I have seen some very calm, matter of fact news releases from Jack and others, but my friend, you are getting blackmailed. Where is your outrage? Where are you drawing the moral line in the sand? I know (trust me I do know) that some negotiations with the FAA need to be private if you have any hope of winning. But, sorry, you don't have any hope of changing the FAA's mind here, the Senate campaign will fail in this because there is no time for legislation before, no hope the President will sign it and people will soon forget after August.

So it comes down to this, the FAA has had the courage to put everything on the line. Does the EAA? If you don't you lose. Sure you have your "AirVenture" as normal, but you have set a precedent that will never be undone and you have proven to the FAA that the largest Experimental Lobbying organization and the second largest Aviation Lobbying group can easily be pushed around. That loss of reputation is unrecoverable. FAA has bet everything that you will go for the short term money - prove them wrong.

And look, I keep harping on this, but will say it again. Airventure is a nice vacation, but you are not Airventure inc. In my mind at least, EAA exists as an industry trade group to protect me from bad people. I pay a lot of money and volunteer a lot of time for you to protect me from said bad people. So I don;t want to speak for the guy that started it, but I think this poll is really about that question. Has EAA become Airventure Inc, with every other service subordinated to that function or is the EAA willing to take a hit on Airventure to protect those in general aviation? Stated differently - are we going to choose short term balance sheet health for long term damage to GA?

That is really what this poll is asking, what do the members value more? I think it is important that the leadership knows what the members think.
Couldn't have said it better myself.

[vaflier]

We as an organization ( speaking as a member ) need to take a stand for general aviation. I can think of no better moment in time than to just say no to extortion !. We have already paid for these services through the many taxes we all pay all year long , and now the FAA is going to fail to do the job we have paid it for. This is nothing short of holding a gun to our nose and taking our money. I for one believe that now is the time to stand and fight. If we fail to fight now then user fees at all airports will be just down the road. While I enjoy Airventure I will gladly vote to suspend it for this year if that is what it takes to send a message to our elected and non elected officials that we are not going to give in to thievery. Either we stand and fight for the future of general aviation , and that is exactly what this is about , or we may as well scrap our aircraft and forget our dreams. I say FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT.

[Floatsflyer]

Either we stand and fight for the future of general aviation , and that is exactly what this is about , or we may as well scrap our aircraft and forget our dreams. I say FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT.

Agreed! Now for additional HQ inspiration, cue Rocky theme songs, "Gonna Fly Now" and "Going the Distance" and pipe them through the office speaker system.

[Joe LaMantia]

Hal,
No apology needed, and thanks for your response.

vaflier,
GA is the smallest fish in the FAA pond, as I said in my first post, there are no "trust funds"! All taxes go into one big bucket and Congress decides what to do with it every year. The general public has been sold a bill of goods on taxes for years. No politician in D.C. wants to bring this up, it opens the door to a big can of worms and could create changes that reduce this center of "power". Since Congress couldn't decide on what to fund and what to cut they kicked the can down the road with "across the board cuts". The reaction is just beginning to be seen by the public and the response is "don't cut mine!". The FAA took a hit on the contract tower closings last month, now it's an AirVenture "fee". I would suggest the fight, if there is to be one should focus on the mission of the FAA. I believe there is a conflict between "public safety" and "promoting aviation". On the promoting side, we've seen a few situations where the FAA "looks the other way" on airline inspections and maintenance, then there's the whole "user fee" thing which is an attempt to shift some costs from the airlines to GA. I would like to see a fight to change the FAA mission to public safety. The airline industry is not some fledging business sector needing govt support to operate or grow. The public does expect the govt. to provide both a safe and secure transportation system. I do like your spirit, and believe we have to fight this, we just don't have enough information to make an intelligent decision. The poll is a necessary for the folks at EAA HQ to get some idea of where the membership stands. I would support a fight on the whole mission thing, and if I had some numbers on AirVenture revenues and costs we could vote on what to do next. Based on Hal's post I'd say the guys in Oshkosh have their hands full trying to sort this out. In the great D.C. budget debate $500K is a nit, but that could be a real show stopper in OSH!

Joe
:eek:

[Jim Rosenow]

Interesting, well-thought out responses, all! It's kind of a poll outside the poll, but without choice limitations! I'm just going to cut and paste here what I emailed to EAA HQ in response to their "thank you" email....

"I think it's time to make a stand...unfortunately, against our government. The imposition and timing of these fees are nothing more than extortion out of what are perceived as deep pockets.

As a member/aircraft owner since 1971 and current owner of two aircraft, I assure you my pockets are not deep enough to support the governments' out of control actions on an individual basis thru fees. At our home field, we were told last week that 100LL goes up $.60 a gallon when the new load is purchased.

I am in support of EAA telling FAA they will NOT be paying any extra fees for AV and let the chips fall where they may. My wife, who flies a Citation Part 135, agrees with me on this, as the new 'policy' will ultimately negatively impact the entire industry.

Please pass these thoughts along to the powers that be in EAA.

Thanks!

Jim
EAA #64315"

[Ylinen]

I would like to see a choice of EAA does not pay. Let the FAA decided if they want to provide the service. This fee is unconstitutional. Only congress can create fees and tax.

i would stare the administrator in the face and tell him we are not going to comply. Let him take the next step.

they will then have to decide to close the tower, staff with the controllers they have there or do,the right thing.

EAA should request a house hearing so the administrator can answer questions under oath.

[Bill Greenwood]

I hope that Congress makes this right, or that there are at least a few cooler and wiser heads at the FAA that will revise this.

I do hope this can be worked out and Airventure go on as usual.

If forced to make such a hard choice, I might even agree that EAA should POLITELY AND RESPECTFULLY decline to pay this fee.
So what happens then?

The FAA might staff the tower on their own funds and continue as before. Or contiue at less than maximum staffing which might make delays for a lot of traffic arriving.
Or they might try to issue a ruling that Airventure could not be held.

I don't think EAA is in a position to staff with other controllers or any such volunteers, and the traffic load is so big that we really do need good ATC services. It could not be done just as a fly in without as tower as is in smaller traffic events ,could be unsafe and have liability for EAA. And I say this even from a standpoint of preferring non tower airports most of the time. The contollers at Oshkosh seem much more polite and helpful and as if they really like gen aviation and fun planes, which is not always true at other airports.

I really and sincerely hope that this doesn't result in EAA deciding to cancel Airventure. It would be a major disappointment to thousand of people and an economic loss in the millions not only for Wisconsin , but vendors from all over.

[Joe LaMantia]

A-men Bill,

The timing of this couldn't be worse! I do think we at least have one "ace in the hole" and that is the loss of millions in economic benefit if AirVenture is cancelled. I think HQ is scrabbling at this early stage but there will be hell to pay in D.C. when the Wisconsin representatives get wind of this and the fall out amongst the various AirVenture sponsors are faced with a cancellation. The economic impact far exceeds $500K! I suspect if GA withheld fuel purchases for a month the loss in fuel taxes would exceed that $500K as well. This may end in another FAA whimper rather than a bang!

Joe
:cool:

[wa6ilt]

First time I ever created a poll and didn't put in enough choices and it doesn't seem to let you edit after you submit. Next time.
I would like to see a choice of EAA does not pay. Let the FAA decided if they want to provide the service. This fee is unconstitutional. Only congress can create fees and tax.

i would stare the administrator in the face and tell him we are not going to comply. Let him take the next step.

they will then have to decide to close the tower, staff with the controllers they have there or do,the right thing.

EAA should request a house hearing so the administrator can answer questions under oath.

[TedK]

Forgive me if this seems like rehashing, but why do we not staff our ATC needs ourselves? We all claim we send too much $ to DC, but then we complain when the govt try's to trim its expenses.

Who here is a Controller? If you are a Current licensed Controller, would you volunteer to Control at Airventure? (Pls forward this thread to your Controller friends)

Military Controllers: Weigh in here too. Can you take leave to volunteer to Control?

How do we solve this problem ourselves without the FAA and without becoming a special interest?

PS: I, personally, would contribute to provide travel, lodging, food to volunteer controllers.

[Ylinen]

The per diem rate for Oshkosh is $77 for lodging, $46 for meals x 78 controllers x 6 days is @ $58000. Even if the controllers went first class you could not get to $500,000. As far as over time how much could that be with the airport closed at night and during the air shows.

no way the EAA should pay, but if they do they should ask for an itemizes bill.

[FloridaJohn]

As far as over time how much could that be with the airport closed at night and during the air shows.
The overtime pay is supposedly for the controllers left at home who now have to cover for the controllers at Oshkosh.

[Mayhemxpc]

Another tricky thing. Either the FAA is under sequestration or it is not. DoD is and we have been told that overtime is flat out not authorized. If the FAA is not restricted from overtime, that means it is FUNDED for these things (as we know that they are) and should not be charging for ANY personnel costs.

As I have said before, I am sure that the EAA's negotiators know these things. At least 28 Senators know this, too.

I have never understood a government agency that PLANS for the use of overtime to cover normal or predictable operational requirements. (and AirVenture is a predictable requirement.) You take the total number of man-hours required to perform your planned work for the year, divide by 1,688 (Full time equivalent hours) and that is how many people you need to have employed for that year. At least that is how I have justified my personnel requirements in various assignments in DoD. (That is for civilians. Military time is calculated somewhat differently.) Overtime is for unexpected requirements and emergencies (not exactly the same.) AirVenture does not fall into this category.

Well, I am not going to fix the FAA's manpower and budget mess here -- but no one else should be required to pay for it, either.

[rwanttaja]

I have never understood a government agency that PLANS for the use of overtime to cover normal or predictable operational requirements. (and AirVenture is a predictable requirement.)
Happens in the civilian world all the time. The costs of hiring an employee is much more than their hourly wage. It's often cheaper to pay existing employees overtime than to hire the number of full-time people it would take to cover the same jobs without overtime.

This is especially true in jobs where the surges come at specific times. Say you need 400 labor-hours per week for 51 weeks per year. That's ten employees working 8-hour days. Say week 52 is the annual weed-whacker and slide trombone festival, and you need coverage for the same ten positions for 12 hours a day, or 600 total labor hours. If everyone's still working eight hours a day (e.g, no overtime) that 200 additional labor hours translates to 40 hours per day, or five additional employees.

The question is, what would those five additional employees do the REST of the year, when only ten total employees are sufficient?

In the example above, the total amount of overtime needed per year is 200 hours...one-tenth of what a single full-time employee normally works in a year. But hiring one additional full-time employee won't help, since you'll have only 11 employees during the festival, and they still have to work overtime.

In the civilian world, this is often handled by hiring contract or temp workers...or just firing people when the need is over.

Ron Wanttaja

[gmatejcek]

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.

[scott f]

Called and shut off my auto renew on my membership today (would have renewed end of this month). I do not want to renew until I see how EAA handles this issue.

[cub builder]

... and perhaps the FAA will get back to their charter of promoting aviation....

You might note that the FAA Mission statement below does not mention promotion of aviation in any way, shape or form. Expecting that from the FAA is wishful thinking, but certainly not their mission.

-CubBuilder
----------------

FAA Mission Statement Quoted directly in it's complete form from <http://www.faa.gov/about/mission/>

Our Mission
Our continuing mission is to provide the safest, most efficient aerospace system in the world.

Our Vision
We strive to reach the next level of safety, efficiency, environmental responsibility and global leadership. We are accountable to the American public and our stakeholders.

Our Values


Safety is our passion. We work so all air and space travelers arrive safely at their destinations.
Excellence is our promise. We seek results that embody professionalism, transparency and accountability.
Integrity is our touchstone. We perform our duties honestly, with moral soundness, and with the highest level of ethics.
People are our strength. Our success depends on the respect, diversity, collaboration, and commitment of our workforce.
Innovation is our signature. We foster creativity and vision to provide solutions beyond today's boundaries.

[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:

(http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=ec7fffbc-8739-4256-bf01-1db6aaea7981)As Backlash Grows, FAA Is Planning 'Extensive' Special Event User Fees
(http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=ec7fffbc-8739-4256-bf01-1db6aaea7981)
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
:P

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?

[Jeff Boatright]

Called and shut off my auto renew on my membership today (would have renewed end of this month). I do not want to renew until I see how EAA handles this issue.


I don't see how this is moves you in the direction you want to go. Once you're no longer a member, EAA will be even less concerned with what you think/want/demand, etc.

[FloridaJohn]

Why should taxpayers in rural Kentucky or NYC or coastal Maine help foot the bill
Why should I pay for roads in North Dakota when I live in Florida?

You're argument also neglects the fact that these services have already been paid for in advance through aviation fuel taxes. About 20 cents per gallon.

[turbopilot]

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?

Well it is not that simple. Current aviation user fees fund 71% of the FAA capital and operating budget. Just by flying our airplanes we are all ready "pay as you go" for much of the cost.

We currently pay 19.4 cents/gallon in Federal fuel tax which is designated for funding airport and Air Traffic Control operations.

[scott f]

I don't see how this is moves you in the direction you want to go. Once you're no longer a member, EAA will be even less concerned with what you think/want/demand, etc.

Jeff, I am not really concerned with EAA meeting my "demands" as you put it. What I am very concerned with is the future of GA. You can see from the ANN article to what extant the FAA is planning to impose this stuff. If EAA manages to steer their way through this for the benefit of Experimental Aircraft and all GA, whether that is using my thoughts or not, well then I stay a member. If they need donations for help, I am there with a checkbook. But, if we get a short sighted or cave in response then they certainly don;t need my membership.

So, it's not about forcing a direction with EAA, its about wisely investing my money in causes I believe in.

[Bill]

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

Since we're in the long decline from the golden age of GA, my philosophy for the experimental that I'm building is I expect to lose every dollar that I have and will invest in it. I regard it as money well spent for the joy of flying that it brings me for the time remaining. Enjoy what you can, while you can. If, in the end, I can get something for it, fine; if not, I'll still have the memories.

[wa6ilt]

The FAA & DOT had an opportunity to hike that amount years ago, with the concurrence of the aviation alphabet groups, but it never got through Congress. Also, since aviation is supposed to be a benefit to the general economy as a whole, the argument has been that some of the funds support the NAS should come from the general funds.
Well it is not that simple. Current aviation user fees fund 71% of the FAA capital and operating budget. Just by flying our airplanes we are all ready "pay as you go" for much of the cost.

We currently pay 19.4 cents/gallon in Federal fuel tax which is designated for funding airport and Air Traffic Control operations.

[Hal Bryan]

I'll post this link in each of these threads, just to make sure that you all see it:

http://www.eaa.org/news/2013/2013-06-13_no-good-options-in-FAA-ATC-demands.asp

[Bill Greenwood]

It is a shame, and I hope this is something that EAA will continue to pursue with Congress and maybe in court if there is any likelihood of prevailing there.

It's going to be a fun meeting if the head of the FAA shows up for the public session at Airventure as they usually do. Maybe we should organize a mass shoe throwing!

I'd really like to know how high in the FAA this decision went and the particular person or persons responsible.

[cub builder]

Unfortunately, with the EAA HQ organization capitulating, that also sets the precedence for all the regional fly-ins, of which having FAA controllers is of dubious value to begin with. Tower services will soon follow. So now we can pay over and over. IMHO, capitulating was very short sighted on the part of the EAA HQ. We get a short term gain in keeping this years cash cow on schedule, but gave away the farm. I'd rather we cancel AirVenture for a year than give in to extortion. It really saddens me to see the EAA be the first in the US to give in to FAA user fees. Once that line has been crossed, you can't uncross it.

I'll wait and see how the EAA HQ handles this after the fact, but I'm not sure I want to belong to an organization that is leading the way into user fees, as this means the destruction of General Aviation once and for all. Welcome to the new Europe. :(

I'm thinking AOPA could use the funds I've been paying the EAA as they seem to have a better focus on the big picture.

-CubBuilder

[scott f]

I'll post this link in each of these threads, just to make sure that you all see it:

http://www.eaa.org/news/2013/2013-06-13_no-good-options-in-FAA-ATC-demands.asp


I guess 20 years was long enough for me to be a member, I will not be renewing. Honestly, I realize that my EAA, Warbirds and IAC membership money is chump change to AirVenture Inc, however I bet I can find a better use for it.

[Mayhemxpc]

It is extortion, pure and simple. They made an offer EAA couldn't refuse. I certainly hope that EAA carries through using whatever means necessary to get this reversed. My Senators were NOT among the 28 who signed the petition, and they will hear from me again, as will my representative.

It is NOT issue of how much it they demand. A dollar per attendee per day. (The savings in water prices will cover that several times over.) It is the issue of ramming a new fee down the public's throat without any semblance of due process of law. Is it any wonder why the latest polls show the public's trust in government to be even lower than it was before (and it was pretty low to begin with.)

Well there is an issue about cost, but that has to do with the absence of open negotiation -- which is another rule of law issue.

[wa6ilt]

I'll post this link in each of these threads, just to make sure that you all see it:

http://www.eaa.org/news/2013/2013-06-13_no-good-options-in-FAA-ATC-demands.asp
I called and cancelled my auto-renew. So long all.

[FloridaJohn]

I'm thinking AOPA could use the funds I've been paying the EAA as they seem to have a better focus on the big picture.
Hold on to your money until you see how AOPA handles the FAA during their Aviation Summit. I predict similar results. :(

[wa6ilt]

Hold on to your money until you see how AOPA handles the FAA during their Aviation Summit. I predict similar results. :(
Nowhere near the traffic for the AOPA event. Most people drive in or fly commercial. It's not like you can camp out like you can at Oshkosh. Now if they were still running the Open House, that might be a different matter...

[FloridaJohn]

Nowhere near the traffic for the AOPA event. Most people drive in or fly commercial. It's not like you can camp out like you can at Oshkosh. Now if they were still running the Open House, that might be a different matter...
I don't think any of that is going to matter to the FAA. They see a place to collect money, and by October they will already have had both Sun N Fun and Oshkosh pay. They get AOPA and they hit the trifecta!

Next up will be the LSA Expo in Sebring, and then all the regional fly-ins. Finally, any weekend where more than the "usual" number of planes congregate will require the proper "permit" from the FAA. How much is that free pancake breakfast again?!

[scott f]

This is just so dang sad - there is literally no way to fix this. Jack was doing so dang good on other issues, then he strikes out on arguably the most important issue we have seen in decades. Literally Strikes out, than uses the excuse about "how important AirVenture is to the Aviation economy" -- dude.......... I honestly feel like EAA just sold us all out to make sure "AirVenture" was a go this year. Maybe I am wrong, maybe he has something in his back pocket, but in the end I sure as heck am not going to fight anymore for people that refuse to fight for themselves.

Last post, last forum view, I am done with all things EAA. Again, probably not a big deal to Airventure Inc, but a sad moment for me.

[Mayhemxpc]

You can quit. You can run away and say that you are no part of it. Your choice. The problem is much bigger than you perceive. My impression is that EAA top management is fighting it, and they are pretty savvy about it, too.

If we do not fight...if we do not offer our support and do what we can to help in that fight, whether it is EAA, AOPA, or any other group out there, then you are just giving in to government doing whatever it pleases, regardless of law. The Administration's action (and do not believe that this idea is some independent thought of the FAA's) was brazen and really unparalleled. Just like the previously announced tower closings. That also violated the Administrative Act. It takes a little more time to counter a blitzkrieg action like that. The planner's within the Administration learned very well from the closing of Meigs Field. It is right out of that playbook.

As for me, as long as the EAA leadership continues to fight (and I do NOT regard this as a surrender, just a defeat) then I will be there with them and help however I can. After all WE are the EAA. For those who feel the same way...I will see you at ground zero next month.

[TedK]

+1 Spot on, Mayhem!

[wa6ilt]

You can quit. You can run away and say that you are no part of it. Your choice. The problem is much bigger than you perceive. My impression is that EAA top management is fighting it, and they are pretty savvy about it, too.

If we do not fight...if we do not offer our support and do what we can to help in that fight, whether it is EAA, AOPA, or any other group out there, then you are just giving in to government doing whatever it pleases, regardless of law. The Administration's action (and do not believe that this idea is some independent thought of the FAA's) was brazen and really unparalleled. Just like the previously announced tower closings. That also violated the Administrative Act. It takes a little more time to counter a blitzkrieg action like that. The planner's within the Administration learned very well from the closing of Meigs Field. It is right out of that playbook.

As for me, as long as the EAA leadership continues to fight (and I do NOT regard this as a surrender, just a defeat) then I will be there with them and help however I can. After all WE are the EAA. For those who feel the same way...I will see you at ground zero next month.

Jack Pelton's statement makes it very clear that EAA and AirVenture are one and indivisible. Lot's of members have felt and spoken about that for a long time. This is just the last straw. I have my principles and evidently they don't coincide with EAAs. You don't give in to extortion and/or blackmail. If the EAA just said "no", don't you think that the vendors and the rest of those who would be financially impacted wouldn't be screaming to their legislators and lobbyists? What is more important, one summer's revenue or pushing back on government that is out of control?

[vaflier]

Mr Pelton has made a very bad decision which will cost us all for many years to come in many ways. He does not represent my views. Give in to extotion once and you will be robbed forever. He has done a great disservice to all of aviation. I know he is in a no win situation but he should have stood up and done the right thing and simply said NO. The organisation would survive and in the end be stronger and better for it.

[cub builder]

I am not cancelling my membership... yet. I believe Mr Pelton picked the worse possible decision by caving in to the FAA. But, I'm taking a wait and see attitude. There may be other factors, like maybe the EAA can't survive as an organization without a week long fund raiser carnival.

The EAA will either file suit and go after the FAA for a full refund and vigorously pursue remedies both in Congress and the courts, or I simply can not be a member of an organization that sold out my way of life in return for a buck. Yeah, time was against Jack. He caved when he shouldn't have. It's going to be incredibly expensive and difficult to uncross that line. If the EAA is willing to pursue it, I'll wave the flag and back it up with my checkbook. If they simply caved, I can't be a part of it. OK EAA HQ. The clock is ticking and the membership is watching....

CubBuilder

[Joe LaMantia]

Guys,

I think Mayhem has it right, checkout the AirVenture blog on this subject and read D. Knapinski's blog on page 10. As for EAA and AirVenture, if you are one of those who want to cancel and not pay then consider the impact on revenues and what gets funded. You need to understand what will have to be cut in EAA's budget this year. A cancellation at this late date would hurt a lot of sponsors and all the businesses that get a major piece of their annual sales at the convention. The timing on this is what is so bad, if we cancel at this late date it will have a negative impact for years, even if we "win" this fight. As I noted in one of my previous posts,
EAA is only one small voice in a much bigger debate over "who pays and who benefits". As for "privatizing" the FAA, that just reduces your voice in the long run, and will open the door for all kinds of "fees" just like our current banking system.

Joe
:eek:

[wa6ilt]

Guys,

I think Mayhem has it right, checkout the AirVenture blog on this subject and read D. Knapinski's blog on page 10. As for EAA and AirVenture, if you are one of those who want to cancel and not pay then consider the impact on revenues and what gets funded. You need to understand what will have to be cut in EAA's budget this year. A cancellation at this late date would hurt a lot of sponsors and all the businesses that get a major piece of their annual sales at the convention. The timing on this is what is so bad, if we cancel at this late date it will have a negative impact for years, even if we "win" this fight. As I noted in one of my previous posts,
EAA is only one small voice in a much bigger debate over "who pays and who benefits". As for "privatizing" the FAA, that just reduces your voice in the long run, and will open the door for all kinds of "fees" just like our current banking system.

Joe
:eek:

I have an ancestor who signed both the Declaration and the Costitution. He died in debtors prison and I believe he had his priorities straight.

We've got the Feds tracking, stopping and searching our aircraft without warrant. We're the only form of travel that has to get permission to leave the country. We've got the FAA making us an offer we can't refuse. It has to stop somewhere! There needs to be a line in the sand where we say this far and no farther.

Unlike some of the folks who say they're quitting EAA, I didn't, when the guy at Membership asked, ask for a refund on the remainder of this years dues. I'll see how this plays out, but auto-renew is off and EAA will have earn my dues every year. Right now it ain't looking good.

[gmatejcek]

Guys,

The timing on this is what is so bad, if we cancel at this late date it will have a negative impact for years, even if we "win" this fight. As I noted in one of my previous posts,


Joe
:eek:

The timing? Negative impact for years? This is just the first payment. Do you honestly think next year's bill will be smaller? And each successive year? With all due respect to a fellow concerned aviator, I feel that comment is like saying "it's okay, it's just a little cancer". The bureacracy has run amok, and we've been handed the bill. If someone, if WE don't put an end to this tumor quickly, it will put and end to us. Especially when it metastisizes to across the board user fees. I don't say these things lightly, and I have a long history of attending via car and plane as well as volunteering at the local level, and even a few years in grounds prep prior to the convention. I am a homebuilder, grass roots guy, and I detect a serious grub infestation. Pretending and looking the other way won't help. I truly feel this needs to be stamped out NOW.

[EZRider]

"EAA" is not picking up the tab for this, we the members are. We will probably see an increase in membership cost and I'll bet they will be asking for donations at the show this year. Of course the cities around the area should contribute, since the show brings millions for the business in the area. I think it would be a disaster to cancel the show, so I understand paying the ransom. I will certainly donate if asked. I hope this doesn't cost us in lost memberships.

[gmatejcek]

You might note that the FAA Mission statement below does not mention promotion of aviation in any way, shape or form. Expecting that from the FAA is wishful thinking, but certainly not their mission.

-CubBuilder
----------------







Hi There, Cub builder- To use your turn of phrase, you might note I did not say anything about their current mission statement, I quoted their charter, the document that created the FAA and defined it's mission. Let me quote the first sentence: "CHAP. 344.-An Act To encourage and regulate the use of aircraft in commerce, and for other purposes." This is from the Air Commerce Act of 1926, and can be found on line. So, it certainly is their mission, and it's about time someone reminded them of that. If many folks feel as you seem to, that it's wishfull thinking that the folks that work for us do what we stipulate, then the war is already lost.

[Joe LaMantia]

Gmate,

The EAA is not big enough to "Stamp Out" much of anything, we don't have the clout of the NRA. In the world of Washington this "outrage" is the mouse that squeaked! While we were able to get 28 Senators to listen it takes a "super majority" to do anything in the Senate. It is very early in this whole "sequester" fight and AirVenture is only about 30 seconds into round one. Go get a cold drink, and check out the 19 pages of comments on the AirVenture blog and you'll get some insight into what has happened and what may be coming. We were faced with only 2 choices, pay or cancel AirVenture, both really bad choices. I hate the under handed methods being used to make a political point, but at least we will remain financially in the game by keeping the convention over having to cut EAA's budget. How much revenue do we take in from AirVenture and what does it cost to run EAA for a year? How much do we spend to get our point across in D.C.? Do you think we're going to "Win" a war there with less money?

Joe
:confused:

[FloridaJohn]

check out the 19 pages of comments on the AirVenture blog
Do you have a link to this blog? I have been unable to find it from the EAA website.

[gmatejcek]

Gmate,

The EAA is not big enough to "Stamp Out" much of anything, we don't have the clout of the NRA. In the world of Washington this "outrage" is the mouse that squeaked! While we were able to get 28 Senators to listen it takes a "super majority" to do anything in the Senate. It is very early in the whole "sequester" fight and AirVenture is only about 30 seconds into round one. Go get a cold drink, and check out the 19 pages of comments on the AirVenture blog and you'll get some insight into what has happened and what may be coming. We were faced with only 2 choices, pay or cancel AirVenture, both really bad choices. I hate the under handed methods being used to make a political point, but at least we will remain financially in the game by keeping the convention over having to cut EAA's budget. How much revenue do we take in from AirVenture and what does it cost to run EAA for a year? How much do we spend to get our point across in D.C.? Do you think we're going to "Win" a war there with less money?

Joe
:confused:

Joe, you underestimate your own power. Many regs been affected by EAA, and EAA people are moving into FAA management positions due to their acknowledged expertise and talent. We may be 30 seconds into round one, but our openning shot was to bend over, drop trou, and wimper "I resent this..." That makes for a short fight. As to your other points: What does it cost to run EAA for a year? Well, what would it cost to run for a year without the convention? Further, what will it cost to run for a year when we get a bill every time the FAA answers their phone? You ask how much do we spend to get our point across? Zero, if the state of Wisconsin and the rest of the domestic and international aviation industry does the shouting when we cancel. Do I think we'll win with less money? You mean, like 500k less??

There comes a time to stand up and be heard. EAA didn't gain it's stature from rolling over, but from doing the right thing. Not every challenge or threat requires nuclear response, but I personally feel this event does.

[Jim Hann]

My feeling is we have lost this battle but we are still in the war. If we "win" this battle by canceling AirVenture we may very well lose the war because of a loss of corporate support from both in- and out-side of the aviation industry. Y'all can complain about the commercial support but we need it whether it is trucks to move stuff (Ford) or discounted lawnmowers (JD) an operation like EAA or AirVenture can't operate solely on your dues.

Sport Aviation can live to fight another day we shouldn't fall on our sword just because we were blindsided. Did we give up after the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor!?!?!!! (Please forgive the Animal House reference!)

Good bye quitters, enjoy chess or shuffleboard in the park. I'll be at the airport and supporting those that are battling to keep general aviation affordable and accessible in the most aviation friendly country I know of!

Jim

[EDGEFLY]

Might it have been that this poll is closed because it was trending towards 75% of the membership exhibiting great dissatisfaction with the course of action it's management had taken ? Perhaps it would be inconvenient to have such a membership statement on record within the organizations own records ? Airventure did not die this year but options trading on future years are not likely to hold significant promise either. Mr. Pelton, you have my support for the moment. But, I urge you to think of internal reorganization rather than getting strategically cornered again.

[Hal Bryan]

Might it have been that this poll is closed because it was trending towards 75% of the membership exhibiting great dissatisfaction with the course of action it's management had taken ? Perhaps it would be inconvenient to have such a membership statement on record within the organizations own records ?

No. The poll is closed because the creator of the poll - someone called wa6ilt - chose to have it close automatically after a certain number of days.

[SBaircraft]

As a pilot, I hope the FAA provides Airventure services for free. That is clearly in the best interest of aviation.

As a citizen, who is concerned about the deficit and economy, I want the government to cut spending... which is exactly what the FAA is threatening to do.

We all want the government to cut spending... but not on our own interests. We want the government to raise taxes... but only on other people. That sort of wishful thinking isn't going to lead to any long term solutions. Perhaps we need to give some serious thought (not wishing), into how to fund aviation in the future.

[wa6ilt]

No. The poll is closed because the creator of the poll - someone called wa6ilt - chose to have it close automatically after a certain number of days.

That is correct. And my name is in the signature line.

[Jim Hann]

That is correct. And my name is in the signature line.

I don't know if you use Tapatalk but it doesn't show the signature block. No worries from me and I believe Hal uses it for quick access much to his family's dismay I'm sure! :-)

Jim

[Hal Bryan]

I don't know if you use Tapatalk but it doesn't show the signature block. No worries from me and I believe Hal uses it for quick access much to his family's dismay I'm sure! :-)

Jim

Correct on all counts, Jim. And certainly no disrespect intended to David.

[VanDervort]

Not sure if this was shared yet, but its already spreading...

"The 47th Annual Father’s Day Fly-In has been cancelled this year only due to the cost for the FAA to staff our temporary tower. An Airport Appreciation Day will be held instead on Saturday, June 15th from 9 AM until 4 PM only. The Boy Scouts will hold their annual Pancake Breakfast."

http://www.fathersdayflyin.com/index.html?0

[prasmussen]

So....... Please forgive a slightly cynical response to this incursion of politics into our flying lives but.....suppose you took your $40 and went home because the EAA got out-maneuvered by the folks who do politics for a living. Wouldn't that make our voice just that much softer and those who arebehind this symbolic trifle happier??? Get your adversaries to fight among themselves. It's working in Syria after all. Just a thought.

[FloridaJohn]

So....... Please forgive a slightly cynical response to this incursion of politics into our flying lives but.....suppose you took your $40 and went home because the EAA got out-maneuvered by the folks who do politics for a living. Wouldn't that make our voice just that much softer and those who arebehind this symbolic trifle happier???
I don't think it will change their mood one way or the other. The FAA got exactly what they wanted even with the current large EAA membership base. Those large numbers didn't seem to have any effect, so I don't see how fewer members would change anything. It would be hard to imagine them being even less effective.

[vaflier]

I don't think it will change their mood one way or the other. The FAA got exactly what they wanted even with the current large EAA membership base. Those large numbers didn't seem to have any effect, so I don't see how fewer members would change anything. It would be hard to imagine them being even less effective.


The reason the numbers had no effect is that EAA management rolled over and gave in. Maybe it was the right thing to do and maybe it was not. In my opinion we just missed our one big opportunity to greatly influence aviation policy in the US. By giving in we have just said in effect that we will be happy to pay user fees of all kinds. I truly believe that the management of EAA has made the wrong choice. Yes I know that declining the generous offer from the FAA would have caused great financial pain, but in the end it would have been way cheaper than what it will cost us in the long run. Others have said that we all want government to cut spending and now we are getting what we asked for. I disagree, I think most people want to see the government cut the waste and theft . Giving people cell phones is hard to defend and then paying the bills for them as well. Giving benefits just because someone is lazy and will not work is wrong. Illegals getting free money and benefits including Social Security benefits is wrong. I will gladly pay my taxes but I have a right to expect the money to be spent wisely. Giving free furnaces to people and when you go to their home to install them you have to get the new Cadillac Escalade moved in order to get in the driveway. When you go in the house the first thing you see is the biggest flat screen TV that can be had. Then you see these same people in the grocery store buying junk food with their food stamps and beer and lottery tickets with $100 dollar bills. In my job I see many of these things on a daily basis. It is truly disgusting.

[Kevin O'Halloran]

We have arlready paid the FAA with our fuel taxes
Its just not EAA thats getting screwed
click the link below to see how the feds are destroying the Reno air races

http://www.aafo.com/hangartalk/showthread.php?11048-Unlimited-Saftey-Stand-Down

Kevin

[Mike M]

Hmmm. Suppose people are voting with their $ and saying "do not pay" ?

http://www.airventure.org/news/2013/130616_ticket-discount-extended.html

[PaulDow]

The time extension isn't something new. They did it last year.

http://www.airventure.org/news/2012/120616_tickets.html

and the year before
http://www.airventure.org/news/2011/110616_tickets.html‎ (http://www.airventure.org/news/2011/110616_tickets.html‎)

and the year before
http://www.airventure.org/news/2010/100616_tickets.html‎ (http://www.airventure.org/news/2010/100616_tickets.html‎)

and the year before
http://www.airventure.org/news/2009/090616_tickets.html‎ (http://www.airventure.org/news/2009/090616_tickets.html‎)

and... Well, you probably get the pattern.
It's almost as if the real deadline is June 30.

[Jim Hann]

The time extension isn't something new. They did it last year.

http://www.airventure.org/news/2012/120616_tickets.html

and the year before
http://www.airventure.org/news/2011/110616_tickets.html‎ (http://www.airventure.org/news/2011/110616_tickets.html‎)

and the year before
http://www.airventure.org/news/2010/100616_tickets.html‎ (http://www.airventure.org/news/2010/100616_tickets.html‎)

and the year before
http://www.airventure.org/news/2009/090616_tickets.html‎ (http://www.airventure.org/news/2009/090616_tickets.html‎)

and... Well, you probably get the pattern.
It's almost as if the real deadline is June 30.
:thumbsup:

[Jim Hann]

We have arlready paid the FAA with our fuel taxes
Its just not EAA thats getting screwed
click the link below to see how the feds are destroying the Reno air races

http://www.aafo.com/hangartalk/showthread.php?11048-Unlimited-Saftey-Stand-Down

Kevin
Kevin, the fact that a new group was formed almost immediately smells of politics and control issues at RARA, sad. I guess I won't get to see Reno in all its glory, was hoping to go in the next year or two.

From the auto racing world: I had a buddy who was an engineer in CART when the split happened in 1996. Open Wheel racing in the USA has still not recovered 17 years later even though there was "reunification" a couple years back.

I see no good coming from this, and RARA hasn't even gotten a bill yet for ATC services which will be added to the incredible insurance increase after the Ghost accident. Last one out please turn off the lights. :(

Jim