Intelligence Usually Rises Above...
 

Although, it can be a tough sled. Believe me Tom, most of us were absolutely crushed and dumb founded as to where the LAA was coming from.

They are counted on, and as well as the FAA in this Country to know just and very well what is relevant. None of us needs or wants any more ineptness from our Government agencies, especially in these most crucial times!

They need to get their heads on straight!!!!

Thank you for your update Tom!

Terry
_____________________________

Here's hoping you best success with your FAA decison appeal, and hopefully a design-that-fits can be found. Laconia only knows too well what it's like to be out-of-work, what with its' second highest jobless rate in the state, after the northern most county which is a serious basket case.

Getting skydivers into the area during April-May-June, and Sept-Oct-Nov would be a helpfull boost to the local economy. Last November was the warmest November ever, followed by a much colder December starting on Dec 1. Sixty year old ladies was playing tennis outdoors, wearing summertime shorts & tees, on last November 11 in low-70 degee temps.

Go for it......and don't quit, no matter how long a federal decision appeal can take...!

One giant step closer was made yesterday.
 

Greetings to all,

Just an update for those still interested. Our patience was rewarded yesterday, and an FAA agent from Flight Standards out of Washington DC came to the Laconia Municipal Airport and conducted a legitimate safety audit. In attendance were the Portland FSDO, the NHDOT Aeronautical Department, the local FAA Airport Division, the Laconia airport manager, a member of the LAA airport authority, the Laconia airport's legal council, owners of both FBOs, the Director of Government Relations for USPA and of course Mary and I.

Throughout the 3 hour meeting, it was made crystal clear to all in attendance by the FAA rep from Washington, that skydiving has a rightful place on municipal airports such as LCI and that the role of the airport sponsor is to promote all aeronautical activities, including skydiving. This point was emphasized throughout the entire proceedings.

I don't think we will ever win over a handful of certain local residents......but for those of whom that play any role in the airport's compliance requirements, atleast it was made clear yesterday that the FAA in Washington has an expectation that we will all work together to promote the airport and all aeronautical activities available to it.

Stay tuned........

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,
Tom

So does being made "crystal clear" have any teeth at all Tom? Does LCI have to comply now or does more arm twisting have to be done as in withholding federal funds?

Skydive Laconia
 

I don't want to speak for anyone on their side of the table, but I would have to guess (given the presence of the LAA's legal counsel), that they are all now fully aware that they will not be able to defend their recent denial using the previous report that was issued by the local FAA office.

As far as the message having any teeth, I cannot imagine that there was any person in that meeting that didn't leave it realizing that if skydiving is not allowed at LCI and Mary and I are forced to keep pushing this upstream at the FAA.......the end result will be a letter to the LAA from the FAA stating they have been found in non-compliance of their federal funding grant assurances and that they have 30 days to get into compliance (allow skydiving), or forfeit current federal funding and refund the last ten years of funding they received.

Personally I can't imagine why they would continue to try to cause us problems, but only time will tell.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

P.S. - I was reading in another thread that unemployment is up to 10% in Belknap County. If we were open, our season would have started April 1st, and there would be at a minimum 6 new jobs at our hangar, all filled by local residents. We'd have had customers coming up from Boston every week, buying gas, eating at the restaurants, staying at hotels, etc. If we were allowed to open in 2009 like we had originally planned, we'd have 12-15 jobs filled by local residents by now with over a 1000 customers having travelled to the area spending money at your businesses. Our season doesn't end until November 1st, so even after the Labor Day tourist evacuation of the Lakes Region, we would continue to be bringing customers to your businesses through Nov 1.

The reason I say this is that if I were you, I would all watch very closely the actions and votes of each member of the airport authority from here on out. Their actions affect you directly. The airport itself does not belong to 8 board members and two FBOs, the airport belongs to all of you.

I believe the seats on the board are appointed positions? Who makes the appointments? It's your economy that hangs in the balance of their actions and decisions, only you can hold them accountable.

Well, ... I wrote that way back in the beginning of his thread, with tongue in cheek. While I would not want to jump I appreciate that others love the sport.

TheNoonans have more than adequately addressed and explained any concerns I had about in later posts about the safety of jumping into a working airfield and they have done it in a manner that reflects the professionals that they are.

This quote disturbs me:
I think the FSDO needs some training in electronics and radio systems if they believe the parachutes would be a problem. There is more chance that an aircraft or heli would affect the signal than a parachute. Maybe they should ban aircraft! Yes, that is a foolish statement, just as foolish as banning parachutes. ( I worked on that equipment many years ago at NAS Quonset point before it closed.)

Hopefully this summer I will be able to sit outside at Sawyers, enjoying the ice cream, and watching the chutes float down to the airport. :)

An interesting afterthought, I have seldom seen aircraft comming or going while enjoying my ice cream outside at Sawyers.

Taking A Plus From A positive...?
 

Dear Tom, most of us are still very interested in seeing Skydive Laconia through it's fruition and to beyond be very successful.
All Entrepreneur's' should take a look in what you have put into the process... Facts, knowledge and The Great Spirit!
Fortitude, patience and resolve!

You have shown us all, and I for one believe that you are also looking out for our best interests!

Rock on, my friend!



Terry
_____________________

This thread is a bit old but I wonder if there is anything new.

:confused:

Skydive Laconia
 

Hi RI Swamp Yankee,

We're still here.....lol.

Basically, as we understand it, the FAA rep that came from Washington issued a report that, as we expected, found no reason why skydiving could not exist on the Laconia airport. The only thing left that could be debated on a local level was whether or not our presence would obstruct the IFR Glide Slope. I guess it's one of those "many, many concerns" that were implied but not stated back in Janaury of 2009......when this thread was first created. Anyways, based on our extensive research, we could find nothing that showed we posed any issues to the glide slope (more info on that back up the thread). And that the ILS approach was only critical when the ceiling was 800ft or lower and planes were flying in IFR conditions. The problem (for the otherside) is that we only skydive in VFR conditions, so that issue couldn't be used against us. Despite that being the only factual piece of information available about glide slopes, somewthere on their side of the table, someone is frantically looking for anything they can find to prove otherwise. If the otherside has shown anything, it is the power of a beauracracy to delay the just (us?). We are simply waiting for whatever info they believe is out there.......

So that's where we are at right now.

Not to worry though, as I said before, Mary and I are not going anywhere, and we have legal precendence on our side. There will either be skydiving on the airport in the near future or a forfeiture of their federal funding. I'd prefer they keep the funding and let us skydive, we'll see how they decide to handle it.

The dropzone I am at while we are forced to wait, had 500 tandem students (with additional non jumping guests) come out over the last seven days to skydive. Most drove 1-2 hours to get here. Thats about 750 people patronizing the local restaurants, bars, hotels and gas stations in the LAST WEEK. We expect another 1000 people this week. The 35 employees and contractors (that's 35 jobs) that I work with at our dropzone were all thrilled to have them. Skydiving based tourists and jobs should be at the Laconia Airport. Currently they are not...........

What cracks me up the most is that when I am not skydiving, I fly right seat in the Twin Otter and watch our plane share the same airspace with jets, both commercial Boeings and those little ones that the LAA is so afraid we'll scare away......all in harmony. Oh, and our runway is 13 miles from one of the largest international airports on the east coast. But hey, maybe jet pilots are simply trained better down here? (I'm kidding of course........we must actually be endangering them for our own financial gain, right? :D )

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

Skydive Laconia
 

Hi Folks, I have followed this thread and am wondering, anything new?

any news?
 

Just curious as well if anything is new on this subject

Skydive Laconia
 

Greetings to all,

Just wanted to follow up with an update. Please forgive my lack of activity here as of late, Mary and I, like many of you, are simply playing the waiting game. The FAA came up from Washington, DC last year and we all got together with the LAA and their lawyer. The FAA (federal, not local) stated, as we expected, that there wasn't any issue with skydiving on the airport. Local FAA admin still wanted to review our landing area proposal as they felt, without any factual evidence to support it, that our original landing area was too close to the ILS equipment and that our parachutes would affect it's operation. Rather than argue the fact, we simply submitted a new landing area proposal away from the ILS equipment. That was back in September 2010.......

Still waiting........

The good news is, we are still fully committed to bringing skydiving to the airport and have not been swayed an inch by all the red tape/delay tactics thrown at us. The majority voice continues to speak: The community believes the airport belongs to them, not a handful of people and pilots. Jobs and economic stimulus to the area. That's what we bring to the table.

In the interum, we continue to skydive over Mount Everest and continue to skydive locally in the US beside Leer jets, Life Flight helicopters, and air traffic ten times that of LCI. Landing on airports the same size or smaller. And guess what, not a single pilot was ever scared by the parachutes, and not single skydiver hit an airplane.......

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight.

Tom

Still Waiting....
 

I admire your tenacity and your patience as you wade through the muck of all the red tape.
Have you tried bribes? (just kidding!!) :look:

Does LAA stan for Local Airport Advisory?

LAA Stands For...
 

the Laconia Airport Authority.

I hope this helps.

Terry
______________________________

Close
 

I believe it is Laconia Airport Authority.

Add Vantage, A Bigger Picture...
 

The Noonans are welcome and my hope is that, they are included and find, that what they can bring us all will diminish some of the red tape that they have had to endure.
They offer an alternative and JOBS as well. Some may get rattled, who among us hasn't.
They will bring us photos that others haven't.
Terry
______________________

PS: Isn't this what PhotoPost is all about?

Skydive Laconia
 

Greetings to all,

I just returned from a skydiving trip and came across this article in the Citizen:

http://www.citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll...WS02/703249667

Apparently the Gilford Selectmen have voted not to endorse our proposal.

Mary and I find it curious for two reasons:

1) The current ADO review of the airfield is projected to be concluded in two weeks. Based on what has occurred within the FAA after that initial grossly erroneous report was published, it is our expectation that a fair, factual report will finally be issued that will find no reason for the landing area to be considered "objectionable". If the FAA finds no fault in our proposal, that is basically the last stall tactic that the LAA could throw in our way........

It is my guess that in an 11th hour strategy meeting behind closed doors, the idea came up to go the Selectmen and ask them to vote not to support us. I'm sure that request came with all sorts of horror stories of what skydiving was like 30 years ago. And the Selectmen voted to not support us.

This vote was done after we have had our proposal on the table for almost three years, so why now?

2) It was also made without any input from us the business owners. Why do you think that was? Perhaps the small group of people that don't want us there thought it would be easier to spread the fear if the Selectmen lacked the facts.

The point is this. Whether the Selectmen endorse us or not is not the issue. The issue is that they made a vote without any factual information. A vote that directly affects everyone of you in the community. We will bring jobs and $1,000,000 of economic stimulus to the area (and we can prove it). If I were a Selectman, even if I didn't like the idea and even if I was friends with the small group of residents of strong influence in the community that oppose us, I would still make sure I had every fact possible before voting on something that would affect my entire community. That did not occur. Does that concern anyone? It concerns me. Agreeing or disagreeing with our proposal is freedom of choice. They are elected officials, elected to vote their conscience to serve the community. I get that, and I respect that. But to vote on anything that will directly impact the financial future of the community without doing their due diligence is a questionable decision in my mind. What do you think?

selectmen@gilfordnh.org is their email address. I encourage you to write them. I'm not asking you to write them in support of us. We would be grateful if you did, but that's not what I'm asking. I'm asking you, the community they are elected to serve, to ask of your Selectmen how they justify voting on something they know nothing about, without hearing all sides of the story. If it was done with us, what other votes are being made that way? That's the issue that should concern us all.

Below is the email I sent to the Selectmen today:

Selectmen,

My name is Tom Noonan. My wife and I are the proposed business operators of Skydive Laconia. We read with great interest in the Citizen that the board recently voted not to endorse skydiving at the airport.

I am writing to inquire if the Selectmen have any interest in learning more about our business proposal and modern day skydiving operations. Selectman Hayes was quoted in the article citing a concern about the Fire Department's training facility. Modern parachutes have accuracy and directional control similar to aircraft, and pose no reasonable threat to the training facility, this is a quantifiable and provable fact. Certain people at the airport would like to lead you to believe otherwise, but there are no facts available to them to support their claim. Selectman Hayes is also quoted as saying he saw "several problems" with our proposal. We would very much like to meet with Selectman Hayes and the entire board to discuss any concerns that they may have with our proposal. We would also like to ask why we were not contacted to address any of their perceived problems?

The truth is, for three years, my wife and I have followed every protocol and step to bring a legal and viable business to the airport. Our business will infuse about a dozen new jobs in the town and about a $1,000,000 of economic impact to local Inns, Restaurants, and businesses. Selectman Hayes stated that our presence would affect the current businesses at the airport. The truth is, the airport is currently almost barren of businesses based on the current economy and the way the LAA rules over the airport. There are only two businesses on the airport at the moment, both long standing FBOs with flight schools. Thanks to federal funding and the LAA, they have the airport to themselves and want to keep it that way. That is where 99% of the minimal opposition to our business is coming from. Despite their claims, neither will be adversely affected by our business model. They are simply making uneducated claims based on what skydiving was thirty years ago, not what it is today. Your airport is designed to serve the community as a whole, not just those two business owners.

We understand our proposal is a classic case of NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) and that a select few people in town with positions of influence do not want us there. They have used every stall tactic available and now, as it seems the FAA will mostlikely issue a ruling in two weeks stating all of the "safety concerns" of the LAA are unfounded, they have turned to you to attempt to block us. Why else would the Selectmen choose now as the time to make such a vote on this issue as it has been on the table with the LAA for almost three years now?

It's a shame really. Not that you voted to oppose our operation, but that you did it without seeking out all of the available data. We are experts in our industry, and I can assure you a number of things:

1) The Laconia Municipal Airport is an ideal location in terms of size and air traffic to support a skydiving operation.
2) The current air traffic will not leave for other locations. (John Marriott's pilot will still fly his private jet into LCI if we are there.)
3) Student pilots will not be adversely at risk. Student training programs across the country operate at airports with skydiving operations and train students to safely fly at airports with parachutes.
4) Our business will bring 2000+ people to the area from April 1 - Oct 31st each season.
5) Our business will bring a dozen new jobs to the area and train locals to work anywhere in the world off season.
6) Despite the vocal minority, the vast majority of the community actually wants us at the airport. Please visit www.winnipesaukee.com and look under the General Discussions forum for "Skydive Laconia". It has been viewed over 20,000 times and 90% or more of the responses are positive.
7) The LAA has used "big government" bureaucracy to stall our proposal as long as possible and have been allowed to get away with it by the local FAA.
8) We have offered repeatedly to do demonstration skydives into the airport for the LAA and the community to illustrate how minimally intrusive our presence will be on the airfield. The LAA has flatly denied our request each time because they know as soon as the community sees how safe and accurate our parachutes are, the fear mongering will not hold any water any longer. If we do demonstration jumps, the LAA will no longer be able to cite "safety concerns" when we show the community there are none.

It is with all of that in mind, I would like to ask the Selectmen to consider the following:

The airport is intended to serve the community as a whole, not just a select few in a position of power and authority. As Selectmen, it is your duty to ensure that any decision that affects the community as a whole and it's economy, is reviewed to the fullest extent before issuing a ruling. I ask you to consider three requests:

1) Allow my wife and I an audience to address your concerns and allow us the opportunity to provide factual information to support our proposal.
2) Provide us a Town Hall open forum to address the community at large.
3) Allow us to make demonstration skydives onto the airport to illustrate how non-intrusive we really are. Invite current business owners in the area and airport business owners to observe.

If you do all of that, and then reach a conclusion as to whether or not you believe that we will be a good fit in the community, you will be serving the community as a whole. We humbly request that you consider that course of action.

Best regards,

Tom Noonan
Skydive Laconia


Lastly back to the thread: The "FAA" never issued a report saying the landing area was unsafe. A local branch of the FAA, called the "ADO" issued a report citing the landing area as "objectionable". Every line item used to find it objectionable was seen by "Higher Ups" within the FAA as being completely erroneous. The ADO, for reasons beyond my understanding, has elected to keep a grossly erroneous document in the public realm without issuing a retraction. I will post both the report and detail all of it's inaccuracies shortly. Suffice to say, the FAA at a Federal level is aware of all of this and we plan to take it to the top of that chain when this is over.

Skydive Laconia
 

For the conspiracy theorists out there......lol

I forgot to add this to my last post:

Somewhere around the summer of 2009, Mary and I submitted our Skydive Laconia business plan and proposal. We provided it to the airport manager who in turn (appropriately) provided it to the members of the LAA board.

Now fast forward to March, 2011. It seems somehow the Gilford Selectmen received a copy of our business plan and proposal. Selectman Hayes is even quoted in the paper as saying he found "many safety concerns" with our proposal. He obviously had it and obviously read it.

Odd thing is, we never submitted our business plan or proposal to the town Selectmen. That means someone else provided it to them. Someone else had it put on the March 23rd agenda and put to a vote. All without our knowledge........interesting, huh?

The first I was even told about the vote was a week after it happened with the link to the article was sent to me.

So, let me ask all of the conspiracy theorists out there a question........

Why would someone in an appointed position of authority (the LAA) "allegedly" provide someone else's business plan to a town selectmen committee and put it on an agenda and have it put to a vote, WITHOUT informing the persons that 1) created the proposal, 2) can provide FACTUAL information about the proposal and 3) have their contact information on the proposal?

If you would like to email the Laconia Airport Authority yourselves and ask them who provided the Selectmen our business plan without our knowledge, their email is:

laa@metrocast.net

Who knows they will probably email you a copy of our proposal too.......lol

In the end we are not bothered the Selectmen received a copy. We would have given them one ourselves. But all this back room politics is getting a little out of hand.

We are actually pretty amazed that our little business plan had created such a back room political spin to it. It just goes to show how resistant to change and forward progress some people truly are.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

Tom,I for one have skydived indoor and out of a plane. I think your plan brings a positive finacial impact to the region as well as a recreational one. I have just emailed the LAA requesting info from them reguarding weather a member had the item put on the agenda,if you pm me I will forward you a copy of the request. Rob

Really?
 

So Tom says "Modern parachutes have accuracy and directional control similar to aircraft". Apparently the chutes of the Golden Knights aren't as good: “Golden Knight gets stuck on ballpark flagpole”, Army Times, August 2010.

As for the Selectmen, perhaps they were influenced by this very recent incident; One dead after skydivers collide in Kentucky"

And he says: "We will bring jobs and $1,000,000 of economic stimulus to the area (and we can prove it)."

Please do so. I'm sure we would all like to see the "proof"!

Just my opinion: Small time thinking yields small brained results.

I was initially opposed to this Skydiving proposal. Then, I got motivated and did some research. My opposition was based on limited thinking. After digging into what is happening very safely throughout this country and planet, I have concluded this Skydiving proposal is a solid, well-thought out proposal. I also concluded that the FAA has significantly more knowledge about this than anyone on any local NH board. If it works for the FAA, it works for me.

I do not pay taxes to Gilford. I pay much more that my share to Laconia. However, this well-thought-out skydiving proposal has a regional impact, as it brings revenue into our area. It is time to look at what has been non-traditional revenue sources to support our local towns. Gone are the days of sticking uncontrolled, local expenses mainly on the backs of out-of-state property owners.

Who do these small thinkers on the Gilford Board of Selectmen think they are fooling? The Ames Farm thinking on their part is/was a mess, and now this! Please, if you are a Giilford Selectman, get the town out and fix the potholes and leave these issues to the proper federal authorities that are more able to think and make fair decisions. Your kangaroo court antics are getting tired! If you want a fair discussion, let both sides of the argument be heard. This is the USA, even in your little world of Gilford, NH.

For the record, I have no desire to jump out of a perfectly air capable aircraft and I have not met and do I know the Noonans. I just have had it with the small-brain thinking I see all too often around this area, an area where I have a significant, but dwindling, real estate investment.

R2B

Skydive Laconia
 

Hi Bill!

I missed not being able to exchange ideas with you on here, thank you for responding.

The Golden Knights in question were performing a stunt into a stadium. What they were doing was called CReW (Canopy Relative Work). It is a fringe discipline that has nothing to do with our skydiving proposal. Bringing a "2 Stack" into a Stadium is akin to an acrobatic pilot flying inverted 10 ft off the runway. When a stunt plane crashes, is that indicative of the safety of how you fly your plane? I don't think it is. Same situation with the example you posted. But thank you for sharing it, again you allow me the opportunity to share facts with the community.

Regarding Kentucky, there was an accident. Two skydivers collided in the air and one died. Same thing that happens when aircraft collide. Should we ban two planes over the airport at the same time? The facts, yes facts, are two airplanes collide with each other in flight about once every ten days in the US. If the Selectmen are that concerned with risk, then only one plane at a time should be allowed in the air over Laconia. And what about motorcycles? Should Gilford ban motorcycles and denounce bike week? People die doing all sorts of of things. The fact is skydiving collisions and fatalities are so less likely to occur than aircraft collisions and motorcycle collisions that they are not even in the same league based on volume.

I will be happy to prove my claims of economic stimulus, but not to you. You don't get that information Bill, sorry. Your not exactly unbiased here, ya know.....lol I will be happy to share that information with the Gilford Selectmen in a private or public forum. Perhaps you'll attend the meeting and share with the Selectmen the tremendous economic impact your aerial photo business has on the local community? I asked you awhile ago here, (and you never answered by the way), how many jobs does your aerial photography business create? How many people to you employ full time? I have answered just about every one of your off the wall fear inducing questions, how about doing me the courtesy of answering those two questions? What specifically does your business generate in the local community in terms of jobs and economic impact?

The day we open, that's eight new jobs. 3-6 months later, it will be up to 12 new jobs. Thats a fact.

As always, we wish you well Bill.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

P.S.- I don't think I ever said that skydiving was "safe". You can get injured or killed doing just about anything these days. My point to any and all is this: Like Bill, you can look far and wide and find something on the internet that looks scary, and when taken out of context as a stand alone situation, it can look like whatever he wants to paint it as (like the Golden Knights example he just posted). But the reality of these scare tactic examples is simply this, these things have nothing to do with our proposal. We don't bring anything more or less risky to the airport than the flight schools or Bike Week on the highways. (Less so in terms of risk to be honest). And reading these scare tactic examples of Bill's keeps bringing me to the same conclusion about him and the minority opposition, and that is that they really have no idea of what we are proposing to do and what modern day skydiving really looks like. Every example that is posted to scare you just further illustrates the point. If you knew what I knew and let me share that information and facts with you, everyone would be on the same page and we would be happily co-existing with the two FBOs on the airfield.

Skydive Laconia
 

Hi Rob

Thank you for your support and for sending an email to the LAA. My email is the_noonans@yahoo.com.

It really is amazing the lengths some people will go to resist change, even positive change. No where else in the country has there been a mass migration of GA pilots because a skydiving operation opened up. If anything GA flights will increase as some skydivers actually own planes and fly them too.

Competent flight instructors can train student pilots to fly with parachutes on the airfield. Imagine graduating from one of these two flight schools and the instructor saying "Congratulations on earning your really expensive private pilots license! Now here are a list of the 290+ GA airports across the country that you can't fly to because we didn't train you how to fly to airports with skydiving operations on the airfield. Remember! Airports with skydiving operations are not safe because those parachutes will distract you!"

I mean seriously, Middleton, RI (Newport, RI really) has one of the most beautiful airports in New England, and they have a skydiving operation with TWO planes dropping skydivers. No collisions, no scared student pilots, they enjoy an integrated and peaceful co-existence. If you train to fly at the Laconia flight schools, better cross off that airport in your flight planning, there are parachutes there!"

The irony is that being able to flight train on an airfield with parachutes will make the students BETTER pilots. It's actually a selling point for both flight schools. But, ugh, its change and it's having to work with others instead of having the place to themselves.

But don't worry, fuel prices are forecasted to spike ridiculously high this summer and there is another recession just around the corner equal to the one we just had according to the economists. Less and less people will be able to afford something as expensive as a Private Pilots license and renting aircraft.

Those that oppose us don't believe that having a relatively recession proof skydiving business isn't going to keep money and jobs in your local economy during hard times.......but that two flight schools and an aerial photographer will certainly do that for sure though........maybe John Marriott will open a hotel on the lake and bring more jobs? After all that's their argument. If we are allowed to operate, Mr. Marriott won't fly in to his beach house. (Trust me, he still will) But how many of you benefit directly from Mr. Marriott's private jet landing at the airport. How many of you benefit from his jet's $10,000 fuel sale one of the FBOs is so fearful of losing?

Oh well, stay tuned to see what their next trick will be!

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight!

Tom

Resident2b has it correct,for some unknown reason a few people that unfortunately have some sort of clout in Gilford won't remove the blinders and allow an open minded and informed process to take place. I for one applaud the efforts of the Noonans. In this very difficult economic envirment anyone looking to invest wisely in local economy should be applauded and encouraged. I hope you continue and are very successful in your endevor. I do not know the Noonans or am I affiliated with Skydive Laconia,but do support and encourage their effort and look forward to the grand opening. Rob

**********s Goes To R2B!
 

WOW! Did you ever hit the nail on the head, over here!

Everyone knows that Laconia Airport is FAA funded and as such, under a very clearly defined obligation in the Noonan's favor. Now that the Gilford "Selectmen, and very few others" have gotten involved publicly, to continue to Stonewall and hoard the Airport to themselves, they may find that they were instrumentally responsible for losing FAA funding, and may have to find part time jobs to foot the entire bill... Does anyone know the state of Gilford's taxes today?

The Noonan's are Saints, in my view in that they have shown such patience and resolve in this matter.
I'm here for Ya,
Terry
_______________________________

You know what....I have no clew why there is so much "Official" opposition to this proposal. Let's just look at it from this point of view.

SO: Will a sky diver come crashing through the roof of my house nearby...? Will YOU DIE as a result of a mistake by a skydiver misjudging his landing point.

FACT: These Skydiving Tourists are NOT jumping out of airplanes on their own.

These Skydiving Tourists are jumping in Tandem with professional jumpers. What does THAT mean...? That means that the Tourist Jumper is Hugging a Professional jumper that is controlling the whole event. TWO jumpers on ONE parachute with a Professional controlling the jump. That's what Tourist Skydiving is about.

So the cynical part..if these people want to risk their lives..just like motorcycle riders do every time they ride.. why get in their way.....? They're not getting in Your Way..are they...?

For the Record: I am a Private Pilot AND a motorcycle rider with over 200,000 "touring" miles. :) NB

Just wrong!
 

What I don't understand about the whole thing is how the board of selectmen could vote on something without even letting them present there side of there story. That to me is wrong on so many levels! And no I don't know the owners and I would never jump out of an airplane, but come on they deserve to be at least heard.

As a Gilford resident I plan on contacting the selectman's office and express my support for this new business. I really believe that they have not heard the "whole story". I plan to ask that they hold a full public hearing on this.

http://www.gilfordnh.org/Public_Docu...omm/selectmen2

There is a link on the site to send comments. ;)

The meeting notes for the 3/23/11 meeting have not yet been published.

SteveA,

Since you are a resident of Gilford, they should at least listen to you.

I do not think it was right for them to render a decision supporting one side without having any time or desire to listen to the other side. Their creditability as a group is very poor and sinking.

I expect much more from my public officials and when I think they are not doing their job, I let them know.

Thanks for stepping up.

R2B

This is almost like the speed limit argument.
So you cite 2 skydiving accidents. How many successful skydives are there in a year? What exactly are the numbers?
I would be willing to bet that skydiving is safer statistically then driving in my car.

They have no credibility. Gilford Town Officials think they are "Kings" and they like to "rule the kingdom" as such. I've had my run-ins with them as well, and know many other business people in town that have had negative experiences with them. It's high time that they get replaced with pro-business members.

Skydive Laconia
 

For those of you that live in Laconia, I thought I would offer this post. The Airport Authority consists of mostly appointed positions. The Mayor of Laconia is one of the non appointed seats. I think it's seat of the Chairman, but I cannot find anyone willing to confirm that.

With that said, I have just submitted the following email to the Mayor of Laconia at citycouncil@city.state.nh.us :

Mr. Mayor,

My name is Tom Noonan. My wife and I submitted a request to operate a skydiving business with the LAA back in late 2008. We have since attended multiple LAA meetings and have been met with a tremendous amount of resistance from the board.

I am writing you today to discuss a specific issue and ask for your official opinion as the Chairman of the Airport Authority.

It seems that recently either the airport manager, or a board member of the LAA provided the Gilford Selectmen a copy of our business proposal without our knowledge or consent. Further, our proposal was then placed on the town's agenda and voted on. All without our knowledge. We believe this was done because a decision from the FAA is due in a few weeks that will most likely pave the way for our approval.

We consider the actions of the person or persons that submitted our proposal and orchestrated our exclusion from the town meeting process as a breach of the ethical responsibilities of the LAA. We are deserving of the same rights and due process of any other business on the airfield. In this case a concerted effort was clearly made by the LAA (in part or in whole) or the Airport Manager (or both) to attempt to defraud the Gilford Selectmen of the opportunity to learn about a business that is projected to bring $1,000,000 of economic impact to the region and a dozen new jobs.

The spirit and intent of the LAA is to ensure that all aeronautical activities receive the same fair and impartial treatment and due process. The LAA has made a clearly concerted effort over the last three years to ignore that role in favor of protecting the business interests of select few people of power in the community. This last example is the most bold to date, and I am asking you to make a statement on the actions, to go on record.

If in your investigation, you find these allegations are true (which they are and easily can be proven), I would ask that you as the Chairman of the Airport Authority, remove any member of the board that was involved in this latest attempt to fraudulently derail our proposal. To do anything less is to endorse fraud and the failure of the board members involved to live up to the role and responsibility of the position they were appointed to.

Your predecessor Matt Lahey ignored virtually every attempt I have ever made in the past to communicate with him regarding the conduct of the members of the LAA. I sincerely hope that your position will not be the same. (At a minimum, I would like to ask that you at least respond to confirm receipt of this email. Mr. Lahey would not even respond to confirm receipt of our emails, despite his secretary confirming well after the fact that he received them all.)

If you wish to learn more about our struggle and the positive economic growth we are trying to bring to the area, I invite you to visit the website: www.winnipesaukee.com, click on the "General Forums" and then open the thread entitled "Skydive Laconia?". It will chronicle the vast majority of the struggles we have been forced to endure.

Thank you for your time. I can be reached by phone or via email any time. I would like to offer you and the Laconia council the opportunity to ask questions of our proposal and learn more about our proposal. We are happy to meet with you at your earliest convenience. Our business will bring positive economic contributions to the entire region, not just Gilford, hence our treatment by the LAA and the breakdown of this process affects your citizens' economic future as well.

Best regards,

Tom Noonan


I encourage anyone that lives in Laconia to contact the city council and share their thoughts on this process with the Mayor and City Council.

Blue skies, to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

Lets see two incidents in the last 9 months.....I don't think I have gone a week in the last nine months without seeing a picture of at least one upside down crashed private plane on the news with the pilot dead or at least signifcantly injured.
I have no horse in this race...all these folks are trying to do is make a living

Tom, I think that your approach to the Mayor is too informal. Although more and more business is done through informal emails, dealing with government is still the domain of real mail.

I would send the Mayor a concise, polite letter by certified mail. Ask him to do very specific things, acknowledge your letter, acknowledge or deny the transfer of the business proposal, and ask for redress.

If you want to impress him with your struggle as chronicled on this website, printout and send just the key excerpts. I would not expect the Mayor to research the forum to find why your struggle is important to Laconia.

I would then send a copy of the letter to the town newspapers and his political rivals.

Skydive Laconia
 

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

Mr Mayor and Selectmen,

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

In the document section 13 it states:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Respectfully submitted,

Tom Noonan

Skydive Laconia
 

Now for the bad news.......lol

It seems during all this down time, the LAA has scoured the internet to find any and all cause to deny us. What a surprise......lol.

They have issued yet another denial of our proposal, this time with pictures and charts! Before the FAA has even ruled on the landing area. How's that for letting the FAA due it's due diligence and rule on safety issues.

The best parts are that

1) They actually quoted my postings here on the Winnipesaukee forum, which means they actually read the posts. (Hope it wasn't billable hours). And of course I am quoted out of context. The paragraph somewhere up there where I referenced the economic impact of landing off the airport and having to drive back to the dropzone as being "uneconomical". The quote of course stops short of somewhere else in the above thread where I state (as an industry expert) that 99% of skydiving operations land on airports and AOPA actually states that landing on the airport is the safest place to land parachutes.

2) They used that grossly inaccurate ADO report that I mentioned earlier as the primary basis for their denial. Big government bureaucracy alive and well......lol

So, for now anyways, the airport belongs to two FBOs, an aerial photographer, an airport manager and the airport authority. It's their kingdom, we are not welcome.

Of course the next step is to patiently wait until April 15th for the FAA to state it's findings. And then the fun really begins.......

Now my final thought on the report just issued by the LAA, they have yet again positioned themselves to deny us without ever having actually seen a skydive made on the airport. That's very impressive.

So, now it's all out there for you the community. What you do with all of this information is up to you. Maybe the Laconia/Gilford area is really it's own universe. Maybe small town alliances really are the status quo. Maybe the community is fated to let the masses bear the grunt of the burden while the privileged few reap it's rewards.

That's up to all of you at this point. You have a Mayor and group of Selectmen that you can turn to and voice your opinion.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight
Tom

Tom,I emailed you the response I got from my email. IT IS TIME FOR THE LAA TO GET THEIR HEADS OUT OF THE SAND AND LOOK AT THE FACTUAL RESULTS OF THE FAA REPORT. Nothing more nothing less,to make these decisions without the final report is like shooting craps with loaded dice we already would know the outcome. Unfortunately the FAA report is needed to make an educated decision. My question since someone on the board is reading this thread is why the rush,is maybe you want to open a skydive operation now that it's been shown to be viable?? All I ask as a resident,taxpayer and voter in this state is our elected and appointed offials play by the same rules that govern the citizens by. Why is that concept lost on the LAA?

Skydive Laconia
 

Hi robmac,

I didn't receive your email at the_noonans@yahoo.com, perhaps you can resend when you have a chance.

To robmac and the others that have sent your emails of support, we sincerely thank you.

For what it is worth, trust me, this isn't over by a long shot. I've been saying for a long time that Mary and I have the resolve to see this through and that hasn't diminished at all. We have patience and ample resources to see this through.

To be clear, the LAA denying us was 100% expected and planned for. That they chose to publish their denial prior to the FAAs report being issued......well, let's just say, we aren't disappointed they chose to do that. It doesn't make any sense to us for them to do that, but we are very very glad they did. I mean really, they could have waited until after the FAA report was issued, which would have atleast been procedurally more sound. But it's published now and it's out there ahead of the FAA report. I guess we should thank them for that in the long run........lol

We remain unemotional in this process, I wonder if that the same case on the otherside?

Anyways, as I said, trust me, this isn't over by a long shot. Skydiving may not be on the airport May 1st as we had hoped, but it will be there sooner or later........

Thank you all again for your support and encouragement. Contact your Mayor and Selectmen, voice your opinions, for us (or against us Bill).

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

Edit to add: We are amazed and flattered that this thread has been viewed 850+ times in the last 24 hours. So much for our little "dirt road" business not being of any consequence or concern to the community as a "certain someone" suggested a long time ago....lol

Please...Close this thread already!!! :rolleye2: