We The People

[DanielP]

Jerry,

So, are you volunteering to pursue these council members, to get feedback?

Dan

[JerryCarr]

Dan, I think someone with more knowledge and passion on this issue might do better. Here is a link to the Council with contact info:

http://www.hawaii-county.com/council/districts.htm

Cheers,
Jerry

[PunaLover]

Gee, why do I feel like I'm always peeing on the fire? Before the "war" when the fly overs weren't just the ocassional tourist it felt like we were in iraq right here in HPP. Minutes apart back and forth.

There was a public hearing at UHH for the ATMP, the Air Tour Management Plans, for National Parks. There were the usual agency representatives, one guy from Orchidland, one from Volcano one guy from Eden Rock and only me from HPP. I still have the meeting on tape. Them listening to public testimony seemed to have no effect. Had to get rid of my cockatoos, they went nuts when the choppers used to fly grids.

Those who can afford to fly around in choppers will support their use.
Those only abused by their use, won't.

Whatdayado shoot the pidgeon?

[DanielP]

punapetah,

I had no knowledge of this meeting, as I am only on island 4 months/year and then am without internet. Makes it hard to be in touch.

If meetings have been held and there has been little community involvement, then those in power must feel that the issue is moot.

If the CAOA (or others)can muster community support and convince the county council to hold a hearing, then perhaps the ball might get rolling.

If this whole issue's support is us whining to each other on line, then I,m Pau. Better things to do. I will just have to try to ignore the helicopters give them my hand gestures and stink-eye.

I am off island now, but will be back next month. Perhaps a letter to the council members to get an initial response on the issue would be easy enough and would give us? an idea of how to proceed.

I might do that. Hmmm

Dan

[mella l]

quote:

---

Gee, why do I feel like I'm always peeing on the fire? Before the "war" when the fly overs weren't just the ocassional tourist it felt like we were in iraq right here in HPP. Minutes apart back and forth.

There was a public hearing at UHH for the ATMP, the Air Tour Management Plans, for National Parks. There were the usual agency representatives, one guy from Orchidland, one from Volcano one guy from Eden Rock and only me from HPP. I still have the meeting on tape. Them listening to public testimony seemed to have no effect. Had to get rid of my cockatoos, they went nuts when the choppers used to fly grids.

Those who can afford to fly around in choppers will support their use.
Those only abused by their use, won't.

Whatdayado shoot the pidgeon?

---

Could we have a reference point for this get together. When was it held????

Thanks Bob amd all! I really like the tone of this thread. It seems a likely direction for positive action. I tend to scream into the dark, so I find this information and direction, focused and user friendly!

Use the tools in place, not having to reinvent the wheel. Wish I was there to do some of the lifting. I'm trying to get my issue settled, and getting there as fast as I can.

mella l

[Bob Orts]

I did see a few public meetings regarding the ATMP. If these were the meetings, the purpose was to hear, not necessarily debate. All required meetings have concluded, all required studies are completed, and all required input has been received. I was told that one NP on the east side already has a new restriction under ATMP and is being evaluated for compliance. Maybe Darl can fill us in. Otherwise they said it looks good for HI and ATMP implementation

Back to the topic-
I was told that unless there is a single point of contact (person, group, or body), it's nearly impossible for good information to get disseminated and ideas implemented. The recommendation based on similar concerns in other parts is a single body whose purpose is to deal with the issue from a neutral viewpoint. Many locations have a group, DOT, council or other government body that acts as the liaison between the people, government, FAA, elected officials, and the people. The key was they have to be neutral (as best they can being citizens impacted) and willing to listen to what can and can not be done and evaluate suggestion based on rational thought versus emotions.

So, we're back to the beginning.
1- Private organization sanctioned by the county to deal with air overflight issues.
2- An Independent County Commission formed to deal with air overflight issues.
3- An office within an existing County Agency formed to deal with air overflight issues.
4 - ????
What say ye?

[HADave]

Hi Bob If I understand any of this report It appears that a noise abatement was included in SFAR71 safety issue and The FAA's position was because of the language they wouldn't concern themselves with the issue of noise regardless how, who or what it impacted. So there is room for change w/regards to noise but it appears it must enter under its own issue. The FAA has also deemed it, in Hawaii as of 1994 a min altitude and min standoff distance of 1500 ft and 300 ft in non populated areas, I forget the variance maybe 300 ft. However it or I haven't found it yet, does not define a landing or what space below the harddeck is called but the state has jurisdiction (SP) on unauthorized landings in residential areas.

Special operating rules for air tour companies in Hawaii

http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgFinalRule.nsf/0/0596a838bbbfad4e86256dcd00510fd0!OpenDocument&ExpandSection=6

HADAve



Edited by - HADave on 11/13/2007 17:21:23

Edited by - HADave on 11/13/2007 17:23:14

[Bob Orts]

Your reading is correct. The problem with SFAR-71 is it's now just history since it has terminated and isn't in effect anymore. It was an excellent piece that still can serve as a starting point. And I think this is what I'm driving towards. Information is key. Right now there's no single entity that can be relied upon for information or to advance realistic suggestions.

From my experience, this emotional free for all, doesn’t have a chance in the world because it ranges from doable too insane all competing against it's own interest. I believe without a single entity recognized as point of contact on this issue, nothing will ever get done.

Do you think one or the other of the above is a good place to start? If not, any suggestion would be welcomed. As you see, this thread isn’t about complaining but acting so anything, and I mean anything, to get something viable off the ground is needed

Thanks.

[PunaLover]

mella
this was 3-4 years ago. Only the war has made a dent in the Puna fly overs mauka up to Volcano, doesn't effect lower puna unless they're circling around?
Darl, do they circle or go stright out and back?
That ATMP hearing wasn't widely advertised, I got it through the coconut wireless.

[DanielP]

O.K. Here is a shot; Some editing or fine tuning might be helpful, but, say a few folks were to send a document such as this requesting that the county council respond and see what happens?

Cut and Paste and send to the folks at the link below.

As much as I have now, but something



REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ESTABLISHMENT OF A SPECIAL COMMISSION TO STUDY THE IMPACTS OF HELICOPTER FLIGHTS ON THE CITIZENS AND ENVIRONMENTS IN THE COUNTY OF HAWAII

To:
The county commissioners of the great County of Hawaii

I/we the undersigned residents, property owners, and voters request that the county council of the County of Hawaii, address the issues of helicopter overflights within the county by holding public hearings and appointing a special board to study and make recommendations to the council with regard to possible legal regulations needed due to the increasing impacts by the helicopter tour industry upon us.



http://www.hawaii-county.com/council/districts.htm