FAA Goes after Chicago on Meigs

Matt Whiting wrote:

bryan chaisone wrote:

Better late than never. A little is better than nothing.

I have to disagree and agree with the other poster who said this will
only encourage others. If they can get out of having to return all of
the federal airport funds and close and unwanted airport for a mere $30K
fine, then this is a great deal for them.

If a city tries it today, the fine is $900,000.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

G.R. Patterson III wrote:


Matt Whiting wrote:

bryan chaisone wrote:


Better late than never. A little is better than nothing.

I have to disagree and agree with the other poster who said this will
only encourage others. If they can get out of having to return all of
the federal airport funds and close and unwanted airport for a mere $30K
fine, then this is a great deal for them.


If a city tries it today, the fine is $900,000.

Still chump change for a city the size of Chicago. The fine should be a
percentage of the cities annual budget, something like 50% of its budget
would work for me. A fixed rate fine only deters the small towns and
cities.


Matt

Matt Whiting wrote:

A fixed rate fine only deters the small towns and cities.

And how many cities the size of Chicago have an airport that they might reasonably
want to tear up without warning?

Although I don't agree with you on that side of it, I *do* agree that the fine should
be set up in a different fashion. Like any fixed price, inflation will eventually
render it trivial for some people, and requiring an act of Congress to increase it is
not a good idea.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

That's good to hear George. Where did you hear/read that from? I
hope this will help dicourage any future incidents. There are less
and less places to land anymore. I'm glad I fly helos too! I better
declare/register a heliport on my property soon, before it gets hard
to do.

Bryan "Formerly known as 'The Monk'" Chaisone

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message ...
Matt Whiting wrote:

bryan chaisone wrote:

Better late than never. A little is better than nothing.

I have to disagree and agree with the other poster who said this will
only encourage others. If they can get out of having to return all of
the federal airport funds and close and unwanted airport for a mere $30K
fine, then this is a great deal for them.

If a city tries it today, the fine is $900,000.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

bryan chaisone wrote:

That's good to hear George. Where did you hear/read that from?

AOPA mainly. The "Meigs Legacy" ammendment was attached to the last FAA
Reauthorization bill. It increased the notice from 30 days to 90 and increased the
fine from $1,100 a day to $10,000 a day.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

Good deal. Thanks George.

Bryan

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message ...
bryan chaisone wrote:

That's good to hear George. Where did you hear/read that from?

AOPA mainly. The "Meigs Legacy" ammendment was attached to the last FAA
Reauthorization bill. It increased the notice from 30 days to 90 and increased the
fine from $1,100 a day to $10,000 a day.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.