04/26/2018
Our East Hampton saga continues. It has been my privilege for some years now to serve as an expert witness in federal court to NBAA, Helicopter Association International, and several aviation operators at East Hampton in successfully challenging illegal noise and access restrictions imposed at HTO. In my judgment, there is only one reading of the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990, which is that any US airport owner which wants to impose noise and access restrictions on its airport must petition the FAA pursuant to Title 14 CFR Part 161. Any airport means any airport, not just airports obligated to the US government pursuant to federal grant assurances, not just airports that have accepted federal funding within X number of years.
Having been correctly advised of the law in writing by their own learned aviation counsel, the Town of East Hampton nonetheless forged ahead to impose the most far-reaching airport noise and access restrictions within memory, even to the extent of adding days to the definition of "weekend" for the purpose of quiet operations. The leadership of the Town repeatedly assured their residents that the pursuit of the restrictions "won't cost you a dime," meaning that their legal and consulting bills would be paid for with airport revenue and not with the taxes paid by the citizens.
The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit unanimously ruled against the Town of East Hampton and struck down the restrictions across the board. No exceptions. The US Supreme Court denied a writ of certiorari. Case closed.
During these years of litigation, the Town of East Hampton spent over THREE MILLION DOLLARS pursuing these restrictions, knowing from the beginning that they were illegal in the opinion of their own counsel. And the Town's leadership continued to tell folks that it "won't cost you a dime."
Now, the FAA's Airport Director of Compliance has entered a Determination pursuant to Title 14 CFR Part 16 finding that the Town of East Hampton, having paid these millions with revenue generated by the airport, does not have to reimburse their airport account. In other words, revenue generated on the airport from airport users through fuel sales, hangar rentals, the provision of aviation goods and services, and otherwise, can be used to pursue illegal noise and access restrictions (restrictions which were known to the Town to be illegal from the start) rather than using those airport revenues, as required by federal law, to support, maintain, improve, operate, and expand the airport.
NBAA and its co-complainants are absolutely correct to challenge the Director's Determination. With all due respect to my friend Kevin Willis, the FAA Airport Director of Compliance, who did tons of important, valuable work for me and the Airports Organization when I was the FAA Associate Administrator for Airports, the Determination is wrong. It's wrong on the law. It's wrong on existing FAA Part 16 precedent. It's wrong on airports policy.
The taxpayers of the Town of East Hampton should prepare to have a $3 million bill hit their general fund.
Washington, DC, April 25, 2018 – The town of East Hampton, NY cannot divert airport revenue to pay for legal fees stemming from its unsuccessful effort to impose access restrictions at East Hampton Airport (HTO), the National Business Aviation Association (NBAA) stated today in an appeal to the F....