WELCOME GUEST  |  LOG IN
carpetman, hamptons, flooring
27east.com

427 Comments by localEH

<<  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6  |  7  |  8  |  9  |  10  |  11  |  12  |  >>  

Accident Report Revealed Pilot Battled For Clear Visibility In Quogue Plane Crash

Brandon if he had what is called partial panel loss, meaning some of his critical instruments became inoperable then when he entered into IMC (instrument meteological conditions - basically clouds) then he could lose his situational awareness of which direction the plane was flying in three dimensional space. Without our instruments we can’t tell if we are climbing or descending or turning right or left when we get into IMC. Imagine having a blindfold over your eyes and try to drive from your house to your office without hitting a single thing. The pilot here had to descend into IMC to get back on the ground but if he couldn’t trust his attitude indicator or his airspeed indicator he could have ended up in a 1G tight spiral that eventually became too fast for the structure of the aircraft and tragically the wings would detach. " Oct 28, 18 11:20 AM

Zeldin, Gershon Spar, Parry In Home Stretch Of Campaign

I still don’t understand liberal “logic” on this. If my father robbed a bank/defrauded thousands and stole their money/embezzled or did some other illegal act where he ended up with several millions that he only got through illegal means when I was a small child, and because of that illegal money I grew up to be a teen who drove a BMW, lived in a big mansion, had three vacation homes, had expensive jewelry, and went to a luxury private school. Are you saying if my father was finally busted for his illegal and criminal activity, I should be able to keep all of these things and whatever amount of the illegal money I needed to continue my lifestyle? How is that different than an illegal child getting all the benefits of free food, education,healthcare, housing, societal welfare and other things our country provides that he would have never had in his native Honduras but for his parents engaging in illegal activity and breaking the law?" Nov 1, 18 6:27 PM

At Candlelight Vigil On Thursday, Show Of Strength And Unity Is Called The Best Response To Violence

While this is a heartwarming thing and they type of thing we should see more often to remind us of our humanity, why was there no vigil in our area for the 26 people killed in the church in Southerford Texas? More than twice as many powered killed in their house of worship there yet no one lit a single candle for them out here. I’d hate to think your thoughts and prayers and vigils were only given based upon the victims’ political affiliation... " Nov 4, 18 10:35 AM

Umm of course Gerson’s minions did it. How is that even doubted by anyone with a shred of common sense. That is exactly the textbook kind of manipulation his supporters think is warranted in their “By any means necessary” mindset. " Nov 4, 18 10:31 PM

And Louis Farrakhan is a leader in your party, who is loved and admired by so many others in your party's leadership like Obama, Clinton, Waters, Meeks, and Ellison. Meanwhile Mr. Farrakhan just led a chant of "Death to America" and "Death to Israel" in Iran this weekend, while saying he is "anti-termite" referring to Jews as being termites. " Nov 5, 18 1:19 PM

How about you name a eo nazi white supremacist who currently has a seat on the local or national Republican Party since you are the one who started the conversation that way. An actual one who has proclaimed said position publicly, not just your continued frothy mouthed screeching about Trump. Or do you just want to stick with moving the goalposts and deflecting the discussion to avoid having to acknowledge your party’s own anti-semitism problem. G-d forbid you actually just admit that both sides have outliers who don’t represent the main core of the party. " Nov 5, 18 2:46 PM

UPDATE: Lee Zeldin Defeats Perry Gershon In 1st District Congressional Race

I’ll be so glad when this election is over. The only thing worse than the vitriolic, angry, and uncivilized behavior of people during this election are those never ending friggin election Robocalls! I think we can all bipartisan agree those Robocalls need to be stopped! " Nov 6, 18 12:51 PM

Those Robotexts too! I’m waiting for a drone to fly by and do Robosemaphore in my backyard next. " Nov 6, 18 4:31 PM

Zeldin Wins Election To Third Term, But Democrats See Other Victories

You say "nationalist" like it is the same as "child molester". Since when does being proud of America, appreciative of our citizens, grateful for our achievements, and supportive of our sovereignty such an appalling concept that needs to be attacked and vilified? Do you hate America that much? " Nov 7, 18 1:28 PM

What's Next For Perry Gershon

The only reason he got so many absentee votes was because the Democrat party unabashedly and admittedly went to NYC and had tens of thousands of city people re-register to vote in Suffolk County instead of where they actually live in NYC in an attempt to take the seat away from Republicans. There are significantly more Republicans who actually live and work out here in Suffolk, so to get more votes the Democrat party told the NYC Democrats that their vote in NYC was just a grain of sand at the beach and helped them re-register out here to force their city "values" on the locals out here. Now they are the ones who will be voting for things like school budgets and local issues even though they have absolutely ZERO connection with the area or skin in the game out here. Dirty politics. " Nov 13, 18 1:53 PM

Except none of them pay one red cent in taxes out here either. If they don’t live here and have no connection to the area they sure aren’t paying any local taxes here. They were just helped by the Democrats to re-register out here even though they live in NYC. Some may occasionally rent a place here in the summer but most don’t even do that. How is that not unethical. If Republicans went to various deep red towns in upstate NY and had residents there register to vote here, even though none of those voters live here, and did it for the sole purpose of padding the Republican vote numbers you would be totally ok with that?" Nov 14, 18 9:17 AM

How am I wrong. You yourself just posted the exact quotes from the Democrats saying they were intentionally re-registering people from the city who are not real residents and inclu those who only RENT here in order to stuff the ballot box. Since when do summer house renters pay taxes locally? So you have no problem with Republicans getting tons of Republican NYC residents who rent summer houses out here to register to vote out here. Since Republican voices are drown out in NYC we can definitely solidify the Republican hold out here. Plus we will have your support. " Nov 14, 18 8:52 PM

North Forkers Berate FAA Over East Hampton Helicopter Traffic

This is what the FAA has to deal with. A dozen screaming banshees who spout false facts they make up themselves and who have zero interest in compromise or resolution of anything. If the FAA offers to route traffic in multiple places across the north fork so it’s not just in one spot, McCaskie and McGreevy scream Nooooo. If the FAA proposes to route some of the traffic around Orient Point, Irving screams Noooo. If the FAA proposes to route traffic to the south, Trunzo screams Nooooo. They are all members of the same group - a group dedicated to the closure of the airport in order for its members like Trunzo and Dalene to build hundreds of McMansions on the airport land to make themselves a huge personal profit. They don’t care about the economic damage to the rest of the community, the loss of jobs, the loss of medivac services, the loss of animal rescue services, or the loss of emergency services an ingress/egress in the event of a natural disaster. The FAA has no chance of ever developing a helicopter solution because they simply don’t ever want one. Their goal is not noise reduction - it is getting their hands on the land to develop it." Nov 23, 18 9:16 AM

Thanks for confirming everything I just said with your comment. At least you admit you have zero interest in finding a compromise or reasonable resolution and your sole intent and goal is to close the airport. You’re happy to screw the community, so long as you get what’s best for you. Unadulterated greed. " Nov 23, 18 11:30 AM

Hey Fred let’s talk facts. How many complaints were there again... Oh yeah only 300 households out of the entirety of Long Island from Queens to Montauk. Of those around 30% only complained ONCE in a whole year. The other 58% came from just TEN people and 35% came from just FIVE people. You can’t deny the facts that came straight from the town’s own consultants. Sorry that your massive anti-airport marketing campaign that you’ve spent over $100k on has not borne fruit. Also your efforts to completely shut out and silence local pilots, because you know we keep bringing reasonable solutions to the table, has completely failed. You don’t want solutions, you want the land, so you just keep trying to shut us down. Sorry but we will NOT let you redevelop our community’s critically important airport for your own greed. " Nov 23, 18 11:47 AM

Your logic makes no sense. Kathleen Cunningham is one of the principal leaders of your anti-airport group. All you are doing is quoting one of the very 10 people who make nearly all the complaints. That’s like saying water is wet because it’s made of water. " Nov 23, 18 2:31 PM

Air Noise Report has long since been discredited as unreliable and is not considered by the towns consultants. It just displays a map of all aircraft flying in the vicinity of Long Island and lets people tap a plane to report a complaint. It did not require people to identify themselves or their location when they made the complaint. That led to certain people *cough* having their friends all over the country and world tap on every plane in the sky to file thousands of complaints even though they were nowhere near the area (often not even in the same state or country). Those people would just spend they day tapping planes even if they never heard one in an attempt to manipulate the complaint numbers. The FAA doesn’t consider fake data. " Nov 23, 18 2:40 PM

Hahaha! If you can’t tell the difference between a court of law and a small town’s internal evaluation of a local concern, then you need more help than I can provide you. But if you want a hint, go to htoplanning website and look at all of the reports by the town’s consultants and see how they disregard Air Noise Report’s data. " Nov 23, 18 8:47 PM

We can all agree that the helicopters are very noisy and that having them approach on the same route over the same houses is unfair to the people who live under those routes. Ira Rennart’s S-92 is a monster that everyone hates (it literally will blow us small planes away). But if helicopter noise was really your concern then why would you demand that the whole airport be closed. No discussion, no problem solving, no middle ground. Why wouldn’t you want to work with our local aviation community to come up with a solution that reduces the noise over those highly affected people? Last fall an easy solution was proposed by us local pilots and local ATC - raise the tower height so the tower can see 360 degrees, especially to the south, which allows ATC to bring helicopters in from all possible directions in all weather rather than forcing traffic into a single corridor. So instead of the same people getting 20, 30, 40 helicopters passing overhead they will only have 4 or 5. But your group said NO WAY and shut down the discussion instantly because noise mitigation wasn’t your goal - airport closure and a land grab is all you want. " Nov 23, 18 9:03 PM

Wainscott Water Contamination Investigation Looks At Sand Pit

We have said from the beginning that the contamination did NOT come from aviation activities at the airport. That it came from the use of fire suppression foam during firefighter training south of the airport (no fault of the firefighters either since the foam was legal, works well on roof fires and car fires, and they had no reason to suspect it was a contaminate). Now we have been proven RIGHT! I wonder if Overby and Bragman will now allow the much needed airport maintenance to take place since they have no reason to hold the airport funds hostage any longer. Doubtful since they will just find a new reason to confiscate the airport funds and refuse to do maintenance. I also wonder if their buddies at SayNo will publish a retraction for all the false and slanderous ads they put out last year blaming local pilots and aviation activities for the contamination. Pigs may get PPLs first. " Nov 29, 18 11:31 AM

Deer Go Rogue On The Roads And Elsewhere

So much better than controlled hunting... *sarcasm*" Dec 3, 18 10:50 PM

ARF Has No Shortage Of Black Cats Up For Adoption

Black cats are the absolute BEST! They are smart, have lively personalities, and are very affectionate with their servants ... I mean owners. I’ve been immeasurably blessed to have had two in my life. Please go adopt one of these kitties if you are wanting to add a little furry love in your life. " Dec 20, 18 2:07 PM

East Hampton Town Sues Two Local Fire Departments, Sand Pit Owner And Chemical Companies Over Wainscott Contamination

Really Bragman, suing our poor volunteer firemen for using a product that was approved and effective against things like car and roof fires? The firemen didn’t know it was a contaminant. Plus we are still waiting for Bragman to release the airport maintenance funds he is holding hostage over this issue. Neither Bragman, Overby, nor their buddies in the anti-airport land grab faction have recanted the multitude of accusations they made against local pilots and airport operations claiming we were responsible for the contamination despite it being abundantly clear aviation operations had nothing to do with it. What a mess Bragman has turned into. " Dec 29, 18 12:25 PM

Except that is not how insurance defense works in the real world. IF the fire departments have CGL policies they will likely be riddled with exclusions, such as the standard ISO Pollution Exclusion, which will mean the insurance companies’ response to the claim will be an immediate denial of both coverage and duty to defend. The fire departments will then have to retain their own coverage counsel at their own expense just to fight the insurance companies to try to get them to participate, which will still be unlikely if they haven’t purchased the additional pollution coverage at an outrageous cost. Plus in the meantime they will still have to retain litigation counsel at their own expense to defend against Bragman’s suit. " Dec 29, 18 3:37 PM

That is 100% INACCURATE AND FALSE! The crash truck only uses WATER. Which you would know if you had ever been to any of the airport events and seen it demonstrated. But spreading false information about the airport is what you seem to do best. " Dec 29, 18 7:06 PM

Not to mention we haven’t had an “aircraft fire” at the airport in well over 40 years. The one the crashed north of the airport a several years ago only had a small fire that was put out with water. " Dec 29, 18 7:11 PM

With CDCH Building, East Hampton Sees Opportunity And Challenges

How about adding a kidney dialysis center. There are literally NONE past Southampton hospital. " Dec 31, 18 7:37 PM

State Finds High Concentrations Of Chemical Pollution At East Hampton Airport

So if a single use of the firefighting foam can contaminate a whole area then does every single location in East Hampton, Wainscott, Amagansett and Montauk for the past 30 years where there was a car fire, roof fire, and other fire where foam was used now qualify as a contaminated zone that is polluting the ground drinking water?" Jan 4, 19 12:24 AM

You are spot on about use of the phosphate fertilizers for years and now we are seeing the consequences. But both the area at the approach end of runway 16 (had to close the runway to use) and the now parking lot of the terminal (it was just an empty field when they did the mass casualty drill before the terminal was built in the mid/late 90s, article has the date wrong) were actually only used one time each for firefighter training (we’ve never had an actual crash). So it seems concerning that if the DEC can find such levels of the PFOS after a single use from 20 years ago, how many other hot spots are all over the area from other fires where they used foam? " Jan 4, 19 8:52 AM

Community's Concerns Intensify Regarding Bridgehampton Gateway Complex

Ah the Hamptons. Land of perpetually outraged CAVE dwellers (Citizens Against Virtually Everything). They scream “I don’t go to the gym - how dare you propose to build something I personally would not use!” Now let’s all go back to worshiping at the alter of Jeff Bezos since we have zero local business or infrastructure. " Jan 28, 19 2:00 PM

I absolutely agree that development should be controlled and we need to be very careful to protect against overdevelopment. But there is a huge difference between overdevelopment and zero development or undevelopment, which is what all the CAVE dwellers out here want. Just last week they secretly used $5M of CPF funds to buy only one acre on Ocean near Lily Pond in order to tear down the existing mansion and let the land return to being overgrown scrubgrass filled with ticks. I’m sure it was only coincidence that the owner had not been able to sell the property on the market for that price and that it was an arms length transaction - but we’ll never know because it’s all been done in secret and the identities of the owners are hidden." Jan 28, 19 7:05 PM

UPDATE: Lee Zeldin, Ilhan Omar Trade Barbs Following Subcommittee Appointments

So you agree with Rep. Omar's comments on taking action against Israel, on calling Israel evil, on support for ISIS terrorists, and on support for Maduro's reign of terror against his own people. Glad to know your true colors Fred." Jan 31, 19 7:37 PM

Oh you make me laugh. Slime presents facts about Democrat Rep. Omar, you respond a few minutes later with a derisive comment that he is flailing - meaning his outrage over Rep. Omar’s positions and comments are unwarranted and weak. I challenged your apparent agreement with her current well publicized positions and you take a hard left turn to avoid the issue and randoml throw out the word racist like it’s get out of corner you’ve back yourself into for free card. The old Hey look over there! debate technique. Hahaha!" Feb 1, 19 4:38 PM

Here ya go Fred. In June 2016, a U.S. District Court jury in Minnesota convicted nine Somali-American men of multiple charges relating to their efforts to join and provide support to the Islamic State terrorist organization (ISIS). Some of the Minnesota men involved in the conspiracy did ultimately join ISIS in Syria and were believed to have subsequently been killed in combat there. The defendants that were caught were dedicated and enthusiastic members of the conspiracy, and highly motivated to go to Syria, join ISIS, and perpetrate violence on that terrorist organization’s behalf. They were facing prison sentences ranging from 30 years with lifetime supervision upon release to life in prison. She wrote to the judge begging for leniency, stating “I bring your attention to the ramifications of sentencing young men who made an inconsequential mistake to decades in federal prison. Incarcerating 20-year-old men for 30 or 40 years is essentially a life sentence. We should refocus our efforts on inclusion and rehabilitation. A long-term prison sentence for one who chose violence to combat direct marginalization is a statement that our justice system misunderstands the guilty.” She said their desire to join ISIS and engage in violent terrorism was not their fault and was simply “the consequence of systematic alienation; people seek violent solutions when the process established for enacting change is inaccessible to them. Fueled by disaffection turned to malice.” Rather than being punished and sentenced to prison she proposed instead that they be allowed to go free and simply told “I believe you can be rehabilitated. I want you to become part of my community.”
According to her it was not their fault they were trying to become murderous terrorists, it’s all OUR fault, so they should be let go back into their community to give them a chance to ... do it all over again. " Feb 1, 19 5:10 PM

Helicopter Traffic Continues To Swell As East Hampton Town Seeks Options To Reduce It

Absolutely no one believes the majority of the current Town Board has any interest in doing anything other than closing the airport in 2021. It has been their plan all along. There has never been a single incident of an airport that has intentionally be closed to later be reopened. They will close it and sell the land to developers regardless of the severe impact to our local economy. In fact, the consultant admitted they are not even doing an economic impact study (because they don’t want to have to publish the extent of the huge hit our local economy is going to take). Instead they are only doing a cost study to see how much it will cost the town to close the airport (they eliminated studying the benefit side because they only wanted to accept the conclusion that the entire community was supposedly benefiting from closure because it would become a little quieter near a couple dozen people’s summer homes for 25 days of the year after the closure). Our community needs to come together NOW to save our local community airport!" Feb 6, 19 5:05 PM

It always makes me laugh how you think a couple of single prop local recreational pilots could control and dictate to multimillion dollar commercial corporate operations. Just because we both happen to oppose draconian restrictions and the closure of the airport doesn’t mean we are somehow in charge of the helicopters. We have zero relationship with Blade and never have had one. You think you are a majority, but you seems to be using common core math. The fact is only about 25 local residents want to close the airport but we have 1000s of signatures of local residents opposing the closure of the airport. But since you know everything how about you tell us local pilot’s what we should do to reduce noise concerns? Are our little Piper Cubs and Cessnas so noisy and offensive? Go ahead and tell us in this open forum what “rational noise reduction” us little local pilots can do since it OUR airport you are trying to close?
By the way, nice new name registration - was the last one banned?" Feb 6, 19 10:20 PM

PBR your post makes absolutely no sense as usual. What “truth to power” were we supposed to speak about and to whom? Are you actually saying that because we didn’t join your protests to close the airport for the past 10 years that the noise from commercial helicopters and jets is our fault? Do you hear how ridiculous that is are do you just hate all pilots so much you have aviation derangement syndrome? You never answered the question - tell us what powe we have to do anything to control or direct the actions of a multimillion commercial corporation with whom we have no relationship with? Seems like you just want to close the airport no matter what we do or don’t do. " Feb 7, 19 10:06 AM

Fred the complaint numbers not only include people who don’t live in this area, they turned out to be proven by HMMH to be falsified. HMMH reveal that nearly half of 2017 and 2018 numbers were intentionally falsified and they had to for e the private website owner to remove them from the data he provided them (yet he left the fake number up on his website). Even then the data was so questionable that they had to caveat that those complaint should not be taken seriously and asked the board to encourage people to go back to Plane Sense because it was a commercial product and its data was verifiable and more helpful. The FAA will not even consider them in the Part 161. As for your comment that “no one opposes small planes” look at PBR and his friends. They oppose us more than the helicopters! It’s our airport they are trying to close. Clearly you don’t care that we are the baby being thrown out with the bath water. " Feb 7, 19 10:14 AM

No only will there be more landing pad but there will be a 300% increase in helicopter traffic! All the closure of the airport does is eliminate a few jets and all the small local little fixed wing planes. Since none of the rich people and summer commuters can come in by jet or seaplane the will ALL now have to take helicopters (you don’t think they are going to ride a Jitney to their $35M house do you?). The helicopter companies already have prepared for this and the huge increase in their business and profit - that is why you don’t see Blade cooperating with anyone and why they keep getting more and larger helicopters. A helipad will be built on private land in EH. Liberty Helicopters has already bought a floating heli landing pad for Sag Harbor. Then thousands of helicopters will fly in to SH heliport, Sag Harbor, EH and Montauk nonstop. So go ahead and support the closure of HTO in 2021 - I’ll just sit back in 2022 and watch all of your heads explode from the never ending sound of a low flying helicopter nightmare that you will have created and will never be able to get rid of them." Feb 7, 19 10:25 AM

THAT is what you got out of the fact that closing the airport will increase helicopter traffic by 300%?!? In that case, all of the tennis courts, golf courses, hiking trails, bird sanctuaries, nature preserves, boat docks, and beach accesses out here are just a convenience and not necessary. I could say that I don't have trees around my house so leaf blowers should be banned because I don't use them and they are not necessary. I don't have a motorcycle and don't like them so they should be banned, they are not necessary. Why aren't you advocating to closing and eliminating all of them? " Feb 7, 19 2:54 PM

What makes you think we have not already asked the ERHC to find ways to mitigate sound, reduce operations, comply with voluntary curfews, and fly higher? I personally reported three helicopters that took off at 3:45am this past summer and flew much lower than they were capable on a clear night to both the airport manager and the EHRC. We have done all of that, but we have ZERO power over them. In fact, Jeff Smith and the EHRC doesn't have any power over the companies either, the are just an advisory counsel. Several of the companies (cough, Blade and Liberty) won't even participate in discussions. Us small plane local pilots simply don't have any control over these multimillion dollar corporations. We want to know why we have to be punished for their actions. Why do you want to close our airport which will literally only will punish us small local pilots rather than finding a solution that affects the helicopters, who will show up in exponentially greater numbers once the airport closes? The helicopter traffic is estimate to increase by 300% if the airport is closed - is that what you want!?" Feb 7, 19 3:02 PM

I will take that as a high compliment since you seem to be utterly unable to respond to or refute any of the facts that I have presented and instead just keep maniacally saying the same empty baseless phrases over and over. Discussing this issue with you feels like trying to discuss astrophysics with a goldfish. The only thing we have ever "sided with" the helicopters on is that we both oppose the closure of the airport and the institution of draconian restrictions (ie: curfews that close it all weekend to all traffic, restrictions that limit all aircraft to only one takeoff/landing per week, etc). We have ALWAYS supported reasonable restrictions like the curfews that were in place and finding other measures to reduce helicopter noise, and have made our position known in public and in writing to everyone. Please provide factual details of how we have "sided with" the helicopters other than on those issues? You can't because you are just making things up to justify your militant opposition to all things aviation. Of course we want FAA money to fix the airport! The secondary runway is filled with cracks and vegetation, the taxiway A has been only half completed for two decades, our PAPI lights and runway lights are broken more often than they work - we need that money to fix things since the town has spent all of the airport's self generated money on its attorneys and consultants. Sorry but no matter how much it irritates you, local residents who support the airport exponentially outnumber those who oppose it. Facts are facts no matter how much you scream and cry that you don't like them. The LTV meeting was only about 45 people, most of whom came from far up island not this area. The only people who get to decide what happens to OUR airport is us the local residents. Yeah that's what I meant by OUR airport, it is OUR community's asset and we the local residents should be the ones to decide what happens to it, but you knew that and just chose to be factious because that's what zealots do." Feb 8, 19 9:19 AM

I am surprised that you find jet traffic to be noisy over the North Fork. Most jet traffic from HTO departs on Rwy 28 and procedure requires that they immediately turn out over the water to the south. If they depart on Rwy 10, again the departure route is over the water on the south side of the South Fork. If the jet did have to eventually turn northbound it would be well over 5000 feet up by the time it crossed the North Fork. Inbound jet traffic is typically very quiet because their engines are at the lowest output setting while slowing down to land. Plus most jet traffic lands on Rwy 28 which has its approach offshore out over the water at Amagansett. If a jet does rarely land on Rwy 10 then the approach would be over Riverhead, not the North Fork. However, the main approach to Rwy 24 at Gabreski in Westhampton is right over the North Fork. Perhaps you are hearing the jets from that airport instead." Feb 8, 19 10:39 AM

First of all the airport was built in 1936, not 1955. It was first proposed by the East Hampton Business Men’s Club specifically as a “convenience to summer visitors” because “each year more and more of our summer residents are turning to aviation as a means of commuting between New York offices and East Hampton homes”. The claim that it was built as a small recreational airport is a complete fiction made up by the anti-airport group. Scheduled daily commercial flight began in the late 1930s through Hampton Air Service, Inc. By the late 1940s there were daily commuter Grumman Mallard and Widgeon seaplanes flying between the city and the Hamptons on Long Island Airways, known as “America’s First Commuter Airline”. Also in the 1940s the runways at HTO were expanded expanded to accommodate daily commercial commuter flights on large land planes like 21 passenger DC-3s which were used by Island Air Ferries, Inc. on its scheduled daily commuter flights. By the 1950s commercial commuter service was expanded to have more than 40 scheduled commuter flight per week into HTO using the expanded 27 passenger DC-3s. In fact, in 1955 when development was really expanding in the Hamptons and developers started looking at the airport land, the town proclaimed that the airport was so vital to the community and the local economy that it needed to be protected from developers. Jeannette Rattray, the Editor of the East Hampton Star, proclaimed prophetically “Don’t let your community be sold down the river for a real estate killing...East Hampton must continue to have and airport!” Commercial commuter service continued to expand in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s with half a dozen full time airlines and helicopter services operating out of HTO with hundreds of scheduled flights per week. All of the aircraft and helicopters used during these years were larger and exponentially noisier than any used today. So as to your question, would I agree with banning all commercial flights into HTO - no I would not agree to that extreme restriction. I would agree to reducing the number of commercial operations (limit on number of helicopter flights and restricted time slots), but not a wholesale ban. Those commuter flights, private jets, and commercial charters bring in over $20 million in revenue to our local economy each year. Our local economy will suffer and hundreds of local jobs will be lost if they are eliminated. Also, over 90% of HTOs fuel sales and landing fees come from commercial operations. That money fully pays for the operation and maintenance of the airport so that not one single taxpayer dollar is ever used and makes it entirely self sufficient. Excluding all commercial operations would cause the airport to no longer be self sufficient. So it’s my turn for a question for you - are you willing to pay more in taxes to fund the airport operation and maintenance costs in exchange for banning all commercial flights? " Feb 9, 19 11:30 AM

First of all the airport was built in 1936, not 1955. It was first proposed by the East Hampton Business Men’s Club specifically as a “convenience to summer visitors” because “each year more and more of our summer residents are turning to aviation as a means of commuting between New York offices and East Hampton homes”. The claim that it was built as a small recreational airport is a complete fiction made up by the anti-airport group. Scheduled daily commercial flight began in the late 1930s through Hampton Air Service, Inc. By the late 1940s there were daily commuter Grumman Mallard and Widgeon seaplanes flying between the city and the Hamptons on Long Island Airways, known as “America’s First Commuter Airline”. Also in the 1940s the runways at HTO were expanded expanded to accommodate daily commercial commuter flights on large land planes like 21 passenger DC-3s which were used by Island Air Ferries, Inc. on its scheduled daily commuter flights. By the 1950s commercial commuter service was expanded to have more than 40 scheduled commuter flight per week into HTO using the expanded 27 passenger DC-3s. In fact, in 1955 when development was really expanding in the Hamptons and developers started looking at the airport land, the town proclaimed that the airport was so vital to the community and the local economy that it needed to be protected from developers. Jeannette Rattray, the Editor of the East Hampton Star, proclaimed prophetically “Don’t let your community be sold down the river for a real estate killing...East Hampton must continue to have and airport!” Commercial commuter service continued to expand in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s with half a dozen full time airlines and helicopter services operating out of HTO with hundreds of scheduled flights per week. All of the aircraft and helicopters used during these years were larger and exponentially noisier than any used today. So as to your question, would I agree with banning all commercial flights into HTO - no I would not agree to that extreme restriction. I would agree to reducing the number of commercial operations (limit on number of helicopter flights and restricted time slots), but not a wholesale ban. Those commuter flights, private jets, and commercial charters bring in over $20 million in revenue to our local economy each year. Our local economy will suffer and hundreds of local jobs will be lost if they are eliminated. Also, over 90% of HTOs fuel sales and landing fees come from commercial operations. That money fully pays for the operation and maintenance of the airport so that not one single taxpayer dollar is ever used and makes it entirely self sufficient. Excluding all commercial operations would cause the airport to no longer be self sufficient. So it’s my turn for a question for you - are you willing to pay more in taxes to fund the airport operation and maintenance costs in exchange for banning all commercial flights? " Feb 9, 19 11:30 AM

Protest Held In Bridgehampton On Monday

Oh look, affluent coastal liberals virtue signaling in their air tight echo chamber. How progressive. " Feb 19, 19 12:12 AM

East Hampton Town Fortifies Gerard Drive In Springs

It would be nice if they fixed the nonstop flooding on Stephen Hamds Path at 114 too. It’s a perpetual lake filled with hidden potholes. " Feb 19, 19 5:34 PM

Police Chief Raises Concerns Over State Plan To Legalize Marijuana

That is incorrect. The only thing the study found was that the number of legal opiate prescriptions written through Medicare Part D decreased in states where medical marijuana was available. It said absolutely nothing about illegal opiate use, overdoses, or addiction rates or how recreational marijuana factored in. " Feb 24, 19 7:22 PM

The study is definitely a valid study. However my point is that it was being referenced in a misleading way. Btw, your citation to the information promulgated by drugabuse.com is also inaccurate. That website is not an independent non-profit research group - they are a for-profit drug treatment facility corporation. The real numbers from NIDA show that in 2017 deaths from prescription opioid overdoses were only 35% of all opioid overdoses, and only 23% did not involve the simultaneous use of other illegal synthetic drugs. My point about the study was that it only looked at small a fraction of that 35% - only those in that group who were using Medicare Part D to get their prescription. So any small decrease in opioid overdoses due to the availability of medical marijuana in that very small group is not nearly as significant as was being portrayed. Plus the discussion is about recreational marijuana which had absolutely no factor or involvement in the study whatsoever. I just think it’s reckless to make claims about how “great” marijuana is by citing inaccurate information. " Feb 25, 19 9:48 AM

Fred you keep obtusely avoiding the point and conflating topics. That study was about medical marijuana only. No one objects to medical marijuana, which is used for medical treatment in controlled lower doses supervised by a physician. The topic of this article and Cuomo’s new law is about recreational marijuana. Recreational marijuana is not for medical use and there is no evidence that it reduces opioid overdoses. People are rightfully concerned about legalizing recreational marijuana. " Feb 25, 19 12:58 PM

Gruber And Reformers Will Challenge Fellow Democrats Again In East Hampton Town

The Gruber Reform party doesn't want to "reduce airport noise" - they want to close the airport and build expensive houses on the land to make themselves rich. In that they are no different than the regular Democrat party, both of whom have actively prevented several noise reduction measures from taking place. The last thing in the world they want is to "reduce airport noise" because that would thwart their goal of closure and land grab. Now they are simply fighting among themselves over who gets to redevelop the land when they close it. You are correct though that they make strange bedfellows since the Republicans actually want to reduce the impact of airport noise on those who are affected while keeping a safe and beneficial asset to our community open. " Mar 5, 19 10:04 AM

<<  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6  |  7  |  8  |  9  |  10  |  11  |  12  |  >>