"Read the footnotes in the NPRM. Numbers I quoted above are more than adequate to show FAA that the FRIA is nothing more than one more AMA attempt to get forced membership. I would be really curious if AMA was clear to FAA that for a citizen to use these fixed sites, they have to send $75 a year to AMA. Matter of fact, I'm fairly certain AMA was not open about this important detail. Why? Because it would have been included in the cost analysis if they had."
It is true that the NPRM projects that 90% of AMA chartered club fields will be approved as FRIAs, implying that the FAA intends to recognize AMA as a CBO. That does not change the fact that recognition has not yet occurred. Nor does it prevent additional CBOs from applying for recognition.
Nothing in the NPRM states that one must join a CBO in order to use a FRIA. It is only necessary to "follow the safety programming" of a CBO.
The FAA might have reasonably assumed that members of a CBO applying to have an existing flying site recognized as a FRIA were already dues paying members of that CBO - so there is no additional cost.
I cannot understand why anyone who values this hobby would be against FRIAs.