Originally posted by Sledge
AMA vs Chartered Club 4129
Below is the story or the AMA vs Chartered Club 4129
1/30/2003
It is impossible to Solve problems that are fictitious, and only exist as fictions in the minds of Silver wings and some of the AMA officials.
The law is very clear that overflying of someone's property like Silver Wings is doing to mine can be considered as Criminal Trespass and Taking of Property.
Does this mean you intend to take American Airlines, Delta, and Southwest Airlines to court for Criminal Trespass? While I bet not, I also believe I understand part of the frustration I see you have. It is probably created by several parties all misunderstanding each other's position and some reaching for power they do not have under the rules.
[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Sledge
The agreement the AMA wants me to sign written by the offending neighbor has nothing to do with safety. It demands that I agree never to never develop my 300 acres now or by any future owner. And allows him to overfly my property forever and the AMA demands that I agree. Why??[/QUOTE
Exactly WHO wrote that agreement? I suspect that you and your neighbor have had some strong words over this and neither of you is willing or able to think in the cold clinical manner necessary to avoid this entanglement. That appears to be proven by the District VIII AMA VP instructing people to deny the club (who appears to be your neighbor) Chartered status pending his decision which rests on you giving away your rights. If that is a fair assessment, you may, as property owner, may just ignore the whole mess as it is the CLUB's problem. You could be gracious and just allow the overflight (including the recovery of the occasional downed a/c since some run out of fuel) and go on.
However, if you elect to be vindictive you cannot stop the over flight. Nor can you prevent the recovery of downed aircraft under the law. Since it appears that the 300 acres is currently undeveloped, there is little action you can take unless provable damage is done to you or your property. A model impacting the dirt does negligible damage to the dirt. However you CAN post "NO TRESPASSING" signs charge a large access fee for recovery of downed aircraft. You can make the collection easy by pressing criminal charges against those who violate the signs. In fact, if you do it right you can probably get your local law enforcement folks to check and help protect your property from foreign invaders. These actions ARE legal even if they will not make you any friends. I would not do them, but I am not you.[/B][/QUOTE
Originally posted by Sledge
Tom Hammer president of AMA Chartered Club 4129 owns the land and mows and maintains the 5 acres that the club uses to fly. There are no Club dues. Tom allows any AMA member to fly at no cost.
Eventually as events unfold the truth will finally be proved.
Unfortunately the AMA's posture in the handing of this non event
will only cause disharmony among the AMA family.
Below is the story or the AMA vs Chartered Club 4129
I am upset when AMA contends that Hammer has done nothing
as to rectify Silver Wings complaint. It is unfortunate that while the information was e mailed to the AMA about December 9, 2002, the date of their phone call, there had been absolutely NO indication until your phone call today that they wanted the same information sent snail mail. HAMMER HAS BEEN WAITING 7 WEEKS for a reply from AMA.
And, what about the fact that AMA sponsors fly-ins and fields
at full scale airports all over the country. WE STILL WANT TO
KNOW WHAT POWER Silver Wings has with the AMA that he
can shut down Hammer's field while others continue in similar
situations. Also, might I ask if a neighbor in Muncie complains,
will the AMA shut down their own field as they have done to so
many of their clubs.
The AMA should receive the letter from our attorney shortly;
he has been advised of the February meeting.
We are sending literature to both Sandy Frank in Texas and the AMA Dave Brown in Muncie in today's mail...both priority plus registered to the AMA.
Subject: Re: My CALL
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 09:50:30 -0600
From: "Dr. Sandy Frank" <[email protected]>
To: Jay Mealy <[email protected]>,
Joyce Hager <[email protected]>,
Hammer <[email protected]>
CC:
Dave Brown <[email protected]>,
Carl Maroney <[email protected]>,
Wes De Cou <[email protected]>
when and if AMA is NOT in receipt of the agreement.
""I got a call yesterday from Mr. Severe stating he has informed Mr. Hammer, more than once during the last 30 days, that the agreement is complete and ready for his review but has gotten no response from Mr. Hammer."" by the FEB. EC meeting...
I would expect to withhold his CLUB CHARTER and Field coverage renewal. JOYCE PLEASE SEPARATE this Club Charter Renewal Package and SITE Coverage renewal package for this matter.. and I will instruct you if it should be sent by the close of the FEB. EC meeting.
Sandy Frank AMA D8 VP
First things first. I think it is kind of stupid to involve the AMA in what is clearly a personality clash between a pair of landowners, one who happens to have a model field and has NO impact on liability. I wonder exactly where the authority to take this action stems from. Is this more of the "My way or the highway" approach to modeling I have heard of? Unless there is development there what right is there to deny or cancel a club's right to fly under the AMA? This clearly is not a way to help the AMA grow which is what I THOUGHT part of the job of DVP was.
Originally posted by Sledge
Jay Mealy wrote:
Sandy,
I got a call yesterday from Mr. Severe stating he has informed Mr. Hammer, more than once during the last 30 days, that the agreement is complete and ready for his review but has gotten no response from Mr. Hammer. As we discussed early on in this project, what we need from you is your signature on the "AMA Vice President Authority Form" holding the 2003 club charter renewal for Mr. Hammers club. We can utilize that to make
Mr. Hammer aware of the seriousness of this matter and how important it is to resolve the dispute. This does not require Council action, simply your signature, and I personally believe you should do it ASAP as the renewals are in the process of being mailed now.
Jay Mealy AMA Programs Director
-----Original Message-----
From: Dr. Sandy Frank [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 10:06 AM
To: Hammer; jay; Carl Maroney; Joyce Hager
Subject: My CALL
As of this morning I did call Mr. Hammer (AMA# 9732)
and remind him of the upcoming AMA EC meeting...
and the concerns which AMA has about the safety conditions at his flying field.
I reminded him that AMA has requested that he answer fully those questions of model field at his flying site.. and have in place an agreement which AMA has also agreed to.. which will confront those concerns which have been raised...
BUT much like a TRAFFIC TICKET which a driver disregards...
in the absence of HIS presentation of solutions to the problems of flying at his field... when asked WHAT the OWNER has done to remedy the problem.. if the answer is ""NOTHING..."" his continued Coverage by the AMA Flying Site policy will assuredly be terminated... IT IS THE responsibility of Mr. Hammer to reply in writing as to the safety concerns at his field... I asked that all of his correspondence be directed to AMA in Muncie,IN as I will be in transit soon and could well miss his correspondences while enroute.. He mentioned that his lawyer will be doing so soon... (contacting AMA on his behalf) and I also AGAIN reminded
him of the EC meeting on FEB. 8,2003 where I am sure that this
will be presented...
Sandy Frank D8 VP
(ps if this is to be presented at the EC meeting..
please include this correspondence as well as all other such correspondence which I have done in this matter.)
Does all this aggressive action by the District VIII AMA VP mean that now we have to kiss up to him to stay in the AMA? He has to inspect and approve all our flying fields? This ability to deny clubs Charter status is much more dangerous than the effort to allow DVP's to punish CD's. It impacts hundreds, no thousands of modelers.
Have I missed something here that is obvious to any other observers?