ORIGINAL: goliathman
At this point my ultimate agenda is to get the County to keep the $20/year park pass that the advisory board (the club) uses for field improvements, but the argument to eliminate the AMA requirement is linked to the park pass in the minds of the county. I’m looking for a logical argument to use on the county bureaucrats and lawyers to keep the fee. The suggestions from the AMA are to stress the AMA insurance.
But after reading the original contract the county was ready then to accept equivalent insurance.
If the county sticks to the equivalent insurance concept I would rather keep the fee more than the AMA requirement.
I gotcha. I think that's a very reasonable approach. I'd suggest telling the county that many of the field users are nervous about the prospect of flying with uninsured individuals. Equate it to auto insurance, and the no-fault laws that require everyone to carry it. Part of the purpose of those is to reduce conflicts at the scene of accidents. In the same way, knowing that the county has verified the insurance (be it AMA or other) for each of the participants at the flying field sure does add a certain comfort level. It also reduces the chances of conflict, and removes the need for any self-policing by people using the site.
I'd suggest that the issuance of county permits (they don't have to be anything special, ours are just little construction paper slips that we hang on the frequency board) can address that, and the fees can go towards the office time required.