Penalties Set for Violations of Airport Rules
Although three new laws restricting the use of East Hampton Town Airport have been challenged in court — with a hearing Monday on the challengers’ request for a temporary restraining order — the East Hampton Town Board set penalties for violating those laws after holding a hearing last Thursday night. It also agreed to seek bids on an automated weather observation system and agreed to hire an engineering firm to address obstructions at one of the airport runways.
The town board adopted the laws last month in an effort to reduce noise from helicopters and other aircraft after widespread complaint. They are scheduled to take effect on Tuesday unless a United States District Court judge in Central Islip issues the restraining order. The hearing was to have been held today but was rescheduled.
A group called Friends of the East Hampton Airport, comprising a number of aviation industry firms, filed suit on April 29 against the new regulations. The town is to post all of the court filings, as well as information about the penalties, at a dedicated website: htoplanning.com.
Among the penalties is a fine of up to $1,000 for a first violation. A second violation could result in a fine of up to $4,000 and a third a fine of up to $10,000. An aircraft charged with a fourth violation within the summer season could be barred from the airport for up to two years.
Kathryn Slye, a pilot who spoke at the board’s hearing on the penalties, took objection to them, saying local pilots would be hurt most by the fines and that they would not have a significant financial impact on professional or corporate pilots. She asked that exemptions based on individual circumstances be considered.
Otherwise, she said, East Hampton-based fliers who encounter unexpected delays, due to weather, for instance, or holding patterns around metropolitan airports, may have to land at unfamiliar airports in order to avoid arriving in East Hampton after curfew and incurring a fine. “So you’re going to have us making bad decisions,” she said.
Among related airport action Thursday night, the board retained Peter Kirsch to defend the town against the airport lawsuit, at up to $425,000 without further authorization. Mr. Kirsch’s firm, Kaplan, Kirsch & Rockwell, has been working with the town for many years and was separately retained in 2015 to give it advice on airport matters in general.
The board voted unanimously to move $283,000 from contingency lines in the airport budget to pay outside professionals and contractors in order to cover attorneys’ fees and other operations and monitoring costs.
Town Councilwoman Sylvia Overby abstained from the Kirsch vote. Nevertheless, on Tuesday, she said, “I think we’re being well represented.” Earlier in the meeting, Charles Ehren, a vice chair of the Quiet Skies Coalition, had questioned whether Mr. Kirsch was the best choice.
Also approved Thursday was a plan to extend the collection of data on aircraft noise complaints to the Montauk Airport. This will initially cost $2,000, with a $400 increase in the monthly fee paid to Plane Noise, a contractor that does that work with regard to the town airport, to $1,725.
Ms. Overby also abstained from a vote to hire Michael Baker Engineering, for $64,800, to develop recommendations about how to address obstructions at the end of Runway 10-28, so that nighttime instrument approaches may once again be employed by aircraft.
Her concerns, she said this week, were based on assuring that “the money in the airport fund is spent in the best way possible,” and on being fiscally cautious. She said she was reluctant to immediately authorize such an extensive expense for legal fees.
The Federal Aviation Administration had informed the town some time ago that trees and other obstructions were impinging on the runway clear zone and had to be addressed.
Also speaking last Thursday, Patrick Trunzo III, a member of an airport committee that had reviewed the obstruction issue, said the board had been addressing the issue in “missteps.” Ms. Overby moved to table the resolution hiring the Baker firm so that the matter could first be reviewed by the town’s budget and finance advisory committee, but she got no support.
Andrew Sabin, on behalf of a group called Keep the East Hampton Airport Open, presented the petition calling for airport repairs and maintenance, mentioning runway repaving, the elimination of obstructions and the automated weather observation system. “I really don’t think there’s a sincere effort to keep this airport open and keep this airport safe,” he said. “There’s no reason not to do these things.”
The board also agreed to have Leviton, a company that makes charging stations for electric cars, install one at the airport at a cost of $2,000. The project will be paid for in part by a grant from the New York State Energy and Research Development Authority. It also voted to lease an airport hangar to Matthew J. Brennant for $2,000.