Is Arcola Airport (off McKeever Rd.) Safe? See this Crash Report From FBN.com
Last March when the county was deciding whether or not to help Arcola Airport expand, near Sienna and many other Arcola-Missouri City communities, through a developer supported road diversion project, that would have required the take over of parts of New Pointe Estates and would have closed many area businesses on McKeever Rd., the issue of moving/closing this airport was addressed in several area discussion groups.
After this recent crash and the growing population density in the area, is it a topic that should be revisited? Several schools flourish now along this fly-way that received Hobby reliever status only last year, along with the many thousands of residents in this area of Arcola-Missouri City.
____________________
Comment/Question:
-Whatever happened to the mobility bond promise by Chief County Judge Bob Hebert to expand and improve McKeever Rd. without diverting it?
-Do the area schools on the fly-way have an emergency plan for an Arcola Airport crash on or near their campuses (see Sienna Crossing and/or BB Middle School)?
posted by responsible_dvlpmnt at Monday, August 21, 2006
34 Comments:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Earlier comments on this from FBN threads (background)-
1 Tom Hilton - Dec 30, 05:37 pm
Howdy,
Ms. Kistner is simply not credible. We have emails from her to area residents dated this year that claim the airport expansion is dead…but now, it’s not dead but in actuality IS expanding, BUT the runway is not going to be extended – or so she claims. Uh Huh.
James DeVoge, then-Arcola City Councilman met with Kistner earlier this year in an effort to get the airport’s latest ALP (Airport Layout Plan) – she gave him a plan almost 8 years old which pre-dated the Feasibility Study. Uh Huh.
If Ms. Kistner would like to make credible claims, she needs to cough up the mysterious ALP. What is the latest plan for the airport Ms. Kistner? Lay them on us.
Uh Huh, I thought so – not going to, eh?
When the County declined to acquire the airport 2 years ago (Oct 2003), the plans had to change as they couldn’t use the County’s power of eminent domain to confiscate the 12 home west of the runway, and 36 properties in Arcola Heights. Mike Nicely of the FAA sent a letter to County Judge Bob Hebert in August 2004 (after the plans had changed). In this letter, Nicely says that allowing McKeever to remain in it’s present location violates FAA design standards, AND PRECLUDES ANY EXTENSION TO THE RUNWAY. What extension to the runway is Mr. Nicely referring to Ms. Kistner? Uh Huh, not willing to impart that info either are you.
November 9, 2004 – Houston SW Airport invites a local radio station (93.7) to use it’s runway to launch potatoes. This is such a busy, important airport that they are able to shut down the entire airport to launch potatoes? Uh Huh.
Forget the propaganda Ms. Kistner, show us the LATEST Airport Layout Plan. What length is the planned runway? What size corporate jet are you sizing the runway to accommodate? What effect will this have on the surrounding residential communities?
Uh Huh. Didn’t think Mr. Griffith would authorize you to divulge this pertinent information.
Anyone interested in documentation, and not propaganda, you are welcome to check out; http://www.citizensforbettergovt.org/
All the best,
Tom Hilton
2 thelittleguy - Dec 30, 08:10 pm
Is this the same Ms. Kistner that claimed at the first reading at Arcola city council that area kids were on the runways riding their bikes? They really are working over time on this one don’t you think? She actually asked the city to foot their security bill by providing police protection for the private airport (and her boss/owner).
I’m just glad we have citizen watchdogs like Tom and the 60+ homeowners that showed up from Sienna, Oakwick, Silver Ridge, New Pointe Estates, West Point, Waterbrook & Waterbrook West along with most of the McKeever Rd. HOAs to witness the fiasco voting at that council session.
The Arcola council put on a good show before the KTRK abc 13 cameras and once they left they went right on and voted for the gift to the airport owner. We do need to recognize former mayor Saenz and Rosie, current city council member, for voting with their supporters on this and not the special interests (SJD developer, airport owner & Mr. Hebert).
Thanks again Tom! KEEP THE JETS OUT OF ARCOLA!
3 Bob Dunn - Dec 31, 06:39 am
To be fair, Genny Kistner didn’t come forward with claims or statements about the nature of the airport expansion, she responded to the questions I asked her. I didn’t ask her about an airport layout plan for this story.
4 Tom Hilton - Dec 31, 10:01 am
Mr. Dunn,
I am in agreement with your journalistic ethics – your job is to ask the questions…you can’t be responsible for her answers.
The fact remains that Ms. Kistner is quoted as saying: “Houston Southwest Airport is expanding, but that expansion doesn’t include extending the runway or adding a new one, Airport Director Genny Kistner said Friday.
Instead, she said, the expansion is mostly being undertaken to comply with Federal Aviation Administration regulations that apply to facilities designated as FAA “reliever airports.”
Houston SW Airport, Fort Bend County, and the Mayor/City Council of Arcola have not been forthcoming with information about the actual plans for this airport. (Yall make your own assumptions why Mayor Gipson and Greg Abarr are acting as agents to further the interests of this airport, and what THEY have to gain from doing so).
The main point here is that all of these people; Genny Kistner, Mayor Alvin Gipson, Councilman Greg Abarr, County Judge Hebert, and others, ALL are saying what they want you to hear, but are unable, when asked, to provide any documentation to corraborate their claims. It’s time to demand that these people back up what they say.
For example; Mayor Gipson has stated on several occassions that McKeever Road will NEVER be closed. But when presented with the proposed plan and asked to please elaborate how McKeever is going to avoid being closed here, his response is a simple “No”. He and Mr. Abarr have resorted to making statements about this, but will not allow any questions.
Propaganda, plain and simple.
Show us the documentation that shows that there are no plans for runway extension, and those documents that illustrate how to the expansion complies with Federal Aviation Administration regulations that apply to facilities designated as FAA “reliever airports.”
That’s all I’m asking – no more propaganda – show us the documentation.
All the best,
Tom Hilton
5 ., - Jan 4, 09:06 am
Maybe Tom the new HB914 will prove more of a help with the political “sell outs” in our county! It looks like they have to document their business networks for a change.
6 Dan - Jun 25, 10:03 pm
Mr Hilton,
What is the big deal about landing jets? Im from California and looking to invest in Arcola, your anti growth stance is a little disconcerning. I’m willing to guess you take a plane when heading out of town. It is ok for the Houston residents to have planes in there backyard but not yours. Im hearing alot of crying and not enough solution. Anti growth stances keep that society in the dark ages.
7 maized&cornfused - Jun 26, 07:47 am
Mr. Hilton is not anti- growth, he’s pro-residents/citizens that live in the area. He has lived and worked in this area for a long time and has the respect from his community and neighbors.
There are plenty of other places you could look into since Arcola doesn’t fit your needs. Perhaps you should look elsewhere instead of trying to change the area to suit you.
BTW, We call that carpet-bagging here in Texas.
The local citizens have made their feelings known on this issue and it is not the type of developement we want here.
8 John Armstrong - Jun 26, 08:26 am
Dan,
The ‘big deal’ was it in a nut shell… it was planned and devised with little or no regard to the people living around the neighboring areas. There was very little proof other than ‘talk’ that the airport ‘improvement’ project would generate any economic growth. Tom isn’t against growth, it’s blantant misuse of executive power under the guise of ‘growth’ that brought many people together to address issues that would have destroyed an area not brought economic growth. What type of ‘investments’ do you plan on doing in this area if I can ask?
9 Tom Hilton - Jun 26, 10:30 am
Howdy,
No, I’m not anti-growth – I’m for the RIGHT kind of growth. Arcola is a living organism, which unfortunately has a cancerous growth living inside it. This cancer keeps wanting to spread, endangering the very life of this tiny town. The cancer needs to be held in check because it is already too large for the space alloted, yet it continues to want to mestasticize. We are against the growth of this cancer, yes. Do you really believe that if Houston Intercontinental wanted to expand it’s runway right into the heart of downtown Houston, that it would be benficial to the City? Well, that is the situation that Arcola is facing.
As far as keeping people in the dark ages, perhaps you should educate yourself about the way the airport owner, Fort Bend EDC, and others attempted to rush this “Feasibility Study” through Commissioner’s Court without anyone having adequate time to study what it contained. Thanks to Sugar Land City Council, the Commissioners were forced to answer 26 questions before taking action. Guess waht? After the “facts” in the study were shown in the LIGHT OF DAY, the County was FORCED to refuse sponsorship of this boondoggle because it became clear that it was not in the best interests of anyone involved, except for the airport owner.
The fact is, that the airport owner has recently been approached by developers interested in buying his airport and the 211 acres north of it in order to develop this land to it’s true potential. Just the act of taking the airport acreage off of the +_ free County tax roles, would be an incredible financial windfall for Arcola…for example, the 77 acres that the runway sits on is probably worth close to 6 million dollars, yet is on the County tax roles valued at +_80,000 because it is a public use runway. How much tax money is this cancer sucking up that Arcola could use? Imagine what benefits would arise for Arcola if the land was developed PROPERLY, generating true jobs, sales tax, property tax, etc. etc.
I could go on, but I am just trying to bring you out of the Dark Ages Dan.
Good luck with your investments!
Tom Hilton
10 Sienna Resident - Jun 26, 11:12 am
Dan,
I’m sure the Sugar Land Airport would love to talk to you about your flying needs. They have a first class facility just down the street. No need for another in Fort Bend!
11 John Armstrong - Jun 26, 12:35 pm
Tom,
Thanks for sharing the information… sounds like some exciting plans are in store for the airport down the road… wonder if Arcola is thinking that ‘Imminent Domain’ is an option for that airport, especially if there are ‘true’ plans in the making for the area.
And more…
1 Tom Hilton - Feb 28, 04:56 pm
Yahoo!!
My commendations go out to County Commissioner’s Court for doing the right thing here.
Now, the airport owner needs to remove 950 feet from the west end of the runway to take McKeever Road, and the additional traffic from the new Steep Bank Trace, out of harm’s way. NOW! The FAA needs to follow their own laws and REQUIRE that this airport be brought into compliance. The safety of Fort Bend County citizens is at risk here.
All the best,
Tom Hilton
2 Chris Calvin, Ph.D. - Feb 28, 06:09 pm
Tom,
Residents of Sienna, Colony Lakes, Silver Ridge I & II, Waterbrook, Waterbrook West, Arcola Heights, Plantation Oaks, Oakwick, Oyster Creek, West Point, and especially New Point Estates, etc. all owe you a debt of gratitude for your efforts since rediscovering this was not “off the table” this past November.
A word of caution to anyone reading this. This project has been an on-again-off-again deal so it is always necessary to keep an eye on this.
I want to thank those commissioners who genuinely went with the voting public on this and did what was best for the residents and taxpayers of this area of FB county.
Stay informed and keep in touch!
*****
Dr. Calvin, Co-Chair
Committee for Responsible Development-SP Group
http://missouricitychatter.blogspot.com
responsible_dvlpmnt@yahoo.com
Missouri City, TX
3 maized&cornfused - Feb 28, 06:58 pm
Thank you all for all of your efforts to make us a safer and a better place to live. I will feel better knowing that the students a BBMS won’t have jets flying over them. I know, and you do too, that this won’t be the last of it, but can celebrate for now.
4 Matthew Feinberg - Feb 28, 08:07 pm
Great Job!.. I think Herbert got the election year jitters. Lets keep an eye on this after the election. It could pop up on us.
5 Chris Elam - Mar 1, 08:10 am
‘Hebert got the election year jitters’?
What do you base that comment on? There are only two logical reasons you could say that…
1) You believe that Bob Hebert should be worried about his opponent in November (nobody)
or 2) You needed something to say that wouldn’t come out and sound too kind about a man whom you and your buddies have been spending way too much time worrying about in recent weeks, so you quickly came up with a total non sequitur.
6 Matthew Feinberg - Mar 1, 09:10 am
For those with a limited vocab.
Main Entry: sequitur
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: a logical
conclusion from the premises; a logical consequence
Chris.. Just because Herbert eliminated his opposition with questionable tactics does not mean he does not have to worry about is constituents. Just three weeks ago Herbert was hell bent on helping getting this project approved. Now there is a sudden turn around after much pressure from community activists like Hilton and Calvin. Hilton and Calvin care more about the community and people than the politicos and their cronies. I applaud them for their efforts. I also thank Herbert for making the right choice.
Chris.. You have your own blog. If you really think that Herbert does not have to answer to anyone then you can vent there. Personally I don’t think elected officials can do what ever they want. They have to answer to the people and need to be held accountable for their decisions. Apparently there are very few people around here that feel that way.
Thanks again to the few people that blocked this pointless project. I still say we need to keep an eye on things after the election. I am not blind to think thinks can’t change.
7 Tom Hilton - Mar 1, 09:37 am
Chris,
You are correct – Hebert surely doesn’t have any election year jitters, as nobody had the cajones to run against him. (Hundreds of thousands of $ in campaign chest, incumbent, backing of EDC, etc.) As far as spending too much time worrying about Judge Hebert, let’s just say that without plain ‘ol citizens keeping an eye on politicians such as Hebert, I ASSURE you that he would not be reversing his position on this matter. By the way, McDougal is promising to create an Ethics Division in the DA’s office if elected – this is sorely needed in this County where ethics is considered a four-letter word.
All the best,
Tom Hilton
8 Chris Calvin, Ph.D. - Mar 1, 11:22 am
Matt & Tom,
I wouldn’t worry too much about the musings of the young Elam. He works for his dad in a firm that is hired to put “out the spin” for the politicians and their cronies. Hebert must apparently be one of their clients. CE becomes increasingly insignificant in the big picture. You’ll never see him carrying a sign he isn’t paid to carry.
Keep up the activism guys. I know Hebert may be worried about the bond elections coming up rather than Mr. Small whom he smeared out of the race on a ridiculous Elam rumor of an incident which took place 22 years prior.
I hope McDougal does get in and get the ethics panel established and going so the “good ole boys club” can get shook up a bit!
Yes, keep an eye on these special projects backed by the likes of Delay-Hebert-Owen (and their Houston based developer buddies).
Congrats all again!
9 Prescott E Small - Mar 1, 12:35 pm
I have to congratulate Tom Hilton, Chris Calvin and others like them in their efforts to force the County Court and Bob Hebert to do their job and represent the constituency, albeit reluctantly. I guess being dragged along kicking and screaming might be considered progress.
Jamie Griffith isn’t going to go away quiet either. Griffith and his Airport were just sacrificed. I have to bet Griffith isn’t to happy and we haven’t heard the last of him.
I have to say that although it appears the commissioners court is doing the right thing in this instance there is still a lot of room for improvement. It is reassuring to see that even Bob Hebert can Flip-Flop when hammered repeatedly with hard evidence and continuous scrutiny. Although it is a shame that it takes several years of hard scrutiny and constant vigilance to get an elected official to represent the voter.
Hebert and the other commissioners need to start returning campaign contributions from those same people that silence free speech by using SLAPP suits against their constituency. They need to stop representing out of county special interest and get to work for their real bosses – the residents of Fort Bend County.
When you take money from individuals that crush rights, mislead or defraud the public you are no better than they are. Last count there were about 230,000 pieces of evidence in Hebert’s bank account that were valued at $1.00 each. Maybe DeLay has taught him well and now Hebert realizes his price was to low?
Things to improve on:
Give back all the money from the Sienna/Johnson Developers. The same developers that use huge cash reserves and SLAPP suits to crush free speech and deplete the savings of hard working families. Crushing free speech is as un-American as you can get. These families are your constituents Bob.
The Commissioners’ Court needs to start having hearings in the evenings or on weekends so that the constituents can attend the court and still take care of their jobs and families.
Bob Hebert and the Commissioners’ Court need to press our State Legislature and the Texas Secretary of State to approve of the V6 version of the eSlate system and require printers. Then demand that the state provide enough funds to buy the correct number of voting machines and printers for the primaries as they have always been in the first place.
Bob Hebert and the other officials need to get their full disclosure documentation completed and published for everyone to see. Bob Hebert believes HB 914 “Has good intentions” but “It is a bad law.” Why is full disclosure bad? I think it was a good start. It needs to be expanded to show when a contract was “no bid” and include all elected state officials including the Legislature.
The Commissioners’ Court should establish a county wide policy of fiscal transparency and reporting that is in plain language so that the average person can understand what the reports say. That information should be readily available to any constituent in any Library, county office or on the internet.
The county should have ZERO no bid contracts. They are handling our money with complete irresponsibility and need to have competitive bids on all jobs. Bob Hebert and the Court should be demanding that the Legislature re-instate the repealed checks and balances that previously made “no bid” contracts illegal.
Emergency contracts should be pre-bid at a fixed rate of profit based on actual costs. These costs should be independently audited and severe penalties should exist for any form of abuse, including criminal prosecution.
I have heard it from several reliable sources there are republican party plans for Bob Hebert and Sugar Land Mayor David G. Wallace.
Bob Hebert has more campaign money than any County Judge in the U.S. – Why? We will see where the “republican golden boy” heads next.
10 Chris Elam - Mar 1, 01:22 pm
Dr. Calvin – Internet Imposter – ResponsibleDevelopment, whatever you call yourself…
I’m not sure where you read “spin” into that comment that was soley addressed at Feinberg. But then again, for a man who’s currently in the midst of legal proceedings over your own “spin”... perhaps you’re more qualified to talk on the subject. =)
11 Chris Calvin, Ph.D. - Mar 1, 01:58 pm
Thanks for such a deep well thought out response CE. Maybe your dad can help you touch it up a bit.
All one has to do is look at your clients list to know what you are up to.
Take care-
12 Chris Elam - Mar 1, 02:51 pm
Hey, I’m just glad that you have started attributing your own name to your comments. Best of success in all your future endeavors.
13 gogetter - Mar 2, 10:08 am
It’s great to see someone was successful with the local EDC crowd. Well done Tom, Chris, Prescott, Matt, Rosie, Anson, John and all the area residents who helped keep the pressure up on this one.
It is amazing to me how many people/voters must get involved to get any movement on the special interest boys!
Well done!
14 Tom Hilton - Mar 3, 08:22 am
Howdy,
The Judge is quoted as saying; “And that runway was knowingly built in close proximity to McKeeever Road’s right-of-way. Therefore, Houston Southwest Airport must correct any conflicts existing between its runway and McKeever Road under FAA regulations,”
I contacted the County Attorney’s office about this safety issue and they claimed that the County has no power to ensure the safety of it’s citizens using County roads. What?
Our position is that this private developer is endangering the safety of County residents using McKeever Road (the runway was built too close to the road which violates mandated safety clearances). This fact is clearly stated above by the Judge, and the County is fully aware of it. Since Griffith cannot go into Newpoint to divert McKeever, (which was the whole reason behind S. Post Oak) the only alternative is to remove 950 feet from the west end of the runway. He’s certainly not going to do it on his own – he will have to be forced to do it. Who is going to step up and enforce the law here? The FAA? Ha! The County should be taking this to the next level and ensuring that County residents are taken out of harm’s way.
I find it hard to believe that the County does not have the authority to require a private developer to take measures to ensure that his runway is not endangering the safety and welfare of the general public.
Any attorneys out there who could shed some light on this?
All the best,
Tom Hilton
15 Artemio Temo - Mar 14, 10:12 pm
Just to say a BIG THANKS to Tom Hilton, Chris Calvin, Matthew Femberg, Rosie, Anson, John and
whomever else participated with your efforts to stop this nonsense Airport expansion/Mckeever divertion. None of us want to lose our land for pennies, and we need to feel safe at home, just the way we are. Thanks again.
Artemio Temo
16 JLS - Mar 15, 07:40 am
I want to thank Rodrigo Carreon, Paul Malone & Greyling Poats for also working tirelessly on this issue.
Rodrigo especially appeared before the commission, several councils and went door-to-door on this for his neighbors in Arcola! Thanks Rodrigo and the rest! Keep your eyes on this after the bond election. It will probably come back as it has many times before.
17 Susan - Mar 15, 06:54 pm
It is super that the realignment plan failed. Congratulations.
18 Tom Hilton - Mar 16, 10:38 am
Howdy,
I went to TxDOT Aviaition a while back asking questions about the proposed 953 foot extension of the runway to the east. They denied that there was any plans to extend the runway, and that they were simply wanting for the airport to purchase the 2,000 foot section of property extending eastward for a “Safety Zone”. The plans still show the runway being extended however. Now, the consulting firm that the airport hired to negotiate land purchases is talking to people on the EAST side of FM 521 looking to acquire their homes. There were 36 properties over there that were to be condemned via the feasibility study – Griffith is still trying to make it happen.
This thing won’t go away until Arcola steps up with a Plan for their own city – right now, the Planning Commission is one man – Jamie Griffith.
Never mind that his airport is currently out of compliance with FAA safety standards, they are wanting to make it even MORE unsafe. And, our City, State, and Federal governments all have a hand in it (aka hand in the cookie jar).
All the best,
Tom Hilton
Current FBN thread on recent crash:
1 MCCNewsComment - Aug 20, 08:12 am
Is Arcola Airport (off McKeever Rd.) Safe?
Last March when the county was deciding whether or not to help Arcola Airport expand, near Sienna and many other Arcola-Missouri City communities, through a developer supported road diversion project, that would have required the take over of parts of New Pointe Estates and would have closed many area businesses on McKeever Rd. the issue of moving/closing this airport was addressed in several area discussion groups.
After this recent crash and the growing population density in the area, is it a topic that should be revisited? Several schools flourish now along this fly-way that received Hobby reliever status only last year along with many thousands of residents in the Arcola-Missouri City areas.
____________________
Comment/Question:
-Whatever happened to the mobility bond promise by Chief County Judge Bob Hebert to expand and improve McKeever Rd. without diverting it?
-Do the area schools on the fly-way have an emergency plan for an Arcola Airport crash/incident on or near their campuses (see Sienna Crossing and/or BB Middle School)?
...from http://missouricitychatter.blogspot.com
2 Tom Hilton - Aug 20, 01:36 pm
Howdy,
The fact that this airport is poorly positioned due to the surrounding residential neighborhoods keeps raising it’s ugly head. The west end of the runway is out of compliance with FAA safety regulations, therefore putting citizens living in Sienna, Arcola, and Newpoint Estates in harm’s way, yet the FAA keeps casting a blind eye to this safety hazard. The airport owner is steadily working on his plan to EXPAND this airport to the east, hoping to upgrade it’s classification to bring in MORE AND LARGER JETS, further exacerbating the safety issues (imagine a corporate jet and thousands of gallons of jet fuel crashing into our neighborhood). This crash was positioned 1,900 ft east of the end of the runway – if you extrapolate that position from the ultimate planned extension to the east, the airplane crashes into the heart of Arcola, just north of MacNicoll/Honey Grove intersection, and OUTSIDE of the planned Ultimate RPZ. If the airplane crashed on the west end of the airport equi-distant from the west end of the runway, it crashes right on top of the Stenberg house on McKeever (there are 13 homes between the Stenberg home and the airport). It is clear that this airport needs to be re-located to a more suitable location. The FAA and TXDOT Aviation keep pouring MILLIONS of taxpayer dollars into this fiasco, ignoring the egregious safety problems here (and denying that there are any plans to expand BTW), especially in light of the new development planned in Sienna adjacent to our subdivision. They are willing to gamble on the safety of our citizens – WE ARE NOT.
This airport needs to be brought into compliance NOW. NO EXPANSION SHOULD BE ALLOWED. It should be re-located as soon as possible for the sake of the safety of the citizens of Arcola, Newpoint Estates, and Sienna.
Tom Hilton, Arcola
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
more latest comments:
3 Brad Gilmer - Aug 20, 09:21 pm
There are car crashes every day. Those roads on which accidents happen are obviously dangerous and therefore should be closed because they pose a threat to everybody living nearby. Right?
4 Chris Calvin, Ph.D. - Aug 21, 04:59 am
Brad,
I think Mr. Hilton is talking about the FAA compliance issues. Also several schools with thousands of kids live directly on these fly-ways. Some discussion about moving it to a less populated area is warranted if they can’t get it into compliance.
Even a dangerous road would be a target for improvement and not just ignored where cars/accidents are concerned and the population is growing by leaps & bounds in this area of the county.
This is a wake-up call. I guess we have to wait for the worst possible scenario, right?
and...
5 maized&cornfused - Aug 21, 02:44 pm
There is a great concern if children are in the fly zone-period.
How would you feel if you knew that the safety of your elementary or middle school child was at stake when planes using this airport take off and land over the schools? This is the worry that parents of the students going to Sienna Crossing Elementary and now Baines Middle School face everytime a plane flys over their child’s school. I don’t want my child to be considered colateral damage in the airport expansion issue, would you.
If a road is dangerous and has many accidents then steps are taken to fix the problem-not make it worse. Thank goodness for Mr. Hinton and the others that are looking out for the residents of the area.
Well said Maized!
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
more comments:
7 Taildragger - Aug 21, 09:48 pm
Just a thought, but maybe they should have done a better job of planning where the schools are built considering that airport has been there since the early 1970’s and provides tax revenue with the businesses that operate there. This was an unfortunate accident that occured at the airport this past weekend but as historical facts show flying is still far safer than the automobile.
Also, Hightower High School which lies to the Northwest of the field is not in the direct flight path of aircraft taking off or landing at that field.
Lets work together through constructive means to make the airport a safer place for all that live near or use that facility. It is my understanding at this time that measures are already underway to make the navigation and lighting systems better at that airport which is a positive step in making it safer for all.
And one last note for Mr. Hilton, sir if you feel unsafe about your proximity to the airport you are always free to move.
Taildragger
8 Historian - Aug 21, 10:33 pm
Let’s see, the airport has been in continuous operation since the early ‘70s (with regular jet, turboprop and helicopter ops there since the ‘80s). Five or six older, widely dispersed homes predate the airport’s opening; the next (newer) homes were built in the mid to late ‘70s; Newpoint was developed in the ??s and Sienna was developed in the late ‘90s.
So, I guess the fact a group of airport businesses that were there before the majority of the homes, schools and other businesses – and brings over $7million in annual economic benefit to the area – should be penalized for the pleasure and perceived safety of those who freely chose to live, work and educate their kids nearby, knowing full well a busy airport was there.
Except for “Taildragger’s” reasoned comments, the rest of you sound just like the kid who threatens to take his football and go home when the game doesn’t go his way.
How many of you drive within the speed limit/don’t run red lights, don’t drink and drive, don’t wait at school for Billy and Susie in your Lexus or Escalade with the engine running to keep cool, don’t run your 5,000+
sq. foot home’s A/C to cut down on greenhouse emissions, etc., etc.?
All this sounds like the complaints of subdivision NIMBYs who focus only on their well-manicured nails and landscapes while remaining ignorant of the realities of a prosperous and free society.
If you’re going to selectively oppose nearby businesses, be sure you don’t overlook your pledge to Jim Hightower and KPFT.
Historian,
You and tail sound like an airport rep. that presented at the Arcola city council last December who tried to blame the 10,000+ residents of the area for security problems at the airport. Your rhetoric is old and tireless. This area is growing and changing and the airport has been out of compliance for years as well documented.
The only answer you few who fly your private planes out of it can give to those who speak up is to move. Well the developers of this area opened that door a long time ago and their sales people sold the airport to those moving here as a small commuter service, not a wanna-be regional expanding airport (out of compliance with the FAA RQs).
The funds that would be made available to Arcola would exceed anything currently produced if that land was sold and developed for businesses, homes, etc...
I will follow your cue and invite the airport to relocate for the safety of the thousands and many more coming to this area. You can park your private plane somewhere else (Sugar Land--15 mins?)!!!
As for your comments on the schools and children now in the area, well enough said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
and more comments:
11 hot - Aug 23, 12:35 pm
It’s funny maized, they always try to paint such a picture when it doesn’t agree with their position. I talked to people from all over Arcola, including the Arcola Heights area and found similar opinions about the airport regardless of socio-economic status. As I was discussing the issues with one family a plane taking off came roaring low and over our heads. I asked them if this was usual and they responded yes.
I’m sure that city, with its new reform mayor and some council members, can find better uses for that land that will help boost economic development in that area for all its citizens, not just a few elites (and their personal friends)!
12 John Knox - Aug 23, 01:17 pm
It is considerably more likely that a home near an airport will be struck by lightning as opposed to a plane. Do all those who oppose the airport’s right to do business have lightning rods? It is clear to me that those who oppose the airport are inconvenienced by the sound of the planes flying over their homes. The planes were doing this safely long before these residents moved in. The airport’s opposition successfully blocked the widening and improvement of McKeever Rd. because they feared its improvement (and required diversion) would allow the airport to grow and prosper. There was mobility bond money specifically earmarked for McKeever which is now being spent elsewhere thanks to their efforts. If the opposition is truly concerned with the safety of our children, I wish they would recognize that, thanks to their efforts to destoy a thriving business that has existed safely for thirty years, Sienna and McKeever children are placed in harms way each and every day travelling, what has to be, the most dangerous road in Fort Bend County. Regardless of what we say here, the airport will and has the right to remain in its current location. I truly wish we could work together and divert our safety concerns to the clear and present hazards of McKeever Rd.
13 mark - Aug 23, 03:40 pm
i want to know why those planes fly so low over our house in Newpoint. Definitely at time close to the treetops. Get these freaking planes out of my backyard! If people want an airport in their backyard have them move to one of those airport residential developments. Please all you pilots out there, please don’t strafe our properties. It only makes us madder. I don’t want to bring in the anti aircraft artillery.
and more:
14 Chris Calvin, Ph.D. - Aug 23, 04:00 pm
Mr. Knox,
According to this article below you should be pressuring Hebert and the developers involved who were originally pushing this project (have they no more interest now that the road isn’t being diverted through New Pointe Subdivision?). Mr. Hilton and many, many others repeatedly asked that the road be improved as is (giving this area a legit second exit away from the crowded hurricane evac. route hwy 6). BTW, don’t you serve on one of the airport committees and fly out quite a bit? Whose safety are you concerned about?
— “County Pulls The Plug On Plans To Divert McKeever Road
by Bob Dunn, Feb 28, 2006 03:51 pm
...“He accepted it,” Hebert said of Griffith. “He’s not a happy camper, but he’s accepted the reality of it.”
Hebert said the county intends to rebuild McKeever, keeping it as a two-lane road on its current alignment, and adding improved shoulders on each side to improve safety.
“We’re going to have to tear it up and rebuild it,” he said. “It will be a new county road.” He estimated the work will cost about $1.5 million.
He said with the improved McKeever Road, a new road called Steep Bank Trace also will be built, which will provide access to an undeveloped portion of Sienna Plantation property.”...
— Looks like you need to talk to your developer friends and Mr. Hebert, but know most of the residents of this community will not accept a return to the old plan that you and other Griffith friends are pushing.
Take care neighbor!
and more--
15 maized&cornfused - Aug 23, 04:54 pm
“How many of you drive within the speed limit/don’t run red lights, don’t drink and drive, don’t wait at school for Billy and Susie in your Lexus or Escalade with the engine running to keep cool, don’t run your 5,000+
sq. foot home’s A/C to cut down on greenhouse emissions, etc., etc.? ”
”...Do all those who oppose the airport’s right to do business have lightning rods? ”
Jeez, we need lighting rods too. What do these people want??-How many hoops do they want average homeowners to jump through before they will let you have the right to oppose non-essential growth near our own homes.
It’s too funny!!!
The type of development they proposed does not coexist with what the community has grown to be.
Thriving business? Hmmmm, if they are/have been thriving for 30+ years then I guess there is no need for them to expand and enlage the place. THAT ENDS THE DEBATE-THEY ARE DOIN’ JUST FINE AND WON’T NEED TO EXPAND TO DO BETTER. Whew-I’m glad that’s over.
(The next tune will be the “if you don’t like it move….” song.)
Maized -- I just love the "please move" veiled threats too. I remember last year we kept hearing them from the same crowd that pushes the bonds in this area for their political contributors.
Remember these:
One city official last year from Fulshear told the entire town of Simonton to move if they didn't like what was coming at a town hall mtg over disincorporation. Mayor Owen of Mo-City told a Sienna resident the same thing before city council over the apt. debates and of course these recent invitations too by the few pro-airport friends..--the rhetoric is quite tiresome!
I wonder if there is a template they all use from somewhere?
and more--
16 John Knox - Aug 23, 06:21 pm
Mr. Calvin,
I appreciate your comments but you and I both know that they are less then true. I am proud to say that I am a pilot who is based at AXH. I have never nor have ever been asked to serve on any committee related to the airport. The only commitee I served on recently that even came close to your attempt at an accusation was the mobility bond commitee whose purpose was to convince taxpayers like yourself of the benefits of the bonds to your community. I invite you to look into the county, state and federal dollars that were diverted from improvements that were planned for areas very close to your home because of your efforts. I also invite you to join me in a flight from AXH so that you will learn how safe it is for you and those below you. I apologize if our engines at take-off impede on your peace. When I was considering the purchase of my home very close to yours, my concern was the noise of the trains. I spent several evenings in the drive of my soon to be home to decide if I could tolerate the obvious. I decided that I could and have never been happier with the decision.
17 Chris Calvin, Ph.D. - Aug 24, 05:13 am
John,
The bond committee you mention I believe is what you have been touting in your consistent support of the on again off again road diversion airport expansion project. How is it not directly or indirectly related to the airport? I believe a fairly accurate history is available, and correct it and me if I’m wrong, of the history from “Citizens for Better Gov’t” at http://www.citizensforbettergovt.org/chronology.htm.
Like your support of the up to 2700 apartments approved by your father-in-law (Mo-City council), which was opposed by over 1100 area residents and several HOAs in a petition drive last year, your rhetoric on the road diversion is, I believe, all about the airport and not the safety of McKeever Rd.
I noticed you failed to address the key points above on the Hebert statements about improving the road “as is” for the safety of riders. Since you were on this “bond” committee (airport bond committee???). You can check the council and commission minutes to verify that the statements from Mr. Hilton, myself and many other residents/homeowners in this area that spoke against the airport expansion, road diversion emphasized the importance of upgrading McKeever as is. I would stop trying to use that disinformation, as it is highly inaccurate, and a matter of public record.
Hope pointing out the repeated flaws in your arguments is productive. We love this community too and won’t be silenced through intimidation, SLAPP-suits or information spin and will continue to engage public officials and others on what we consider the wrong direction of development in this area and applaud them when proactive value added growth is evident.
I look forward to your follow-ups neighbor…
and more:
15 maized&cornfused - Aug 23, 04:54 pm
“How many of you drive within the speed limit/don’t run red lights, don’t drink and drive, don’t wait at school for Billy and Susie in your Lexus or Escalade with the engine running to keep cool, don’t run your 5,000+
sq. foot home’s A/C to cut down on greenhouse emissions, etc., etc.? ”
”...Do all those who oppose the airport’s right to do business have lightning rods? ”
Jeez, we need lighting rods too. What do these people want??-How many hoops do they want average homeowners to jump through before they will let you have the right to oppose non-essential growth near our own homes.
It’s too funny!!!
The type of development they proposed does not coexist with what the community has grown to be.
Thriving business? Hmmmm, if they are/have been thriving for 30+ years then I guess there is no need for them to expand and enlage the place. THAT ENDS THE DEBATE-THEY ARE DOIN’ JUST FINE AND WON’T NEED TO EXPAND TO DO BETTER. Whew-I’m glad that’s over.
(The next tune will be the “if you don’t like it move….” song.)
16 John Knox - Aug 23, 06:21 pm
Mr. Calvin,
I appreciate your comments but you and I both know that they are less then true. I am proud to say that I am a pilot who is based at AXH. I have never nor have ever been asked to serve on any committee related to the airport. The only commitee I served on recently that even came close to your attempt at an accusation was the mobility bond commitee whose purpose was to convince taxpayers like yourself of the benefits of the bonds to your community. I invite you to look into the county, state and federal dollars that were diverted from improvements that were planned for areas very close to your home because of your efforts. I also invite you to join me in a flight from AXH so that you will learn how safe it is for you and those below you. I apologize if our engines at take-off impede on your peace. When I was considering the purchase of my home very close to yours, my concern was the noise of the trains. I spent several evenings in the drive of my soon to be home to decide if I could tolerate the obvious. I decided that I could and have never been happier with the decision.
17 Chris Calvin, Ph.D. - Aug 24, 05:15 am
John,
The bond committee you mention I believe is what you have been touting in your consistent support of the on again off again road diversion airport expansion project. How is it not directly or indirectly related to the airport? I believe a fairly accurate history is available, and correct it and me if I’m wrong, of the history from “Citizens for Better Gov’t” at http://www.citizensforbettergovt.org/chronology.htm.
Like your support of the up to 2700 apartments approved by your father-in-law (Mo-City council), which was opposed by over 1100 area residents and several HOAs in a petition drive last year, your rhetoric on the road diversion is, I believe, all about the airport and not the safety of McKeever Rd.
I noticed you failed to address the key points above on the Hebert statements about improving the road “as is” for the safety of riders. Since you were on this “bond” committee (airport bond committee???). You can check the council and commission minutes to verify that the statements from Mr. Hilton, myself and many other residents/homeowners in this area that spoke against the airport expansion, road diversion emphasized the importance of upgrading McKeever as is. I would stop trying to use that disinformation, as it is highly inaccurate, and a matter of public record.
Hope pointing out the repeated flaws in your arguments is productive. We love this community too and won’t be silenced through intimidation, SLAPP-suits or information spin and will continue to engage public officials and others on what we consider the wrong direction of development in this area and applaud them when proactive value added growth is evident.
I look forward to your follow-ups neighbor…
18 John Knox - Aug 24, 08:30 am
Chris,
Let me address each of your points…1) The county formed mobility bond committee served to educate the citizens of the value of the mobility bonds to the taxpayers. McKeever road improvements were part of the original plan. The airport expansion was not. The airport was and is a private enterprise and no mobility bond money was designated for it. Two distinct issues. The subsequent consideration for diversion was because the McKeever widening in its current path would extend into FAA required easements, so the airport suggested that the road be diverted to land that he would donate so that all could get what they needed. Again, nothing to do with airport expansion. And telling me to read your own writings to get a fairly accurate history is kind of funny, don’t you think? 2) The apartments were agreed to by city council 2 years before my father-in-law took office and what does that have to do with what we are talking about. To make that your arguement that it proves that my concern is all about the airport is embarrassing. I know the airport is always going to exist and its current size is just fine with me. My concern is and always has been the safety of McKeever. 3) What Mr. Hebert represents about improving the road has nothing to do with what has actually been done, so why do I need to comment on what he said. There are currently no plans to improve McKeever from what I understand. If Mr. Hebert says otherwise, I hope he does what he says he will do. “Airport bond committee”? Please…Statements like that really diminish any arguement you may have had. Don’t insult me or anybody else who may be reading this with statements that are not only knowingly misleading, but present no statements even remotely resembling the truth. Now tell me where I am providing misinformation when I say that you opposed McKeever’s diversion because it represented to you that the airport would expand. I don’t care where McKeever runs, as long as it is improved. You want it not to be diverted so the airport cannot expand. There are no plans to improve McKeever currently and one reason for this is that nobody could agree on where it would go. What misinformation? 4) I don’t even know how to respond to your last paragraph without offending you, so I won’t.
19 Chris Calvin, Ph.D. - Aug 24, 10:41 am
Once again John you are giving me credit for materials that were collected by someone else. So I guess that is more disinformation too. If you visit the citizens for better gov’t site that is Mr. Hilton’s group, which I do support and trust, you will find a fairly accurate account (given his perspective) on what has happened. Similarly you have reverted to obfuscation in your discourse. Repeating many of the same public arguments county officials made before they reversed their decision in March. Go back a revisit those pages and article. Many available on the FBN site (fairly easy to find too).
I guess your 8/23 comment is referencing the diversion which you claim is required for the airport. So the airport won’t expand if the road is diverted? John I’ve heard too many politician over the last few months speak out on both side of issues to clearly see the tactic being used in this thread and the e-mails you have been sending me behind the scenes.
Your comment above:
“The planes were doing this safely long before these residents moved in. The airport’s opposition successfully blocked the widening and improvement of McKeever Rd. because they feared its improvement (and required diversion) would allow the airport to grow and prosper. There was mobility bond money specifically earmarked for McKeever which is now being spent elsewhere thanks to their efforts.”—Knox
—I suppose now you will deny this statement too and claim you don’t support another effort by the county to expand your airport (which will be adamantly opposed).
The double-bind tactics of debate are useless once identified. Argue honestly or don’t bother. Your bias is clear and we simply don’t agree as do many homeowners, taxpayers.
It is too bad that the bonds you helped “educate the public about” aren’t at least being used to fix McKeever Rd. as is because those that supported them didn’t get their way on the project.
You can have the last word if you like and their is no need to e-mail me behind the scenes while playing these public verbiage games.
As always debate can be enjoyable…take care neighbor!
20 Tom Hilton - Aug 24, 01:06 pm
Mr. Knox,
McKeever was put into the mobility bond issue by Jamie Griffith himself, the owner of Houston SW Airport. Go to; http://www.citizensforbettergovt.org/griffith_adolphus.jpg and there it is, from the horse’s mouth…”An integral part of the future development of Houston SW Airport is the EXPANSION of the airport north across McKeever Road and the Briscoe Canal. In order for this to happen, McKeever Road needs to be diverted up to Highway 6 where it will tie into South Post Oak. To facilitate the inclusion of this project in the upcoming (mobility bond) election, I will commit to dedicating the right-of-way to the county and to funding 50% of the road’s construction cost between Highway 6 and the old McKeever Road. Upon completion of the new McKeever Road/South Post Oak, the old McKeever Road right-of-way would be deeded to the airport owner”. There it is, in black and white, and signed by Mr. Griffith himself. It’s time to come out of denial Mr. Knox – you ARE presenting misinformation sir.
It reminds me of the last day of Judge Adolphus tenure in office, when the airport feasibility study got delayed by questions from Sugar Land City Council…the obviously-preturbed Judge (may he rest in peace) looked at us homeowners and wagged his finger; “Didn’t you know the airport was there when you moved there”? In other words, the logic was that since the airport was there when we moved here, it gives the airport owner the right to bulldoze our homes at will – we have no rights as homeowners in this county. (The feasibility study at that time required demolition of several homes at the west end of the airport). It is exactly this type of twisted logic that you, Mr. Knox, are carrying forward here.
For someone who used to office in the County Judge’s office, I would think that you would be privy to the current plans for McKeever Road – the funding has been approved, and Judge Hebert has alerted Mayor Tuffly that McKeever will be totally rebuilt including new shoulders beginning this October. Your claim that there are no plans to improve McKeever again sir, is more misinformation.
McKeever Road CURRENTLY, (not widened as you incorrectly claimed) violates the RSA at the west end of the runway, thus the airport is operating in an unsafe manner. The FAA cannot grant waivers on RSA’s. You insinuate that it is unreasonable for citizens living in the area to demand that this airport operate under mandated saftey requirements. It is not. You also claim that the “improvements” are for safety reasons – the main reason for the expansion of the airport is to upgrade it’s classification from a B-II to a C-II. This will allow the airport to service more and larger jets. This airport cannot operate under mandated safety requirements NOW, and common sense tells you that bringing in more and larger jets will NOT MAKE IT SAFER. Sabe?
McKeever was INTEGRAL (refer above) to the expansion of the airport, and if not diverted, WOULD/DID prevent the expansion. This road has always been a thorn in Griffith’s side for 2 reasons; 1) It violates the RSA and must be diverted (or the runway needs to shortened, and Griffith surely didn’t want that) and 2) Griffith must get rid of McKeever in order for the planes to taxi across to the new hangers planned on the property north of McKeever. South Post Oak was the solution to both of these problems.
As far as McKeever Road being the most dangerous road in the County, decisions were made to remove McKeever from the mobility list because it is clear that is not anywhere near deserving of our county tax dollars as other more dangerous roads such as Harlem Rd and Oilfield Rd. McKeever was in there as a way for the county to pay for improvement of Mr. Griffith’s property using our tax dollars. If you have a beef with McKeever being taken off of the mobility list, then take it up with the appropriate authorities.
Mr. Knox, this airport is a cancer on this community…it keeps wanting to spread. It is a drain on the city and county coffers as the tax base is basically non-existent on the airport properties. The land would be much better utilized (and safer) if it were developed for commercial/residential uses, as sales tax and property tax revenues would skyrocket vs what the feeble airport can muster up now.
If it could ever come into compliance with FAA safety regs, and NOT expand to the east, then we have no problem with the airport remaining where it is (contrary to your claims).
After all, we knew the airport was here when we moved here.
Tom Hilton
Arcola
22 John Knox - Aug 24, 02:41 pm
Mr. Hilton,
I no longer wish to debate this with you or Mr. Calvin as it is clear that we will never agree nor will you ever understand or do you want to understand my position, my motivation to debate this issue or where my loyalties lie. Suffice it to say that the John Knox that you mention above is not me, though that John Knox served this community proudly and without pay for 25 years, loves this City, its residents and business owners and would do anything he felt was right for all of the above. I am very proud to say that he is my father. I would never speak for him nor would I ever have to, but I suspect he would also disagree with what you are trying to do. It is and always will be my opinion that what you and Mr. Calvin are trying to do is wrong and motivated by self-serving desires. I’m sure you will accuse me of the same but I can sleep at night knowing that it is not true. I hope you can do the same.
23 Chris Calvin, Ph.D. - Aug 24, 03:23 pm
I guess Tom he isn’t going to thank you for keeping us posted on the McKeever Rd. improvement that will provide a safer environment for those who frequent that roadway, as claimed earlier.
I know many here that are glad to hear this news. Keep us posted if you hear anything else and thanks again. Hopefully if another crash occurs at this airport FBN will get the info out to us promptly. We didn’t hear a thing about it through our HOA here in Sienna, which, of course, is developer run.
John--this should be a time of celebration given the news but I guess the theory and praxis are somehow out of sink. Right?
and more:
23 Chris Calvin, Ph.D. - Aug 24, 03:23 pm
I guess Tom he isn’t going to thank you for keeping us posted on the McKeever Rd. improvement that will provide a safer environment for those who frequent that roadway, as claimed earlier.
I know many here that are glad to hear this news. Keep us posted if you hear anything else and thanks again. Hopefully if another crash occurs at this airport FBN will get the info out to us promptly. We didn’t hear a thing about it through our HOA here in Sienna, which, of course, is developer run.
24 Prescott E. Small - Aug 24, 08:16 pm
This is a highly emotional debate with lots of personal interests on both sides.
But one thing remains true that I learned from Spock – “The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.”
So The Airport was here first, so were the Indians. I don’t see you history buffs clamoring to return all of the land back to the Indians?
While historical precedence is used often as a point to stand ground in an argument the fact is you can not fight change.
The area has evolved and the need for the airport is obsolete.
As I pointed out in a post months ago: (http://www.fortbendnow.com/opinion/695/mckeever-road-expansion-doesnt-pass-smell-test)
Still the questions remain:
Why does this airport require expansion when Sugar Land has nearly completed their expansion?
Where is the benefit to the community?
The area has evolved beyond the needs to the airport and it’s clientele, the thousands of residents in the area would greatly benefit from new services that could be provided while the few could spend an extra 15 minutes driving back and forth to Sugar Land airport.
25 David Reitz - Aug 24, 08:37 pm
And I just moved next to the train tracks and the trains are too loud and might jump the tracks with a resulting chemical spill. How do we get them to go somewhere else? PS – thanks for the news on McKeever expansion.
26 maized&cornfused - Aug 24, 09:36 pm
“How do we get them to go somewhere else?”
Well David, first you need a lightning rod…..
more comments:
27 . - Aug 25, 07:08 am
David,
We had a neighbor call the 2 train companies involved about that a few months back (we live near those tracks and the airport too). The rumor we had heard is that they couldn’t transport hazmet through highly populated residential areas, but when we talked to co. execs. found out this was not true and when we checked on the other rumor about decreasing train traffic the same exec. told us that it has actually increased as more traffic routes around Houston through this area.
Sorry for this additional news. Hope all works out for you and yours in that area.
28 John Knox - Aug 25, 07:24 am
I have not heard the news from a reliable source yet, but if it is true that they are planning to improve McKeever, that is wonderful news. If Mr. Calvin and/or Mr. Hilton had anything to do with it, my sincerest THANK YOU!. You may now continue bashing the airport, me and or any other who disagrees with you without my input, as this response is my final. Your distaste for my views is a compliment to me.
Please explain to 13 mark that threats of shooting down airplanes, regardless of its intent, is extremely unsettling to a pilot, to say the least. It is also a felony. Freedom to express your views publicly comes with a responsibility. I suggest you remove it from this site.
29 . - Aug 25, 08:15 am
Yes maized I guess a very long lightning rod might help. . . ;-)
30 Bob Dunn - Aug 25, 08:18 am
It seemed obvious mark was not making a threat.
However, let me suggest that commenters are more likely to influence others with their views if they make an effort to keep the discourse civil and show respect for everyone.
Thanks.
31 hot - Aug 25, 08:42 am
Good point Bob. The core rules of netiquette are located at:
http://www.albion.com/netiquette/corerules.html
and more--
28 John Knox - Aug 25, 07:24 am
I have not heard the news from a reliable source yet, but if it is true that they are planning to improve McKeever, that is wonderful news. If Mr. Calvin and/or Mr. Hilton had anything to do with it, my sincerest THANK YOU!. You may now continue bashing the airport, me and or any other who disagrees with you without my input, as this response is my final. Your distaste for my views is a compliment to me.
Please explain to 13 mark that threats of shooting down airplanes, regardless of its intent, is extremely unsettling to a pilot, to say the least. It is also a felony. Freedom to express your views publicly comes with a responsibility. I suggest you remove it from this site.
29 . - Aug 25, 08:15 am
Yes maized I guess a very long lightning rod might help. . . ;-)
30 Bob Dunn - Aug 25, 08:18 am
It seemed obvious mark was not making a threat.
However, let me suggest that commenters are more likely to influence others with their views if they make an effort to keep the discourse civil and show respect for everyone.
Thanks.
31 hot - Aug 25, 08:42 am
Good point Bob. The core rules of netiquette are located at:
http://www.albion.com/netiquette/corerules.html
32 Tom Hilton - Aug 26, 10:16 am
John Knox,
“It is and always will be my opinion that what you and Mr. Calvin are trying to do is wrong and motivated by self-serving desires.”
Your viewpoints are clearly in alignment with the Fort Bend Economic Council propaganda regarding this boondoggle of an airport.
If asking for a business to operate under mandated safety requirements is wrong, then (how does the song go?) I don’t want to be right. It is not self-serving to keep things up on top of the table for all to see (not just GFBCEDC insiders). I know it irritates you and the EDC that someone cares enough about this community to do that, but rest assured, I will continue to try to keep the information available to ALL (including you).
The abandonment of the South Post Oak extension is partially due to my vigilence regarding the misinformation put forth by the airport owner and (at that time) the County Judge – but I cannot claim full credit for that happening. Judge Hebert came to realize (after meeting with residents of the area) that the South Post Oak realignment was indeed not in the best interests of the citizens of this County. Your comment; “There are currently no plans to improve McKeever from what I understand. If Mr. Hebert says otherwise, I hope he does what he says he will do.” I assure you, Mr. Knox, that Judge Hebert is a man of his word – you do not need to question that.
Construction on McKeever should start in about 6 weeks. If Mr. Griffith wants a road going thru his property, then he will have to pay for it himself – not Fort Bend County taxpayers.
All the best,
Tom Hilton
. . . and we thank you Tom for standing up to these people who like to run our lives. . .
[url=http://loveepicentre.com/][img]http://loveepicentre.com/uploades/photos/2.jpg[/img][/url]
lake city fl florida dating salt [url=http://loveepicentre.com/advice.php]cowboy dating show[/url] robert pattison dating kristen stewart
free phone dating in los angeles [url=http://loveepicentre.com/testimonials.php]wife was dating another woman[/url] joomla dating site
latest adult dating site [url=http://loveepicentre.com/testimonials.php]dating sim dates[/url] dating boston
palm pilot tv remote software http://buysoftwareonline.co.uk/product-31439/Windows-XP-Professional-SP3-x86-32bit-German panasonic phone system software [url=http://buysoftwareonline.co.uk/fr/category-100-110/Internet?page=48]windows automated recovery software[/url] drivers ed simulator software
[url=http://buysoftwareonline.co.uk/product-37369/Abexo-Memory-Defragmenter-and-Process-Tweak-2-4]Abexo Memory Defragmenter and Process Tweak 2.4 - Software Store[/url] wii software wikipedia
[url=http://buysoftwareonline.co.uk/fr/product-14304/PassMark-PerformanceTest-v6-1][img]http://buyoem.co.uk/image/4.gif[/img][/url]
weitendorf software gmbh http://buysoftwareonline.co.uk/product-14006/IK-Multimedia-Amplitube-Live-2-0 computer software car modeling [url=http://buysoftwareonline.co.uk/category-200-212/Multimedia-and-Entertainment?page=2]dvd editing software croping[/url] orthogonal software
[url=http://buysoftwareonline.co.uk/product-36580/Microsoft-Windows-7-Ultimate-x64-Danish]Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Danish - Software Store[/url] oracle and agile software press release
[url=http://buysoftwareonline.co.uk/it/product-37092/Mask-My-IP-2-2][img]http://buyoem.co.uk/image/3.gif[/img][/url]
[url=http://redbrickstore.co.uk/products/prilosec.htm][img]http://onlinemedistore.com/6.jpg[/img][/url]
kmart pharmacy clinton oklahoma http://redbrickstore.co.uk/products/cordarone.htm bethesda giant pharmacy old georgetown rd [url=http://redbrickstore.co.uk/products/sinequan.htm]safe reliable offshore pharmacy[/url]
clinical pharmacy http://redbrickstore.co.uk/products/ventolin.htm history pharmacy [url=http://redbrickstore.co.uk/products/dramamine.htm]dramamine[/url]
pharmacy regulations in a skilled care facility http://redbrickstore.co.uk/products/inderal.htm pharmacy coupon new prescription [url=http://redbrickstore.co.uk/products/citalopram.htm]seychelles pharmacy[/url]
tx state board of pharmacy http://redbrickstore.co.uk/products/viagrx.htm main street family pharmacy [url=http://redbrickstore.co.uk/products/mentat.htm]mentat[/url]
[url=http://certifiedpharmacy.co.uk/products/biaxin.htm][img]http://onlinemedistore.com/4.jpg[/img][/url]
canadian mail order pharmacys http://certifiedpharmacy.co.uk/products/hytrin.htm carecenter pharmacy [url=http://certifiedpharmacy.co.uk/categories/party-pills.htm]compounding pharmacy virginia[/url]
pharmacy tech resumes http://certifiedpharmacy.co.uk/products/relafen.htm pharmacy oakdale [url=http://certifiedpharmacy.co.uk/products/buspar.htm]buspar[/url]
compair walmart pharmacy http://certifiedpharmacy.co.uk/catalogue/g.htm u of water pharmacy school [url=http://certifiedpharmacy.co.uk/products/epivir.htm]hy vee pharmacy[/url]
canadian vet pharmacy http://certifiedpharmacy.co.uk/categories/gastrointestinal.htm what is managed care pharmacy [url=http://certifiedpharmacy.co.uk/products/phenergan.htm]phenergan[/url]
[url=http://certifiedpharmacy.co.uk/products/generic-keflex.htm][img]http://onlinemedistore.com/1.jpg[/img][/url]
qsi pharmacy software http://certifiedpharmacy.co.uk/products/elavil.htm katsaros pharmacy hyde park [url=http://certifiedpharmacy.co.uk/cart.htm]cvs pharmacy internship program[/url]
cardizem cd cardizem cd nasacort cvs pharmacy store http://certifiedpharmacy.co.uk/products/alavert.htm dallas schools pharmacy technician education [url=http://certifiedpharmacy.co.uk/products/chloramphenicol.htm]chloramphenicol[/url]
managed care pharmacy conferences 2008 http://certifiedpharmacy.co.uk/products/abana.htm horten and commerce pharmacy [url=http://certifiedpharmacy.co.uk/catalogue/l.htm]michigan pharmacy association[/url]
beakett pharmacy weatherford tx http://certifiedpharmacy.co.uk/products/trimox.htm university of central florida pharmacy programs [url=http://certifiedpharmacy.co.uk/products/plavix.htm]plavix[/url]
maryland bans online dating chatting http://loveepicentre.com/taketour/ 100 free saudi arabia dating sites
free mature bbw dating [url=http://loveepicentre.com/map/]dating medford oregon[/url] powered by phpbb india bombay dating
divorced and dating with children [url=http://loveepicentre.com/]old mature women free dating sites[/url] totally free christian dating sites [url=http://loveepicentre.com/user/rainland/]rainland[/url] ok ask dating to a concert
zhengjx20160706
juicy couture
louis vuitton
true religion outlet
coach outlet
nike roshe run mens
air jordan shoes
adidas nmd
toms wedges
oakley outlet
hollister clothing
replica watches
christian louboutin sale
burberry outlet
michael kors outlet
jordan concords
ray bans
adidas outlet store
replica rolex watches
adidas originals store
christian louboutin sale
louis vuitton outlet
louboutin shoes
nfl jerseys
michael kors outlet
kobe shoes 11
coach outlet
nike uk
celine bags
gucci belts
vans sneakers
kate spade handbags
gucci bags
coach outlet store online
coach outlet
louis vuitton handbags
hollister jeans
polo ralph lauren
coach outlet
michael kors
ray ban sunglasses
qzz0714
ferragamo shoes
canada goose outlet
mac makeup
prada shoes
cleveland cavaliers jersey
kate spade outlet
air max 95
lebron james shoes
polo ralph lauren
michael kors outlet
nike air force 1
goyard handbags
golden goose
timberlands
converse outlet
adidas gazelle
nike shoes
balenciaga shoes
kobe basketball shoes
jordan shoes
Ongoing All Government Job Circular 2021 has been released on our website- www.jobnewsbd24.com. These government job circulars such as Defense Services, Bangladesh Civil Service (BCS), Bangladesh Police, Bangladesh Railway, etc. Every day a new job circular has been released our website
Post a Comment
<< Home