Comments on: Tensions High as Kalispell Airport Study Proceeds
By skylane on 02-09-12
I work right next to the airport and used to live on Teal. I hardly notice its there.
Haters gonna hate
By Smackya on 02-11-12
Not sure who skylane thinks are the Haters, but QUIET SKIES members are not haters of the airport or of pilots. We just want people who live and work next to the airport to continue to
hardly notice it’s there. So we are saying NO, to expansion. We don’t want Bigger, Faster,
Louder, More Helicopters and Turbro Prop jet aircraft any where near there or flying over our
city. And if you expand it, they will come, if you use F.A.A. funding to expand it at that location
you will have no choice as the 39 assurances to get the money allowes that to happen.
we of QUIET SKIES agree with Stellings findings, the two best options for the City of kalispell
are to Move it to G.P.I. or to the Stillwater location. leaving it alone is fine, but we want the
removel of the airplane and helicopter school, and new management and airport user rules as
they are the most troublesome as far a noise complaints go. And who in there right mind
wanted to put a Airplane and Helicopter school right smack dab in a residential neighborhood
anyway. I think the most cost effective route for the city is to leave it until the leases run out,
the only cost will be to remove the airplane and helicopter schooling activities. And then look at
other profitable uses for that land.
By Maria on 02-11-12
Chances are the City Airport was there when you bought your house. You knew the airport was there. No one had a gun to your head and forced you to buy a house in the flight pattern of the
airport. Now you’re pitching a hissy fit over the noise you think is excessive.
Few feel sorry for you. Either learn to live with the City Airport nearby, or move. Those are your
options.
By Smackya on 02-11-12
We didn’t move next to a airport that was wanting to get expanded into a larger one. We didn’t move next to an airport when in fact we live on the west and east side of kalispell. Kalispell was
already plotted out way before the airport came. It’s the airport that move to the wrong location.
Are you saying move 2000 plus home and busneses -vs- no to expansion? That doesn’t make
any sense. Are you wanting to spend 24 plus million dollars for just a few pilots wishes? Please
re-think your answers.
By Maria on 02-11-12
You moved next to an airport. Period. What did you think was gonna happen? It’s your opinion the airport “moved” in the wrong direction. I never said move houses - I suggest you move if you’re so
unhappy.
It is you who needs to do some re-thinking.
By Smackya on 02-11-12
Oh, my, you are an angry one. 2000 of us didn’t move next to a airport. Period. You ask what did you think was going to happen? Did the airport management think what was going to
happen when they wanted to expand it. Like do they think everyone one was going to say, O
by golly yes we want bigger, faster, noisey planes flying over our heads. Are you saying we
don’t have a say in what go’s on at OUR public owned property? I’m sure if we wanted to build
a 10 story building at the end of the runway, pilots would say Hold on that will be in our way
and we don’t want it there. Why do you want it expanded?
By verifiabletruths on 02-11-12
I, too, am a close neighbor of the City Airport and agree with Skylane that the airport is a non-issue, but I vehemently add, AS IT IS NOW. Smackya said it all, we object to
expansion, and spending millions and millions of dollars for less than 100 people.
I resent being a property owner in the Airport TIF district and that a portion of my property
taxes goes to that $2,000,000 debt the City incurred back in 2005. The airport manager,
also hired in 2005 managed to convince the entire council with the exception of Bob
Hafferman that if we spend the city’s money to bring the airport up to FAA B1 standards,
the FAA will pay that money back as well as foot the bill for the expansion plan. By
spending that 2 million, the City of Kalispell was locked into accepting FAA money. That
$2,000,000 debt has figured prominently in deciding to forge ahead no matter how
ridiculous it had become.
All these years, that has been the mantra that drove the engine of expansion. This whole
issue has been a money pit and in a time when everyone is seriously hurting financially, it’s
not reasonable to continue.
By Smackya on 02-11-12
I agree with verifiabletruths, it’s a money pit allways has been and that was the plan of the Airport Manager. It’s not all as bad as it seems, good part of that 2 million was land purchase.
We still own the new land and it can be sold or used for the city and taxpayers use. I’m so glad
we have some new council members asking questions. When Quiet Skies first stepped in to
this the Council had NO idea what they were getting into.
By Fast on 02-12-12
Small general aviation is dying .Small aircraft production is down.
Interest among younger people in aviation is almost non existent compared to the 1960’s 70’s 80’s Un like baby
boomers.
Baby boomers will be gone in a few years and along with them the interest in working to own,operate and keep
current there personal aircraft.
Bussnies avation and air carrier avation will be here for a long time.
But the hay day of general avation is gone.
By LogicalOne on 02-12-12
I might suggest the citizens NOT allow Quiet Skies and City Council to deny FAA funding and follow the FAA route to improve the airport to the basic FAA standards which would allow the
airport to be remodeled to make it a REAL airport, like all the rest in the state. Conforming to FAA
guidelines will leave you with a safer facility and it will have expert oversite and regulatory involvement from the DOT and the FAA.
We have had 80 years of letting the city and citizens groups NOT manage the airport to keep us in
the same argument year after year.
FAA funding is the bonus. The money is there and WE don’t have to cough up and build it
ourselves.
Look at it this way:
A group called “Quiet Roads” demands the city either remove HIWAY 93 N from the college to
West reserve because it is noisy, congested and dangerous due to accidents.
The group pressures the City to put speed bumps across the highway and repave the road with cobblestones to slow traffic down and make it so uncomfortable for drivers the just quit going there.
Of course that could not happen because there are DOT federal funds, rules and regulations that
make that highway built to standards which are the same nation wide. We have a safer
transportation system because of it.
Letting concerned citizens dictate to society how to build an airport is just as ridiculous.
Next issue is if they follow the pressure to move it up by the Glacier High School, what has that
solved? Remember there is an approved Starling subdivision up there too with 1200 approved
homes! 10 years from now you get the same issue all over again. The city will grow around the
airport. And take a look at Glacier Airport. Look the building that has pooped up around it.
AIrports, railroads, sewer plants and gravel pits cause land values to go down, yet people are
willing to live near them because the price is right for them.
For once in 80 years, the City should let AVIATION experts from the FAA put in airport
improvements which allow City Airport to better, safer. With that comes buffers so building will not
happen in the clear areas it uses south of the airport to make that happen.
By mooseberryinn on 02-12-12
I’m sure we will hear all the same arguments the next time an aircraft crashes into a home near the city airport. It’s not “if”, it is “when”.
By Maria on 02-12-12
Smackyouback-
You don’t listen very well do you? I suspect this might be your #1 problem.
I never said I wanted the airport expanded. What I did say was…if you’re so unhappy, move to a
different location where the airport is not the bain of your existance.
For 18 years I lived 1/4 mile from the railroad tracks in Whitefish. In a short period of time, I didn’t
even notice the noise or when the whistle blew twice a day every day. We knew the tracks were
there when we bought the house and the railroad was non-issue. At no time did we demand BN
move the tracks or limit train traffic.
Nobody likes a whiner and you sir (and your Quiet Skies ilk) are whiners of the first order.
By Smackya on 02-12-12
Maria!!! You need to take a Happy pill. But I’m so happy that you don’t want the Airport Expanded. We don’t either. By golly , I think we are on the same page. Have wonderful Happy
day, Be Happy…And most of all Be Nice.
By LogicalOne on 02-12-12
I read the papers in the valley and have followed this for a long time now.
Smackya, it seems to me we have heard you. We know where you stand.
However, you continue to answer every comment tit for tat and pepper your responses with
belittlement. You are a bit more civil over here at the Beacon than the rants and name calling you
get by with over at the Interlake’s Blog. We have heard every idea and issue you have come up
with.
Again we know where you stand. Let the rest of the world get a word in edgewise, please and
allow the rest of us to bring some new thinking and perhaps even alternative solutions than yours.
To me, you, if not already are, are becoming a cyber or blog bully.
By Smackya on 02-12-12
Logical One!!!!! Your just jellous that I didn’t comment on your mis-information. Who’s being the Bully? I say no expansion at this location, you say expansion at this location. I give my
reason, you give yours. I don’t like yours, you don’t like mine. So who’s doing the tit for tat…I
know there nothing you all would like better than for people not to express there opinions on
this matter. Sorry this is not 1932 Germany. You have no alternative solutions, we of Quiet
Skies have three, Move it to G.P.I. and or re located it to the Stillwater location or leave it the
same ( remove the aircraft and Helicopter training school ) and let the lease agreementsof all
the others run out and then close it, then re-develope it into something that’s profitable for the
taxpayer. Now Don’t forget we spent $97,000.00 dollars for a engineering firm to find
the “BEST OPTIONS FOR THE CITY” Not just you and a few others. Are you saying Stelling
engineers are wrong? These are the alternative Solutions, what don’t you understand? You all
are the ones that keep hammering the same old lines.
By LogicalOne on 02-12-12
Just for the record, I will expand on my solution, then you will know exactly where I stand. Then this is the last post for me. I would hope for some new blood to enter in and say what they are
thinking about the article here in the Beacon.
Expanding is not the same as improving. I say take the FAA money and improve the existing
airport. Since I am commenting on the article, not on anyones’ specific opinion and yet at the
same time expressing my own, I found Mr. Richardson’s AOPA study quite revealing.
Since 1961 there have been two fatals here. First was poor Scott Young, the owner of Flathead
Beverage. He had a safe twin and was a good pilot, yet weather he did not expect slammed his
plane into the runway and flipped it; the rest being in the report. Improving the airport with FAA
funds could have allowed this change in conditions to be known to Scott, as Automated Weather
Observations would come with the FAA package. I may have saved 4 lives there.
The other was those two nice guys who accidentally turned off the fuel to the engine without
detecting the mistake and they crashed killing both on board. There is no type of airport that would
have fixed that awful error. They could be enroute to any airport and make that error.
Every other mishap at this airport in the accident reports, except for a Medacvac helicopter that
crashed in town at the hospital resulting in no fatalities, were pilot error or weather related mishaps
contained to the runway.
Thats why, I leave you with improvements with FAA funding seems to me to be a great solution,
and even allow the City to impose very expensive landing fees for those big cargo planes and jets
those folks who fear “expansion” as apposed to “improvement” claim will torture our airport if that
happens. Although, I doubt there will be no more than traffic than the current type of airplanes that
use it now.
Good Luck and God bless.
By Smackya on 02-12-12
Thank you for your opinion LogicalOne. Why spend 24 million dollars on a airport when it all has been pilot error? Why spend 24 million dollars on improvements when there will be no
more traffic and the type of airplains that use it now? If the crash rate and Richardsons AOPA
study is not that bad, why spend 24 million dollars? There is no diffrenence between the
expansion or improvement plans. It still costs us tax payers 24 million dollars. And the people
of Kalispell do not want the 39 assurances that come with getting this money at this location.
Now this is tit for tat that makes sence.
By MommyDearest on 02-12-12
Hey Smack-o-dingo,
Why do you answer everybody with a question that is flawed and has no bearing on the facts?
Like the 24 million of “OUR” tax money question. This has all been covered and you choose to
ignore the money is sitting there for airports to use already…. JUST SITTING THERE… and it’s
not yours…. its the aviation community’s money. It came from USER (aka PILOT) FEES! Stop
being a brick. Its not YOUR or Quiet Scare’s or any combination belonging to you, you want to
claim.
Stop arguing that 24 million dollars of YOUR money is being wasted. ITs earmarked for the project!
It NOT YOUR TAX MONEY… do you understand? Its not yours. Never was, never will be. But it
can be the airport’s money to make the place a basic small FAA approved airport.
Your next point, why spend money when it’s the pilots’ fault in most accidents? How dumb do
you want me make you feel arguing that one? Holy mud. A wider runway and longer overuns would
have saved HALF THOSE ERRORS from bending a nice airplane.
You keep saying the “people of Kalispell don’t want”. They way I read these posts is you are
claiming the 75% of the post who want the airport fixed and they are not bothered where it is as
your “peeps”... so stop that unless you can get your QS primates to post their own opinions
instead you trying to make us believe YOU SPEAK FOR EVERYBODY who walks upright!
You completely ignore the economic result of moving the airport anywhere or somewhere up the
Stillwater.
Move it and all the business around the existing City Airport are going to loose the possibility
of a revenue event due the proximity of the airport. Many pilots come from all the feeder
airport just because they can. Very convenient, very safe…. and you don’t see that because
you are complaining from a mile north. You might as well be in the Center Mall trying to
convince us you know.
Pilots buy stuff from Burtons Appliance, The Harley Davidson Store, fly in to have pizza at
McKenzie Rivers, buy saddles and feed at Murdochs, buy boat and parts from the marina across the
street, water from Culligan, groceries from Rosauers, health food from Witheys, go to the two
motels and hotels for rooms and food. Eat at Scotties, Bring in donations to the Salvation Army.
Get a tattoo, see their attorney over at the clock tower or buy windows and doors at Valley Glass.
Go to the court house, on and on. All that commerce disappears under a Scott Davis win-win. DOH!
Lets talk about the Search and Rescue and the Sheriff responding to that last avalanche…. add
a half hour to get up the Stillwater or over to Glacier. Going to cost lives, Mr Davis.
We all will loose if we let Quiet Skies muscle this debate.
Oh yes, Scott…. let me save you your favorite line: “Thank you for making my point.”
By JosephineDoody on 02-12-12
I’ve been a resident of South Kalispell since 1994. I knew the airport was there when I bought my house and the airport doesn’t bother me a bit. I’ve talked to all my neighbors on both sides of my
street and each one of them has said the airport is a non-issue to them.
This just goes to show that not everyone in South Kalispell is bothered by the airport. It is my
sense that the Quiet Skies people want to give the impression that ALL of South Kalispell is
against the airport, which simply is not even close to being accurate.
By Smackya on 02-12-12
The Airport Was Not Here First.
For those readers who continue to claim that “the airport was here first”, please read this twice.
1) Look at the historical markers throughout the airport affected zone. Many, many buildings
were built before the airport was built in 1929.
2) The airport management is relatively new.
Now read it again.
1) Look at the historical markers throughout the airport affected zone. Many, many buildings
were built before the airport was built in 1929.
2) The airport management is relatively new.
Just because this last plane crash happened in a newer neighborhood doesn’t mean that all
the houses in the airport affected zone are in new neighborhoods.
If you don’t believe it hop in your car and drive two miles north, northwest and northeast of the
airport. Here you will find buildings much older than the airport including the Conrad Mansion,
churches and the courthouse. The last airplane crash, in which the pilots were killed and the
house was destroyed, happened in a neighborhood that was established before the airport.
We know it is hard, if not impossible for you to accept that the airport was not here first,
because this false claim has been used for so long.
Every time it is publicly stated that the airport was here first, we at Quiet Skies will counter the
claim with
the facts. We will not let false claims go unanswered.
As a side note, many aviators prefer to use the city airport because they claim they the city
airport because is “friendly”. “Friendly”, is another way of saying “informal”. Glacier
International
Airport is formal on purpose - for safety and security. Where the safety of the public is
concerned, airports should not be informal.
By MommyDearest on 02-12-12
Smack you are getting nuttier than an Snicker bar.
Who cares which buildings were built before 1929 in Kalispell, 83 years ago? You want to go back
and count Noah’s Ark, too? None issue.
Now you are arguing “informal” vs “formal” ? Where do those points fit in?
I remember when YOU were complaining that Fred the airport managerlocked you out when they put
up the security gate on the west side, and you could not go driving around the airport, and
that took the friendly feel away and hated him for it. And now because you have nothing left to
bring to the table, you invent an informal feel issue to distinguish an FAA funded airport from
City Airport?
Here’s a fact you tell me proves you are right about everything: There are no airports run by
towns and cities from the Canadian border to Darby that have not taken FAA funds to build a
standardized-safe airport EXCEPT Kalispell.
And you saying the house was destroyed, where the unfortunate dog was killed? Did they tear it
down? I drive by it once in a while and it looks to me like they repaired the porch. Maybe
one of us is seeing a mirage?
I can’t hardly wait for you to clear up my statements, go for it!
By Maria on 02-12-12
Smackyouback-
Au Contraire, Mon Frère - we will NEVER be on the same page. You need to take reality pill.
By Smackya on 02-12-12
Wow, I can’t beleave this is still going on, way back in 1991, Mr. Dave Eabart, the Manager of the F.A.A. of the state of Montana at the time said to Doug Rauthie: Are you sure you want an
airport at this location? He was refering to the Kalispell City Airport location, he didn’t think it
was a good location. Then there was other studies done and them engineers said the Kalispell
City Airport should be moved to the east of kalispell out near montford road. Then Mr. Gary
Gates says: This Airport is problematic at this location. Now Stelling engineers are telling you
the best options are to move it to G.P.I. or re-locate it to Stillwater location. After 21 years of
professional F.A.A. and Airport Studies and Engineers firms, and hundreds of residents and
taxpayers telling you to move it, you still don’t understand what they are telling you. I guess it’s
a true saying: You can’t fix Stupid.
By LogicalOne on 02-13-12
Smack, you can remember where you underwear drawer is much less remember what hearsay you want to quote to try to support your nonsense from 20 years ago,
Stelling has offered many solutions in their report.
By Smackya on 02-13-12
Stelling offered other locations NOT solutions. But reported the BEST OPTIONS for the City Of Kalispell. Just like other engineering firms have in the past. $97,000.00 ( Ninty Seven
THOUSAND Dollar ) report came back and said: the two best options for the City of Kalispell
is to Close it and move it to G.P.I. or Re-locate it to The Stillwater LOCATION…( not any other
location) if F.A.A. approves. The Mayor and the Council members asked Stelling Engineering
to give them the Best Options for the City and the Tax payers and the residents of this fine
City. The reasons for this is the Mayor and the Council members and the taxpayers of
Kalispell Know the airport is a money pit, it is NOT a economic engin for Kalispell, it’s in the
wrong location IE: Mr. Dave Eabart, Mr. Gary Gates, and Hundreds of Kalispell Home owners
and tax payers, and not to mention TWO engineering firms. If you insist calling Mr. Eabart and
Mr. Gates, Mr. Stelling, and other Engineering firms studies and findings NONSENSE, please
call or write to them.
By LogicalOne on 02-13-12
Here is Stelling’s Drafthttp://www.kalispell.com/mayor_and_city_council/documents/AirportDraftMasterPlanChp6.pdf
Show me where STELLING says they recommend “BEST OPTIONS” anywhere.
Waiting…...
By MommyDearest on 02-13-12
LogicalDude has the right idea…. show us BEST Smacky.
In fact if you look at their conclusion page… it says it all!
Its BLANK until the approved master plan is published.
So again we caught you making up stuff to make it look like you are an expert…. and again you
proved you are just trying to bully your tantrum wannas through by being the loudest in the room.
By Smackya on 02-13-12
I’m not making anything up, I stated what the experts stated. I know that’s not what you wanted to hear, But it’s the facts, so you stop calling names and trying to be a somebody that don’t
know what they are talking about. Bully, Tantrum, Wannas…can’t find your underware
drawer…...grow up!
12/12/2011 Airport Master Plan Update, work session, by Stellings Engineer Jeff Walla at city
Hall, this is a audio recording. Go to the meeting in demand on the city web page. And look it
up. It’s there words , not mine. If you are in a hurry go forward on the tape about 45 min. into
the session and you will hear the two best options for the city. Look up the rankings and the
scorings, this will also show you the best options for the city. It’s compliacated, but it totaly
understandable, Airport Master Plan Update Work Session. I personally hope F.A.A. ok’s the
Stillwater location and Stelling get the right to develope it. It’s a win win win for all.
12/12/11
02h 55m
Audio
By JosephineDoody on 02-13-12
Mr. Davis-It’s pretty presumptuous of you to think you know what constitutes a “win win for all”. As I
stated earlier, I live in South Kalispell, the airport is a non-issue for me, and you DO NOT
speak for me.
You claim you only state the “facts” and yet it is your interpretation of those “facts” that is
found to be wanting. From the content of your posts and emails to the “Quiet Skies Members and
all who are interested”, it is obvious you hear what you want to hear.
You are the type of person who can be told water is wet and you’d convince yourself (and attempt
to convince others) it’s only wet if it falls within the flight pattern of the City Airport.
By Smackya on 02-13-12
@ JosephineDoody, Just like you said it’s a NON-ISSUE for you. So why are you involved in this at all? And as I told you before, No I’m not at all speaking for you. I’m the Spokeperson for
Quiet Skies that’s a group that you do not belong to. So why do you press your personal insults
on the people of Quiet Skies group? As you said it’s a none issue for you why do you care? I
don’t bthink you are being truthful!
By LogicalOne on 02-13-12
Please tell us the organizational and legal structure of Quiet Skies.Is it a 5013C?
Is it a public club?
Is it a public group?
Who is the chairman, president, officers and directors?
How does one become a member?
Where can we find a list of members?
Are there dues? If not, whose funds are being used to finance their efforts?
Since you are demanding public voting and you are lobbying elected representatives as an
organization and not as a individual, are you registered as required by Montana law?
Please provide us with that registration.
Who is your registered agent and what is his address?
Have you retained legal council?
By MommyDearest on 02-13-12
Smack-arone why do you insist on belittling everyone who does not side with you?
JosephineDoody said the [airport] is a non-issue for her. Now what do you really think she meant?
You took it that she did not care about the issue one way or the other.
Seems to everyone else, but you, she meant that YOUR adgenda of the airport needing to moved
out of town, quieted down and done yours and Quiet Skies’s way was the “non-issue”, otherwise
why in the sam heck did she express her opinion?
There are places you can go to have brain damage looked at, Smack. Try the yellow pages.
By Smackya on 02-13-12
Now get back on the subject!!!!!NO
No
No
Yes
Every One
Send me your e-mail address
Can’t, people don’t want to be harrased by people like you
No, each person pays for there own efforts
NOT, demanding nothing, NOT lobbing anyone. Don’t have to.
no
Don’t have
We do have attorneys, judges, police officers, Sheriff officers, Pilots, city employees, county
employees as members. Hundreds of supporters, taxpayers and residents in the city and
county and state, including people all over the U.S.
Who do you have?
By LogicalOne on 02-13-12
Certainly no bull like what you just wrote!You said Quiet Skies is
Is it a 5013C? NO
Is it a public club? NO
Is it a public group? NO
Who is the chairman, president, officers and directors? EVERYONE
You just can do this legit can ya?
I’ll stop there.
Put up or shut up with “Hundreds” nonsense.
By JosephineDoody on 02-13-12
Mr. Davis-
For some reason (God only knows) I am the unfortunate recipient of the emails you send to “Quiet
Skies Members and all who are interested.” I have no clue how I got on your email list however,
these emails are very telling. Rest assured, I am only involved to the extent I wish to make it
clear you DO NOT speak for me and you DO NOT speak for everyone in the flight pattern as you
would like it to appear. You may be the spokesperson for QS, but your methods suggest QS means
ALL those within the flight pattern. Many in the flight pattern to DO NOT share your opinions or
your message.
If you wish to be the spokesperson for your little band of the disenchanted that’s fine, but
please stop lumping the entire population of South Kalispell and within the flight pattern into
your “cause.”
By LogicalOne on 02-13-12
JosephineDoody You should call the Montana commissioner of political practices in Helena and let them know Quiet Skies has hijacked your name and you want them to investigate the lobbying by that
group.
By Smackya on 02-13-12
Ha ha ha Ha Ha Ha Ha push the button called BLOCK, PUT IT JUNK. Better yet tell me your e-mail address and I will deleat it. You must have sent it to me…... I bet the others are wishing
they were getting them…Ha Ha ha Ha Ha Ha We don’t mind if you are on it, as we tell the truth
and want to keep you informed. Please forward my e-mail address to all in your e-mail address
book. Our mission is to inform you all.
By JosephineDoody on 02-13-12
Mr. Davis-
I would NEVER subject my friends or acquaintances to your emails. I think more of them than that.
By Smackya on 02-13-12
Well, then you must not think much of yourself. Tell me your e-mail for I can deleat it from the hundreds that I have.
By Maria on 02-13-12
Smackyouback-
Now who needs to grow up? Look in the mirror.
By LogicalOne on 02-13-12
Scott Davis represents Quiet Skies with HUNDREDS of members?
If I were a member of Quiet Skies, I would distance myself, quit and take up the issues about this
airport without Mr. Davis’s representation.
Mr Davis acts in a manner which could not represent my views because of his childish, immature, nearly impaired reasoning and judgement and very confrontational, in your face attitude.
He does not argue with any legitimate cause and effect and offers distorted views, opinions and
trumps this all with a cyber bullying I have never seen before. He seems drunk behind the
computer and totally over the limit.
I would point out to the writer of this article that we all have tried to voice our personal opinions.
Davis does not allow views other than his to go unchallenged.. tit for tat. Does the Beacon have a
limit for this cyber bullying? Please investigate just who Davis claims he represents and expose if
he is a loner and doing this only for attention.
If I were on the City Council reading Davis’s post, I would not allow him more than two minutes to
state his wacky, distorted case.
His reasoning totally flies in the face of the goals of the citys draft document.
By Smackya on 02-13-12
Please Read: LogicalOne, Mommy Dearest,
Let’s be civil.
The Flathead Beacon encourages vigorous discussion and ( ” lively debate” ), but we will
delete comments that (” attacks” ) other readers, make ( ” accusations” ) we can’t verify,
( “stray too far off topic ” ), ( “criticize” ) local businesses (call them if you have a problem), ( ”
convict someone of a crime ” ), ( ” use profanity or are simply judged to be in bad taste ” ). We
don’t always have someone moderating comments, so we ask for your help: If you see a
comment that violates these ground rules, or you simply deem it offensive, please e-mail
webmaster [at] flatheadbeacon.com.
By Maria on 02-13-12
Smackyouback-
Said the Kettle to the Pot.
I suggest you re-read the Beacon policy and understand it.
By BiggerMig on 02-15-12
Y’all are getting ridiculous.
By LogicalOne on 02-16-12
Back to the issues…..
How much longer do we have to endure the misleading hearsay? He has no verifiable postion
based on facts of his own so he makes up conversations quoting public officials he tries to hide
behind to make Quiet Skies look like a mighty organization and Scott Davis look right as rain. He is
a fact cheater at best.
Using the media as creepy bully pulpit, he is bullying good honest citizens who have valid, factual
concerns and beats them with his belittling rhetoric and then has the nerve to envoke the “let’s be
civil” posting policies of the blogs? Laughable!
He quoted the Mayor. The mayor did not say that. Call her and ask her. She will gladly tell you.
Call your city council person and ask if Scott Davis quoted them right. or even if they said anything
to him at all! They will answer you.
Call any FAA office and ask if they offered any off the record advice to Mr Davis. (If it was on the
record, any information would conform to the FARs.) Thats how they work; buy the rules.
Davis has no rules. He make ups things people say. Misrepresents the facts like:
1. Sewer gas stops airplane engines. WRONG
2. Airplane engines running on unleaded gas is unsafe. WRONG
3. Stelling engineers are telling you the best options are to move it to G.P.I. or re-locate it to
Stillwater location. WRONG
4. they want to make it bigger for bigger and faster, and heaver aircraft WRONG
5. Morrison and Maierle engineers said the Kalispell City Airport should be moved WRONG
6. Some have questioned the pollution possibility that this airport poses at this location. WRONG
WE DONT NEED SCOTT DAVIS’ GUESSED AND MADE UP MISINFORMATION ANY LONGER!
HE IS WRONG ABOUT THE FACTS is intentionally pulling up junk about aviation he needs to get
an education about.
WHY IS THE MEDIA LETTING HIM USE YOUR SPACE TO CONTINUE THESE LIES?
COME ON EDITOR! You have the facts!
By Smackya on 02-16-12
Maybe we should only allow 83 year old aircraft out there. Back then they just were not thinking, now days if one was to build a airport, you don’t have the take off and landing right
over a town. That’s what they did at this airport. The City of Kalispell was ploted out way before
this airport was even thought of. They just were not thinking ahead. Again, it’s not the residents
of Kalispell who have homes in the wrong place. It’s the airport that put a runway in the wrong
place. Over the years there has been many options layed out to move and relocate this airport
out of town. WHY? Because people know it’s in the wrong spot. Things grow, things change,
get over it. They are moving the Rail Road out, they moved the Cherry Warehouse out, They
put in truck bypasses, they moved the hospitial, drive inn theaters, it’s progress. It’s either
move 2 to 3 thousand homes or a rundown old runway that only serves a few. And on top of
that F.A.A. is willing to pay for a brand new nicer and bigger one else where. Why does it have
to stay where it is at??????????????
By LogicalOne on 02-16-12
Yeah great idea.
Get rid of the railroad and railroad commerce to Kalispell died.
Get rid for the Cherry Warehouse and all the summer jobs went to Polson.
We need to get rid of that sewer gas over by your house, too. Methane has been shown to cause
mental disorientation or confusion, dementia, depression, and making up silly reasons to move
established infrastructure.
By Smackya on 02-16-12
Yep, just get rid of all the B.S. from LogicalOne and we all be fine. LOL LogicalOne what a oxyMORON.
By LogicalOne on 02-16-12
Oxy (Clean) Moron (People who spell stalking… STOCKING).
By LogicalOne on 02-20-12
Again Stelling has NOT said there are two best options. Can’t you guys read? It says:
There are five “preliminary improvement alternatives” for the city airport: upgrade and develop the
existing site according to B-II FAA standards and assisted by federal aid; upgrade the current site
in a limited capacity that would be ineligible for federal aid; build a new airport on West Spring
Creek Road; relocate all operations to Glacier International; or let the airport exist in its current
state without any investment, eventually resulting in its closure.
Get it right.
By Smackya on 02-20-12
Go to meetings on demand on the Kalispell web page and fast forward about 45 min. and what you will hear from Mr. Jeff Walla of Stelling engenners is the “TWO BEST OPTIONS FOR THE
CITY OF KALISPELL” yes there are other options, but they are not THE BEST OPTIONS FOR
THE CITY OF KALISPELL. Our Mayor and our Council members didn’t spend $97,000.00 to
find out what was best for the pilots. They instructed them to find and figure out what was in the
best intrest of the City of Kalispell. And it came down to Move it to G.P.I. or relocate it to the
Stillwater location. The other Alternatives are not in the best intrest of the City of Kalispell. You
sir need to learn to read right and quote it right. Don’t just pick and choose paragrafts that fit
your wishes. Go to the Kalispell web sight and check it out, I’ll be looking for an old hat for you
to eat…lol And by the way victory is allready had.
By Smackya on 02-20-12
I’m not making anything up, I stated what the experts stated. I know that’s not what you wanted to hear, But it’s the facts, so you stop calling names and trying to be a somebody that don’t
know what they are talking about. Bully, Tantrum, Wannas…can’t find your underware
drawer…...grow up!
12/12/2011 Airport Master Plan Update, work session, by Stellings Engineer Jeff Walla at city
Hall, this is a audio recording. Go to the meeting in demand on the city web page. And look it
up. It’s there words , not mine. If you are in a hurry go forward on the tape about 45 min. into
the session and you will hear the two best options for the city. Look up the rankings and the
scorings, this will also show you the best options for the city. It’s compliacated, but it totaly
understandable, Airport Master Plan Update Work Session. I personally hope F.A.A. ok’s the
Stillwater location and Stelling get the right to develope it. It’s a win win win for all.
By Smackya on 02-20-12
I’m not making anything up, I stated what the experts stated. I know that’s not what you wanted to hear, But it’s the facts, so you stop calling names and trying to be a somebody that don’t
know what they are talking about. Bully, Tantrum, Wannas…can’t find your underware
drawer…...grow up!
12/12/2011 Airport Master Plan Update, work session, by Stellings Engineer Jeff Walla at city
Hall, this is a audio recording. Go to the meeting in demand on the city web page. And look it
up. It’s there words , not mine. If you are in a hurry go forward on the tape about 45 min. into
the session and you will hear the two best options for the city. Look up the rankings and the
scorings, this will also show you the best options for the city. It’s compliacated, but it totaly
understandable, Airport Master Plan Update Work Session. I personally hope F.A.A. ok’s the
Stillwater location and Stelling get the right to develope it. It’s a win win win for all.
The views expressed in the comments section do not reflect those of the Beacon.