East Hampton's New Airport Restrictions May Be Grounded
A hearing will be held next Thursday at United States District Court in Central Islip on a bid by helicopter and aviation companies and a group called Friends of the East Hampton Airport to block the East Hampton Town Board from implementing an overnight curfew and restrictions on helicopters and other noisy aircraft.
The parties are plaintiffs in a suit challenging the legality of the new restrictions, which the board had hoped to have in place before the summer season. Aircraft that fall into a “noisy” category would be held to one takeoff and one landing per week from May through September, and the airport would be shut down from 11 p.m. to 7 a.m., with extended curfew hours of 8 p.m. to 9 a.m. for the noisy planes.
The Federal Aviation Administration, which itself was sued in January by the same group of plaintiffs in an action related to the town’s new laws, is expected to support the plaintiffs in their demand for a temporary restraining order. If it is granted, according to attorneys for the plaintiffs, the new restrictions cannot be implemented, at least until theoutcome of the lawsuits is determined.
The National Business Aviation Association recently joined the action against the town. According to its website, the group is also “considering additional measures to ensure . . . reasonable and reliable access” to East Hampton Airport for its members and other aviators.
Those who are suing the town contend that East Hampton is bound by agreements with the F.A.A. to operate within certain parameters of federal aviation law and policy, and that the airport use restrictions fall outside of those bounds and of Constitutional precepts.
The January suit against the F.A.A. challenged that agency’s stance regarding the town’s obligations. According to the settlement of an earlier lawsuit against the F.A.A. by a local group called the Committee to Stop Airport Expansion, the federal agency agreed to release the town from four contractual agreements, or “grant assurances,” after 2014. That, the F.A.A. said in a 2012 letter to former Congressman Tim Bishop, freed the town from complying with certain F.A.A. procedures in developing its own airport use restrictions to reduce aircraft noise.
In a letter to Judge Sandra J. Feuerstein, Lisa Zornberg of Lankler Siffert & Wohl in Manhattan, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said an F.A.A. attorney had indicated that the agency “intends to support plaintiffs’ application” for the temporary restraining order. She asked that the lawsuits against the F.A.A. and the town be consolidated, as they address common legal issues, and said the F.A.A. had indicated it would not object. The town, she said, did not consent.
In a statement released this week, Kathleen Cunningham of the Quiet Skies Coalition called the F.A.A.’s decision to support a restraining order “unexpected and alarming.”
It suggests, she said, that the agency is unwilling to defend its settlement agreement with the Committee to Stop Airport Expansion, which underpins the town’s recent efforts to adopt airport access limits. The settlement, Ms. Cunningham said, “legally restored the town’s proprietary rights . . . and therefore is fundamental to the town’s plans to mitigate disturbing aircraft noise impacts for East End residents this season.”
“The East Hampton Town Board has adopted policy to protect the health, welfare and safety of the residents of the Town of East Hampton, as well as residents all over the East End of Long Island, as is its right and responsibility,” according to the Quiet Skies press release. “The board worked in a transparent and comprehensive way, which led to the adoption of policy to protect the public from the adverse health, environmental and economic impacts of aircraft noise, while supporting a safely maintained, recreational airport. To go back to try to undo the foundation of these policies is the worst sort of big government interference. And, for whom? Some out of state helicopter companies that are unhappy that they cannot have 24/7/365 access to our community.”
“The Friends [of the East Hampton Airport] are trying to compel the F.A.A. to go back and negate the settlement now that the town is rightfully and lawfully acting as airport proprietor because they don’t want any limits on their ability to make planeloads of money at our expense,” said former Town Councilman Pat Trunzo III, a Quiet Skies member, in the release.
Congressman Lee Zeldin, who replaced Tim Bishop and is the newly appointed vice chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Aviation, wrote recently to the F.A.A., calling for the agency to stand by its previous assurances regarding the town’s rights to regulate the airport, provided no new federal airport grants were accepted.
“East Hampton is setting the stage for years of costly litigation by attempting to implement severe operating restrictions at HTO,” Steve Brown, the National Business Aviation Association’s chief operating officer, said in an article on the group’s website.
“East Hampton is part of a national system of airports, and operational restrictions like those under consideration present a threat to the nation’s air transport system that transcends local communities,” Mr. Brown and others had written in a letter to the town. “This is a critical element in the survival of our nation’s system of airports and one the town can expect will be vigorously defended.”