Email - Buddy Motz:
Thank you Scott, I saw your presentation on your web site and have spoken to several of those that attended. Thank you for holding it in a professional manner. As a note most of the people that I have spoken to are concerned about the notification document and that is my major concern and focus as well. We are trying to slow this process down so that we can look at the issues on a reasonable and thoughtful way and Jim and I will be happy to sit down with you again and discus this further if you desire. I understand your and others desire to make this go away, but the airport is where it is and we need to address it from that perspective. Hopefully the end result will be something that will be seen as a benefit to the entire community.
Finally, I noticed that you posted on your web site that the city is negotiating with a company that markets L-39 trainer's as well as insinuating that US Air will be utilizing the airport. Scott I don't know who told you this but it is entirely false and you need to check your source better before posting information that is not true and only fans the fears of the community. I would ask you to remove it from your site as well as other pictures of larger aircraft that you know will not be using the airport. You accuse the city and county of many things, but in posting these articles and pictures that are not factual you are doing the same thing that you accuse others of.
Buddy
My Response:
Mr. Motz,
Thank you for the comments on the meeting.
Be advised that the City and County allowed these homes to be built. There is no reason we need to do this with the airport at this time. You have done no research on the protection of the homeowners, no idea of who or if the aircraft will come and you currently do not qualify for the funding - you are putting the cart before the horse!
We can look at this from the Orange County CA version - sound sensors, curfews and protection for the individuals in and around the airport! You can explore the options and protect all involved but you have not done that and it appears that you have no reason to do that because you are "not required".
I assure you the aircraft information is factual. The individual that told me this is well respected and has asked for me not to mention their names in fear that they will not be able to function in the community because of it. I propose that if the L-39 information is not true - then turn over all documents associated with the airport for the past 3 years. Show us the information and then it will be dropped. We have been instructed that two airports in the region have submitted bids to get this company into either the Rock Hill or Lancaster Airports.
As for the US Air jets you must know that these aircraft can use this airport once the extension is complete. They fall under the weight limits and can use this length of runway. This is from the manufactures web site and after we have talked to two US Air pilots. If you attended the meeting you would understand that these items on the presentation were talking points. We were proving that you are not being accurate in the fact that these type of aircraft can not and will not use our airport. The fact is that this type of aircraft can use this airport and the people have the right to know this. If you are stating that this will never happen then make it law. Propose an item to be voted on by the City and County that you will NEVER use this airport for commercial aircraft of this or any other type.
I know we presented a lot of information. I assure you I have done my homework as have the 14 individuals that are doing the research with me. All of this is documented with either web sites, emails or phone calls to individuals in the know.
I can say it is a shame that many people have come to me, given me documentation and asked not to have their names disclosed because they fear not being able to do business or fear retribution from their bosses in the City or County.
You have focused on the document not us. The focus for us is the airport and the overlay. Current State Law requires that we disclose any type of overlay the document is not needed for disclosure.
I assure you that we have numbers - many petitions and many people willing to work on this and get the information needed to stop it.
I will say this again, we do not mind the airport the way it is - if it needs to be bigger it needs to be moved - or you will have to pay for our losses.
Respectfully,
Scott Ball
Email - Buddy Motz:
Mr. Stegall, thank you for your email and note of concern. I am not quite sure what to make of your statement that you are concerned about my "lack of communication" when to my knowledge I have never met you and I know nothing about your trying to talk to me. To date I have attended many meetings and met and corresponded with hundreds of citizens about the airport and plan to continue having that dialogue over the next few weeks or months. Certainly if you did try to contact me and I failed to respond then I apologize for that and assure you it was unintentional. I will be happy to meet or speak with you any time to discuss the airport or any other county related matter as I would do for any citizen. In fact our county manager, Jim Baker and I met with your neighborhood association officers Tuesday night which I felt was very productive as to exchanging information and answering questions. We left agreeing to having a second meeting with the entire neighborhood at which time I hope you can attend and ask any question that you may have.
As to my support of the airport, my record is very clear that for the past ten years that I have been on the County Council, and even before that, I have supported the airport and I will continue that support and its future plans as well. The runway extension and overlay district issue before the county and city now is one that has been discussed in public meetings that I and others have attended for several years, as well as written about numerous times by the media including being discussed on local radio and television. Almost every month there is a commission meeting which is always open to the public, in addition to an annual meeting which is attended by both the city and county council, staff, and media. During this annual meeting the progress of the airport as well as future plans of the airport, are presented to all in attendance and are recorded in minutes. The airport operation budget is discussed and approved at city and county meetings on an annual basis which is also open to the public including a time specifically set aside to receive public input, also of which is recorded in minutes for public review. The media is always in attendance at those meetings as well.
I don't understand your term "unknowns" that you refer to, but I can assure you that the county operation, all meetings, and all plans are open to the public and are as transparent as possible for public review. As to the specific part of the overlay that concerns me the most and which the majority of negative comments that I have heard have focused on the notification document. I have been clear to our staff and everyone that I speak to that I don't support the notification document as written and which I am pretty confident will be changed before this issue comes back to the county council, and although I can't speak for them, I suspect before it returns to the city council as well.
Finally, I have spoken to both Mr. Ball and Mr. Konow and have seen their web site that you refer to. My personal opinion is that it is full of misleading information; misinformation which includes data pulled from the internet that does not apply to the Rock Hill airport or anything that we are discussing and planning for. I have spoken to Mr. Ball about my thoughts and although we have a difference of opinion, it is his web site and I respect his right to have it. My contention remains that it does more harm than good to his cause and misleads the public by doing so.
Respectfully,
Buddy Motz
My Response:
Mr. Motz,
Your allegation that my information is less then factual is not correct. In fact the professors and universities that have completed the studies as well as State and Local agencies would beg to differ with you. Although it dose not directly apply to our airport it does show a consistent devaluation, issues with noise and health! It has happened in so many areas that it has the potential to do the same here! Again the people that will be affected have the right to know that this could happen here!
This has been in the media over the years, but it has not affected so many in such a large impact as the items that you are currently discussing. This is the issue. You want a larger airport and have allowed residential building to continue while discussing this for years - you have made my point. It is the inept nature of the government to do what is best now and not take into consideration the future of the individuals effected because I may not be in office next year.
Again I challenge you to provide documentation of how this will grow, how it will affect our home values - show me studies that you have completed as a City or County that are directly pertaining to this project or airport and I will post them on the web page!
I have asked for financial statements and been told to file a Freedom of Information Act! I see where you have told us the budget is discussed in open - not the financial statements!
I have challenged you to put a law in place stating for now and the future that the City and County will not allow commercial traffic of any type in this airport. You have been or record stating this now inact a law and I will stop talking about the commercial traffic. You may one day no longer be in office but we will still be homeowners in an airport zone, what assurances do we have?
I have asked for all bids and documents pertaining to the airport to prove that the L-39 Jet Fighter Program bidding is not correct. I have a creditable source that Lancaster and Rock Hill have bid for this program. Show me different.
One thing is for certain, you have supported the airport and now you are on record that you will continue to support the airport no matter the cost to the people. Again, you were not elected by the airport, you were elected by the people and with so many people having an issue with this I would think that the elected officials would stand up for the people not the airport!
If this airport is that vital to the public good, where are the studies proving it, and protecting us. If it will be a huge benefit to York County and Rock Hill then put measures in place that will protect the communities. Show good faith. Sound measuring devices, curfews, per event maximums, sound proofing for individuals in zone 2, laws in place to stop commercial traffic and this would ensure a minimal loss in home values and interruption into our lives.
I applaud you for meeting with people - this is way more than the City is currently doing and for that you should be commended.
I love the fact that this is a democracy and everyone has the right to their opinions! I thank you for your service over the past 10 years and wish you all the best, but understand that I believe the people have the right to know what could happen to them.
Respectfully,
Scott Ball