Available in English (this link) as well as Hebrew! The good people of Midi'in are struggling against the Infra-Structure Oligarchy of the region they live in.
See also posts from last summer about their protest-convoy.
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Recent from Congressman Himes
In a Nov. 19 letter, U.S Representative Jim Himes writes
"As you may be aware, in June, State Attorney General Richard Blumenthal argued before the U.S District Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia that the FAA had not conducted an adequate analysis of the effects of the change in flight patterns on air quality and noise pollution over our district. I was disheartened by the Court's short-sighted decision to side with the FAA."
I was disheartened but not surprised. I'm not a legal professional but I believe the lawsuit is flawed because it does not address the actual harm (including loss of sleep) caused by the FAA. We in the Greenwich area are affected by an increasing number of planes flying lower and lower overhead later and later into the night.
Himes' letter continues:
"On Tuesday, November 17, Attorney General Blumenthal filed a brief with the United States Supreme Court requesting that this decision be overturned. At the core of the Attorney General's argument is Connecticut's 10th Amendment right to seek the elimination of federal policies harmful to its citizens. "
Good point about the 10th, but IMO there hasn't been nearly enough emphasis on the "harm" part.
"I continue to monitor this matter closely, and stand behind the Attorney General's challenge. This flawed and poorly-implemented redesign should not continue to move forward without an adequate analysis of the negative effects it will have on residents of southwestern Connecticut."
The redesign may be moving forward but meanwhile the FAA is causing some area residents to move out... Perhaps that is what some so-called developers want -- cover our entire region with hermetically sealed office-towers. Simply chase residents away since they're powerless anyway.
"As always, if you have comments or concerns you would like to communicate to me regarding the FAA redesign, please email me at himes.noisewatch@mail.house.gov. Thank you for your continued efforts.
sincerely (signature)"
.
"As you may be aware, in June, State Attorney General Richard Blumenthal argued before the U.S District Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia that the FAA had not conducted an adequate analysis of the effects of the change in flight patterns on air quality and noise pollution over our district. I was disheartened by the Court's short-sighted decision to side with the FAA."
I was disheartened but not surprised. I'm not a legal professional but I believe the lawsuit is flawed because it does not address the actual harm (including loss of sleep) caused by the FAA. We in the Greenwich area are affected by an increasing number of planes flying lower and lower overhead later and later into the night.
Himes' letter continues:
"On Tuesday, November 17, Attorney General Blumenthal filed a brief with the United States Supreme Court requesting that this decision be overturned. At the core of the Attorney General's argument is Connecticut's 10th Amendment right to seek the elimination of federal policies harmful to its citizens. "
Good point about the 10th, but IMO there hasn't been nearly enough emphasis on the "harm" part.
"I continue to monitor this matter closely, and stand behind the Attorney General's challenge. This flawed and poorly-implemented redesign should not continue to move forward without an adequate analysis of the negative effects it will have on residents of southwestern Connecticut."
The redesign may be moving forward but meanwhile the FAA is causing some area residents to move out... Perhaps that is what some so-called developers want -- cover our entire region with hermetically sealed office-towers. Simply chase residents away since they're powerless anyway.
"As always, if you have comments or concerns you would like to communicate to me regarding the FAA redesign, please email me at himes.noisewatch@mail.house.gov. Thank you for your continued efforts.
sincerely (signature)"
.
Radio Mention of Airplane Noise
.
On the morning of Nov. 17, I was listening to WNPR (88.5FM) program "Where We Live." There was a discussion of the recent "rankings" of Connecticut towns by Connecticut Magazine.
It seems that Greenwich usually tops the magazine's (yearly) list, but this year it's second to Fairfield. That resulted in frequent mentions of Greenwich during the program. That gave me a chance to call it and... talk about Greenwich... meaning, the airplane noise, the the destructive impact of the FAA redesign on the Greenwich area.
The program's call-screener was extremely nice, very professional and competent. My question to the program's guest was -- why airplane noise was not one of the magazine's "ranking" criteria.
It sounded to me that the editor knows about the noise-problem, and would like to use more environmental factors in his magazine's rating-system. In any case, our cause got a wee bit of fresh "air time."
Recall that the noise had been mentioned some months ago on WSTC1400. To my knowledge, WSTC doesn't archive past programs on the Web. Where We Live might.
Interestingly, at a later point in the Where We Live program, one of the participants described a town that 'looked good' on paper, but, when some people moved there based on rankings they'd read, they were faced with the rude reality of a plane flying over them every 15 minutes! So the editor said -- do your "due diligence" before moving.
I couldn't help think: 15 minutes??? Here in Greenwich, there are many many days where a plane passes low overhead every 2-3 minutes, for hours on end!
But even the "every 15 minutes" mention shows more people are becoming aware of the noise-pollution, and, probably, are becoming less fearful of speaking out about it.
.
On the morning of Nov. 17, I was listening to WNPR (88.5FM) program "Where We Live." There was a discussion of the recent "rankings" of Connecticut towns by Connecticut Magazine.
It seems that Greenwich usually tops the magazine's (yearly) list, but this year it's second to Fairfield. That resulted in frequent mentions of Greenwich during the program. That gave me a chance to call it and... talk about Greenwich... meaning, the airplane noise, the the destructive impact of the FAA redesign on the Greenwich area.
The program's call-screener was extremely nice, very professional and competent. My question to the program's guest was -- why airplane noise was not one of the magazine's "ranking" criteria.
It sounded to me that the editor knows about the noise-problem, and would like to use more environmental factors in his magazine's rating-system. In any case, our cause got a wee bit of fresh "air time."
Recall that the noise had been mentioned some months ago on WSTC1400. To my knowledge, WSTC doesn't archive past programs on the Web. Where We Live might.
Interestingly, at a later point in the Where We Live program, one of the participants described a town that 'looked good' on paper, but, when some people moved there based on rankings they'd read, they were faced with the rude reality of a plane flying over them every 15 minutes! So the editor said -- do your "due diligence" before moving.
I couldn't help think: 15 minutes??? Here in Greenwich, there are many many days where a plane passes low overhead every 2-3 minutes, for hours on end!
But even the "every 15 minutes" mention shows more people are becoming aware of the noise-pollution, and, probably, are becoming less fearful of speaking out about it.
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)