Recent Articles in Real Estate & Construction Law from LexMonitor

Consensus on Gas Royalties

Mon, 08 Feb 2010 22:01:54 GMT

"I'm aware of the problem," Cuccinelli, a Republican and former state senator who sponsored a bill changing Virginia's eminent domain statute, said in an interview Thursday.

"It strikes a sensitive nerve for me because of the property rights issue, and the fact that government is essentially sitting on citizens' money," he said.

"We intend to pursue that informationally to determine what's going on so we can give the best, aggressive advice that we can to the governor, and to the agencies involved, to get that money to the people whose property it is," Cuccinelli said.

Gov. Bob McDonnell said he was unaware of the natural gas royalties accumulating in escrow, or the legislation aimed at releasing the funds. But he's interested, he said Thursday in an interview at a legislative gala sponsored by Southwest Virginia localities.

"Any money that's sitting around not being used we need to put to work."

Consensus on gas royalties should not mean the government worked this out. Dan Gilbert of Media General News Service, compiled a series of articles explaining the problem of the Virginia Gas and Oil Board and its failure to distribute funds that are owned by someone other than the Board itself. While the parties are trying to come to a consensus, the government’s comments that “any money that’s sitting around not being used we need to put to work” hopefully does not mean that the government intends to somehow keep it or find a way of keeping those funds to the detriment of private individuals.

Consensus on Gas Royalties

Mon, 08 Feb 2010 22:01:54 GMT

Richmond Times Dispatch

Sink Appeals Public Adjuster Suit: Delay Possible For Miami-Dade County Public Adjuster Lawsuit

Mon, 08 Feb 2010 20:49:46 GMT

There are two active lawsuits with very good attorneys representing public adjusters who are challenging the 48 hour solicitation ban and the fee caps. The first one was filed in Miami-Dade County, as I reported in Florida Public Adjusters File Lawsuit to Overturn 48 Hour Solicitation Ban and Fee Caps. The second lawsuit challenging only the solicitation ban was filed in Leon County, as I reported in Second Public Adjuster Constitutional Solicitation Ban Challenge Filed. The later filed lawsuit seems to be moving along quicker; the first lawsuit has been delayed by a fight about venue.

In Public Adjuster Lawsuit Challenging State's Cap on Fees and Solicitation Ban Survives Venue Change, I noted that the trial court in Dade County ruled that the matter could proceed there. Unfortunately for those public adjusters, Alex Sink appealed that ruling. By the time those appellate issues are finally resolved, the second lawsuit may be over.

These are important cases raising important constitutional questions. We will keep abreast of the developments in both.

The Renewable Energy Tax Code Wilderness--Production, Investment and Grants OH MY!

shari.shapiro@obermayer.com (Shari Shapiro) — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 20:40:32 GMT

I will make an admission. I took tax in law school, and, it was the academic equivalent of having my left arm sawed off without anaesthesia. Why? Mostly because things which should have been clear seemed hopelessly obscure. Now I deal with advising clients on incentives available for sustainable projects, and the tax code and I have had to battle to a stalemate. At least, I battle, and the tax code just sits there impentarably.

One of the features which is particularly difficicult is the relationship between 26 USC 45, which deals with tax credits for producing renewable energy (the "production tax credit" or PTC), 26 USC 48 which deals with tax credits for investing in renewable energy equipement (the "investment tax credit" or ITC) and the Renewable Energy Grant created by the ARRA. All three of these relate to businesses which have installed renewable energy technologies, like solar, wind and geothermal. It should be clear and easy to understand which ones apply to your business and what the incentive will be. As with all things related to the tax code, however, it is not.

I am going to attempt to clear up some of the obscurity, but, as with all information on this blog, it is for informational purposes only, not legal advice; and you should consult your legal and financial advisor to provide you with proper advice for your business.

FEDERAL RENEWABLE ENERGY INCENTIVE CHART
Title	Applies to	Amount of Incentive
Production Tax Credit	Wind Biomass Geothermal Solar Small Irrigation Municipal solid waste Hydropower Marine and Hydrokinetic	1.5 cents per kW of power generated at a qualified facility for the 10 years beginning on the date the facility was placed in service AND sold to an unrelated person during the taxable year
Investment Tax Credit	Solar for heating, cooling, hot water, illumination or solar process heat Fuel cell Microturbine Geothermal Combined heat and power (cogeneration) Small wind Ground water thermal	30% of the cost of the "energy property" for solar and small wind, 10% for geothermal and other renewable sources
Renewable Energy Grant	Applicable property under Section 45 or 48	10% or 30% of the basis of the property, depending on the type of property placed in service during 2009 or 2010 or after 2010 if construction began on the property during 2009 or 2010 and the property is placed in service by a certain date known as the credit termination date

The incentives are mutually exclusive--The PTC and the ITC cannot both be taken, and they can be swapped for the REG, but you cannot take the PTC/ITC and the REG.

In plain english, it appears that the PTC is designed for renewable energy sources where the power is designed to be sold to others as a Renewable Energy Credit, and the ITC is designed for renewable energy sources where the power is used on-site. The Renewable Energy Grant allows companies which have invested in either type of renewable energy capacity to receive cash, as opposed to a tax credit, which is helpful particularly if the company has no tax liability or a tax loss.

There are some resources available to help you sort through this morass. The DSIRE database has quick summaries of available state and federal incentives. The Utah Clean Energy site has a nice summary of the renewable energy features of the ARRA. The DOE site has a useful summary of renewable energy incentives for businesses as well.

2010 HEPA Distribution List Available at OEQC Website

hilanduse@gmail.com (hilanduse@gmail.com) — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 19:57:03 GMT

Under HAR § 11-200-21,

The [Office of Environmental Quality Control] shall be responsible for the publication of the notice of availability of the EIS in its bulletin. The office shall develop a distribution list of reviewers (i.e., persons and agencies with jurisdiction or expertise in certain areas relevant to various actions) and a list of public depositories, which shall include public libraries, where copies of the statements shall be available, and to the extent possible, the proposing agency or applicant shall make copies of the EIS available to individuals requesting the EIS. The office's distribution list may be developed cooperatively among the applicant or proposing agency, the accepting authority, and the office; provided the office shall be responsible for determining the final list. The applicant or proposing agency shall directly distribute the required copies to those on the distribution list after the office has verified to the applicant or proposing agency the accuracy of the distribution list. For final statements, the agency or applicant shall give the commentor an option of requesting a copy of the final EIS or portions thereof.

In short, here is the 2010 Office of Environmental Quality Control, EA / EIS Distribution List. HEPA preparers should pay particular attention to the mandatory reviewers and persons requiring notice indicated in the table with an "M."

For related articles see Environmental Law.

"Last Dollar" Endorsement Rescinded in Texas

Mon, 08 Feb 2010 16:56:57 GMT

In case you were not already aware of this, the T-15 (Last Dollar) endorsement to loan policies is no longer available in Texas, as of January 1, 2010, because it refers to a provision that is no longer contained in the T-2 form loan policy, so it's therefore no longer necessary.

More on Service Animals...

Mon, 08 Feb 2010 15:56:23 GMT

A recent blog post on service animals has caused some readers to chastise your humble editor about the state of the law concerning service animals. To be sure, we here at the Fair Housing Defense blog want to get it right. Otherwise, what’s the point? That being said, I would probably vote against some of the colorful language in the comments as they are a little over the top and unnecessary. Like politics and religion, it seems service animal issues have touched a nerve. I guess that is good.

First, a little background. While reasonable accommodation requests seeking recognition for a service or companion animal are not rare, it is not a request that comes across my desk each week. What prompted the post was about 20 service animal requests submitted to a single community manager at one property – all about the same time. While I am certainly not implying that 20 residents at one community might not all make the same request for their respective legitimate disabilities all at the same time, I cannot rule out that at least some of these people wanted to avoid paying a pet deposit or monthly pet charge. Again, let me be clear that management should grant service animal reasonable accommodation requests when then arise in almost all circumstances.

To be sure, in the initial post I did not appropriately distinguish the difference between a service animal and a companion animal. And I should have. Again, that was not the purpose of the post, but some readers were correct to point out that formal training is not in the law, particularly for companion animals. Nevertheless, I do think it makes sense for service or companion animals to be well mannered in public.

Also, while I do think it makes good sense for a service or companion animal to be identified – so as to reduce the number of children who might reach out to pet the animal, there is no requirement that it be done. I appreciate that correction.

Hope that straightens it out. To paraphrase Tony Kornheiser, I will try to do better next time.

Just A Thought.

Records Retention: Risks of Failing to Comply with the Statute - Evidence and Spoliation

Mon, 08 Feb 2010 15:00:00 GMT

As promised in last time, this post continues to address issues regarding an Association’s failure to comply with the statutory mandates of records retention. This post is a bit more intense as there are exceptions to consider.

Spoliation/Presumption Against the Association in a Lawsuit/Arbitration
If the missing documents are important to a case regardless of who the opposing party might be (e.g., member, contractor, manager, etc.), the Court could find that the Association spoliated the evidence. This is a fancy way of saying the Association destroyed evidence. This finding could be issued regardless of the intent of the Association. After a finding of spoliation the Court could instruct a jury that if the evidence were not destroyed it would serve to show that the Association conducted itself inappropriately as it pertains to the issues in the case. In essence the Association is then burdened with having to show it did nothing wrong. This does not always work and a finding could be made against the Association such that it would loose the case. In addition to the presumption against the Association a Court could also sanction the Association with the sanction taking the form of the striking of pleadings (claims or defenses depending on the role of the Association in the case) in addition to a monetary fine (commonly referred to as a sanction).

Evidence Used Against Association in a Lawsuit/Arbitration
If the Association retains records past the time mandated by the statute could this could also work against the Association. The Association should create a succinct procedure for destroying records which exceed the 7 year retention required for most records. The only exception to this is if a case is already pending against the Association or if the Association believes a case could be filed against it on a specific issue which is the subject of the records which are subject to destruction. The Association should speak to its attorney if it is not certain if this “exception” applies at any given time.

Knowing there is a rule and an exception is great but not understanding why they are important does not help the Association at all. The problem with keeping records past the mandated time when the exception is not present is that at time those records could show the Association did something inappropriately. For example, assume the governing documents require a 75% member vote to be amended. In 2000 the Board put an amendment prohibiting the over-night parking of motorcycles at the Association up for a membership vote. The Association voted to pass the amendment by 73% but due to a counting error it was believed the full 75% vote had been obtained. Based on the error, the amendment was recorded and became a part of the Association’s governing documents. In 2009, a new member of the Association begins parking his motorcycle over-night at the Association. The Board makes a demand which the member refuses to comply with and legal action is taken. As part of discovery, the Association is asked to produce all records regarding the amendment of the documents. The Association having not discarded any of its records since its creation in 1980 produces all records to counsel who is required to produce those records to the member. The ballots and voting materials show the vote was 73% and the amendment never passed. The Association looses its case and could have to pay the legal fees and costs incurred by the member in defending against the case. On the other hand if the records had been properly destroyed (1 year for the ballots and 7 years for all other pertinent records) there would have been no way to show that the vote was not the 75% mandated by the governing documents, the amendment would have been upheld and the Association would have prevailed.

You may ask, why the records were produced if the Association was not required to keep them? Simple, once the Association determines records pertinent to a case were not discarded, it cannot then destroy them as this could lead to a claim of spoliation. The Association can also not ask its counsel to destroy the records or otherwise refrain from producing them as that would result in an ethical violation of the rules governing attorney conduct which could result in both a claim of spoliation against the Association and disciplinary action against the attorney.

Do not despair remember I promised that the third post on this issue would give Associations guidance on how to limit their exposure.

Governor Corzine signs bill creating Solar and Wind Energy Commission

Mon, 08 Feb 2010 13:56:55 GMT

Among the several pieces of “green” legislation, that Governor Jon Corzine signed just prior to leaving office was a bill (A3218) that creates a new, temporary 11-member public body to be known as the Solar and Wind Energy Commission. This new law - approved as P.L. 2009, c. 239 - authorizes the Commission “to conduct a thorough and comprehensive study to examine State owned property and determine where solar and wind energy installations would be feasible[,]” which shall include a discussion of the financial implications of such installations, projected energy and financial savings, potential use of net metering and a host of other topics. Although there is no limit to the number of documents that the Commission may produce under the statute relating to this study, it must submit to the Governor and the Legislature and make available to the public a final report containing its findings, conclusions and recommendations within one year after its organization. Thirty days thereafter, the Commission shall expire. It will be interesting to see what this year-long effort will generate.

Huge Snowfall Leads to Wave of Roof Collapses

Mon, 08 Feb 2010 13:51:12 GMT

So, here in the Washington, DC area we are buried under a couple feet of snow. You know we have a lot of snow when the Lincoln Memorial steps have been transformed into a good tobogan run. Unfortunately, so much snow means a ton of dead load placed on roof structures. There are a number of roof collapses reported around the area. So far, the major blessing is it appears that none of these events have led to any serious personal injuries. You can definitely expect that these significant collapse events will trigger equally significant property damage claims, business interruption issues, and perhaps threaten the long-term viability of some businesses. These events include:

The roof of the Bailey's Crossroads Volunteer Fire Department collapsed
A hangar roof at Dulles Airport fully collapsed, reportedly destroying several business jets
The roof at a commercial strip store in Forestville, MD collapsed Saturday
The roof at St. John School in Maryland collapsed, destroying six classrooms, the computer lab, library, and offices
A storage warehouse in California, MD collapsed
The scariest has to be the collapse of the Prince William Ice Center which happened with the building occupied with skaters; owners were able to clear all the occupants out when they observed a ceiling beam start to twist

Here is a news report on the Baileys Crossroads roof collapse from WJLA:

With the threat of more snow potentially on the way, the region may not have seen the last of these problems. Building owners may face some significant hurdles to full recovery, including finding out the limitations of their insurance policies, facing problems with statutes of limitations and/or statutes of repose, and finding that responsible parties are casualties of the current economic crisis and thus are judgment proof. All of these factors point to a few very important lessons:

Know and understand your insurance coverage and its limitations before you have problems
When shopping for insurance, evaluate risk and consider not just shopping for the lowest price; you may find that going cheap on insurance ultimately costs you far more
Know and understand applicable statutes of limitations and statutes of repose prior to entering into design, construction, or property purchase agreements
Factor in the impacts of these time limitation issues when you asses the appropriate levels and types of insurance your purchase
Do your homework - conducting detailed inspections prior to purchase and properly evaluating the strength and credentials of your consultants and contractors is an investment of time and money, but it is worth it in the long run rather than face a catastrophic loss in the future

Image by vpickering

New legislative framework for suite metering

Mon, 08 Feb 2010 12:31:37 GMT

People trying to keep tabs on the legislative authority for suite submetering can’t even blink these days without the risk of being left in the dark!

On December 8, 2009, the Ontario Government tabled Bill 235, an Act to enact the Energy Consumer Protection Act, 2009 and to amend other Acts.

If passed, Bill 235 will, among other things, repeal section 53.17 of the Electricity Act, 1998, which is the current authority for condominium boards to install smart meters and download electricity costs to individual unit owners. An entirely new section dealing with submetering and billing in multi-unit residential buildings will be passed, as well as a whole raft of regulations.

As with all recent energy and environmental initiatives, Bill 235 is expected to move forward quickly. Comments were to have been received by February 6, 2010. The public consultation page is here, with links to additional information. The actual wording of the Bill and its legislative status is found here.

ROCs and Civil Rights

Mon, 08 Feb 2010 03:08:58 GMT

I just returned from a brief trip to Memphis, Tennessee and visited the National Civil Rights Museum, which is located at the site of the murder of the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. The museum has incorporated much of the Lorraine Hotel (including the room in which Dr. King stayed and the balcony outside that room where he was killed) as well as the apartment across the street from the hotel where James Earl Ray aimed and fired from a bathroom window and took Dr. King's life. I recall the exact moment when I learned of Dr. King's death and to be able to view the site of his assassination in an "up close and personal" manner was an extremely powerful experience for me. I highly recommend a visit to the museum if you are in the Memphis area and suggest that you view the short movie at the museum called "The Witness" before beginning to tour the exhibits.

As I made my way through the museum, I was reminded that many of the freedoms we take for granted today are the result of great sacrifices and courageous efforts by Americans of all colors and beliefs. I couldn't help but marvel that less than fifty years ago, Dr. King was gunned down simply because many of his fellow countrymen could not accept the fact that all Americans were entitled to certain basic rights. The fact that many of the injustices that Dr. King sought to overcome have been remedied speaks volumes to his legacy and to the laws that our federal and local legislators have enacted during the past five decades.

My visit to the museum reminded me about the direct connection between the Civil Rights laws and the Fair Housing and Disability laws that often create divisive problems for board members and other residents in the communities we work with. Those Fair Housing and Disability laws built upon the earlier Civil Rights laws and extend rights of equality to which all Americans are entitled. The underlying philosophy of all of these laws is simply that no American should be deprived of certain opportunities, whether in employment, or voting, or obtaining housing, simply because of his or her color or religion or disability. Unless our legislators carve out an exception (such as the Housing for Older Persons Act), it's that underlying philosophy that should guide ROC board members.

Some forty-two years after Dr. King's death, it's an important lesson for all of us to remember.

Thanks to our friends at Francis I in Sebring for hosting last week's well-attended seminar. We'll be at Windward Isles in Sarasota and Marco Shores in Naples this week and at Caribbean Isles in Apollo Beach during the last week in February. If you'd like to attend one of these free seminars and haven't yet rsvp'd, please contact either Karen Midlam at kmidlam@lutzbobo.com or Kathy Sawdo at ksawdo@lutzbobo.com. I hope to see you at one of these events.

Oh My Cheese! What Can Dairy Farmers Teach Us About Contingent Business Coverage? -- Understanding Business Interruption Claims, Part 7

Sun, 07 Feb 2010 22:58:06 GMT

(Note: This Guest Blog is by Michelle Claverol, an attorney with Merlin Law Group in the Coral Gables, Florida, office. This is the seventh part in a series she is writing on business interruption claims).

The Saputo Cheese USA Plant in Hinesburg, Vermont, was a successful mozzarella cheese enterprise until a catastrophic fire destroyed its facility. According to claimsjournal.com, Saputo Cheese was receiving about a million pounds of milk a day from 88 dairy farmers in Vermont and New York, which totaled 10-12 percent of Vermont’s entire milk production. Each of the 88 dairy farmers, on average, supplied Saputo Cheese with more than 11,300 pounds of milk every day. Saputo Cheese announced its closure about a month after the fire; the 88 dairy farmers were frantic to say the least. Unless alternate buyers could be found, the dairy farmers would lose a major source of income for months. The dairy farmers were at a loss.

Every day, businesses develop and thrive on symbiotic relationships, where the entities rely on the continued operational viability of each other (or even exclusively beneficial relationships). Few businesses, however, consider the risk and exposure of losing that relationship due to an unexpected calamity. Businesses that are dependent on a non-related entity’s operations should talk to their agents about attaching “dependent business interruption” endorsements to avoid suffering the dairy famers’ fate.

Contingent business coverage is a type of business interruption coverage will protect the “dependent business” from the external business income exposure. There are four (4) types of dependent business ISO endorsements: 1) contributing premises, such as the businesses that deliver materials to the insured, 2) recipient premises, such as the businesses that receive the insured’s products, 3) manufacturing premises (businesses that make products for delivery to the insured and 4) leader premises, such as businesses that bring the customers to the insured. In lay terms, 1) suppliers, 2) buyers, 3) providers, and 4) drivers.

Depending on the relationship the dairy famers had with Saputo Cheese, the dairy farmers could have purchased coverage to pay for the loss of income resulting from Saputo Cheese’s suspension of operation until its closure, since most endorsements provide coverage until the dependent business resumes operations or alternate sources are found.

Harry Styron

hstyron@gmail.com (Harry Styron) — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 15:25:26 GMT

I’ve added a new feature called Ozarks on stage, with the first short bit about the play “Maid in the Ozarks,” which ran for 103 performances on Broadway in 1946, before and after thousands of performances in regional theatres around the country. Its playwright, a woman named Claire Parrish who was apparently an Ozarks native, [...]

I would love to have an essay about the plays of Lanford Wilson, born in Lebanon, Missouri 1937, who went to high school in Ozark, Missouri. He was a giant of Off Broadway in the 1960s and 1970s and won a Pulitzer for “Talley’s Folly,” one of the plays in the Talley Trilogy, which involved a family in Lebanon at the end of World War II and during the Vietnam War era. He also wrote “Hot l Baltimore,” which was first a play before Norman Lear turned it into a TV sitcom that had a short run in 1975. If you have stories or thoughts about Wilson or his plays, please let me know.

If you know of other plays set in the Ozarks, please comment.

I’ve also been fleshing out the Ozarks in fiction compilation, with new info about Suzette Elgin Haden’s Ozarks Trilogy, Donald Westlake’s Baby, Would I Lie? and Edgar Hulse’s Light on the Lookout. I’ ve received several helpful suggestions which I’m working on integrating into the text. Please let me know about deserving books that should be mentioned here.

Filed under: Arkansas, Ozarks, Ozarks arts and culture, Uncategorized Tagged: Ozarks drama, Ozarks fiction

The Government Cannot Simply Disregard a Lower-Priced Proposal When Making a "Best Value" Source Selection

Sat, 06 Feb 2010 17:11:06 GMT

By: Lane F. Kelman

In making an award on initial proposals, is a tradeoff only between the two (2) highest-rated, highest-priced proposals appropriate? The GAO, in a recent decision,Coastal Environments, Inc., B-401889, dated December 18, 2009, provides important clarification. The decision beckons closer scrutiny of awards by unsuccessful offerors.

In Coastal Environments, Inc., the RFP identified six (6) evaluation factors in descending order of importance: (1) personnel and company qualifications, (2) management capability, (3) technical excellence, (4) past performance, (5) small business participation, and (6) price; the RFP also identified several subfactors under the non-price evaluation factors. Award was to be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal was determined to represent the “best value” to the government, all factors considered.

Eight proposals were received and evaluated using the adjectival rating system. The contracting officer, as the Source Selection Authority (‘SSA”), reviewed the evaluation findings and performed a price/technical tradeoff between the two most highly rated proposals; those of Ecological Communications Corporation (“ECC”) and another Offeror. Those two proposals were also the highest priced proposals. The Source Selection Authority (“SSA”) ultimately selected ECC for award after concluding that “due to the highly specialized nature of the work…ECC’s technical superiority” justified paying an additional $2,984 to ECC.

Coastal, who was not part of the tradeoff process, filed a protest and alleged, among other issues, that the tradeoff process should not have been restricted to ECC and the other most highly rated offeror. Coastal’s proposal, while not as highly rated, was $17,434.44 lower in price than GCC’s proposal. The GAO held that the SSA impermissibly limited the price/technical tradeoff analysis to a comparison of the two highest-rated, highest-priced proposals. The SSA failed to conduct any qualitative assessment of the technical differences between the two (2) highest-rated, highest-priced proposals and any of the other technically acceptable proposals to determine whether either of these proposals contained features that would justify the payment of a price premium.

The GAO found that the two higher-rated, higher-priced proposals considered in the tradeoff both received overall adjectival ratings of “Good” and “Low Risk,” while Coastal’s proposal received the next lowest rating of “Acceptable” and “Low Risk,” but was priced approximately 20 percent lower. The GAO concluded that a proper tradeoff decision must, per Federal Acquisition Regulation § 15.308, provide a rational explanation of why a proposal’s evaluated technical superiority warrants paying a premium. Here, the SSA did not identify what benefits in ECC’s proposal warranted paying a premium to ECC when compared to Coastal’s lower-priced proposal, which was found to be acceptable and low risk.

Lane F. Kelman is a Partner in the firm and a member of the Federal Contracting Practice Group

Notifying the Police in the Case of a Theft Loss

Sat, 06 Feb 2010 11:15:10 GMT

(Note: This Guest Blog is by Corey Harris, an attorney with Merlin Law Group in the Tampa, Florida, office. This is the seventh part in a series he is writing on post-loss duties).

Most policies have specific conditions that apply to theft losses. The most common is the duty of a policyholder to notify the police, as well as the insurer, of the theft. While this may seem like common sense, there may be a variety of instances where the policyholder fails to notify the police, and this could cause problems in getting the claim paid.

A small theft claim, for instance, may not seem like something that must be reported to the police, however, it is always better to be safe than sorry. Sure, many times the items stolen may be worth less than the policy deductible, but what happens if more items come up missing later? Often, policyholders do not notice that some items are missing until long after a burglary or theft, and failing to notify the police could create issues with the insurance company covering the loss.

Policyholders should also make sure to understand that notifying the police of a loss does not relieve them of their duty to report the loss to the insurer. As discussed in previous posts, if the insurer is not given notice of the loss, coverage could be denied.

The best practice when dealing with a potential theft loss is to immediately notify the police and insurance company. Most insurers closely evaluate theft claims many with an eye towards fraud. If notice is not given to the police or is unreasonably late, the insurer will likely take a more skeptical view. This can cause substantial delays, even if coverage is ultimately not denied.

With that said, this will conclude my posts on Notice of Loss. I have received some great questions and comments both on this blog and by email. I really appreciate those of you who take time to read my posts. While I will be moving on to other post-loss duties, if anyone has any questions about notice or any other topic I cover, please do not hesitate to contact me.

There's No Such Thing As A "Slam Dunk"! A True Story

Califcondoguru@aol.com (Beth Grimm) — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 05:50:12 GMT

This is a lesson for both HOAs and Owners who want to consider litigation. It is an experience I had when doing litigation years ago. The Association contacted me for assistance. An owner (we will call them Owner A) was complaining about a neighbor's (we will call them Owner B) use of a basketball standard in their back yard. This was a “zero lot line” community meaning the lot line for one unit was an exterior wall of a neighboring unit. The owner that complained was a day sleeper who worked nights. The “neighbor” was the husband in a young family with two children. He also was a “wannabe” semi pro basketball player and loved the BB standard. He brought his daughters out every day to play some B’ball. The “backboard” for loose balls was Owner A’s bedroom wall. You can imagine the situation. Owner A was not getting sleep. Owner B was determined he had a right to play BB in his back yard. The Association’s CC&Rs banned basketball standards in the development. The Owners complained to and about each other and to the Association Board of directors. Tempers flared. Owner A claimed Owner B played B’ball more than...

This is a lesson for both HOAs and Owners who want to consider litigation. It is an experience I had when doing litigation years ago.

The Association contacted me for assistance. An owner (we will call them Owner A) was complaining about a neighbor's (we will call them Owner B) use of a basketball standard in their back yard. This was a “zero lot line” community meaning the lot line for one unit was an exterior wall of a neighboring unit. The owner that complained was a day sleeper who worked nights. The “neighbor” was the husband in a young family with two children. He also was a “wannabe” semi pro basketball player and loved the BB standard. He brought his daughters out every day to play some B’ball. The “backboard” for loose balls was Owner A’s bedroom wall.

You can imagine the situation. Owner A was not getting sleep. Owner B was determined he had a right to play BB in his back yard. The Association’s CC&Rs banned basketball standards in the development. The Owners complained to and about each other and to the Association Board of directors. Tempers flared. Owner A claimed Owner B played B’ball more than ever, all day long and at times simply bounced the ball against the wall for hours on end. Owner B claimed Owner A tried to run him and his kids down when they were walking to the mailbox. Yes, it was bad.

Entrance: me. Through my assistance, the board tried letters, fining, threats, and everything else. We even had a “mediation” of sorts and tried to get Owner B to move the BBall standard from one side of their home to the other. That side of the yard backed up to the back yard of the realtor who sold the home to Owner B (and who was singlehandedly responsible for the entire situation). If balls went astray they would pound that fence or go into that yard. This would be poetic justice I felt. The details would make this blog too long but are covered in my condolawguru.com blog called “Is Eight Years Too Long?” Owner B would not budge. He was adamant about his rights.

The Association sued. They were in the right but that did not mean it would be a painless process. The courts were clogged enough already, and a law had just been passed that required courts to get to trial within one year of filing, so many cases were pushed up. Getting a courtroom was a nightmare. After going back to court 4 times, meaning the board members had to take time off of work 4 times (and I had to rearrange my schedule 4 times), we got into court! Yay! (One would think.)

The other attorney and I went into the judge’s chambers to talk about pretrial motions. The judge was being very resistant to my client’s case. It seemed he wanted the HOA to back down. I cited a now famous case which had just come down from the California Supreme Court upholding the integrity of HOA CC&Rs which should have been taken in my client’s favor (Nahrstedt v. Lakeside Village Condominium Association). The judge’s response was that the 30 days to appeal had not passed and he would not consider the case.

Okay, that first day of trial was rough. It really seemed the judge was being very difficult. That evening, the manager of the HOA called me and said he remembered where he had seen the judge. He lived in one of the manager’s HOAs and had been called to a hearing on a basketball standard matter. His problem was he refused to paint the basketball standard the same color as the garage, which was the association rule. The association had threatened to fine him and he had threatened to sue the association.

Great! The next day of trial I and the other attorney went into chambers and I asked the judge to recuse himself because of this situation. He said that he could be fair, but did recuse because the same management company represented his association as this one in court.

So we were back to square one. We got another judge, went back to court, and this time, the trial went fast, was over by about 2, and the judge did not even want closing arguments. He ruled right away, in favor of the association. Owner B stomped out of court and fired his attorney on the way (a little late I would say).

And the judge ultimately granted about 90% of the association’s attorney’s fees be reimbursed, discounting all of the fees charged for coming to trial on days when there was no trial. He said that was not the client’s fault. (It was not my client’s fault either, but so be it.)

It took about 3 times of hitting Owner B’s bank account on payday to recover the fees. Of course, he did not pay them willingly. And the board members of course did not recover any time lost from work or anything for the incredible inconvenience to them. It was an excruciating process for what should have been a simple “slam dunk” case.

The moral of the story is: THERE IS NO SLAM DUNK!!! Don’t think court will be painless, even when you “win”

Sometimes there is strange “justice” though. I heard several months later that the first judge went back to his HOA and agreed to paint his house the same color as his basketball standard! I hope it’s true. If so, then one more judge got “educated”.

Don't Get Bamboozled Into A Lawsuit!

Califcondoguru@aol.com (Beth Grimm) — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 04:07:32 GMT

Okay, now I have seen it one too many times and feel the need to vent. There is no such thing as a "slam dunk" in court. The scenario is this. A party - it may be a homeowner, it may be an HOA or Condo Association board - goes to an attorney and that attorney gets all excited about their "case". He or she says "THIS IS SOMETHING YOU SHOULD LITIGATE, DEFINITELY. IT's A "SLAM DUNK". Some other word may be used instead of slam dunk. It may be "a great case", "a winner", "you are clearly in the right", or something like that. I am going to keep this to the homeowners association context because that is where my experience lies. Guess what, it does not always matter if you are in the "right". And many times, the situation seems like you are in the "right" and then you find out you are in the "wrong" - wrong frame of mind I mean. Something that happens all too often is the attorney says (taking a retainer up front), I need a $5,000 retainer to get the lawsuit started. Since its such a good case it should not be...

Okay, now I have seen it one too many times and feel the need to vent. There is no such thing as a "slam dunk" in court.

The scenario is this. A party - it may be a homeowner, it may be an HOA or Condo Association board - goes to an attorney and that attorney gets all excited about their "case". He or she says "THIS IS SOMETHING YOU SHOULD LITIGATE, DEFINITELY. IT's A "SLAM DUNK".

Some other word may be used instead of slam dunk. It may be "a great case", "a winner", "you are clearly in the right", or something like that.

I am going to keep this to the homeowners association context because that is where my experience lies. Guess what, it does not always matter if you are in the "right". And many times, the situation seems like you are in the "right" and then you find out you are in the "wrong" - wrong frame of mind I mean.

Something that happens all too often is the attorney says (taking a retainer up front), I need a $5,000 retainer to get the lawsuit started. Since its such a good case it should not be protracted or cost a lot more than that.

What the client hears is "for about $5,000, we can win this case."

When the attorney turns around and says "I need another $5,000 to take this to the next step, now remember, you may be able to recover your attorney fees in this case." the client hears: "{For whatever reason is imagined}, another $5,000 should win it and then you will not only win but get your legal fees back."

... and so on, and so on, until things are up around $25,000 or $80,000 or more. And then the client is in so deep they do not know what to do next.

I do not know whether it is the client who does not hear the attorney, or the attorney who does not present ALL POSSIBILITIES, INCLUDING THE BEST AND WORST POSSIBLE SCENARIOS in any matter that ends up in court. People do not understand additionally that once a lawsuit is filed, and the attorneys fees mount in cost, that one cannot simply drop the lawsuit and expect no ramification. Dismissing a lawsuit does not dismiss the possibility (in California at least) that the other side might file to recover their fees, calling the dismissal a failure to "prevail".

Don't get sucked into a lawsuit without a full understanding of what can happen. To come next, a blog about a true case called: "There's No Such Thing As A Slam Dunk!" And don't forget to look back at this blog: "Should You Get a Second Legal Opinion Before Suing?"

But I already paid for that! So you have a mechanic's lien; now what? (Part 1)

Fri, 05 Feb 2010 23:05:15 GMT

Your project is coming along fine, despite the economy. You’ve weathered the squalls of bids, design changes, agency approval, and credit (mercifully), and now even construction completion is looking good. You can see the finish line through the haze on the horizon, and you’re fairly pleased with how you have pulled everything together with what has been a long haul through the system. You’re in the home stretch. You’re closing down the last items and payment obligations to ensure everything will get done. You didn’t even have to spend much money on legal fees in drafting the contract or during construction (that alone is reason to cheer for your department’s budget). You may just go on a “road show” to tout your expertise about how projects should be run. And then....

You receive a call from your project manager letting you know that a subcontractor says it wasn’t paid and will file a mechanic’s lien in five days if it doesn’t get a check. Well, how could that be? You have a record of payments to the general contractor, but you cannot find a release for those payments. You get two more calls from unpaid trades.... Yet, you feel somewhat confident; after all, the contract says the general contractor “is responsible” and you have that record showing you did pay him. It’s his responsibility to pay all the people he contracted with, right? Well, yes and no (of course!) is the legal answer your construction lawyer will likely give you.

Unfortunately, this scenario is becoming all too common in this lingering depressed construction environment. Tight bids, job or trade failures, and an ailing economy have trapped many owners and general contractors, causing them to potentially pay twice for work they thought was already “clear” and paid for.

Although each state’s laws on mechanic’s liens govern each party’s obligations and rights, in my next post I will provide you with some simple, general guidelines that owners and general contractors should keep in mind at the beginning of each project to help protect against the possibility of such a double payment.

February 5, 2010 - Aviation and Airport Development Updates

Fri, 05 Feb 2010 21:50:56 GMT

February 5, 2010 - A summary review of Aviation and Airport Development related news and information that was made public during the past ten days. These were all first posted, in abbreviated form, on http://twitter.com/smtaber. Trisha Ton-Nu also contributed to this post. If you would like to receive this update in an e-mail delivered to your inbox every week, please send an e-mail to subscribe@calairlaw.com with the word “subscribe” in the subject line.

Study: Water Vapor May Help ‘Flatten Global Warming Trend.’ --- Doyle Rice, USA Today, January 28, 2010
According to a new study released in the journal Science, water vapor, a potent, natural greenhouse gas that absorbs sunlight and re-emits heat, is the “wild card” of global warming. A drop in the concentration of water vapor in the stratosphere very likely helped to flatten the global warming trend since 2000. The cause of the drop in water vapor concentration is unknown, but the decline slowed the rate of surface warming by 25%.
Click here to read more

Controller Staffing Plummets at Busy California FAA Facility; Safety Now an Issue as Errors on the Rise. --- PRNewswire, January 29, 2010
Southern California Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON), the nation’s busiest Federal Aviation Administration air traffic control facility that handles climb and approach phases of flight, has seen a 26% drop in the last six years in its number of fully trained and certified air traffic controllers. Facility representative Mel Davis said that the facility needs more experienced controllers, more space to accommodate them, and updated equipment to train them. The problem facing the FAA is trying to get experienced veterans to leave their short-staffed facilities to come to SoCal TRACON, another short-staffed facility.
Click here to read more

Venice Council Ignores FAA Advice. --- Kim Hackett, Herald Tribune, January 29, 2010
The Venice City Council in Florida voted Thursday, January 28, 2010 to submit a plan to downgrade Venice Municipal Airport despite warnings from the Federal Aviation Administration and consultants’ advice to the contrary. Council member Sue Lang said lowering the airport designation would not cost any money and would solve safety problems. A showdown is likely as the FAA has already frozen funds for airport improvements and the agency has repeatedly told the council it would not approve a downgraded plan.
Click here to read more

More articles on this topic:

Airport Decision Could Cost Venice Millions. --- Kim Hackett, Herald Tribune, January 31, 2010
Venice City Council’s decision to submit plans to the Federal Aviation Administration to downgrade Venice Municipal Airport could cost the city millions in federal and state grants and hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees. Council members want a shorter runway so that approximately two dozen homes and a golf course would no longer be in an airport safety zone, and they also want to limit jet traffic, but the FAA has ruled against the city at every turn. The FAA will likely reject the plan, which could prompt a protracted battle between the FAA and the city, and the agency could also withhold federal and state funds for airport and runway improvements. A spokesman for the FAA said the city must abide by the agency’s rules as it has accepted millions in the past for airport improvements.
Click here to read more

Skydiving Nixed at Airport. --- John Koziol, The Citizen of Laconia, January 29, 2010
The Laconia Airport Authority in New Hampshire has rejected plans to operate a skydiving business at the facility, citing safety concerns raised by the Federal Aviation Administration. In a December 21, 2009 letter from the FAA to the Airport Authority, the agency ruled that skydivers and aviators were not a good mix at the airport. The FAA studied proposed landing sites at the airport and found that the proposed landing area would adversely affect the safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace by aircraft and the safety of persons and property on the ground.
Click here to read more

NTSB Seeks Authority Over Commercial Space Accidents. --- Andy Pasztor, The Wall Street Journal, January 29, 2010
The National Transportation Safety Board is seeking to expand its purview to cover commercial spacecraft mishaps and accidents. The safety board asked Congress for primary investigative authority over accidents involving commercial space vehicles and for a nearly 20% boost to its budget for the fiscal year starting October 1. The Federal Aviation Administration would retain existing authority to regulate space-tourism operators, establish minimum crew standards, and ensure that passengers are advised about the risks associated with such flights, but the NTSB would be specifically authorized to investigate incidents involving civilian unmanned aircraft.
Click here to read more

FAA Approves 3 Wind Turbines for Providence Wastewater Facility. --- Peter Lord, The Providence Journal, January 30, 2010
The Federal Aviation Administration approved plans by the Narragansett Bay Commission to install three 360-foot wind turbines at its Field’s Point Wastewater Treatment Facility in the Port of Providence, Rhode Island. The Commission still needs approval from several other agencies, but hopes to have the turbines up and running by October 2011. The FAA had raised concerns that the turbines would pose a hazard for nearby T.F. Green Airport, but the Rhode Island Airport Corporation did some modeling that showed the turbines would be well below the glide path to the airport.
Click here to read more

Engine Icing Hazards Discovered on Embraer Regional Jets. --- Andy Pasztor, The Wall Street Journal, January 29, 2010
Aviation regulators in Brazil and Europe have issued safety directives for hundreds of regional Embraer jetliners, intending to prevent both engines on such planes from shutting down in mid-flight. The related moves stem from software problems that regulators believe could result in loss of automatic activation of ice-protection systems for engines on some Embraer 170 and 190 jets, and if pilots fail to react properly in such circumstances ice may build up on engine inlets and cause a dual engine shut down. The Federal Aviation Administration is considering taking similar action.
Click here to read more

Work Begins on $18.8 Million Air Traffic Control Tower. --- Josh Mrozinski, The Times-Tribune, January 29, 2010
Work officially began Friday, January 29, 2010 on an $18.8 million project to replace a 57-year-old air traffic control facility at Wilkes-Barre/Scranton International Airport in Pennsylvania. The airport’s existing air traffic control tower is equipped with hardware that is several decades old and limits line of sight, preventing the use of a runway. The new tower is funded from the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act, and thanks to the stimulus funding Luzerne and Lackawanna counties did not have to borrow money as originally planned.
Click here to read more

Toledo Express Air Traffic Controllers Fight Move of Radar Unit. --- Carl Ryan, Toledo Blade, January 30, 2010
Air traffic controllers at Toledo Express Airport in Swanton, Ohio are fighting the Federal Aviation Administration’s plan to move some of their duties to Cleveland. They say such a move would mean diminished service for general aviation at Toledo Express, less safety, higher costs, and a reduction in efficiency. The FAA has made no decision to relocate the terminal radar approach control, but is considering doing so.
Click here to read more

Gulfstream Sales Expected to Grow in 2010. --- Mary Cart Mayle, Savannah Now, January 30, 2010
Gulfstream Aerospace earnings for calendar year 2009 were down significantly from a year ago, but the company reports continued strength in order activity and substantially fewer customer defaults and improved service volume. Sales and operating earnings for the fourth quarter 2009 were up compared with the third quarter 2009, with all indications pointing to market improvement in 2010.
Click here to read more

FAA Proposes Nearly $2.5 Million Civil Penalty Against American Eagle Airlines.. --- Federal Aviation Administration, February 1, 2010
The Federal Aviation Administration proposed a $2.5 million civil penalty against American Eagle Airlines for operating flights without adequately ensuring the weight of baggage was properly calculated. The FAA alleges that American Eagle conducted at least 154 passenger-carrying flights between January and October 2008 when the baggage weight listed on airplane cargo sheets disagreed with data entered into the company’s Electronic Weight and Balance System. Erroneous data into the weight and balance system results in an incorrect computation of the weight and balance of a particular aircraft and could potentially lead to faulty calculations for the proper control settings and reference speeds necessary for safe takeoffs and landings.
Click here to read more

Midway Airport Privatization in Holding Pattern. --- Paul Merrion, Chicago Business, February 1, 2010
The city of Chicago has told the Federal Aviation Administration that it still plans to privatize Midway Airport “at the earliest practicable date” in the city’s first official statement of its intentions since a deal fell through last year. Last week the city asked the FAA for more time to complete the deal, and the pace and direction of the completion of privatization continues to be dictated by conditions in the global capital and credit markets. The city will report back to the FAA by April 30, 2010, on further developments with respect to the process to select a private operator.
Click here to read more

Flaws Cited in ‘09 Crash Could Persist, FAA Says. --- Matthew L. Wald and Christine Negroni, The New York Times, January 31, 2010
The Federal Aviation Administration says it has fixed a variety of flaws that the 2009 Colgan Air crash in Buffalo, New York made obvious, most specifically targeting improved pilot training and safety programs. The agency warned, however, that some problems are not likely to be fixed for years, if at all, such as what to do about pilots who have a long commute and more generally, how to treat and deal with pilot fatigue.
Click here to read more

Raytheon Rigged FAA Bid, Rival Claims. --- Barbara Leonard, Courthouse News Service, February 1, 2010
The Washington Consulting Group filed a complaint in Superior Court alleging that a high-ranking official at the Federal Aviation Administration conspired with her boyfriend to ensure that his employer, Raytheon, won a billion-dollar contract to train the nation’s air traffic controllers. Washington Consulting claims that the defendants’ meddling “undermined the safe and efficient training of air traffic controllers” and that Raytheon’s misconduct constitutes a criminal conflict of interest, waste of federal resources, and unfair bidding procedures.
Click here to read more

FAA Fines Show Extent of Airline Problems. --- Gary Stoller, USA Today, February 2, 2010
The millions of dollars in fines that the Federal Aviation Administration imposes against airlines for violating maintenance and repair regulations illustrate serious problems and show how many flights take off when they shouldn’t and possibly endanger passengers’ lives. The FAA levied $28.2 million in fines and proposed fines against 25 U.S. passenger airlines for maintenance violations that occurred in the past six years, and 90% of maintenance violations do not result in fines but warning letters or other reprimands by the FAA.
Click here to read more

Dangerous Skies? NTSB to Issue Report on Colgan Air Crash. --- Lisa Stark and Huma Khan, Good Morning America, February 2, 2010
The National Transportation Safety Board will issue a report on Colgan Air Flight 3407, which crashed near Buffalo, New York and killed 50 people. The report will highlight commuter airlines’ safety lapses and the board will likely criticize an airline industry that is suffering from serious shortcomings.
Click here to read more

More articles on this topic:

NTSB to Hold Symposium in Response to Buffalo Plane Crash. --- Sholnn Freeman, The Washington Post, February 2, 2010
The National Transportation Safety Board will hold a staff symposium to explore code-sharing agreements between airlines in detail. Code-sharing agreements allow major carriers to expand their operations to routes that would otherwise be unprofitable, and the arrangements have come under scrutiny because of the absence of rules that would require major airlines to examine pilot qualifications and other safety issues at the smaller carriers. The NTSB is holding the symposium as a response to last year’s February 12 crash in Buffalo, New York. Passengers on the flight bought their tickets from Continental Airlines, but the plan was operated by Colgan, a regional carrier.
Click here to read more

Statement from Colgan Air Regarding NTSB Hearing on Flight 3407 February 2, 2010. --- PR Newswire, February 2, 2010
In response to the National Transportation Safety Board hearing on Colgan Air Flight 3407, the company released a statement asserting that all of its pilots are highly trained to handle all situations they may encounter and that the carrier has always made safety the greatest priority. Colgan also said that it will closely review the NTSB’s findings and recommendations and will work closely with regulators and industry colleagues to reinforce safety as the “primary industry objective.”
Click here to read more

In Response to NTSB Recommendations, FAA Issues Statement. --- Federal Aviation Administration, February 2, 2010
The Federal Aviation Administration announced that it will soon publish federal rules to prevent pilot fatigue and further improve pilot training. The announcement comes on the heels of the National Transportation Safety Board’s hearing and recommendations on Colgan Air Flight 3407, which crashed near Buffalo, New York on February 12, 2009. The FAA said it will review and evaluate the NTSB’s recommendations to help determine what further actions may be needed.
Click here to read more

NTSB: Flight 3407 Crash Primarily Due to Pilot Error. --- Joan Lowy, Associated Press, February 2, 2010
In a hearing on Colgan Air Flight 3407, the National Transportation Safety Board said the pilots made “critical errors showing complacency and confusion,”which resulted in the crash that killed everyone aboard the plane. The crash revealed the safety gap that exists between major airlines and regional carriers, and raised concerns as to whether pilots with low-fare airlines are vulnerable to fatigue, long-distance commutes, and inadequate training. The NTSB board will follow up with a forum this spring on pilot and air traffic controller professionalism, and with another forum on partnerships between major carriers and regional airlines.
Click here to read more

Deadly Plane Crash Near Buffalo Underscores Safety Gap, Official Says. --- Clement Tan, Los Angeles Times, February 3, 2010
National Transportation Safety Board Chairwoman Deborah A.P. Hersman said the Colgan Air Flight 3407 crash showed things “[they’ve] seen before” and that the board has made recommendations “time after time” that have not been heeded by the Federal Aviation Administration. In a report on the crash the board cited multiple pilot errors and other procedures and issued 25 safety recommendations.
Click here to read more

Legislation Requires FAA Action. --- WIVB, February 3, 2010
With the release of the National Transportation Safety Board investigation into the crash of Colgan Air Flight 3407, U.S. Senator Kristen Gillibrand is announcing legislation that would require the Federal Aviation Administration to implement the NTSB recommendations. Senator Gillibrand has been working with the families of the victims of Flight 3407 to ask the NTSB to ensure needed changes in the airline system are not ignored, and has worked on a number of bills to address safety concerns in the airline industry.
Click here to read more

Watchdog: FAA Safety Initiatives Lacking. --- Joan Lowy, Associated Press, February 4, 2010
Transportation Department Inspector General Calvin Scovel said the Federal Aviation Administration has failed to implement most of the safety reforms it promised in response to the crash of Colgan Air Flight 3407. The FAA has fallen behind schedule or failed to meet goals on eight of 10 measures the agency said it would take, including new regulations to prevent pilot fatigue and better inspection of training for regional airline pilots. The National Transportation Safety Board has urged the FAA for 20 years to update its rules for pilot hours and work days to prevent fatigue; FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt countered that the law requires the agency to go through a time-consuming process before adopting new regulations.
Click here to read more

United Sues City of Chicago for $1M for Jet-Truck Collision. --- John Pletz, Chicago Business, February 2, 2010
In a lawsuit filed Friday, United Airlines is suing the city of Chicago for more than $1 million for a February 2, 2005 accident when a United jet pushed back from the gate at O’Hare International Airport and struck a city maintenance truck. United alleges that the vehicle was there improperly and that the city had not notified ground control.
Click here to read more

Controllers: FAA Plan Could Jeopardize Safety. --- Edd Pritchard, Canton Rep, February 2, 2010
National Air Traffic Controllers Association members met Tuesday, February 2, 2010 with pilots in Wooster and Akron, Ohio to explain a Federal Aviation Administration plan to move terminal radar approach controllers from the Akron-Canton Airport tower to a central location in Cleveland. The NATCA members have questioned the changes for more than a year and say that under the current setup controllers are familiar with the area around the airports where they work, but that this could change if controllers are consolidated.
Click here to read more

More articles on this topic:

FAA Says Proposal Not Final. --- Edd Pritchard, Canton Rep, February 3, 2010
The Federal Aviation Administration says it has not finalized proposed changes for radar service in Northeast Ohio, and will brief unions as work continues on the plan. Air traffic controller union members have argued the change raises questions about safety, but the FAA insists that safety will not be jeopardized and notes that centralized radar approach control centers are used to manage airspace in major regions like southern and northern California, the Chicago area, and the Baltimore-Washington, D.C. area.
Click here to read more

City Seeks Grant for Runway 17/35. --- Jessica Langdon, TimesRecordNews, February 3, 2010
Wichita Falls, Texas hopes to receive a $5 million grant from the Federal Aviation Administration to get the first phase of reconstruction of a runway. The city plans to do the work in two phases, with work on the southern part to start this year and work on the northern section expected to start in 2011.
Click here to read more

U.S. Interior Dept. Rushed Cape Wind Review Report. --- Ayesha Rascoe, Reuters, February 3, 2010
A report from the Interior Department’s inspector general says the Department in the final days of the Bush administration may have rushed the completion of a positive environmental assessment of the first proposed major U.S. offshore wind project, but no laws were broken by the process. Several agencies were concerned they did not have enough time to provide thorough reviews and input, but none believed the department’s speedy review affected their overall conclusions. The $1 billion Cape Wind project, proposed in 2001, is designed to power 400,000 homes, but has yet to approved by the department under President Barack Obama.
Click here to read more

More articles on this topic:

Federal Investigators Report that Cape Wind Review ‘Rushed’ But Solid. --- Beth Daley, The Green Blog, February 3, 2010
The U.S. Department of the Interior’s Office of Inspector General’s investigation into the Minerals Management Service’s environmental review of the proposed Nantucket Sound wind farm concluded that several agencies felt “rushed” to finish their contributions to the report but that none of the agencies felt their conclusions were changed as a result of that. The final environmental review was largely favorable toward the Cape Wind project but did not include the most current findings about the impact on air traffic. The Interior Department released a statement saying the report “was not the subject of improper political influence or otherwise deficient.”
Click here to read more

FAA Issues Supplemental NOI to Prepare EA for Air Tour Management at Death Valley National Park. --- Federal Register, February 4, 2010
The Federal Aviation Administration has initiated development of an Air Tour Management Plan (ATMP) for Death Valley National Park. An Environmental Assessment is being prepared and Public Scoping comments are requested.
Click here to read more

Our View on Aviation: Does Airline Cost-Cutting Endanger Passenger Safety? --- USA Today, February 4, 2010
Fliers love the low fares that have come with deregulation but should not have to put up with cost-cutting measures that compromise safety. Troubling signs have recently emerged that airlines are shaving costs in ways that are largely invisible to passengers but potentially dangerous, including repeatedly flying aircraft with repair problems that should keep the planes on the ground, and putting regional aircraft in the hands of exhausted, poorly trained, low-paid pilots. The Federal Aviation Administration has caught up with violators and fined them, but it seems that the agency is sometimes worried more about inconveniencing airlines than aggressively safeguarding passengers.
Click here to read more

FAA User Fees Dead for Now. --- William Garvey, Aviation Week, February 4, 2010
The National Business Aviation Association president said the Federal Aviation Administration reauthorization bill could advance within the next four to eight weeks, and that the threat of aviation user fees seems to be dead “at least for this term of Congress.” The Obama Administration’s 2011 budget proposal, released Monday, February 1, contained no mention of user fees to help fund the FAA. The NBAA is hopeful the FAA reauthorization bill will be passed soon by the Senate, where it has stalled in the Senate Finance Committee.
Click here to read more

More articles on this topic:

City Seeks Grant for Runway 17/35. --- Jessica Langdon, Times Record News, February 3, 2010
Wichita Falls, Texas hopes to receive a $5 million grant from the Federal Aviation Administration to get the first phase of reconstruction of a runway. The city plans to do the work in two phases, with work on the southern part to start this year and work on the northern section expected to start in 2011.
Click here to read more

More articles on this topic: