Hi, Dave!
I just wanted to send you a note regarding your editorial in the April/May 2013 issue. Specifically, I really appreciated your feelings about the critical importance of members sharing their views and positions with their member associations, but also realizing that we may not hit on their side of the issue on each occasion.
As you know, our membership (within AOPA) is incredibly diverse. There are as many different ways that people use their airplanes, as there are reasons that our members fly in the first place. This diversity rarely leads to absolute agreement on any one particular issue. AOPA strives to take the position that will protect the majority of our members. Sometimes, our position – and the message – is very nuanced and hard to communicate.
A recent example of this is the debate over the closure of “contract towers.” Contrary to what some members believe, AOPA never advocated that every single tower on the FAA’s list should necessarily remain open in today’s environment. Primarily, we did not agree in the way in which the FAA went about arbitrarily deciding which towers to close without any regard for safety considerations, such as the kinds of operations at the airports, the surrounding airspace, and more. Allowing the FAA to have made the unilateral decision to close nearly 150 control towers without input from industry or pilots would have set a very dangerous precedent for other programs that benefit GA. We already know that the FAA is placing the burden of budget cuts resulting from sequestration squarely on the shoulders of general aviation, so what arbitrary cuts would they make next? Flight service stations? NAVAID maintenance? Certification services? Weather services? Medical services? These are all possibilities.
While we (at AOPA) are always looking to improve on the ways in which we communicate with our members, the control tower program issue was a particularly difficult one to make absolutely clear. In the end, our work with other aviation associations stopped the FAA from being allowed to make a decision without taking critical safety considerations into account or getting feedback from pilots first.
And it probably won’t stop with contract towers. We will continue to fight battles that would cut services for general aviation. Although the actual impacts of these changes might not be felt immediately or acutely by the average GA pilot, if we don’t stop them, there will likely be a gradual erosion of services and/or an imposition of small fees and charges that will eventually undermine general aviation. Our challenge is to engage members in a manner that highlights the threat and urgency without overstating our case.
So thank you for recognizing that these are complicated times with an unprecedented number of issues facing GA. AOPA is working around the clock to do its best by general aviation so that it won’t be further overrun by over-regulation, burdensome taxes and fees, and public misunderstanding and malaise.
Sincerely,
Katie Pribyl
Vice President, Communications
Aircraft Owners & Pilots Association
Frederick, Md.
