Home News Local News Judge affirms town’s right to regulate airport noise, with one exception; curfews...

Judge affirms town’s right to regulate airport noise, with one exception; curfews take effect July 2

Some crying out against helicopter noise on the North Fork were left deflated yesterday as a judge yesterday affirmed East Hampton Town’s legal right to use restrictions to address the issue of excessive noise at the airport — with one major exception.

Others, however, acknowledged the step forward.

Federal District Court Judge Joanna Seybert upheld two local laws instituting year-round curfews: one, a mandatory nighttime curfew from 11 p.m. to 7 a.m., and the other, an extended curfew on noisy aircraft, from 8 p.m. until 9 a.m.

The court, however, placed a temporary injunction on a third law, which would have imposed a one-trip-per-week restriction.

Enforcement of the local laws will begin Thursday at 12:01 a.m., right in time for the July 4 weekend.

“We’re pleased that the judge has acknowledged that the town was justified in adopting restrictions to provide relief to the growing number of people who are negatively affected by airport noise. Although we regret that one of the key laws cannot be enforced for the time being, we are gratified that the court recognized that the law allows the kinds of restrictions that are essential to protect the residents of this town,” East Hampton Town Supervisor Larry Cantwell said in a release.

The judge noted “it cannot be argued that the town lacked the data to support a finding of a noise problem at the airport.”

Added East Hampton Town Councilwoman Kathy Burke-Gonzales, “The court’s decision today is an important first step, but we must recognize that our opponents are well-funded and will not give up easily. This will be a long process, not just for the pending case in federal court but also for the many other actions filed against operations at the airport. In light of today’s ruling, however, we encourage our opponents to rethink their strategy. It’s time to do what’s best for the town and adapt aircraft operations to fit our reasonable restrictions.”

Southold Town Supervisor Scott Russell applauded the news: “It is always a good day when home rule trumps self-interest. East Hampton owns the airport. It certainly has every right to regulate its use. The board there acted in the public interest and I am happy that the judge recognized that.”

Residents, meanwhile, feel the ruling won’t help much:  “This is not what we need to provide us true relief,” said Mattituck resident Teresa McCaskie, who’s been working diligently for months on the effort. “I am confident that helicopter companies will now look into leasing or buying bigger equipment to accommodate more passengers and they will cram more flights to beat the curfews. We needed to limit the total amount of flights coming in and out of the airport in order for this to be a true success, combined with much quieter equipment.”

She added, “If Southampton wanted to limit their total takeoffs and landings, East Hampton should be able to do the same. It’s for a reason. There are too many aircraft on the East End. We have been discovered.”

Southold Town Councilman Bob Ghosio, the town board liaison to the town’s helicopter committee, said while he is pleased that the court upheld East Hampton’s curfews, he feels not limiting the amount of flights may make for a more concentrated barrage of noisy flights trying to get in before the curfew. “It’s a step in the right direction, though. Southold Town’s helicopter committee still advocates that the FAA establish a flight path that stays off shore and goes around Plum Island. That would be the best solution for those on the North Fork impacted by the aircraft noise going the the South Fork. ”

Recently, the Town of East Hampton sent out a release announcing that the federal court had issued an order extending the deadline to rule on a motion seeking to block enforcement of the three local laws passed by the town to curb excessive airport noise.

According to East Hampton Town officials, the federal court heard arguments on May 18 on the request for a temporary restraining order. At the request of Judge Seybert, the town agreed to defer implementing the laws for three weeks to give the court time to rule on a preliminary injunction, Cantwell said.

Cantwell agreed to the delay, because he said he felt it was necessary to “respect the judicial process”.

Assistant United States Attorney Robert Schumacher appeared on behalf of the Federal Aviation Administration and said the FAA also needed additional time for review.

The judge said that she would rule on a preliminary injunction within three weeks. East Hampton Town said, in a release, that they would post an update by the date of the ruling, expected by June 8.

However, that date was extended;  Judge Seybert extended the deadline until yesterday, citing “the complexity of the issues involved”.

Last month, Southold Town Supervisor Scott Russell said, of the temporary restraining order against implementing the East Hampton town board’s effort to limit the impacts of helicopters, “We all knew this would be a protracted legal battle. I am confident in the abilities of Supervisor Cantwell and the town board there to fight the good fight on behalf of all of the East End communities and overcome any setbacks.”

In April, after months of public outcry and many meetings on the East End to address the escalating and controversial issue, the East Hampton town board voted to adopt legislation that will prohibit use of the airport in East Hampton between the hours of 11 p.m. and 7 a.m. In addition, use of of the airport by noisy aircraft is prohibited between the hours of 8 p.m. and 9 a.m. Finally, more than two uses of the airport by a noisy aircraft during a calendar week is prohibited.

A much-debated fourth restriction, which would have banned all helicopter traffic on weekends, from Thursday to Monday during the height of the summer season, was ultimately not included in the vote.

Not even a week after East Hampton adopted the legislation to curb helicopter noise on the East End, the town was slammed with a lawsuit by the Friends of East Hampton Airport, as well as several corporations, stating that the new restrictions were unreasonable and violated the United States Constitution.

In adopting the restrictions, the complaint stated, “the town has knowingly and purposefully transgressed the bounds of its extremely limited authority.” The complaint also said that the restrictions would cause “serious and irreparable harm” to businesses that depend upon the business generated by the airport; the restrictions will also cause neighboring airports to become congested, the complaint states.

According to East Hampton Town, “The complaint cites several federal laws and provisions of the U.S. Constitution, but conveniently forgets what makes these restrictions unique.”

East Hampton, the town’s statement added, “is fully prepared for this litigation and will vigorously defend its legal and constitutional right to impose reasonable, non-arbitrary, and carefully balanced restrictions.”

The adopted legislation came after  a helicopter noise forum held last year in Southold and the formation of a helicopter noise steering committee.

Change came after a new board in East Hampton proved receptive to the cries of its East End neighbors: On December 31, the town of East Hampton let expire four FAA grant assurances, taking back the reins in terms of overseeing its airport. For years, East Hampton had its hands tied and could not regulate hours of operation and number of flights after accepting funding from the FAA.

Last year, although the federal rule requiring Hamptons-bound helicopters to fly over the L.I. Sound along the north shore was extended for two years by the FAA in June, the FAA did not adopt a proposal endorsed by New York State Senator Charles Schumer and former Congressman Tim Bishop to require helicopters to stay off-shore and fly around Orient Point and Shelter Island to the South Fork. Riverhead Town Supervisor Sean Walter first argued for that route in 2010, but got no response.

SHARE