Either Definition Still Means That Grant-Valkaria Is Rabidly 'Anti-Aviation'

The ever-so-anti-aviation Mayor of a Florida community is doing a little back-pedaling to TRY to get out of the hot water his administration is in due to their having undertaken an attempt to illegally limit the freedoms of flyers on, over or near their community. The current definition is not as drastic as that put forth previously... but if you want to conduct flight training or similar business on this airport, this town seems to want to put you out of business. Still, FAA's AIP funding restrictions usually demand that the operator discriminate against NO category or class of user... so we're wondering how this explanation is any less illegal than that discussed previously.

In previous ANN coverage we reported that Grant-Valkaria was attempting to pass an ordinance that stated, "...PROVIDING FOR LIMITATIONS ON ACTIVITIES CONDUCTED AT AIRPORTS LOCATED IN THE GML (Government Managed Land) ZONING DISTRICT; PROHIBITING FLIGHT TRAINING/INSTRUCTION SCHOOLS..." The text of the bill prohibits specific flight instruction activities. For instance the bill states no flight training/instruction or flight training/instruction schools shall be allowed to be operated from or in the GML zoning district, and aircraft based at any airport located in the GML zoning district shall be used for flight training. The bill defines flight training/instruction to mean the giving or receiving of instruction in learning to pilot an aircraft or for recurrent training, and flight training/instruction school shall mean any person firm, corporation or other entity that provides flight training/instruction.

Responding to an email from a constituent, Mayor Del Yonts claimed:

The one thing that seems to be missing in many of the comments from both sides is the exact intent of the ordinance. Because of this apparent mis-interpretation, I believe the wording needs to be clarified.

The articles you provided as reference all deal with "use" of the airport.

That issue is the reason I was not for the proposed ordinance in January 2009. I felt there were many legal questions of what the Town could and could not do or even should or should not do. It dealt almost in its entirety on "use", and the Town Council asked the town attorney to take another look at it. At this point, that ordinance is still in review, but I am expecting a response from the attorney as to his findings fairly soon.

That is not this ordinance. My understanding of the proposed ordinance is not about limiting or restricting "use". Certain types of businesses (flight training/instruction and/or flight schools) would not be allowed in GML zoning. We are not restricting usage of the airport, runways, airspace, nor are we limiting who can and who cannot fly at the airport. That is the authority of the FAA and to a smaller degree, the owner (Brevard County) of the airport. This ordinance will not in any way impact the current flight schools or training that is being conducted at the Valkaria Airport, as they are either not based at Valkaria Airport (FIT, Flight Safety, etc.) or would be grandfathered in (Club aircraft used for training). This would only restrict what type of business may locate in the subject zoning in the future.

Like any property in Grant-Valkaria, what zoning is applied to a property and what is allowed in that zoning is determined by the Town Council, just the same as you do in Palm Bay. (Our expert legal council has advised us accordingly.)

Del Yonts, Mayor, Town of Grant-Valkaria, dyonts@grantvalkaria.org

FMI: www.grantvalkaria.org, dyonts@grantvalkaria.org (Grant-Valkaria Mayor)