The Airport Advisory Board is recommending that the Board of Commissioners have a called meeting on Friday to approve the use of the Gilmer County Airport as one of the 8 local test sites for conducting research flights with Unmanned Aircraft Systems (Drones).
An Opinion by Joene DePlancke
Here it is Wednesday and the called meeting has not been announced yet, however I hear it will be on Friday. I have called several people involved and asked them what research they have done regarding what this will really mean for Gilmer County. I asked Ryan Rees at the Times Courier and he said that he had not done any, that if it would provide revenue to the airport it seemed like it would be good for the county, but he was just starting to write his article.
I called Danny Hall, one of our commissioners and he said that he thought it was a good idea if it brought revenue to the airport. I asked him if he had done any research about any of the companies involved in testing drones flying over Gilmer County and he said no.
I called Randy Bell, one of our commissioners and he said that he had serious reservations. That he didn’t like the fact that we had to make a decision on the spur of the moment without any time to look into what may be involved. He expressed concern at the workshop that the presentation hadn’t been made to the Commissioners and therefore the commissioners were not able to ask specific questions, i.e. like how much revenue will it actually bring? Exactly what will the drones (UAV’s) be trying to accomplish? How often will they use the airport? He had lots of questions.
Jim Smith, an assistant to J.C. Sanford, the County Commission Chairman, called me and I asked him if he had done any research and he said it was Georgia Tech and that sometimes you just have to take people at their word. I told him I had been at the BOC Work Session last Thursday when this was first presented. That I had written down the names of the companies operating the drones under the auspices of Georgia Tech Research Institute which is a research arm of Georgia Tech. And that I had discovered that UNEQ Consulting and Adaptive Flight and AREAI were all heavily involved in military contracts. Mr. Smith said that he was unaware of that, but that we were told that this project was only to determine how drones would interact with FAA procedures.
What I want to know and no one seems to be able to tell me is:
1. What is the hurry?
a. This item was added to the agenda for last week’s workshop after the meeting began so it wasn’t advertised to the public that we were going to discuss drones over Gilmer.
b. We have to have an emergency called meeting because we have to sign a letter giving GTRI permission to use Gilmer County Airport as one of the six sites in Georgia by March 28th .
c. Because we only have one monthly meeting now, we have to have this special called meeting which means we will probably only get 24 hrs. notice and it will probably be early morning.
2. Why have 23 other states adopted or have laws that would prevent this type of operation in the works?
3. Has anyone considered that having a drone operation flying out of GC airport may well discourage an FBO or weekend people flying in and out of our airport because of drone traffic?
4. Why did an entrenched Democrat from Massachusetts, Congressman Ed Markey, introduce a bill in Congress, JUST YESTERDAY, limiting drone operations at local airports? And does the timing of the introduction of this legislation have anything to do with the urgency for us to sign an agreement with these people, a one-sided agreement where we agree to make the airport available but they won’t commit to any specifics, i.e. term or scope or total amount of money we would be receiving? Would the fact that operations started before the bill is enacted will have different requirements for reporting what they are doing have any bearing on the urgency to get us to sign on Friday . . . . .????
a. Why would a democrat be concerned about the possible ursurping of individual rights to privacy?
b. Why would a democrat be concerned about possible violation of our 4th Amendment rights?
c. Why would a democrat be concerned about licensing these aircraft and prohibiting them from carrying any kind of surveillance or filming equipment without a proper warrant?
d. Why would the purpose of the bill be “To amend the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 to provide guidance and limitations regarding the integration of unmanned aircraft systems into United States airspace”?
e. Why would a democrat write into the bill that unmanned aircraft might be helpful in meeting a number of challenges, but that “there is also the potential for unmanned aircraft system technology to enable invasive and pervasive surveillance without adequate privacy protections, and currently no explicit privacy protections or public transparency measures with respect to such system technology are built into the law”?
f. Finally, why would a democrat stick his neck out so far to specifically modify a bill Obama personally demanded and backed, to prevent drone test sites required by the FAA until proper protections for individual rights to privacy are protected, if there was nothing to worry about?
I am worried and I think the people that have the ability to make this decision on behalf of Gilmer County citizens should be concerned too. And before they make such a hasty decision to grab a few bucks they should make sure they aren’t giving up any of our personal individual rights granted to us by the constitution. I have the right to expect that my backyard is private and what I wear or don’t wear while gardening isn’t being photographed. And I have the right to say whatever I want in my own home without a drone possibly recording it some day.
Article by Joene DePlancke
I called Danny Hall, one of our commissioners and he said that he thought it was a good idea if it brought revenue to the airport. I asked him if he had done any research about any of the companies involved in testing drones flying over Gilmer County and he said no.
I called Randy Bell, one of our commissioners and he said that he had serious reservations. That he didn’t like the fact that we had to make a decision on the spur of the moment without any time to look into what may be involved. He expressed concern at the workshop that the presentation hadn’t been made to the Commissioners and therefore the commissioners were not able to ask specific questions, i.e. like how much revenue will it actually bring? Exactly what will the drones (UAV’s) be trying to accomplish? How often will they use the airport? He had lots of questions.
Jim Smith, an assistant to J.C. Sanford, the County Commission Chairman, called me and I asked him if he had done any research and he said it was Georgia Tech and that sometimes you just have to take people at their word. I told him I had been at the BOC Work Session last Thursday when this was first presented. That I had written down the names of the companies operating the drones under the auspices of Georgia Tech Research Institute which is a research arm of Georgia Tech. And that I had discovered that UNEQ Consulting and Adaptive Flight and AREAI were all heavily involved in military contracts. Mr. Smith said that he was unaware of that, but that we were told that this project was only to determine how drones would interact with FAA procedures.
What I want to know and no one seems to be able to tell me is:
1. What is the hurry?
a. This item was added to the agenda for last week’s workshop after the meeting began so it wasn’t advertised to the public that we were going to discuss drones over Gilmer.
b. We have to have an emergency called meeting because we have to sign a letter giving GTRI permission to use Gilmer County Airport as one of the six sites in Georgia by March 28th .
c. Because we only have one monthly meeting now, we have to have this special called meeting which means we will probably only get 24 hrs. notice and it will probably be early morning.
2. Why have 23 other states adopted or have laws that would prevent this type of operation in the works?
3. Has anyone considered that having a drone operation flying out of GC airport may well discourage an FBO or weekend people flying in and out of our airport because of drone traffic?
4. Why did an entrenched Democrat from Massachusetts, Congressman Ed Markey, introduce a bill in Congress, JUST YESTERDAY, limiting drone operations at local airports? And does the timing of the introduction of this legislation have anything to do with the urgency for us to sign an agreement with these people, a one-sided agreement where we agree to make the airport available but they won’t commit to any specifics, i.e. term or scope or total amount of money we would be receiving? Would the fact that operations started before the bill is enacted will have different requirements for reporting what they are doing have any bearing on the urgency to get us to sign on Friday . . . . .????
a. Why would a democrat be concerned about the possible ursurping of individual rights to privacy?
b. Why would a democrat be concerned about possible violation of our 4th Amendment rights?
c. Why would a democrat be concerned about licensing these aircraft and prohibiting them from carrying any kind of surveillance or filming equipment without a proper warrant?
d. Why would the purpose of the bill be “To amend the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 to provide guidance and limitations regarding the integration of unmanned aircraft systems into United States airspace”?
e. Why would a democrat write into the bill that unmanned aircraft might be helpful in meeting a number of challenges, but that “there is also the potential for unmanned aircraft system technology to enable invasive and pervasive surveillance without adequate privacy protections, and currently no explicit privacy protections or public transparency measures with respect to such system technology are built into the law”?
f. Finally, why would a democrat stick his neck out so far to specifically modify a bill Obama personally demanded and backed, to prevent drone test sites required by the FAA until proper protections for individual rights to privacy are protected, if there was nothing to worry about?
I am worried and I think the people that have the ability to make this decision on behalf of Gilmer County citizens should be concerned too. And before they make such a hasty decision to grab a few bucks they should make sure they aren’t giving up any of our personal individual rights granted to us by the constitution. I have the right to expect that my backyard is private and what I wear or don’t wear while gardening isn’t being photographed. And I have the right to say whatever I want in my own home without a drone possibly recording it some day.
Article by Joene DePlancke
I totally agree! I will also add that anytime you are pressured to make a hasty judgement regarding a serious decision, it is best to walk away! It is very unwise to enter a contract with ANYONE without knowing the exact details, knowing what is required of you and what you are giving up. I am very disappointed to hear such flippant answers by leaders in this community. I hope that Randy Bell continues to look into this.
Thank you for bringing this to my attention! FYN please keep us informed as to any meeting times, etc.
How will I know who owns it?
How will I know a neighbor isn't spying on me?
How will I know the drone isn't a terrorists? Don't laugh, this stuff happens.
How will I know it isn't loaded with anthrax?
Anyone think of that??
It is pretty clear that JC and Jim Smith see a chance to generate a little more revenue and don't care how they do it.
I am really sick of the incompetence and corruption in this county.
Bush the lessers GOP majority passed the so-called Patriot Act, created these secret no-fly lists, and created the Department of Homeland Security. What a trampling, even before the needless [Iraq] war that has crushed our economy and many lives.
Why is Gilmer County, land of my ancestors who were Scotts Irish Highlanders descent who were fiercely independent, just agree to ignore our freedom and quality of life for a bunch of military contractors. If they want to play with their drones, go to a military base, or fly over Georgia Tech or Sanford Stadium. Live my life and livestock alone.
And take our BOC with you. They don't deserve power and are ignoring due process, which is what all this is about. Great job, GOP.
I have an extra dog eared copy of 1984, if either of you need to read it.
Hey, thanks for the betrayal! I'd like to think you two are just a couple old men seduced by the shiny new big boy toys [drones], but I think you knew EXACTLY what you were doing to the good citizens of this county.
What next? Cameras at every corner? Door to door gun confiscation?
This disgusts me.
These unmanned aircraft or UAVs are a pain in the neck to say the least.
Your government is not telling the truth. UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLES as they are called are the wave of the future. They pose a very large monetary gain to those governments that embrace their research, development and support by allowing their sole existence.
If the county is considering their placement, then they the county have been approached and are considering the monetary gain of this subject.
The interesting thing about the drone is that unless you are there when they take off and land you will not even know they are airborne. The UAV is very quite and and has all the intelligence gathering capabilities that could become your greatest expressed fears and concerns.
They derive a number of their qualities from the space and satellite programs only more further advanced. They are a wealth of technological information gatherers. They can be programmed and flown to perform anything a manned aircraft can do. They can stand off many miles from their target and gather any information their sensor are designated to gather.
I thought it was funny the gentleman stating he would "shoot them down if he saw one over his property.". The not so funny part is if he did manage to "shoot one down" he would serve time in a federal facility not of his choosing. Charge: destroying Federal property and violation of a ton of other laws that protect these UAVs.
The biggest problem with these aircraft is they fly so high and so far away you do not even know they are in the sky. In order to destroy something you have to see it, you will never see the drone. The problem with these aircraft encountered presently is that they often times go off uncontrolled while being operated by remotely located operators. The only thing a UAV sees in flight is what the operator on the ground sees through a camera. The test beds for UAVs is every where. Where I am they are always encroaching the airspace we fly in. Our biggest fear is mid air collision due to a drone losing signal with its operator or the operator just not seeing us. (And we have had many near misses.) If it does lose signal it arbitrarily will just start an uncontrolled climb. We basically hate the damn things because they are so unpredictable. But they are getting better! The United States Government under a ruses of "research" "development" and "technology advancement" are developing and conducting test with the UAVs as we speak. UAVs are the edge of intelligence gathering for the future. UAVs have a place but it is not in the cities of the United States of America. The subtle demise of the American citizens privacy is being undermined and eroded. The UAVs have been developed to be the big "EYE" and "EARS" in the sky. In the books written by George Orwell,"1984" and Aldous Huxley "Brave New World" they were right on. "The two greatest visions of a future dystopia were George Orwell’s 1984 and Aldous Huxley's Brave New World. The debate,between those who watched our descent towards corporate totalitarianism, was who was right. Would we be, as Orwell wrote,dominated by a repressive surveillance and security state that used crude and violent forms of control? Or would we be, as Huxley envisioned, entranced by entertainment and spectacle, captivated by technology and seduced by profligate consumption to embrace our own oppression? It turns out Orwell and Huxley were both right. Huxley saw
the first stage of our enslavement. Orwell saw the second. UAVs are and are being developed capable of things the American people cannot fathom! Your rights and the rights of every American as we once knew are slowly being taken away, eroded right under your nose. I am in Afghanistan I have seen and know the capabilities of the U.S. Government's technology To tell you the truth it is rather frightening.
So without making adverse remarks about the Gilmer County leadership I will leave there drones alone. I hope that each and every one of you will take the time to seek information to not just local governments sentiment on issues like the drone but look at the state and federal levels of their beliefs in the systems they are imposing on you, supposedly for your safety and good.
Since 1990, I have heard the complaint of "no good paying or high tech jobs available up here" and "all we have are minimum wage WalMart and fast food jobs up here" !! Does anybody know anything about a drone ? There is not a single part on a drone that is low tech or minimum wage. From the airframe, the powerplant, to the computer controlling systems, it represents high paying, technical employment. It attracts, employees that are high paid technically trained employees, college programs, money, better pay, companies who need to build buildings to be close to the operation, employers who may wish to relocate or buy a second home, but most of all, how about this: Our kids might have a better chance to have a future in a high tech industry, and be here close to home. I have hard time understanding the local logic in this. Our economy is driving our kids away, to try to survive in metropolitan areas, while we make sure no good job is ever available here in Ellijay. I wish I could understand, but I can't seem to understand this thought process. If the drone program is here to spy, we must be deep in criminal activity. But, that is not what a drone program is. It is testing equipment to ready it for use. And, yes, they do like a rural area, but not for the asinine argument of safety or "crashing into our homes". Rural areas have less aircraft operations, less towers, less of everything a test program doesn't need in it's way. The Air Force fighter pilot training finishing school is in Columbus Mississippi for the same reasons. For the sake of our nation, thank goodness Columbus Ms. didn't have the same attitude as we are expressing. Having spent time there, watching literally 100's of Cessna Citation jets (A Trainer plane for our fighter pilots) fill the skies heading in and out of training missions everyday, to be protecting our nation somewhere else tomorrow, makes me proud. And then they want to have a drone program here and the lies and misinformation start flying more dangerous than a drone program could ever be. I stand amazed, and welcome any argument to the contrary of this possibility of having a chance like this in our hometown. I wonder if Marietta Ga is appreciated for allowing Lockheed to move into their city and Cobb county ? Maybe they could have said no, and resembled the problematic Clayton or Dekalb counties, who have very little to offer their populace. And, while we are worrying about drones "crashing into our homes", consider the thousands flights each and every day in America, and how much we appreciate the safety of the flying commercial and private public. If we are smart, we will think about the day that American technology is superior (as it is right now) the world over and one of our Allies, with a thick accent says, "...and this equipment comes from Ellijay Georgia USA "?
In closing, with the suicide bombers, the islamist jihadist fighters, the muslim brotherhood, the white supremacy derelicts, the drug dealers, the criminals, etc, who prey on our society and country daily, I would welcome and hope that we could help supply the equipment for our military and police officers who put their life on the line everyday to stop the threats we live under and put out a welcome mat for a drone program. We should be a part of the solution for our country's safety and liberty and not be the one who protects the enemy with our fear of "them finding our dope plants or moonshine stills". Period.
That said, are we really only talking about a total annual revenue stream of $4,500? If that's true it does not appear to be worth all the trouble.