[Craig Muhonen]

Should be Headline News on local newspapers, be they so bold and unafraid,
and "LET THE COURTS DO THEIR JOBS"

Simplify: :No More Leasing Public Parks in San Diego
Just stop it. Open park to all. Simple waiver. Let recreation take place. Let surfing occur. Let jumping occur. Let running occur. Let jumping a little higher occur. Let jumping very high occur. Let people fly kites. Let people walk. Let people play games. Let people breathe air. Let people dance. Let people hold hands. Let people help one another. Let people ride bicycles. Let people play tennis. Let people play catch. Let people run with a wing. Let people enter the federal airspace with a high jump or a skip or a hop or a wing. Let''s hold people responsible for their actions. Let us respect adulthood. Let us use the recreational responsibility clauses that are effective over land owners where recreating people stay responsible for their own recreation; let the courts do their job and hold the recreationist responsible for their actions, not the land owner who allows recreation. Let not private business own what is not theirs! Do not lease out San Diego's historical flight treasure; no San Diego citizen should allow such travesty as handing over the park's treasure to money-grabbing recreation-stopping businesses! Just do not lease out what belongs to the people.

[Chris McKeon]

So do not those of You Pilots, landowners down in San Diego Diago You Guys feels like feel the Lone Ranger. For up here on My favorite SF Bay Area Mountain for launching a Hang Glider. So these Days since the State took Control of the Mountain. They have Park Rangers who are employed by the State. Of course, They are Paid by the taxing of Us Kaw abiding Tax Paying Citizens. And get this: I have had a couple dealings with a Ranger or Two. They absolutely refuse to acknowledge the reality that in the deal I am talking about. The ranger felt that it was His Jon to {Protect the Mountain from Me} I really mean this. I asked Him: Who are You up here? Who are You Employed By? Naturally He said: "I am a State Ranger, and I am employed by the State of California". I replied: "No. You have it somewhat incorrect". You are employed Yes by the State of California, yes You are. But Your Employers are collectively, and I am one of those who You work for, we are the Land Owing Tax Paying rightful owners of this Mountain, and You work for Us. With that He shook His Head, turned to walk towards His Truck. He mumbled that He had: "Other things to Do". I said one last thing to Him: "Reality Bights."

I am noyt kidding here, nor am I making this up. These Park Rangers refuse to accept reality.

[dhmartens]

I have a plan, but not until January. It involves Brad Sherman as he has proven he has connections with Veterans Affairs, it may require BobK to send him his Birth Certificate. But after that all bets are off with 1) City of San Diego, 2) USHPA, 3) Air California Adventure.
We will just be repeating what is proven to work. It may not get Bob reinstated but there will be a lot of Dust kicked up.

By the way there is a power struggle for president of SHGA between Steve Murillo and Kevin Kernahan. (sorry if I misspelled)

[Bob Kuczewski]

By the way there is a power struggle for president of SHGA between Steve Murillo and Kevin Kernahan. (sorry if I misspelled)

Do either of them support restoring the old forum posts?

Would either of them push back on USHPA's expulsion of SHGA members?

[dhmartens]

Replacing the flight school could cause several homes to be placed as short sales on the San Diego real estate market and youtube influencer Anthony Bordanero to cause a sell off.

[JoeF]

I fed Ernie Casco's prose to ChatGPT today and received what it thought was a polished version:

Request for Torrey Hawks to Unite and Endorse the "SD Recreational Waiver" at Torrey Pines Gliderport

I am asking Torrey Hawks to set aside differences and unite our community by endorsing the "SD Recreational Waiver" as a solution for Torrey Pines Gliderport.

The "SD Rec Waiver" is already in the hands of every La Jolla Town Council (LJTC) member. We have unanimous support from the LJTC, along with a verbal go-ahead to implement it as a solution. The petition advocating for this waiver has stood the test of time, gathering hundreds of signatures and continuing to grow.

No one wants a city-appointed enforcer creating arbitrary access passes to control public parks. Commercializing our public parks is unacceptable.

Key Points About the "SD Recreational Waiver"

Modeled After Success: The waiver closely follows the structure of Dockweiler Beach’s successful contract.
Restores Original Intent: It ensures Torrey Pines Gliderport operates as originally agreed upon, allowing fair access to all parties.
Limits USHPA’s Role: Under this waiver, USHPA would function as a club, not a dictatorship.

Torrey Pines Gliderport is already protected under the California Recreational Use Statute. The "SD Rec Waiver" restores recreational freedom while maintaining safety and fairness.

Benefits of the "SD Recreational Waiver"

Eliminates Illegal Fees: Ends mandatory access and waiver fees for public park use, preventing the creation of "city dictators."
Supports Public Safety: Requires tandem operators and schools to:

Cover their own insurance costs (as required by law).
Ensure oversight for safety.

Stops Corruption:

Ends the current monopoly funneling money into private accounts.
Removes the threat of violence stemming from power struggles and profit motives.
Resolves the public dispute that has cast a shadow over the city.

Why This Is Needed
Other locations, like Dockweiler Beach, have successfully implemented recreational waivers. Instructors and tandem pilots benefit from fairer pay and greater control—without the city exploiting pilots or blocking public access. The "SD Rec Waiver" restores rights and freedoms while enabling safe tandem and school operations.

A Call to Action
This is an easy administrative decision for lawmakers that can restore harmony at Torrey Pines Gliderport. With Torrey Hawks’ support, we can present a united front to the City Council. Let’s draft a letter of endorsement for the "SD Recreational Waiver" and rally behind it as a community.

Joe La Cava, our La Jolla representative, needs to hear from us loud and clear. As he seeks re-election, he should act in accordance with what the people want: fair public access, safety, and freedom.

Together, we can:

End the dispute.
Secure public access.
Ensure safe, fair, and sustainable tandem and school operations.

Let’s come together, draft a united letter of support, and present it to the City Council for change. The time to act is now.

I sent a copy of this above while reminding Council President Joe LaCava (District 1) that I had years ago directly in person asked him to do the right thing for many people as regards the City park and access to federal airspace.

Message Council President Joe LaCava (District 1): https://www.sandiego.gov/citycouncil/cd1/contact/form

Filler:
https://youtube.com/shorts/_WkksGOF4CU?si=xPaVwPXb2TrYU_b4

[JoeF]

JenniferAndJosephAndDaveS100th.JPG (17.16 KiB) Viewed 42 times

Click through to see if you want to sign.\\\=========================================

Advocate for Open Access
Challenge Monopolies: Organize efforts to address exclusivity clauses or agreements between cities (like San Diego) and private entities that exclude independent pilots.
Legal and Policy Reviews: Investigate whether the exclusivity given to commercial operators or private corporations or associations violates public access laws, particularly if the gliderport is on city-owned land.

=============================================

Recreational Use Statutes (RUS) and Their Relevance to Recreational Hang Gliding

Yes, many states in the U.S. have Recreational Use Statutes (RUS) to protect landowners who allow the public to use their land for recreational purposes. These laws are designed to encourage landowners to open their lands for public use without fear of liability, provided they don’t charge fees or engage in willful misconduct. Here's how this applies to recreational hang gliding and similar activities:


Key Features of Recreational Use Statutes

1. Limited Liability for Landowners
   Landowners are typically protected from being held liable for injuries sustained by recreational users, as long as:
   - The activity is allowed without a fee.
   - There is no intentional or grossly negligent behavior that causes harm.
   
2. Applicability to Various Recreational Activities
   Recreational use often includes a wide range of activities, including hiking, camping, swimming, and in many cases, hang gliding or paragliding.
   
3. Encourages Open Access
   By protecting landowners, RUS laws encourage public and private landowners to permit recreational activities without undue risk.

How This Relates to Hang Gliding at Torrey Pines

1. Protection for Municipalities
   If the Torrey Pines Gliderport is on city-owned or protected land, San Diego could be shielded from liability under California's recreational use statutes, assuming:
   - Open access is granted for recreational activities.
   - Proper waivers are used to inform participants of risks.
   
2. No Need for Mandatory Insurance
   With RUS protections, the city does not necessarily need a third-party insurance provider (e.g., through USHPA). Liability concerns can be mitigated by:
   - Requiring recreational users to sign waivers.
   - Promoting safety guidelines.
   
3. Potential for Open Access Parallel to Commercial Use
   Allowing independent recreational hang gliding could fit within RUS protections, as it would:
   - Encourage community engagement.
   - Continue a tradition of free recreational use.
   - Avoid imposing unreasonable restrictions or exclusive agreements.

Challenges and Counterarguments

1. Charging Fees
   If the city or operator charges fees for recreational use, RUS protections might not apply.
   - Solution: Ensure open recreational access remains free, with fees limited to optional services (e.g., equipment rental or guided instruction).
   
2. Intentional Misconduct
   RUS protections do not cover willful or reckless disregard for safety.
   - Solution: Implement site-specific safety measures, such as signage, safety briefings, and site rules.
   
3. Coordination with Commercial Operations
   Commercial operators may argue that open recreational use could interfere with their business.
   - Solution: Create designated time slots or areas for recreational and commercial activities, maintaining harmony between both groups.

California’s Recreational Use Statute
Under California Civil Code Section 846, landowners who allow public recreational use without a fee are generally not liable for injuries. This statute could be central to any argument advocating for open access to the gliderport.

And ChatGPT also cogitates to:

San Diego City's Deal: Public Land Sold Out to Private Profit

It’s understandable why this situation would be seen as unfair by public recreational users. Leasing out 100% control of a publicly owned space—particularly without charging rent—effectively shuts out independent users and creates a monopolistic environment that benefits only the commercial operator. This raises several concerns:


Public Land and Citizen Access

1. Public Good vs. Private Profit
   Public lands are meant to benefit all citizens, and exclusive deals often erode this principle. Allowing a single for-profit operator to control all recreational activities on public land undermines the accessibility and fairness that public spaces should guarantee.
   
2. Loss of Independent Access
   For over a century, Torrey Pines allowed free recreational hang gliding. Transitioning to an exclusive, for-profit model eliminates independent access, which many argue is a core function of public spaces.
   
3. Transparency Issues
   Deals like this often lack sufficient public input or scrutiny, leaving citizens feeling disenfranchised about the decisions made with their land.

Monopolistic Practices

1. Anti-Competitive Environment
   By granting a private operator full control, the city effectively eliminates competition. This can lead to inflated costs for commercial services (e.g., tandem flights or lessons) and restricts opportunities for recreational pilots.
   
2. USHPA Certification and Insurance Mandate
   Forcing pilots to join organizations like USHPA, which have had controversies around insurance and governance, adds an unnecessary burden. Recreational hang gliding has historically operated safely without such mandates.

Economic and Ethical Concerns

1. No Rent, No Revenue
   Leasing public land for free is a poor financial decision unless there are significant public benefits in return (e.g., free or low-cost access for residents). Here, it appears the deal exclusively benefits the commercial operator.
   
2. Infinite Lease
   Long-term or perpetual leases with no oversight or renegotiation opportunities lock the public into a bad deal indefinitely. This can be particularly damaging as demographics, recreational trends, and the needs of the community evolve.

Potential Solutions

1. Revisit Lease Terms
   Advocate for the city to renegotiate the lease. This could include:
   - Charging rent for the land.
   - Requiring the operator to provide free or subsidized access for independent recreational pilots.
   
2. Allow Parallel Use
   Designate specific days, times, or areas for independent hang gliding to run alongside commercial operations. This ensures fair access without disrupting the business model.
   
3. Public Advocacy
   Organize efforts to bring public attention to the issue. Highlight the historical significance of recreational flying at Torrey Pines and the impact of monopolistic practices.
   
4. Transparency and Accountability
   Demand greater transparency in public land use agreements. This includes public hearings, periodic reviews of lease terms, and performance audits to ensure agreements benefit the public.

If San Diego City made this decision without adequate public consultation, it’s worth questioning whether the arrangement truly reflects the community’s best interests. Open recreational access to public spaces is a right worth defending.