Monday, May 28, 2007 | 6:08 a.m.
We were told that the reasons for the right-turn flight path for jets taking off from McCarran International Airport are (1) saving flights' fuel and (2) growth in the number of flights to the city .
In other words, profits mainly for the airlines, the hotels and related businesses. The other side of the coin is that people under the new flight path will pay dearly for those profits.
Many people who live in the northwest and Summerlin, such as myself, lose quiet and peace when they sit in their yards or when they sleep, especially when certain flights go right above their homes. Even worse, the home values (which are basically our life savings) will drop, because it is less desirable to buy a house in a noisy area, effectively robbing part of our life savings for their profits .
In other words, the so-called growth or corporate profits are at our expense. Are the Federal Aviation Administration, the airlines or the hotels going to pay us compensation or parts of their profits for this growth? Is the city going to eliminate the property taxes of the affected area? Growth is not an absolute virtue .
If the growth and profits are so important, why not let the hotels and airlines build a remote airport, and let those who planned or supported the new flight path move their houses there. At least it is their choice, and they can listen to the music of the flights night and day.
As for the argument that we are wasting taxpayer money on the lawsuit, let them remember that the northwest and Summerlin pay tens of millions in taxes, if not more. It is exactly how we would like to see our tax money being spent by the city, i.e., to protect our peace and our life savings.
Med Yones, Las Vegas
archive
