


DonnieS wrote:As I understand recent reports from Austin, our state is going to keep the small towers in operation.
GIMNEPIWO wrote:DonnieS wrote:As I understand recent reports from Austin, our state is going to keep the small towers in operation.
Still fighting for ours ... The closure has been extended until June ...

DonnieS wrote:GIMNEPIWO wrote:DonnieS wrote:As I understand recent reports from Austin, our state is going to keep the small towers in operation.
Still fighting for ours ... The closure has been extended until June ...
It would seem to me that this is more state business that federal anyway.
GIMNEPIWO wrote:DonnieS wrote:GIMNEPIWO wrote:DonnieS wrote:As I understand recent reports from Austin, our state is going to keep the small towers in operation.
Still fighting for ours ... The closure has been extended until June ...
It would seem to me that this is more state business that federal anyway.
Well .... 'F'AA is in charge of the towers not 'S'AA ... But, the paper this morning says that our tower will remain open for at least a year, possibly 3 by using money set aside for capital improvements ... But if they seek ANY other state funds while doing that they will be penalized ... Local government is supposed to kick in about $8000 a month but they are exploring other options as well ... Of the towers that were slated for closure we are the 8th busiest and the busiest with comercial traffic ...
anonlooker wrote:GIMNEPIWO wrote:DonnieS wrote:GIMNEPIWO wrote:DonnieS wrote:As I understand recent reports from Austin, our state is going to keep the small towers in operation.
Still fighting for ours ... The closure has been extended until June ...
It would seem to me that this is more state business that federal anyway.
Well .... 'F'AA is in charge of the towers not 'S'AA ... But, the paper this morning says that our tower will remain open for at least a year, possibly 3 by using money set aside for capital improvements ... But if they seek ANY other state funds while doing that they will be penalized ... Local government is supposed to kick in about $8000 a month but they are exploring other options as well ... Of the towers that were slated for closure we are the 8th busiest and the busiest with comercial traffic ...
Shorter - your tower is not closing.
Like so much of the liberal fear mongering regarding the sequester, a bunch of ballyhoo.
Spazsdad wrote:GIMNEPIWO wrote:anonlooker wrote:GIMNEPIWO wrote:DonnieS wrote:GIMNEPIWO wrote:DonnieS wrote:As I understand recent reports from Austin, our state is going to keep the small towers in operation.
Still fighting for ours ... The closure has been extended until June ...
It would seem to me that this is more state business that federal anyway.
Well .... 'F'AA is in charge of the towers not 'S'AA ... But, the paper this morning says that our tower will remain open for at least a year, possibly 3 by using money set aside for capital improvements ... But if they seek ANY other state funds while doing that they will be penalized ... Local government is supposed to kick in about $8000 a month but they are exploring other options as well ... Of the towers that were slated for closure we are the 8th busiest and the busiest with comercial traffic ...
Shorter - your tower is not closing.
Like so much of the liberal fear mongering regarding the sequester, a bunch of ballyhoo.
Yep ... much like that 'fear mongering' about raising taxes on the wealthy ... They still wake up tomorrow rich
So they shouldbe taxed until they wake up poor? Then what?