There are four options on the table, for a vote in the next few weeks: - DAVYJ, or “Put it back”. It means “legacy flight paths are sacred”. If it’s been there for 30 years, communities developed around it, and you can’t just shift it. So, put it back, and deal with the rest of the problems as if the path never shifted. The FAA supports that, and has prepared a plan (DAVYJ) that does exactly that. - “Pine Line”, or “Minimize TPA” (Total People Affected). It means let’s find the place where there’s the least TPA, and move the traffic over there. (And it doesn’t matter if these people went there to have a quiet life.) Here’s a hint. Every City can figure out a different way to calculate TPA, and prove that the TPA over the neighboring city is lower… Statistics is magical that way. The “Palo Alto” plan generally falls under this category, since the Palo Alto activists claim that it’s better to fly over Mountain View “since it’s shorter and higher”. This choice, IMO, won't happen on this round of the Select Committee - but that desire has been there for two years, and it won't go away by itself. - “Fix in place”. It means “keep the recent changes” (SERFR). This is absurd, since the FAA will apply pretty much EXACTLY the same altitude fixes to either SERFR or DAVYJ, and so near MENLO, it’s exactly the same thing since the ground tracks converge there… But SERFR overflies Los Altos and the high elevation communities on the Santa Cruz Mountains, and BSUR does not. (Again, btw, the Palo Alto folks have come up with a clever TPA formula that "proves" that DAVYJ, which overflies communities much further south and at 12,000’, is actually worse – the magic of TPA never stops coming) - “50-50”, or fly along both SERFR and DAVYJ. It means “keep half of the recent changes”, and still doesn’t help Palo Alto, since again – DAVYJ and “Fixed SERFR” are identical there. But not only does it fail to help anything, it is actually the ONLY option of the four that opens up TWO CONCURRENT PATHS for airplanes to fly in… Have you ever seen a new highway lane remain unused for long? 50-50 today, 55-55 next year... For more information on that see this page: http://www.QuietSkiesNorCal.org/50-50 Palo Alto knows they can’t get their plan through the committee, so they’re asking for either “50-50” or “Fix SERFR in place”, because it’s a precedent for shifting flight tracks, even if just a little bit. Palo Alto also paints DAVYJ as the devil incarnate, because they need the precedent and DAVYJ actually sets the opposite precedent. But if the Select Committee votes DAVYJ, here’s what you get: - DAVYJ kills the concept of TPA. It says “Respect legacy flight paths”, don’t move noise, not a little, not a lot. - DAVYJ sets precedent that even if a flight path was recently moved (like Surf Air) then it is possible to undo it. That’s it. DAVYJ is the biggest gift your city can get for Christmas. Cheers, thanks for signing the petition, and please re-post this on NextDoor and Facebook, and enjoy the nice weather that coming up. As always, you can contact us at PeaceAndQuiet@QuietSkiesNorCal.org Ben