Yes, I get that there would be a diversity of opinions on this but somehow the neighbors have previously reached a consensus about what they would find acceptable and made a set of proposals around that. I agree that having those proposals ignored is frustrating. If that consensus is shifting/hardening from simply limiting use, that's helpful to know. Thanks.

Originally Posted By: Advocacy group



Hey Ian Manger, I think the last meeting we attended was after the 24 th. At any rate, at the meeting there was strong opposition to "the pavilion" and for all intents and purposes that means the proposed events that the Mohonk Preserve wants to hold there. Even Carl Zatz proposed just eliminating the pavilion so the dialog could continue. While some neighbors may just want to limit the use of the pavilion, others want a less bloated, lighter on the land campground while others want the whole idea canned. What it looked like to us at the meeting was that the neighbors came in with very reasonable requests and the Mohonk Preserve and PIPC ignored the most important requests like the pavilion and alcohol issue.

Thanks, MPNA