Shout Box

Who's Online
1 registered (1 invisible), 14 Guests and 3 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Page 4 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 >
Topic Options
#18209 - 03/07/06 05:13 PM Re: Preserve neighbors speak up [Re: pedestrian]
tradjunkie Online   content
enthusiast

Registered: 04/19/04
Posts: 365
Of course, if the Botanical Garden took over half of Brooklyn, total government expenditures would drop:
number of homes would drop by around half, meaning that:
number of students in the school system would drop by half
sewerage to be maintained would drop
roads to be repaved would drop
number of pets would drop, so stray dogs would drop, so number of dogcatchers would drop
etc.
So the tax rate shouldn't change all that much. (Half the expenditures divided by half the population = same rate)

Commercial activity implies that the activity is supposed to make money. Which is different from cost recovery. If I lend you my car for a year, and you give me $100 at the end to pay for the now-needed oil change, new spark plugs, car wash, and new clutch, it's hardly profitable for me.

If you believe the Preserve's tax status should be rescinded, then say so. That's a different kettle of fish.

Or do you mean that all non-profits should pay tax, including churches, the United Way, the Red Cross, the PTA, Scout camps, etc.?

Or are you saying that the minimum size of government of Gardiner is too big for such a small population and thus imposing an unreasonable tax burden - in which case maybe Gardiner should try merging with Shawangunk or something, to eliminate duplication of expenses.

Top
#18210 - 03/13/06 07:39 PM Ends Justify Means [Re: dalguard]
Kent Offline
old hand

Registered: 01/21/00
Posts: 1038
Loc: The Bayards
Besides, I thought Gardiner was anti-development, which is how all this hullabaloo started. I can't keep track of it all and as a climber, my sole interest and concern is with preserving climbing access. I'm fond of Kent but I don't appreciate a climbing forum being used to attack the Preserve over non-climbing issues. As long as the Preserve is pro-climber I'm going to lean towards being pro-Preserve.

Dawn, your position is an "ends justifies the means" argument. It would be like someone saying "As a driver, my sole concern is with preserving cheap gasoline. As long as George Bush is pro-cheap gas I'm going to lean towards being pro George Bush". Implicitly, no matter the deceptions or the abuse of politcal power. The consequences of GW's behvavior are in a different realm than those of the Preserve's behavior, and I'm not equating them, but the principle is the same. You are saying no matter the behavior of the Preserve, you will blindly support them. Why? Just as one can be patriotic and still critical of this administrations foreign policy, so too can one be pro Preserve and still critical of some of their policies regarding landowners around them.

One could make the argument, as some have, that climbing community blindness to the MP's behavior towards their neighbors, and the passage of the Gardiner Ridge Zoning Law, will make it more likely ridge owners will sell, ostensibly to OSI or MP or TNC or TPL or whomever, and at a lower price. If the Preserve ends up with the land, the argument follows, then that would be better for climbers. But the Preserve may not end up with the land as a consequence of their behavior and the blind eye of members of our community to the plight of ridgeowners. For example, there is a significant piece of land in the Nears that is currently for sale. The Preserve has weighed in with their usual extreme low ball number, and so the property is going on the open market. Their will be other pieces of land important to climbers coming on the market in the next few years and some sellers are angry enough about what has happened that they want to place restrictive covenants in their deeds to prohibit Preserve ownership in perpetuity. So those pieces may end up in the hands of agencies or organizations that don't allow climbing access, in perpetuity. Blind support of the Preserve might not be such a good idea after all.

Where is the Gunks Climbers Coalition in all of this? Nowhere. The Carolina Climber's Coalition and the Access Fund, to their great credit, have mobilized the Carolinas climbing community to enable the respectful purchase of Laurel Knob in North Carolina. Here at home, our Gunks Climber's Coalition is strangely silent as part of the Near Trapps goes on the open market and the Preserve wings their low balls. There are several members of the GCC steering committee that I both like and respect. I feel badly for them in having to defend their leadership, a leadership that, with their silence, has effectively made the GCC into the PFTP....Poodles for the Preserve. Another new slogan in the offing....."The PFTP, coming quietly to heel for the Mohonk Preserve".

Last summer I gave the names of critically important landowners to the GCC Chair at a steering committee meeting. To my knowledge no one from the GCC has ever contacted those neighbors directly. Instead the GCC seems to be relying on the Preserve's representation of it's supposedly rosey relationships with it's neighbors. My advice to the GCC is this. Don't rely on the Preserve's representation of neighbor opinions, or my representation either. Speak with neigbhors directly. If you need introductions, I'll gladly facilitate where i can

And the hullabaloo in Gardiner isn't about anti-development but rather about the fair and equitable distribution of the costs of being anti-development. Personally, I'm ecstatic that Gardiner is anti-development. That the town board, with the help of the Mohonk Preserve, has placed such a great burden on so few people on the ridge (MP neighbors-what a coinkidink!), at least some of whom are elderly and unable to advocate in their own interest, is shameful.

Top
#18211 - 03/13/06 08:22 PM Re: Ends Justify Means [Re: Kent]
pedestrian Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/05/02
Posts: 2244
Loc: a heavily fortified bunker!
Quote:

Their will be other pieces of land important to climbers coming on the market in the next few years and some sellers are angry enough about what has happened that they want to place restrictive covenants in their deeds to prohibit Preserve ownership in perpetuity.




More blackmail from ridgeowners directed at the climbing community.

I wish them luck getting those covenants into their deeds. Given the volatile political climate in Gardiner, no responsible buyer should agree to such a restriction, for some of the same reasons that landowners are currently unwilling to accept the proposed new zoning restrictions.

Top
#18212 - 03/13/06 08:36 PM Re: Ends Justify Means [Re: pedestrian]
Kent Offline
old hand

Registered: 01/21/00
Posts: 1038
Loc: The Bayards
Again, I reference Laurel Knob. There was some illicit climbing going on there at one point. The landowner said, and I paraphrase, "land closed until purchased". The climbing community leaders there negotiated a purchase, and rallied the community to raise the funds.

It's a different situation here and startlingly so in that any suggestion that climbers might not have climbing access is considered blackmail, at least by some. The local sense of entitlement to access, that some have, is astounding.

Top
#18213 - 03/13/06 08:40 PM Re: Ends Justify Means [Re: Kent]
pedestrian Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/05/02
Posts: 2244
Loc: a heavily fortified bunker!
Entitlement? No.

Listen up here comes your lesson in tactics Kent.

If your goal is for climbers to buy your land to secure access, then aggressively telling them "you can't give an easement to the preserve" is going to be seen to be a complete deal breaker.

So would you care to try again?

Top
#18214 - 03/13/06 08:58 PM Re: Ends Justify Means [Re: pedestrian]
Kent Offline
old hand

Registered: 01/21/00
Posts: 1038
Loc: The Bayards
Nate, my goal is to advocate in the interest of landowners, especially those that aren't in a position to advocate for themselves. To that end I make clear to all, as factually as I can, the behavior of the preserve in the hope they will one day stop bullying their neighbors. Communicating the possible consequences of MP bullying is hardly blackmail.

I'm not trying to get the local climbing community to buy land any longer. That's a lost cause. The GCC's negligence however in even speaking with neighbors upon whose land their members climb, seems a rather egregious oversight under the circumstances.

And thanks for your offer of a lesson in tactics Nate. There are, however, others I think I would be better off learning from.

See you around.

Top
#18215 - 03/13/06 09:06 PM Re: Ends Justify Means [Re: Kent]
pedestrian Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/05/02
Posts: 2244
Loc: a heavily fortified bunker!
Quote:


I'm not trying to get the local climbing community to buy land any longer. That's a lost cause. The GCC's negligence however in even speaking with neighbors upon whose land their members climb, seems a rather egregious oversight under the circumstances.




I can envision a few scenarios under which it still might happen. A purchase with a stipulation of "no conservation easements" is not one of those.

Your "factual" information has so far amounted to mere consipracy theories involving Mr. Fairweather. As I understand it, the Preserve has played an advisory role at best in the zoning process. The citizens of Gardiner are ultimately responsible for the outcome of that process, and nobody on your side has apparently stepped up with a counter proposal.

Top
#18216 - 03/13/06 09:14 PM Re: Ends Justify Means [Re: pedestrian]
Kent Offline
old hand

Registered: 01/21/00
Posts: 1038
Loc: The Bayards
That's what the Preserve wants everyone to think, that any criticism of them is merely conspiracy theory. First, they could simply quell such theory with a full accounting of payments made to Mr. Fairweather. Why don't they?

Second, for a concrete and easily verifiable example of the Preserve's misrepresentation of the facts, I invite everyone to the MP visitor center. Take a look at their model of the Preserve boundaries. All the way down the eastern escarpment of the ridge they show their property line as being well onto their neighbors property. Compare that to the tax map on Ulster County Parcel Viewer. The tax map isn't entirely accurate either, but it's much closer.

But it's a point well taken that more evidence needs presenting. And I will indeed present.

Top
#18217 - 03/13/06 09:16 PM Re: Ends Justify Means [Re: Kent]
Kent Offline
old hand

Registered: 01/21/00
Posts: 1038
Loc: The Bayards
Also Nate, to bring you up to speed, the Gardiner Ridge Zoning Law passed back in January.

Top
#18218 - 03/13/06 09:39 PM Re: Ends Justify Means [Re: Kent]
Smike Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 05/01/01
Posts: 3143
Loc: in your backyard
Hey Kent,
Kerhonkson just pass a zoning bill that does not allow for cars on blocks in my back yard. Sorry to say were going to have to set up a toll outside on rt 44/55 and stop Gardiner residence from passing through, unless you can help defeat this?

Thanks for your support.

Top
Page 4 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 >


Moderator:  webmaster 
Sponsored