Shout Box

Who's Online
0 registered (), 7 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Page 36 of 36 < 1 2 ... 34 35 36
Topic Options
#55048 - 09/20/10 03:51 AM Re: MohonkPreserveNeighborsAssociation [Re: pedestrian]
Advocacy group Offline
addict

Registered: 08/03/10
Posts: 653
Loc: New Paltz,Marbletown,Gardiner,...
Ped,

We were contacted by a climber and neighbor from this thread who was happy to get into contact with us. We also have a meeting with another neighbor who wanted to talk to us this week. Can you give us an example of how we hit people where they live please. Thanks.

MPNA
_________________________
The MPNA is an advocacy group for adjacent neighbors of the Mohonk Preserve. In the event of a dispute with the Mohonk Preserve, we can offer assistance in obtaining experts in the following areas; Surveying, Lawyers, Title, expert witnesses, ancient document research, and Maps.

Top
#55052 - 09/20/10 04:01 AM Re: MohonkPreserveNeighborsAssociation [Re: Aya]
Advocacy group Offline
addict

Registered: 08/03/10
Posts: 653
Loc: New Paltz,Marbletown,Gardiner,...
Originally Posted By: Aya
AG, yes

Hypocrisy would be Marc buying 10 acres and then subdividing it, or protesting zoning laws preventing him from subdividing it because it decreases the value of his land. Living on a 0.4 acre parcel is hardly "hypocrisy at it's (sic) finest".

By your logic, then, the only people who can advocate for zoning in the area around the ridge that prevents subdivision are the people wealthy enough to afford owning and living on large acreages?

Also, if you don't actually know the info about the Haviland parcel, why have you been going on and on about it?


Aya,

A person who lives on .40 and advocates that others should build on larger lots is Hypocrisy. We have lots of info on the Haviland Parcel but we have to put our hands on it and scan it etc. It's not the only file we have, but rest assured it will be posted this week. Thanks.

MPNA
_________________________
The MPNA is an advocacy group for adjacent neighbors of the Mohonk Preserve. In the event of a dispute with the Mohonk Preserve, we can offer assistance in obtaining experts in the following areas; Surveying, Lawyers, Title, expert witnesses, ancient document research, and Maps.

Top
#55053 - 09/20/10 04:08 AM Re: MohonkPreserveNeighborsAssociation [Re: Advocacy group]
Aya Offline
old hand

Registered: 11/18/04
Posts: 754
Loc: Climbing somewhere
AG,

Hypocrisy is advocating beliefs that you do not actually have. Marc would be a hypocrite if he were advocating that others may not subdivide their lots while he subdivides his own. I believe Marc is advocating that people not subdivide their large lots, not that they must build on larger lots.

Again: do you believe that the only people who can advocate for zoning in the area around the ridge that prevents subdivision are the people wealthy enough to afford owning and living on large acreages?

And re: Haviland, since you have all the info on hand and not scanned, can you just please please please answer the question that was asked waaaaaaay earlier in the thread about how the preserve was able to foreclose on her? I (and plenty of other people, I imagine) would be happy to wait for the supporting evidence until you get it scanned.
_________________________
Gunks T-Shirts!

Top
#55073 - 09/20/10 01:47 PM Re: MohonkPreserveNeighborsAssociation [Re: pedestrian]
ianmanger Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 04/25/03
Posts: 319
We seem to have entered Absurdland.

People, we have two choices

1) We give up debating Chris, Mike or whoever is behind the keyboard on a given day. I favor this. We had a quiet couple of days while they passed the keyboard around.

2) Continue this go-around. No one wins, names are called, tempers flare. Its mildly entertaining.

Ok, my final words on this.

I can accept, hypothetically, that the Preserve continues to act in a self-interested way in which the neighbors may be disadvantaged. This is reasonable, given the clear finding in the Fink-Pardini case. However, I have no reason to believe, based on what AG has presented, that this pattern continues. The 'case' is based on opinion and innuendo, nevertheless its possible. Requests for clarification have gotten us nowhere for the last six weeks.

Its also clear, because a fragment of the ruling has been published upthread, that the neighbors (Ullrich) are capable of causing 'irreparable harm' to Preserve lands, and so its entirely appropriate that the Preserve should pursue cases against them.


So we have one documented strike in each column.

Bad Preserve, Bad Neighbor.

Chris, we have no choice but to support the Preserve through memberships IF we want to continue to climb, which is the reason we go there in the first place. We can't alter this. You asking us to withhold support or whatever it is you want isn't going to happen. You have personally given us a rationale to big-up additional funds and attempt to earmark them for 'Hostile Acquisitions.' You have to accept that your actions cannot sit well with this community.

Personally, I will try to get the Preserve to uphold its mission and behave in an ethical manner, but please get a survey like your group advocates. And stop chopping down trees like the good judge suggested.

Top
#55075 - 09/20/10 02:27 PM Re: MohonkPreserveNeighborsAssociation [Re: Advocacy group]
RangerRob Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 06/06/00
Posts: 3763
Loc: Ulster County, NY
Okay okay.....who wants to go climb out at the Sunbowl on the 28th or 29th? Julie? Aya? Whatthe? We can also take a tour of Chris U's property lines. If anyone else is interested please pm me

By the way Advo(Chris U), larger lot size requirements fragment an ecosystem much more than very small lot sizes. 50 homes on 25 acres is much much better than 50 homes on 500 acres. If you can't see the simple logic behind that than your obvious lack of any natural resource background or education becomes brilliantly apparent. That's resource managment 101.

Top
#55119 - 09/21/10 05:00 AM Re: MohonkPreserveNeighborsAssociation [Re: ianmanger]
Advocacy group Offline
addict

Registered: 08/03/10
Posts: 653
Loc: New Paltz,Marbletown,Gardiner,...
Originally Posted By: ianmanger
We seem to have entered Absurdland.

People, we have two choices

1) We give up debating Chris, Mike or whoever is behind the keyboard on a given day. I favor this. We had a quiet couple of days while they passed the keyboard around.

2) Continue this go-around. No one wins, names are called, tempers flare. Its mildly entertaining.

Ok, my final words on this.

I can accept, hypothetically, that the Preserve continues to act in a self-interested way in which the neighbors may be disadvantaged. This is reasonable, given the clear finding in the Fink-Pardini case. However, I have no reason to believe, based on what AG has presented, that this pattern continues. The 'case' is based on opinion and innuendo, nevertheless its possible. Requests for clarification have gotten us nowhere for the last six weeks.

Its also clear, because a fragment of the ruling has been published upthread, that the neighbors (Ullrich) are capable of causing 'irreparable harm' to Preserve lands, and so its entirely appropriate that the Preserve should pursue cases against them.


So we have one documented strike in each column.

Bad Preserve, Bad Neighbor.

Chris, we have no choice but to support the Preserve through memberships IF we want to continue to climb, which is the reason we go there in the first place. We can't alter this. You asking us to withhold support or whatever it is you want isn't going to happen. You have personally given us a rationale to big-up additional funds and attempt to earmark them for 'Hostile Acquisitions.' You have to accept that your actions cannot sit well with this community.

Personally, I will try to get the Preserve to uphold its mission and behave in an ethical manner, but please get a survey like your group advocates. And stop chopping down trees like the good judge suggested.



Ianmanger,

Thanks for the mostly civil and mostly accurate reply. Imagine how this entire thread might have turned out had you started with a reply like your last. Having said that, we agree that the Mohonk v. Fink was unfortunate to say the least. From our very first post we have asked Mohonk Preserve patrons to wait until the current court cases are complete and IF the ruling favors the Defendants to please stop donating etc... In other words, try and reshape this organization that you value. We were met with some extreme hostility from the get go. This type of response will certainly shape how private landowners allow their land to be used, especially by those who were unreasonably hostile. And come on Ian, the Mohonk Preserve is not the only place to climb. Perhaps a better alternative if climbers feel so limited would be to advocate for other climbing areas to open such as Minnewaska, PIPC etc.. If you want the Mohonk Preserve to uphold their mission statement write a letter or call Glenn Hoagland and tell him how distasteful the lawsuit that you refer to is. This surely would go a long way. As for the tally, we have one documented strike in only the Mohonk Preserve's corner (two if you count the Shawangunk Conservancy lawsuit with all the same parties). Thanks and we look forward to debating the content.

MPNA
_________________________
The MPNA is an advocacy group for adjacent neighbors of the Mohonk Preserve. In the event of a dispute with the Mohonk Preserve, we can offer assistance in obtaining experts in the following areas; Surveying, Lawyers, Title, expert witnesses, ancient document research, and Maps.

Top
Page 36 of 36 < 1 2 ... 34 35 36


Moderator:  webmaster 
Sponsored