NEW GCC ELECTIONS

Posted by: Jgreene

NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/12/09 11:47 AM

As a member of the climbing community I feel my interests as a climber are not being addressed by the current GCC board. Chris Moratz and crew have done a poor job at best and it's time for a new era of change. I call on my fellow climbers to step up to the plate and turn the GCC in a new direction that will foster access while maintaining a professional face in the New Paltz community. All suggestions welcome.
Posted by: pedestrian

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/13/09 01:29 AM

I suppose you nominate yourself?
Posted by: Jgreene

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/14/09 06:10 PM

So I guess your happy with the current state of affairs. so why bother posting?
Posted by: TerrieM

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/14/09 06:35 PM

Why not just go to the next meeting and provide input, rather than call for mutiny? The meetings are open to anyone, and there may very well be some projects your help with would be appreciated.

Do YOU want to get involved? That's the way to do it!

edit: This is Terrie from before. My username got lost in the site redo, somehow.
Posted by: Jgreene

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/14/09 06:45 PM

What's up happiegirl,

Not calling for mutiny just new elections, and then I would enjoy working with a new group. In my opinion this group must go, bring in some new folks, and try again.
Posted by: phil

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/14/09 06:48 PM

Doing Something!!! shocked

other than just posting and complaining? grin

Actually getting involved? What a concept... cool
Posted by: phil

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/14/09 06:50 PM

Originally Posted By: Jgreene
What's up happiegirl,

Not calling for mutiny just new elections, and then I would enjoy working with a new group. In my opinion this group must go, bring in some new folks, and try again.


Come'on here big Jgreene... be a man, show up to a meeting in person, state your case eye ball to eye ball

I dare you... cool
Posted by: mworking

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/14/09 07:47 PM

JGreene - From the GCC web page:

"The Gunks Climbers Coalition, established in the fall of 2002, is an advocacy group dedicated to creating and maintaining sustainable opportunities for responsible climbing along the Shawangunk Ridge and surrounding areas."

But it seems to me that if you do not like this organization, then you might start your own rather than complaining about others who's are working as they see fit. After all they are working toward what you are what you want -just not exactly as you would like.
Posted by: Jgreene

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/14/09 08:04 PM

mworking,

I see what your saying. I was under the impression that the GCC was an elected body that has scheduled elections. Perhaps I'm wrong, but it would be easier to use some of the info and contacts and ideas that are currently available instead of starting fresh. As I said before I just think it's tame to change it up a bit.
Posted by: phil

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/14/09 08:18 PM

Do the right thing... here's their email address

GCC@gunksclimbers.org

contact them, actually talk to real people who are really in front of you listening to what you are saying

You'll be suprised... smile

Beer is on me, if Chris says you showed up... or even made a real attempt to contact them, deal? smile
Posted by: Kent

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/14/09 08:19 PM

The problem is they haven't done a very good job of "maintaining sustainable opportunities for responsible climbing".

The GCC in many ways seems defunct. They no longer have members or elections. The terms of the people running what is left of the GCC expired more than a year and a half ago.

A completely new start seems like a good idea. The climbing access organization we all deserve would hopefully look something like the Southeastern Climbers Coalition.
Posted by: Kent

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/14/09 08:21 PM

Phil, you owe me a whole lotta beers then. smile
Posted by: Jgreene

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/14/09 08:33 PM

The SCC just acquired a crag and were losing them WTF....... Do we even have a budget to do that if one were to become avail. Chris Moratz? Bueller......Bueller.....
Posted by: Jgreene

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/14/09 08:36 PM

Kent,

You'll be waitin' along time for those beers, Phil ain't got that kind o' money, he crib be in crooklyn.
Posted by: phil

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/14/09 08:50 PM

Originally Posted By: Kent
Phil, you owe me a whole lotta beers then. smile


Hay it's Darth Varder! Got tired of water boarding tresspassers, are related to Dick Chaney in anyway? I was wondering smile

Anyway... of course I owe you a lot of beer, I still owe you from my fall 5 or 6 years ago.


True Story:

I am actually the first chair of the GCC... aint that a kick in the ass laugh

It was me and John Meyers when this started and that was it... I got kicked out of the GCC after I was emailing some people using terms like "what the hell you are talkng about?" and "hay moron" well I got a call from John... we had a heart to heart and I decided that being nice to poeple all the time for volunteer thing is not for me.

What's my point?

It takes a lot of work to do what those people do. I dont want to do it.

The fact is, I dont think you have what it takes to start something like the GCC... Not that I dont think that you're Darth Vader, I do smile , you're Vadrer on Steriods Bro! grin it's just that it is a lot easier to throw stones at something than it is to really get involved.

Are they doing a good job? I'll put it to you this way... I wanna see you even try to start something like the GCC and then we'll talk wink
Posted by: TerrieM

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/14/09 08:54 PM

Anyone can get involved with GCC. Last year, when the "oh no, the c/ground may close! GCC DO SOMETHING!!!" issue came up, people with the GCC extended email invitations to several(if not all) who commented - "Attend out next meeting!"


I went to that meeting. Even though I haven't got a car, one of the GCC people came out and picked me up at the cliffs, and then drove me back later. There was even a party with STEAKS and corn on the cobb(personal party, not on anyone else's dime).

Of all those invited, I was told that I was the only one who even SAID they would try to attend.

I think it's all too easy to say "They should." "They" are only so many people. If we don't like the job, "We" should become involved.
Posted by: Jgreene

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/14/09 09:03 PM

"I am actually the first chair of the GCC... aint that a kick in the ass"

That's not even on their website, I knew this was a covert operation, I demand transparency. If Chris Moratz is gonna stay we at least need to find him a hot young woman. It looks pretty bad when the SCC is acquiring crags left and right and all we get is Chairman Moratz walkin' around with grandma Annie Oh on his arm.
Posted by: phil

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/14/09 09:07 PM

I bet she climbs better than you do?

Or at lest has more balls? cool
Posted by: Jgreene

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/14/09 09:09 PM

ROFL, she was definately the man in that relationship.....sorry Chris
Posted by: Kent

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/14/09 09:14 PM

Haha. Yeah, Cheney called. He's coming over later to give me some tips.

And yeah, there's no way I could start something like the GCC. I've started two companies, and one's 20th anniversary was just five days ago. But something like the GCC would just be sooooo beyond me.

Anyway, seriously speaking, I'm advocating on behalf of landowners here, not climbers. As a landowners advocate though I'd very much like to have a reasonable, respectful, and communicative group on the other side of the table. Instead I get the passive aggressiveness of the GCC. The passive aggressive message...."We're going to express our displeasure with you by not speaking to you." And so we landowners are left to communicate with things like land closures.

It's nice to see we agree on one thing though Phil. You owe me a lot of beer smile

The Caped Crusader aka Luke Skywalker
Posted by: Kent

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/14/09 10:17 PM

Quote:
Anyone can get involved with GCC. Last year, when the "oh no, the c/ground may close! GCC DO SOMETHING!!!" issue came up, people with the GCC extended email invitations to several(if not all) who commented - "Attend out next meeting!"

Selective invitations to meetings aren't exactly a good way to build a healthy organization, one able to embrace and digest dissent.

The Preserve does the same thing. They selectively invite neighbors and Life Endowment members under the guise that "the meetings are for those who support the mission of the Preserve". The truth is those of us who are dissenters do support the mission of the Preserve, just not the tactics. They don't want any criticism of their tactics.

The GCC seemingly follows suit. They privately invite select people to private meetings like the one Terrie speaks of. Their steering committee meetings are announced but it's "please rsvp" in order to find out about the location.
Posted by: TerrieM

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/15/09 12:15 AM

Bullshit.

The meeting was announced on the GCC website and also on this one. An open invitation was also expressed within the thread I mentioned above.

I received an email about the meeting; perhaps "invitation to attend" was a poor choice of phrases. I was reminded that the meeting was upcoming and that the input of climbers was helpful and appreciated.
Posted by: Kent

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/15/09 01:08 AM

Terrie, a misunderstanding does not constitute bullshit. I misunderstood what you said. So they have open meetings. Great.

That still doesn't solve their problem of legitimacy. They have no members and their terms expired more than a year and a half ago.

As for the Preserve's selective invitations, that's not a misunderstanding but rather it's from the horse's mouth.
Posted by: pedestrian

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/15/09 01:09 AM

Jgreene:

Oh, I'll be the first to say it: stfu, a$$hole. Nobody wants to listen to your moronic personal attacks anymore.
Posted by: Fraser

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/15/09 03:03 AM

Kent,

Apology accepted.

All meetings are posted on the GCC website with the date and location. Apologies for not posting the street address on the web but in this case I thought you could find the address since it was across the street from you blush It is helpful to know how many people are attending so that there are enough nachos and dip. I hope that is transparent enough.

Speaking of transparency, we still haven't received your $500 offer to the rescue fund yet, will you be making the check out to the GCC or the Mohonk Preserve?

See you around.

Best regards.
Posted by: Jgreene

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/15/09 03:40 AM

Ped,

Ease up bro, I had no idea you you were trying to move in on Annie. Anyway I'm getting quite the support in the PM department, even from some GCC folks, so if you hate me I'm ok with it. By the way I'm more of an A-hole than you will ever know.
Posted by: Kent

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/15/09 04:00 AM

Fraser,

On numerous occasions and in numerous ways I've asked the GCC to reach out to landowners. As the GC hasn't done so for the last four years I figured none of you were much interested in what I have to say. Indeed I haven't attended a GCC meeting since CM walked out while I was talking at our only meeting about this years ago now.

Certainly other more active climbers might just drop by if they were to know where the meeting is being held. Is having enough dip more important than making it easy for people to participate? Make the meeting sites public information. If you really want to draw more people in consider holding them somewhere other than people's houses. How about R&S?

As for the rescue cache, I'm sure you will recall the $500 offer was for a reward. Did someone provide information resulting in an arrest and conviction? If so, I'm unaware. I'll go to the bank for the cash tomorrow to be given to whoever provided the info resulting in conviction. Just lemme know by pm.

And what of the the lack of members and elections? No comment?
Posted by: Jgreene

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/15/09 04:05 AM

Kent,

Maybe a landowner/climber liasion would be a good position for the GCC. I actually think you would be quite good at this.
Posted by: Jannette

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/15/09 05:30 AM

When the meetings are held at a private residence, I don't post the address on a public website. That doesn't mean it's invitation only - it's just for privacy of the host. The GCC email address is published (gcc@gunksclimbers.org) so if you are interested in attending, email us and we can email you the address and directions to the meeting. While Rock and Snow has been generous to allow us to use their office space for our meetings, there aren't enough chairs upstairs and they are trying to conduct business while we're there. It's less of an imposition for us to have the meetings at people's homes.

The next meeting is June 13th at Ajax's place in Gardiner at 6pm.
We welcome participation from the climbing community. I am a busy working mother of 2 in NJ with way too many hobbies and responsibilities and yet - I have managed to attend almost every monthly GCC meeting since 2002. Find the time, get involved.

Jannette
GCC Secretary, webmaster, geek
Posted by: tallgirlnyc

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/15/09 11:27 AM

The GCC put up blazes guiding climbers down through Smeade's cove immediately after the "cliff closure" in the Nears. That seemed like a very quick and effective response to me.
Posted by: Kent

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/15/09 11:43 AM

Thanks for the added info Jannette. Not publishing people's home addresses is certainly understandable. A more public facility, rather than someone's home, would allow for publishing the location, and it might facilitate greater participation. Have you considered the new Gardiner Town Library? Ajax, no doubt, knows who to contact.

Are any of you going to explain why you've stayed on for more than a year and a half after the end of your elected terms and why elections were not held in October of 2007?
Posted by: Kent

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/15/09 11:51 AM

Originally Posted By: tallgirlnyc
The GCC put up blazes guiding climbers down through Smeade's cove immediately after the "cliff closure" in the Nears. That seemed like a very quick and effective response to me.


It's too bad that was necessary though, eh?

From the Access Fund website "It's much more effective to work with landowners, land managers, and other user groups before a situation reaches the crisis stage."
Posted by: Jgreene

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/15/09 12:05 PM

Chris M,

Why is the GCC actively trying to open up access to some private crags but leaving the nice folks at Cereus way alone. Why are you so adament about not gaining access to this cliff?
Posted by: Fraser

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/15/09 12:10 PM

Originally Posted By: Kent
Fraser,

On numerous occasions and in numerous ways I've asked the GCC to reach out to landowners. As the GC hasn't done so for the last four years I figured none of you were much interested in what I have to say. Indeed I haven't attended a GCC meeting since CM walked out while I was talking at our only meeting about this years ago now.

Certainly other more active climbers might just drop by if they were to know where the meeting is being held. Is having enough dip more important than making it easy for people to participate? Make the meeting sites public information. If you really want to draw more people in consider holding them somewhere other than people's houses. How about R&S?

As for the rescue cache, I'm sure you will recall the $500 offer was for a reward. Did someone provide information resulting in an arrest and conviction? If so, I'm unaware. I'll go to the bank for the cash tomorrow to be given to whoever provided the info resulting in conviction. Just lemme know by pm.

And what of the the lack of members and elections? No comment?


I apologize this time Kent, I thought you were serious about making a contribution.

What did you think the likelihood of your offer being taken up was?
Posted by: Jgreene

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/15/09 12:16 PM

Dana,

Why duck the lack of members and elections question? Kent is good for the cash I can assure you if the conditions are met.
Posted by: Jgreene

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/15/09 12:18 PM

Jannette,

Since you are viewing this thread why not answer the above question about elections?
Posted by: Kent

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/15/09 12:25 PM

Fraser,

I was serious and still am. Conviction equals reward. What did you not understand about that? At the time I made that offer, immediately after the theft, I was hopeful someone would take me up on it, and that the rescue gear might be recovered.

At one point you asked if I would make a donation in lieu of the reward and I didn't respond. Again, what did you not understand? If my memory is failing me and I did somewhere offer to convert the reward to a donation, quote me and I'll make good by forking over the cash.

And dwelling on this seems like you are just distracting people away from the point of this thread. Despite the obnoxiousness of the OP, he posts a reasonable question. Why have there been no GCC elections since October of 2005?
Posted by: pedestrian

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/15/09 02:16 PM

Originally Posted By: Jgreene
Ped,

Ease up bro, I had no idea you you were trying to move in on Annie. Anyway I'm getting quite the support in the PM department, even from some GCC folks, so if you hate me I'm ok with it. By the way I'm more of an A-hole than you will ever know.


Shows what you know... LOL!

Anyway, nothing personal, but I think you're gay.
Posted by: chip

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/15/09 02:32 PM

I have served on the board of our neighborhoos pool for many years and thought the similarity to GCC striking. While many use the pool it is always a very small number who care enough to do the grunt work. We have not ever filled every board position. I loved it when asked how much I got payed as president. In addition to paying full dues, I got to put in an extra 10-25 hours of work each week through the entire spring to get everything working. Much of it was manual labor. No pity party, just history.
The difference is that when we offer yearly elections and gripers usually don't want anything to do with the actual work. They then go away. I think I understand why the GCC is structured the way it is but encourage them to consider bi-yearly elections, even if it is just to re-elect the same people each time.
Posted by: dalguard

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/15/09 02:54 PM

If the only people who are allowed to have an opinion about how an organization works are the ones willing to do the work themselves, then it's not very representational. For instance, I can want to elect a new Senator without having the desire to be a Senator or have any part in running our government.

My concern about the GCC is that it's not representational and I've been saying that all along. If it's just a bunch of locals doing their own thing, that's their business, but theoretically it's the local Access Fund affiliate. I'm a staunch Access Fund supporter but the Access Fund's endorsement of this group of locals who seem to mainly represent their own interests is frustrating to me. I don't much care whether the GCC lives, dies, or is reborn, but I do wish the Access Fund wasn't holding them up as my local representative when they have nothing to do with me.
Posted by: phil

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/15/09 03:25 PM

Chip and dalguard you make a lot of sense

I dont like Chris being peronally attacked for doing volunteer work, I think it's pretty crappy and very unfair.

However these attachs do bring up an important point.

If the GCC has turned into a locals only group by default then so be it.

But the appearance or even the perception that it's a locals only can be very damaging for the long term.
Posted by: TerrieM

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/15/09 04:25 PM

That's not my perception of the GCC. And though I agree the SCC is an excellent group, there are plenty of reasons as to why the GCC/SCC don't have the same level of actions/acquisitions; only the FIRST being that the SCC has a high number of local climbers who actually GET INVOLVED.

There are also huge differences in land ownership/availability and all sorts of other things between the the Shawangunks ridge, and the several states that the SCC covers.

I have been to SCC events. They do an excellent job. But to compare the GCC as coming up short, especially from those who are judging based on the PR notices online, is just wrong.
Posted by: Jgreene

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/15/09 10:59 PM

Ped,

Your old lady certainly didn't think I was gay.
Posted by: Jgreene

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/15/09 11:00 PM

Dalguard,

Great post! Ditto.
Posted by: edpav

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/18/09 11:53 PM

Originally Posted By: dalguard
For instance, I can want to elect a new Senator without having the desire to be a Senator or have any part in running our government.

but I do wish the Access Fund wasn't holding them up as my local representative when they have nothing to do with me.


I don't know any of the players here, so 'unbiasedly':

You can't vote for a Senator without being a resident, citizen, and pay your taxes, obey laws, etc. If the GCC has no membership dues, what contribution does one make in order to pay for the right to vote? And how does the GCC become aware of that contribution?

Who else should the Access Fund be working with at the Gunks?
Posted by: dalguard

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/19/09 03:28 PM

I once stated here that I support and pay dues to multiple climbing organizations but that I intentionally don't support the GCC because I don't agree with their stance on many issues. The reply was along the lines of "Nyah, nyah, if you support the Access Fund, you support us whether you want to or not." I guess that's the point at which it rankles.
Posted by: Kent

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/19/09 04:00 PM

Along the lines of supporting other climbing organizations, I'll be wearing my Southeastern Climber's Coalition shirt at the Trapps, or Nears, this afternoon.

I stopped renewing my Access Fund membership because of their support of the now defunct, but still there somehow, GCC.
Posted by: phil

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/19/09 06:10 PM

Well... I'm wearing a bright green Ralph Lauren Polo shirt with kaki pants and trail runnung shoes... smile

A wonderful all around spring attire crazy

Great for a casual day at the office and loose enough for avioding vomit on the subways... sick

Whats an Access Fund? some new adult web site?
Posted by: Jgreene

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/21/09 01:50 PM

It's pretty sad that since the day I called on the GCC to have new elections Chris Moratz has been mute, Janette has been mute, WTF?

Hey Chris M and Janette P et al. if you are reading this, it is my opinion that your days are up. Time for new elections people. Failing to address this forum is just more proof that you guys are unable to communicate with your constituancy.
Posted by: pedestrian

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/21/09 02:08 PM

Yawn. Trolling about new elections on the Internet is pretty gay, until and unless there are credible candidates for said elections. Nothing to talk about till then, 'specially for someone who's not even gonna show his face at a meeting.

Arguing on the Internet is like competing in the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded...
Posted by: Julie

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/21/09 07:46 PM

It does not surprise me that Chris and Janette haven't responded to the history of incredibly hostile, baited sniping towards them here, which is myopically one-side-of-one-issue. Clearly, you view them with no other interest than serving your singular goal, and with antipathy at best. Such a "conversation" is not a worthwhile investment of anyone's time.

And as you've demonstrated - you're willing to do anything under the sun, no holds barred, taking any uninvolved bystanders hostage as human shields, towards your one goal. So no, I don't want you as a replacement for Janette and Chris. But thanks for your offer.

In fact, it kind of speaks to a higher road that they haven't responded ... and I respect that.
Posted by: Kent

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/21/09 09:00 PM

Julie, there are others, long time members of the climbing community, who have posted respectfully to this thread about their frustrations with the lack of GCC representation and accountability.

So too, it comes with the territory. They hold themselves out as representatives of the climbing community, participate in online discussions, put up a web site, a Facebook page, and otherwise participate in online climbing community. As such, online questions about their conduct, accountability, and credibility, are fair game. I think the adage is "if you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen".
Posted by: Smike

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/21/09 09:08 PM

I'm also displeased with the current situation in climber representation in the gunks. Good thing I haven't been climbing much in the last couple of months, and down to on-sighting 5.3 OTC (off the couch), so nobody will listen to me anyway.
Posted by: pedestrian

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/21/09 09:20 PM

No no no, you don't get it. They're your regional representatives of The Access Fund, not of the climbing community. wink

Not a democracy, here, more of a meritocracy and a willing-to-do-volunteer-work-ocracy.

As an aside, it just seems that Julie (I agree with her for the most part, except for this) seems to have confused JG with you.
JG is clearly far more landowner-hostile, so I'm not buying the "Kent's alter ego hack account" theory.

Anyway, insofar as the GCC is or isn't a representative of the climbing community, there are a wide variety of opinions out there in the climbing community about how to handle the local politics and zoning issue, so can one really be surprised that they've decided to stay neutral? Taking a neutral position is actually the most democratic thing they can do.

This zoning issue complaint is the only substantive complaint you've ever raised about the GCC Kent, and you can castigate the Preserve on it with some validity, you can definitely castigate the FoS on it and the FoS is indeed completely misguided as far as I'm concerned, but all this flame-baiting of the GCC is just pointless and trollish for somebody who claims to want to start a dialogue

(And JG, wow, don't get me started, this guy bitches and moans but fails to advance one coherent suggestion as to what should have been done differently, and is probably just somebody's, not Kent's, anonymous hack account. Lame-o.)
Posted by: RangerRob

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/21/09 10:49 PM

Do you people even climb? I haven't seen a single climbing post from JGreene since he/she started posting. I suggest you drop the lame politics, throw your rack over your shoulder, and go scare the shit out of yourself on a good route. That might give you some fresh perspective.

RR
Posted by: tallgirlnyc

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/21/09 10:55 PM

Ranger Rob...you couldn't of said it any better.

Ditto.
Posted by: MarcC

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/22/09 12:19 AM

Originally Posted By: RangerRob
Do you people even climb?

It's still lift-served ski season out here. (Well, at least on Fri - Sun, but including this coming Monday.) We even drive right past this climb on the way....

Not my photo. Photo brazenly swiped off of imageshack.com. Originally appears in a thread on utahclimbers.com. The route is Fallen Arches, 13a, trad with one bolt, Little Cottonwood Canyon. Details at this link.
Posted by: dalguard

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/22/09 03:06 AM

Actually, I'm 100% in favor of the GCC's neutral policy on the zoning issue, which is the only possible one climbers can take. My quarrel with them predates the neutral policy which was not always their stance, though proof of that has disappeared from this site.

Aside from the zoning issue, I have disagreed with their policy in other areas. I think I can sum up the GCC policy as: Most climbers are undesirable.

And Ranger Rob? That's what you say to every thread posted here. Sometimes I think you're a bot from rockclimbing.com sent to kill this site by ending every thread with the same pithy remark.
Posted by: Kent

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/22/09 01:18 PM

They are not neutral though. They merely feign neutrality.
Posted by: pedestrian

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/22/09 02:09 PM

Originally Posted By: Kent
They are not neutral though. They merely feign neutrality.


Heh. More of your dredging up of old issues. Kent your laundry smells pretty bad too.
Posted by: Kent

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/22/09 03:52 PM

They are not old issues. The assault on landowners, by organizations and individuals the GCC aligns itself with, is ongoing in the form of lawsuits, planning board votes, and the like.

And Nate, what do you mean by my laundry smells too? What the hell does that mean?
Posted by: pedestrian

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/22/09 04:16 PM

Kent, simply saying you're airing out others' old dirty laundry, by dredging up these old issues. Expect yours to be aired out too, so to speak. This fight is becoming too personal.

The Preserve is the only game in town, for better or for worse, and the GCC does not align itself with the FOS.
Posted by: Kent

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/22/09 04:26 PM

Nate, I'm intentionally avoiding making the fight personal. I've never once mentioned anything about the personal lives of the people involved. Their personal lives are not relevant.

As for the rest, the GCC's past conduct, including the lack of members or current elections, has given them zero credibility with landowners. Zip, zilch, zero. None.

I don't see how a constructive relationship with landowners can ever evolve as long as the current players at the GCC are involved.
Posted by: pedestrian

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/22/09 04:43 PM

Originally Posted By: Kent
As for the rest, the GCC's past conduct, including the lack of members or current elections, has given them zero credibility with landowners. Zip, zilch, zero. None.


Yes, yes. I agree that one of the appropriate roles for a GCC type organization is, in addition to advocating on behalf of climbers, to attempt to lead the pack of climbers towards doing things like, for example, being environmentally respectful and respectful to land managers decisions, etc. They've done an ok job as far as that goes, but they can not lead a horse to water and make it drink. There's a difficult balance to be struck because climbers can be led only so far. The GCC can't move mountains, and they can't, as part of negotiating some hypothetical landowner agreement, make promises that the remainder of the climber/preservation community can't or won't keep. If you ever do decide to restart any negotiations, you'll certainly have to keep that in mind. Meanwhile, the constant complaining about the current management only serves to... make things more personal.
Posted by: MarcC

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/22/09 04:48 PM

Originally Posted By: Kent
As for the rest, the GCC's past conduct, including the lack of members or current elections, has given them zero credibility with landowners. Zip, zilch, zero. None.

I don't see how a constructive relationship with landowners can ever evolve as long as the current players at the GCC are involved.

Let's step back a moment and clarify something...
How much of once or currently climbed cliff sections are under landowner control as opposed to being on Preserve lands? Specific cliff names would be helpful if it doesn't infringe on "private knowledge" or brings up sensitive access issues. Meaning, we know about the section of the Nears and Kent's section of the Bayards. We know that certain named cliffs are on Mountain House property or under PPIC control. I'm not suggesting that you say "Obscure cliff xyz is owned by Mr. Black". I suspect that most climbers didn't even know about Paul et al and their cliff till it was discussed here, but we all know that the AI Wall is privately owned and currently off limits.

What I'm really trying to get at in a Devil's advocate kind of way is, does the GCC need to be all that concerned about credibility with the local landowners or do the really only need to deal with the hotel, Preserve, and PPIC? Does the credibility of the GCC with landowners actually matter? How much climbing or potential climbing is owned by small landowners?
Posted by: Kent

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/22/09 04:52 PM

Roughly the middle third of the Nears and the southern half of Millbrook. There are other less signifcant crags scattered around as well.

Edited to add:
If the middle third of the Nears and the southern half of Millbrook don't really matter to climbers then yeah, the lack of GCC credibility with landowners doesn't really matter either.
Posted by: TerrieM

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/22/09 05:01 PM

But, not all parties who own private land as mentioned above have any intention of joining the Kent Brigade.

Who's intending to go to the next GCC meeting, if I may ask?(If so, I could use a ride to/from Slime). Or better yet - can we have the meeting there? That would make it really convenient...for me. hahahah
Posted by: Kent

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/22/09 05:24 PM

Terrie is right. Each landowner is different. But the more entitlements the community, including the climbing community, pushes for, the more upset they become and the more likely they are to close their land and leave it closed.
Posted by: MarcC

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/22/09 06:59 PM

Originally Posted By: Kent
But the more entitlements the community, including the climbing community, pushes for, the more upset they become...

Um, what additional "entitlements" are the climbing community seeking?
Posted by: Kent

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/22/09 07:45 PM

When the no trespassing signs get torn down, that has an affect on the sentiments of landowners.
Posted by: MarcC

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/22/09 07:58 PM

Originally Posted By: Kent
When the no trespassing signs get torn down, that has an effect on the sentiments of landowners.

No doubt, and at least some of us don't agree with that action. But did you honestly think that wouldn't happen? On 150' of trail? That has been in continuous use for at least 60 years? By some members of a group who feel they are being used as pawns in a small town political pissing contest? Really? And even if they weren't torn down, did you honestly think that even a simple 51% majority were respecting them? Really?
Posted by: Kent

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/22/09 08:05 PM

Well, that's the core of the problem Marc. It's private property and should be respected as such.
Posted by: MarcC

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/22/09 08:18 PM

I agree.
We can also rightfully wonder why the private aspect wasn't being posted/enforced 50 years ago. Or 25. Or 10. Or even 5.
Posted by: Kent

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/22/09 08:21 PM

It was always live and let live, until the zoning law.
Posted by: LarE

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/22/09 09:52 PM

I declare! This thread (and the other threads like it) are like watching a nasty bus accident, or a Van Damme movie! I cannot bear to look and yet I cannot turn away...
Posted by: RangerRob

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/22/09 09:54 PM

I may be many things my dear lady, but I am most certainly not Pithy! I can't help it if I am shallow and transparent...it's in my genes. Calling me a bot from rockclimbing.com though....that's grounds for a serious ass kicking!!!
Posted by: oenophore

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/23/09 10:54 AM

Kenr: It was always live and let live, until the zoning law.

MarcC: a small town political pissing contest

Need any more be said?
Posted by: MarcC

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/23/09 02:59 PM

Not really I suppose. I keep hoping that at some point Kent and the landowners will have the intellectual honesty to just simply state that "Yes, we're using climbers as unwilling pawns to try to get what we want from the town." This thread is about the closest he's come and not hide behind the lofty verbiage of landowner rights and issues of respect.
Posted by: pizzaman

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/24/09 10:59 PM

I have very thin skin, and won't ever forget a few years ago, when I offered professional services to GCC and was told "No we definitely don't need you. We already have somebody handling that."

Also, please see page six of an old issue of "Friends of Shawangunks" http://shawangunks.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/03/shawangunk_watch0502.pdf ....in which a letter from its president offers hearty support for closing the Gunks MUA. Printed next to this, some apparently aimless doggerel by GCC's award-winning Chris Spatz.
Posted by: empicard

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/25/09 02:36 AM

Originally Posted By: pizzaman
a few years ago, when I offered professional services to GCC and was told "No we definitely don't need you. We already have somebody handling that."


i had the same experience.
Posted by: Kent

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/25/09 10:31 PM

Characterizing the plight of landowners as part of a small town political pissing contest demonstrates that you are unable to empathasize with the fate of landowners.

Gardinerites fighting over whether or not we will have sidewalks in the village and who will pary for them if we do is a small town political pissing contest. Gardinerites fighting over whether or not we will have a sole appointed tax assessor is a small town political pissing contest.

Characterizing the fight over a zoning law that gravely affects the financial security and well being of people living on the ridge, as a small town political pissing contest, trivializes the people and their fate.

And Marc, the zoning law could be repealed tomorrow and the land in the Nears would still be closed for an indefinite period of time. So tell me, how am I being intelectually dishonest? I've been as blatantly honest and candid as I can possibly be.
Posted by: pizzaman

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/25/09 11:55 PM

Too bad the U.S. didn't have more civilized, English-type access laws, so we could avoid the squawking from lord-of-the manor types.

GCC may have its head up the a** of local land managers, who have their heads up the a** of local to-the-manor-born types, bird-watching zillionaire board members, gentlemen climbers, etc., (all of whom Spatz once described to me, in zombie zoning board staff-speak, as "stakeholders") --- none of whom put a priority on the interests of the poor, dumb-a** non-resident climber scum.
Posted by: oenophore

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/26/09 11:19 AM

Originally Posted By: pizzaman
Too bad the U.S. didn't have more civilized, English-type access laws, so we could avoid the squawking from lord-of-the manor types.

GCC may have its head up the a** of local land managers, who have their heads up the a** of local to-the-manor-born types, bird-watching zillionaire board members, gentlemen climbers, etc., (all of whom Spatz once described to me, in zombie zoning board staff-speak, as "stakeholders") --- none of whom put a priority on the interests of the poor, dumb-a** non-resident climber scum.
That'll change some minds, won't it? laugh
Posted by: TerrieM

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/26/09 05:42 PM

"Gentlemen Climbers" - Now there's a term I've never heard before!

I like it. I can't help but imagine Mr. Douglas(Green Acres) in his spanking fresh Prana attire, with a tidy rack of double cams in sizes(no Aliens, of course), trying to get his city-girl up the route on Toprope without breaking a nail.
Posted by: chip

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/26/09 07:39 PM

Originally Posted By: TerrieM
"Gentlemen Climbers" - Now there's a term I've never heard before!

I like it. I can't help but imagine Mr. Douglas(Green Acres) in his spanking fresh Prana attire, with a tidy rack of double cams in sizes(no Aliens, of course), trying to get his city-girl up the route on Toprope without breaking a nail.


Unfortunately, not much different than what we have all seen too often.
Posted by: Jgreene

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/27/09 04:23 AM

Hey Ped,

1. I'm land owner hostile? Why, because I called Paul out on his calling on the GCC to intervene in the nears while keeping his land closed? I have stated from the get go that Paul can do what he pleases with his land and all the power to him but the hipocrisy is profound. Paul can go on and on about the Cereus way crag not being a destination crag, parking, access determined by a group, etc but in the end if you call on the GCC or other authorities to intervene with access issues while your crag is closed you are not only a hipocrite you are a first class douche.

2. While on the topic of first class douches, and I mean this with the utmost respect, Where are all of Nate's bright ideas?

3. I offered my OPINION on the GCC and the roles that are not being played by our representatives. My solution was to hold new elections. If you don't like it, say so and move on, but you keep talking like some guy who likes the sound of his own voice. I think Dizz makes some good points and nominations could be held online so maybe it's time to nominate some new blood.
Posted by: mworking

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/27/09 01:27 PM

Jgreene: The GCC isn't your's to control. But, like them you have your own oganization with no members!

However the GCC manages their "memberless" organization, it does a fair amount of well documented good work.
Posted by: Coppertone

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/27/09 01:42 PM

Paul is not a hypocrite by asking the GCC to work on the Nears issue. His land, as he has stated, is not closed to climbing, but merely requires that you ask permission of the land owner. Seems to me that is a pretty fair balance of protecting his land owner rights while at the same time being generous to the outdoor recreation community. I don't see how asking someone for permission to use something that is theirs is an imposition.

As far as your "idea" for new elections, thats quite a contribution to the climbing community. You sat at your keyboard and told everyone on a website that you think there should be elections. That is really putting yourself out there and really giving of yourself. New elections is not an idea, but merely a way for you to spout off instead of actually doing something. If this is so important to you then go to meetings, participate in a meaningful way and contribute to solving real issues.
Posted by: pedestrian

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/27/09 02:32 PM

Originally Posted By: Jgreene
but in the end if you call on the GCC or other authorities to intervene with access issues while your crag is closed you are not only a hipocrite you are a
first class douche.


Thank you for proving my point beyond a shadow of a doubt. Calling a landowner a dbag... very mature way to make your point. Yes, you are landowner-hostile, and you have like zero social skills, and if the GCC ever has guys like you running the show, we will be screwed.

Quote:
but you keep talking like some guy who likes the sound of his own voice.


You'd be the expert on that. I think you'll find that opinions are like a_holes: everyone has one. My opinion is that you owe Paul a sincere, well-thought-out apology.

Edited to add: and Chris, and Annie, and, oh hell, the list is growing faster than I can keep track of.
Posted by: pedestrian

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/27/09 02:43 PM

Since you asked where my ever so bright ideas are, presumably concerning how to deal with the Nears issue, my opinion is that we should not approach the landowner in question. He's represented by Kent, so let him approach us - he already has. If Kent has anything to offer, let him make an offer, otherwise let him pipe down.
Posted by: Julie

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/27/09 05:23 PM

Originally Posted By: pedestrian
My opinion is that you owe Paul a sincere, well-thought-out apology.

Edited to add: and Chris, and Annie, and, oh hell, the list is growing faster than I can keep track of.


I couldn't agree more. Kent had some pretty provocative (to say the least) things to say about the Chris-es the last time this all went around, and I'm way too uninterested to drag them out of the woodwork, but - quite uncivil. Quite unimpressive, as a "representative" of ... anyone.

(but then of course, he'll add a ps like, "how's your mother doing?" as if that makes it all better)
Posted by: Kent

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/27/09 06:29 PM

Julie, what are you talking about?

Edited to add:

Oh. I see. You're posting up to talk about something you're not interested in talking about.

Julie (Member #42)
Last Online: 05/27/09 10:12 PM
Posted by: PAF

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/27/09 08:48 PM

Jgreene,

You are so amazingly dense when you keep saying "My land". Its not just "my" decision and you have never asked what "my" opinion was once in the discussions with the "GROUP" that owns the crag and the "GROUP" that made the decision to allow access by invitation only. The GROUP, "read majority rules", doesn't want the place over run, so live with it. You cannot say I am hypocrite if you never asked what my PERSONAL opinion on the matter was. Lastly, this forum is a waste of my time for this land owner discussion, when all you do is resort to faceless name calling and don't actually act on anything yourself.

Paul
Posted by: yorick

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/28/09 12:09 AM

Originally Posted By: pizzaman
Too bad the U.S. didn't have more civilized, English-type access laws, so we could avoid the squawking from lord-of-the manor types.

GCC may have its head up the a** of local land managers, who have their heads up the a** of local to-the-manor-born types, bird-watching zillionaire board members, gentlemen climbers, etc., (all of whom Spatz once described to me, in zombie zoning board staff-speak, as "stakeholders") --- none of whom put a priority on the interests of the poor, dumb-a** non-resident climber scum.


Good evening, Pizzaman,

Having never recalled using the word "stakeholders" in conversation or in print, I'd would be pleased to learn otherwise. If I remember correctly, you did take exception to my use of "mitigation" regarding efforts to remind users of the MUA to follow the posted rules.

Since the GCC has a long record of supporting efforts to keep the MUA open, including offering to pay for port-a-johns, doing trail and campsite maintenance, and reminding climbers that responsible stewardship of the MUA is the best defense against the campground's closure, I'm not sure how this could be construed as bowing to monied interests or not advocating on behalf of average climbers, as I explained at the end of this thread:

http://gunks.com/ubbthreads7/ubbthreads.php/topics/29447/MUA_camping#Post29447

Regarding your paraphrase of my response to your offer, if again I remember correctly, we had several people, including myself, entrusted to the work. I thanked you for your generous offer, courteously, since even with those I disagree I rarely find the need to respond otherwise (I think Kent would agree), but had to respectfully decline the offer. Though I do remember attempting to make light of several personas, including the bureaucrat, I can lapse into depending on the situation, I apologize if you found my exchange with you offensive. That's certainly never my intention in any such exchange, especially one in which a donated service was being offered.

What any of this has to do with an unrelated poem that appeared in the FOS newsletter, wherever it happened to be placed, is beyond me. The newsletter has been a terrific outlet for every Gunks-related subject and concern I wish to raise, from challenging the usage, translation, and origins of Shawangunk, to bat, coyote, and cougar essays, to questioning the efficacy of targeted deer hunts on our degrading understory (what we really need are big predators). It's the best single outlet to reach insiders on Gunks minutia, and I'm grateful that they continue to provide a forum for me, though I've never been a member.

Posted by: Kent

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/28/09 01:26 AM

In my experience, Chris Spatz has always been a stand up guy.
Posted by: LarE

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/28/09 10:14 AM

Originally Posted By: Kent
In my experience, Chris Spatz has always been a stand up guy.


Ditto!
Posted by: RangerRob

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/28/09 01:13 PM

Yeah, he'd stand up to steal your chair out from underneath you!! Just kidding, he's peachy keen,and he is afterall, the Reverend of the Gunks.

RR
Posted by: pizzaman

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/28/09 01:27 PM

Yeah, I used to publish "poetry" in the NRA's house journal. But that doesn't make me a right-wing nutcase. Just that I love Charleton Heston!!

And like, I totally understand that you don't need any help. On behalf of all climbers, I'd like to thank you for helping. You've helped make the world a better place, and that's like, so helpful !!!

I wonder what sort of work the GCC has been doing lately, along with its chalk-cleaning project, to keep people informed about status of the DEC's "Shawangunk Unit Plan" and its potential affects on the MUA.
Posted by: Smike

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/28/09 03:52 PM

I agree with Spatz on the angle of sharing information and creative work in the FOS newsletter regarding the Ridge. I have contributed photos in the past. What I do oppose to is the politicking that comes with it. I would love a newsletter or other venue to contribute and share work with that is not tied to any political stance or debate.

Over the years as I
Posted by: mworking

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/28/09 06:45 PM

Originally Posted By: PAF
forum is a waste of my time for this land owner discussion...and don't actually act on anything yourself.

Paul


I think you identified people who behave in an unapreciative and hostile manner toward you, and who should get a no should they ever ask for permission to climb.
Posted by: mworking

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/28/09 06:50 PM

OE's apostorphe bug got you. just delete them.
Posted by: pizzaman

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/29/09 07:43 AM

FOS is highly and obviously political....

Except for their poetry section.

GCC is, Thank Goodness!! Non-political, of course!!!
Posted by: yorick

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 05/31/09 10:05 AM

Originally Posted By: RangerRob
Yeah, he'd stand up to steal your chair out from underneath you!! Just kidding, he's peachy keen,and he is afterall, the Reverend of the Gunks.

RR


More like Irreverand. Much obliged for the kindnesses, gentlemen.
Posted by: Jgreene

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 06/11/09 03:21 PM

The GCC is at it again....

1. IF YOU WANT PEOPLE TO SHOW UP, ADVERTISE IT ON MORE THAN JUST THE FACEBOOK PAGE!

2. HOLD THE MEETING IN A PUBLIC PLACE.

After all the discussion on this it shows the GCC's is out of touch with the climbing community. Chris M. Please resign....Jannette P. Please resign...... Ajax please resign....
Posted by: Hater

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 06/12/09 02:15 AM

When where is the next meeting? I haven't heard anything yet. It would be nice to hear some thing from our local access fund reps
Posted by: quanto_the_mad

Re: NEW GCC ELECTIONS - 06/12/09 02:26 AM

Have you tried looking on their website?

gunksclimbers.org