Adirondack Forum  
Rules Membership Donations and Online Store Adkhighpeaks Foundation ADKhighpeaks Forums ADKhighpeaks Wiki Disclaimer

Go Back   Adirondack Forum > The Adirondack Forum > General Adirondack Discussion
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 11-05-2013, 11:07 PM   #61
Bill I.
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,587
NCPR reported this half an hour ago:

Quote:
10:23pm NYCO Adk land swap Yea votes 54%, Nay votes 45% statewide with 32 counties reporting
Not the best of outcomes, but I can log off tonight knowing:
  • My Almanack post was shared more than 1000 times--substantially more than any other essay on the NYCO subject.
  • My Facebook content brought more than 100,000 views from people throughout the state. That's more the seven times the population of Glens Falls.

The point being, I acted according to my conscience and made a measurable impact. I will sleep well tonight.
Bill I. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2013, 11:18 PM   #62
Mavs00
I am the sith
 
Mavs00's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,751
Quote:
Originally Posted by l'oiseau View Post
I'm not sure the position of the HP foundation is, but I suspect it is neutral... if not I doubt there would actually be any discussion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by adkjack View Post
The foundation does not have a position on this or any political position. Our not for profit classification is a charitable organization and as such we cannot.
Jack sums this up nicely...... We forbid political discussion on this site, outside of local or regional politics that effect the ADK or Forest Preserve in general. That is why this one is allowed. Even so, we heavily moderate these threads. It's too easy to become personal with passions inflamed. It's a fine balance between allowing constructive discussion and dissenting opinions on these topics (which ultimately serves to inform and educate readers).

The Foundation is itself non-political.
__________________
"I can feel your anger. It gives you focus. It makes you stronger. " Supreme Chancellor
Mavs00 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2013, 11:37 PM   #63
Holdstrong
Member
 
Holdstrong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Keene, NY
Posts: 409
Not the outcome I was hoping for... but either way, thanks, Bill I., for all of the information and perspective you provided on this issue.

I do feel like you, and others who vocally opposed Prop. 5, were starting to make a difference and were starting to turn some minds at the end here... but it feels like the push came a bit too late. That is a lesson I will keep in mind when this inevitably comes up again in the future.
Holdstrong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2013, 06:20 AM   #64
dundee
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,576
Thank you, Bill!
dundee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2013, 07:03 AM   #65
Justin
Moving along
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,361
That's it, I'm moving to Portland, ME.
Justin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2013, 07:38 AM   #66
adkmoose
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Where The Alders Grow
Posts: 402
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin View Post
That's it, I'm moving to Portland, ME.
You don't want to move to Colorado , they just added a 25% tax to the stuff.
__________________
The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.
adkmoose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2013, 07:55 AM   #67
Bill I.
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,587
Results of all 6 propositions here:

http://www.nytimes.com/projects/elec...s/results.html

Note that Prop 5 had the narrowest margin.

As for the Adirondack Mountain Club, this is an excerpt from a mass-email that was sent on Sunday--the one that prompted my "Dear ADK" post earlier in this thread:

Quote:
Proposition 5 sets no precedent. NYS Constitutional Amendments have been used in Forest Preserve land exchanges for both public and private corporations for many years.
So by these words of wisdom, we can all rest assured that the examples set by past Article XIV amendments prove that amendments don't set examples!

But I have come to this conclusion:

The Adirondack Mountain Club has betrayed my beliefs. For the past ten years I have been an active volunteer and participating member. I have never fully agreed with all of its positions, but being a member-based organization I acted under the assumption that by participating I could influence the club's direction. But what I have observed is that the club's leadership will ignore its own conservation policies when convenient to do so, which makes continued participation seem pointless. If ADK is going to continue to act in a short-sighted self-serving manner--such as by supporting NYCO in an attempt to gain Essex Chain support from Betty Little--then it doesn't need my time, effort, or money.

What has put me over the top was this comment, from the same mass-email from Sunday:

Quote:
... Proposition 5--the NYCO Minerals Amendment, has become a more complex issue in the press due to some groups providing misleading information to the public about this constitutional amendment.
So by dissenting with the club's position, was I providing misleading information too? I was after all assisting Peter Bauer and Dan Plumley (leaders of organizations with which I have no affiliation) in driving traffic to their Facebook page.

After a night's rest I've decided to cut off my ties with ADK. I have one remaining November commitment for the club, and then I am done. My membership will not be renewed in 2014.
Bill I. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2013, 08:54 AM   #68
TCD
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,729
Bill, I don't think the ADKs statement was directed at you. Rather, it was probably directed at the last minute "smear" campaign by the Sierra Club.

The legislation says:

"In the event that lot 8 is not conveyed to NYCO Minerals, Inc. pursuant to this paragraph, NYCO Minerals, Inc. nevertheless shall convey to the state for incorporation into the forest preserve not less than the same number of acres of land that is disturbed by any mineral sampling operations conducted on said lot 8 pursuant to this paragraph on condition that the legislature shall determine that the lands to be received by the state are equal to or greater than the value of the lands disturbed by the mineral sampling operations."

But in a last minute push, Sierra was saying:

"...if it is found that the ore vein currently being mined does not continue on Lot 8 then NYCO can walk away without giving the State any land or other compensation at all for the damage it has caused."

Clearly, this is a flat out lie from Sierra. I imagine this is what ADK was referring to.

Certainly not all of us agreed on this proposal , but I don't think anyone here presented any completely false information during our debate.

TCD
TCD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2013, 09:26 AM   #69
Alpine1
Member
 
Alpine1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: North River, NY
Posts: 859
Personally I find that groups such as ADK & Sierra Club to name a few typically have agendas beyond my comfort level....My money stays where it belongs, in my pocket so I can spend it as I see fit
Alpine1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2013, 10:00 AM   #70
redhawk
Senior Resident Curmudgeon
 
redhawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: In My Memories
Posts: 10,931
Regardless of any assurances, I am firmly convinced that the door is open for the rape of the Adirondacks by developers.

Knowing the nature of the beast and understanding that they can't drive past of through undeveloped land without getting heartburn, or sleep at night thinking about the money they are not making, we all need to be ready for what will transpire in the coming years.

Make no mistakes, the current governor is no friend of the environment. He is a "business friendly" politician who receives large donations from developers. Using the current state of the economy and a need for jobs, along with the ignorance of the average voter, the Adirondack Park is now more vulnarable than any time in the past.

As for the ADK, I guess I'm a little more perceptive than the average bear.I had lived here for just a couple of years before figuring out that "The best interest of it's members" was not necesarily in the best interest of the Adirondack Park. As for Betty Little, it's always been clear that she has been on the side of those who see our natural resources as something to be exploited and even destroyed if necessary to make a profit.
__________________
"If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracles of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it." Lyndon B. Johnson
redhawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2013, 10:27 AM   #71
Teleskier
Member
 
Teleskier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by redhawk View Post
As for the ADK, I guess I'm a little more perceptive than the average bear.I had lived here for just a couple of years before figuring out that "The best interest of it's(sic) members" was not necesarily(sic) in the best interest of the Adirondack Park.
Like each of the organizations mentioned in this thread, ADK advocates a point of view generally reflective of the broad majority and consensus of its members. If that's not you point of view that's fine, and if you diverge enough from it, obviously you would align yourself with, and support, an organization which does. But it's hardly unique to, or a flaw of, the Adirondack Mountain Club to operate that way.
Teleskier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2013, 10:45 AM   #72
Bill I.
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teleskier View Post
Like each of the organizations mentioned in this thread, ADK advocates a point of view generally reflective of the broad majority and consensus of its members. If that's not you point of view that's fine, and if you diverge enough from it, obviously you would align yourself with, and support, an organization which does. But it's hardly unique to, or a flaw of, the Adirondack Mountain Club to operate that way.
With a vote result this close--only seven percentage points, a difference of about 130,000 votes--the state was clearly split. I have to imagine that ADK's membership was split as well.

Did ADK reflect "the broad majority and consensus of its members"? Were any ADK members following this thread polled by the club as part of the process of reaching its decision? The club's leadership may have reached a consensus, but I know there are more ADK members beside myself who voted no on Prop 5. Therefore no one should make the mistake of assuming that ADK is somehow a 30,000-member voting bloc.

I can accept some differences of opinion between my own views and the organizations I participate in, but Prop 5 represents a fundamental shift in core values that I cannot forgive and will not follow.
Bill I. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2013, 11:11 AM   #73
Teleskier
Member
 
Teleskier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill I. View Post
Did ADK reflect "the broad majority and consensus of its members"? Were any ADK members following this thread polled by the club as part of the process of reaching its decision? The club's leadership may have reached a consensus, but I know there are more ADK members beside myself who voted no on Prop 5. Therefore no one should make the mistake of assuming that ADK is somehow a 30,000-member voting bloc.
I'm not suggesting it's a monolithic voting bloc, just that it's been my experience that the leadership's positions reflect the broad consensus of member opinions. Certainly there's diversity of opinion within the club on this and many other issues.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill I. View Post
I can accept some differences of opinion between my own views and the organizations I participate in, but Prop 5 represents a fundamental shift in core values that I cannot forgive and will not follow.
That's not only your right, I'd say it's almost a duty. I've been in similar situations and have dropped support for an organization that I felt no longer represented my core positions.
Teleskier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2013, 11:50 AM   #74
Bill I.
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teleskier View Post
...just that it's been my experience that the leadership's positions reflect the broad consensus of member opinions. Certainly there's diversity of opinion within the club on this and many other issues.
What you also see in organizational structures are charismatic individuals who are skilled at influencing a decision and making it seem like consensus.

Obviously, plenty of ADK members must have supported the NYCO amendment. I'm just cautioning against the assumption that it was a "broad consensus."
Bill I. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2013, 01:27 PM   #75
Teleskier
Member
 
Teleskier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill I. View Post
Obviously, plenty of ADK members must have supported the NYCO amendment. I'm just cautioning against the assumption that it was a "broad consensus."
Fair enough - that's an assumption on my part!
Teleskier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2013, 03:41 PM   #76
jan
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 589
I was not polled by ADK, nor were any other members that I know. In fact, I was shocked when I read that ADK supported this. It seemed to go against what I thought they stood for. The political games have me questioning my membership going forward. If they think this will gain them anything from Betty Little they're crazy.
jan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2013, 05:16 PM   #77
Bob K
Member
 
Bob K's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Saratoga County, NY
Posts: 536
I’ve enjoyed the information on this topic and have great regard for those that have contributed (particularly Bill I). I voted in favor of the amendment with a clear conscience when balancing all the factors (that I know about). I do read nearly all on this site in certain forums, and get many other sources of information too.

Since each land swap in the park has an elaborate approval process, I don’t fear that the precedent regarding an exchange with commercial enterprise is to be feared. Every possible future swap will need to be considered in balance. Those badly out of balance may not make it to the voters, or hopefully won’t get approved.

It pains me a bit that ADK doesn’t poll members on such issues (as far as I know), and I’ve been a member for many years. However, I do have confidence that their leadership made a knowledgeable decision – balancing many issues – to support this. It is entirely possible that an agreement was made as a compromise to support this in return for other things that will make (or already have made) many ADK members very happy. Call me optimistic, or perhaps naïve. Having been involved in a small way in some past NY State legislation and budget language, the deal making is a part of the process.

I wonder how many reading this thread would like our politicians in DC to be more compromising rather than stick to a position regardless of the impact. Given the vocal push by many to protect/create jobs in the Adirondack, regardless of the consequences, I’m hopeful that having an “environmental organization” support the amendment will provide a return – on balance.
Bob K is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2013, 06:01 PM   #78
tgoodwin
Member
 
tgoodwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Keene, New York
Posts: 289
The first thing worth noting is the difference in the "yes" votes between Prop 4 and Prop 5. Many voters had apparently listened to the arguments for and against for both and were not just idly filling in the circles on the back of their ballot.

Secondly, I hope that those who opposed this amendment will now accept the results of this state-wide vote and not look at any post-amendment means to legally stop or delay its implementation.

I certainly realize that every approved amendment sets a precedent for future amendments. The Perkins Clearing land exchange definitely benefitted a private company, International Paper, but the crazy checkerboard nature of land ownership seemed to make this amendment a "no-brainer" since the Forest Preserve gained a huge unbroken piece of land instead of owning multiple disconnected 40-acre lots. That amendment was one of the positive precedents cited for the Lot 8 amendment.

So maybe the passage of Prop 5 has further "lowered the bar" for future amendments, but it has only lowered a tiny bit. In exchange, the Jay Mt. Wilderness grows by over 20% and will now be only a few hundred acres short of the nominal threshold for designated wilderness.

I also read much criticism of the Adirondack Council and the Adirondack Mountain club for their support for this amendment. I believe their support was justified based on the major benefits of new lands becoming Forest Preserve. I also believe that their support will pay benefits in the future should they decide to oppose another land swap or other major development project. Their support of this amendment will clearly demonstrate that they are not an unthinking C.A.V.E. (as in Citizens Against Virtually Everything) group and their opposition to a future issue is based on facts, not knee-jerk emotion.

Last edited by tgoodwin; 11-07-2013 at 07:47 AM.. Reason: Copy for another post
tgoodwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2013, 06:06 PM   #79
dpc34
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 658
I wonder how many jobs were saved for future ADKers who want remain in the ADKs and try to make a living....just saying , I voted yes
dpc34 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2013, 06:30 PM   #80
Justin
Moving along
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,361
Being positive....Here's to hoping that NYCO finds more wollastonite in what was formerly forever preserved Adirondack land....cheers!
Justin is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

DISCLAIMER: Use of these forums, and information found herein, is at your own risk. Use of this site by members and non-members alike is only granted by the adkhighpeak.com administration provided the terms and conditions found in the FULL DISCLAIMER have been read. Continued use of this site implies that you have read, understood and agree to the terms and conditions of this site. Any questions can be directed to the Administrator of this site.