ARTICLE 78 LAWSUIT FORCES BIG TUPPER TO CLOSE

hahahahaha

Noah John wrote

I:)skiing wrote

Not the best writer as is obvious.   However if anyone rereads with unbiased mind the point was there is no pure right or wrong.        Just decisions that are influenced by power money and time.   Over raw facts that neither side in this or current politicians would admit to.    We can't trust what we read as it it tainted.    Tainted by the fact givers.  The reporter. And time or perspective.      Time or perspective may say we entered ww2 to save the Jewish slaughter.   Others say free the french as above...   I only say it was not a linear decision and politics played more into the decision than facts.   Hey.   Today people would argue w great stats to back them up that we ONLY entered ww2 to help fat cat rich industrialists.    I say the Jews were such a small part..but would give up all of our rivers polluted with iron and coal acid to have freed one prison.   I agree all wind and solar is subsidized...along with all coal as and oil..  I raised the wind issue only as a perfect example of fact hiding and linear thinking and reporting....my sons lunch was right with it......

This is pure interwebz awesomeness!  

Brought to you by the Ridiculously Hysterical Rant Preservation Service.

Just a few details that should be added to Mr Lavalley's statement. The way ARISE ran the ski hill was not strictly a volunteer effort, they had 4 people on the payroll which chewed up a good chunk of their operating budget. And if ARISE is not in cahoots with the ACR guys, why did ARISE purchase a Groomer last year? If as ARISE has claimed along the way that there is no Collusion between them and ACR why would a non profit organization need a snow groomer? Just some thoughts.

endoftheline wrote

 why would a non profit organization need a snow groomer?

maybe they just wanted to offer groomed snow to the public especially on the green and blue trails

Endo - you are seeing a vast right wing collusion where I was seeing the Green's ganging up on this

I've moved on - time for you to do so as well.  Its over and nothing is going to bring it back.  You won chillax and enjoy.

Endoftheline has provided a great deal of commentary on what appears to be their enjoyment over the idea that Big Tupper is closed, that the Adirondack Club is faced with a lawsuit and failure, that the investors are “bad” people, that I am a selfish, no good person, that Tupper Lake isn't smart enough to understand, and now there is collusion with the ACR over the snowgroomer.  

I appreciate the dialogue from those who are asking reasonable questions, and I have always invited anyone to contact me directly, at anytime to discuss Big Tupper, ARISE, or the Adirondack Club.

First, let me address the most recent accusation of the snowgroomer.  For the first two seasons, ARISE leased a groomer from Prinoth.  The annual cost ran approximately $12,000 – fuel not included.  We were responsible for paying for any repairs, upkeep, etc.  That is money out the window.  So, in 2011 we were told about an incredible deal on a PistenBully.  Another ski areas misfortune, was our blessing.  The groomer had a book value of $100K plus.  We bought it for $50K and negotiated a deal with the bank that would keep our overall annual payments to just under $10,000.  Seemed like a no-brainer.  No collusion with the ACR – just a business decision that made sense.  Be glad to show you our books to show that there is no collusion.

Some of the most recent accusations ARISE has been faced with, deal with the reasons why we have been forced to close Big Tupper.  ARISE acknowledges what some groups have been saying… that our financial challenges were a result of a poor winter. That's real. But, what some don't want to accept, is that we were negotiating a financial assist from several purchasers/investors of the ACR. The APA permit was issued in January. I was in discussions with several prospective buyers who wanted to make sure Big Tupper would continue in the 2012-2013 ski season. I told them what our financial losses were over the past two seasons. We told them that even as a volunteer organization, we have averaged $160K per year in operational expenses. This does not include volunteer hours. They were very willing to provide the financial assist, until the Article 78 lawsuit was filed in March.

Some have accused me of using the plaintiffs of the lawsuit, as a scapegoat. I lay 100% of the blame for closing Big Tupper, at the feet of PROTECT the Adirondacks, the Sierra Club, and the 3 landowners who filed the suit.  Would any of you invest in something that had pending litigation?  Over the next few weeks, some of the investors that were looking to contribute somewhere between $100K and $200K will be coming forward to discuss their intentions. These discussions will be reported.

So, we reviewed our financial position, and we had long discussions about further fundraising. With the preservationist groups publicly stating that they are going to keep coming after the ACR project, and that they want to 'kill' it, how many times can you go to the financial well? And, after consulting with a number of attorneys who suggested that because these lawsuits could keep coming, ARISE could be operating under the same circumstances for another 3 to 6 years.  So, it was clear that we could not financially handle it, nor could we continue to rally the volunteers.  

It's bad enough that the Article 78 lawsuit is a taxpayer funded action against a State Agency.  But, it's even worse that the actions of a few, have placed a tremendous amount of damage on an entire community.

 

Jim LaValley wrote

Endoftheline has provided a great deal of commentary on what appears to be their enjoyment over the idea that Big Tupper is closed

Some have accused me of using the plaintiffs of the lawsuit, as a scapegoat. I lay 100% of the blame for closing Big Tupper, at the feet of PROTECT the Adirondacks, the Sierra Club, and the 3 landowners who filed the suit.  Would any of you invest in something that had pending litigation?  Over the next few weeks, some of the investors that were looking to contribute somewhere between $100K and $200K will be coming forward to discuss their intentions. These discussions will be reported.

So, we reviewed our financial position, and we had long discussions about further fundraising. With the preservationist groups publicly stating that they are going to keep coming after the ACR project, and that they want to 'kill' it, how many times can you go to the financial well? And, after consulting with a number of attorneys who suggested that because these lawsuits could keep coming, ARISE could be operating under the same circumstances for another 3 to 6 years.  So, it was clear that we could not financially handle it, nor could we continue to rally the volunteers.  

Though I appreciate your polite and detailed response, I still take issue with the idea that the operation of Big Tupper as a ski area and the ACR project as currently designed in its full form are considered one and the same. Again, I feel that if the passion that aroused the community to reopen Big Tupper was entirely about a love for skiing, there would be more of an effort to either modify/downsize the ACR plans or to separate the two entities entirely. PROTECT has actually publicly stated its sorrow that its legitimate environmental concerns over ACR, which are not related to the operation of Big Tupper as a ski area, have been used as a reason to close the mountain. I agree that the fight over ACR should not be tied to the ski area itself. Whether it's a legitimate fight is a wholly separate issue, and even if the lawsuit is despicable, that doesn't make it go away. I'm in favor of proceeding with mountain operations in the face of adversity, rather than halting them in order to make a point.

Has anyone worked out a mock business plan for opening the mountain as a either a nonprofit or co-op type setup with paid employees? Obviously given another winter like last year's, breaking even would be a challenge, but I'd like to see some effort put into exploring the viability of running the mountain on its own.

now you are insulting the locals that have put a shit ton of work getting that place workable.  The people that were going to put up the money to help run the operation found out there project has been put on ice.  I can see why I would not want to put up the money if I were in there shoes.  

Foxman himself should cut a check out of his personal checkbook to run the place for the year.   I only know the guy from what I read.  My opinion of him would change on a dime if he put his money where his mouth is.   So far all I see from him is lipservice..  He will spend state dollars but wont spend any of his own.  

As far as the lawsuit goes.  Its bullshit.  They went through the process and got the project approved.  Let them  have at it.    This state paying to sue the state is crazy.

and if would like to see a study go do it yourself.  

Resort plaintiffs hurt Tupper Lake
October 4, 2012
By Michael D. Foxman, Preserve Associates

I read recently that Peter Bauer said the Article 78 appeal filed by Protect the Adirondacks was "largely based on procedural matters" and that he expected it to be "settled" in 2013. Apparently, he was trying to pour oil on the waters Protect and the Sierra Club had roiled with their 642-paragraph appeal of the 10-to-1 state Adirondack Park Agency vote to approve the Adirondack Club and Resort.

It appears that Mr. Bauer, who apparently believes people's memories are so short they have forgotten his role in the inappropriately named and unlamented Residents' Committee to Protect the Adirondacks and who has only recently returned from exile, does not yet understand that the regional community is not willing to sit passively while Protect and the Sierra Club grind it under the shiny new hiking boots they bought (from a catalogue or somewhere south of the Adirondacks) for the occasion.

Mr. Bauer should understand that very few people consider it acceptable for those special-interest lobbyists to file any appeal, let alone one based on "largely procedural matters," knowing that the consequences of filing that frivolous appeal include the possibility of ruining hundreds of lives, effectively destroying the economy of an entire village of 3,700 people, shuttering struggling small businesses, needlessly distracting already overburdened judges and their staffs, unnecessarily costing government staggering amounts of money, deferring much-needed local governmental and school revenue, and jeopardizing the only project on the horizon that might serve as a catalyst for the rejuvenation of Tupper Lake. That sentence is a mouthful, but it all is true. The appeal was filed in the hope the resultant delay and cost would kill the ACR. At best, it was filed with no concern for the consequences to the community. At worst, it is a shameless attempt to destroy the community and see the village doors close forever.

By describing the litigation as largely based on procedural and, therefore, non-environmental matters, Mr. Bauer seems to be in conflict with Mr. Caffry, who, in the same article, is quoted as saying that Protect always opposed the ACR.

I am not surprised that they could not keep their stories straight. It usually is easier to remember the truth. From the day in 2004 that the preservationists realized the ACR had the potential to revitalize the economy of Tupper Lake, they have spun a web of deception using half-truths, disingenuous questions, unjustified fears, malicious gossip, anonymous notes and blogs, and all the other tools lobbyists and self-righteous ideologues traditionally use in their attempts to stop what they oppose.

Mr. Bauer makes an outstanding effort to seem sincere when he questions accusations about the litigation made by ARISE (Adirondack Residents Intent on Saving their Economy) and demands substantiation of the obvious. I take my hat off to him. If I were in his place and had to do that, I would have trouble keeping a straight face. Like everyone else in his position, Mr. Bauer's business is making unsubstantiated allegations, raising doubts and whispering unrealistic fears into all available ears while scattering red herrings about with both hands.

Despite Mr. Bauer's attempt, on behalf of Protect and the Sierra Club, to avoid blame for Big Tupper being closed, it is a fact that there are people who, but for the appeal, would have advanced the moneys required to reopen Big Tupper this winter. Some already have invested in the village with Tom Lawson. Most want to buy lots in the ACR. Coincidentally, some of them will be in Tupper Lake in the next 10 days to meet with members of the community, not with Mr. Bauer.

As to Mr. Caffry's glib remark about our "being where we are," we like where we are. We have the approval of the New York State Adirondack Park Agency to develop a unique, four-season resort on 6,300 wooded acres with 650 vacation home sites. The resort will offer downhill and cross country skiing, golf, a marina, trails through thousands of acres of forest and many other amenities in one of the most desirable and prestigious locations in America, the Adirondack Park. We border large lakes that are available to the public for boating, swimming and fishing, and a 250,000-acre state forest as well as Follensby Park and Litchfield Park. We have trout streams and ponds on site. We have almost 3 miles of frontage on the beautiful Raquette River. Our ski area exists, is a very good family mountain and has an interesting, 1,152-foot vertical. The golf course was designed by Donald Ross and built in the 1930s. No one before has ever been able to obtain such a permit, and no one else will in the future.

In addition, we have the support of the community, the governor, the boards of Franklin County and the town and village of Tupper Lake, the Franklin County Industrial Development Agency, the town supervisor and the village mayor; state Sen. Betty Little, Assemblywoman Janet Duprey and the Veterans of Foreign Wars, Rotary, Knights of Columbus and other local service organizations.

Yes, Mr. Caffry, in large part because of the tactics and opaque influence of the preservationists, it has cost more time and money (eight years and well in excess of $8 million) than anyone anticipated to reach where we are, but now that we are there, the view is great. Of course, it would be even better, for us and for the community, if Protect and the Sierra Club were not trying to block it.

As to capital constraints, yes again, Mr. Caffry. We will have to raise more money, some quickly, but I doubt that the water barrels on the Nina, Pinta and Santa Maria were full when Columbus first saw the Bahamas. Development projects can be like the early exploratory expeditions. They set their goals, make adjustments as needed, run the risk of meeting savages and, with luck and perseverance, achieve something worthwhile.

---

Michael D. Foxman lives in Elverson, Pa., and is the lead developer for the ACR in Tupper Lake.

tjf1967 wrote

now you are insulting the locals that have put a shit ton of work getting that place workable.  The people that were going to put up the money to help run the operation found out there project has been put on ice.  I can see why I would not want to put up the money if I were in there shoes.  


As far as the lawsuit goes.  Its bullshit.  They went through the process and got the project approved.  Let them  have at it.    This state paying to sue the state is crazy.

and if would like to see a study go do it yourself.

+1

tjf - i'm happy to see we agree about this.  For me this issue has always been about the economic development that outside special interest groups have been blocking to advance their ideology

tjf1967, I agree with you, Foxman or Lawson should open up their checkbooks. As big developers surely they can afford to fund the operation of the mountain for a year in return for all the local support they have garnered. After all the dangling of the Big Tupper carrot for years it seems like the least they can do.

Presently, any investment or a direct operational role in the running of Big Tupper by the ACR project sponsors would be illegal.  

ARISE's operation of Big Tupper is a separate and distinct land use from the ACR project and by state law must be until ACR secures all other necessary state/local approvals and financing.



 

Well said Adkskier.    

Here is another piece on this situation.  I am not sure who to believe.  I know it is a shame that BT is not opening.

http://www.adirondackdailyenterprise.com/page/content.detail/id/533273/It-s-time-to-consider-the-merits-of-the-Protect-Sierra-Club-lawsuit.html

Goreskimom wrote

Here is another piece on this situation.  I am not sure who to believe.  I know it is a shame that BT is not opening.

http://www.adirondackdailyenterprise.com/page/content.detail/id/533273/It-s-time-to-consider-the-merits-of-the-Protect-Sierra-Club-lawsuit.html

This argument sounds peculiarly level-headed and fact-based coming from such a crook whose only goal in life is to ruin the economy of Tupper Lake.

In response to Scottyjack 10/06/2012.  Sorry but you are wrong about it being illegal for the ACR group to run the mountain at this  point. They have been given their approval by the APA and they actually own the ski area(they don't own any of the land they want to develop because they don't ahve the $$s to buy it) so they are not prohibited legally from running the ski area. It has never been a priority for them and the current situation proves it.  Sad for the local skiers and for that matter any skier who enjoyed the hill.

Jim LaValley wrote

Some have accused me of using the plaintiffs of the lawsuit, as a scapegoat. I lay 100% of the blame for closing Big Tupper, at the feet of PROTECT the Adirondacks, the Sierra Club, and the 3 landowners who filed the suit.

No blame for zero snowmaking? It is the East Coast - no snowmaking - no skiing. When the snowmaking was sold BT was effectively buried. Even when BT was infrequently open over the past 2 years, it was marginal. The only people who skied BT the last 2 years were people who were local and / or the hardcore who populate this forum and other ski forums. You cannot convince people who ski a few times a year to risk driving 3 hours for a weekend of skiing at an area with zero snowmaking.

This is not written with any malice towards those who tried to make BT work. But without any snowmaking it will never work.

Jim LaValley wrote

 Would any of you invest in something that had pending litigation?  Over the next few weeks, some of the investors that were looking to contribute somewhere between $100K and $200K will be coming forward to discuss their intentions. These discussions will be reported.

The same questions can be asked about the housing proposals around BT. Who is going to invest hard earned dollars to buy slopeside housing at a ski area with no snowmaking, a clearly missing lift, and a plan that says we will update it in a few years?

x1000cq: Good points: I just happened to look back on Lavalleys prior post on 9/28/2010 where he answered questions put on the blog. First question had to do with what improvements will be made to Big Tupper under ACR. Quote from Jim Lavalley, "new state of the art snowmaking has been put on order". OK that was 2 yrs ago, where is the new snowmaking equipment? Didn't arrive yet, on back order? No money to pay for it? At least he could tell us specifically what was put on order 2 yrs ago. That only seems fair.

Goreskimom wrote

Here is another piece on this situation.  I am not sure who to believe.  I know it is a shame that BT is not opening.

http://www.adirondackdailyenterprise.com/page/content.detail/id/533273/It-s-time-to-consider-the-merits-of-the-Protect-Sierra-Club-lawsuit.html

Beware of folks that say they only have 7 things to say and then say the same thing over and over again.  Face it these protect nut jobs are a highly funded liberal agenda lobbying firm with the goal of prevent any and all development in the ADK park.  They care not for the local economy and the jobs that they are preventing with their law suits - they have deep pocketed donors so they can sue away and not worry that they are fighting 10-1 decision of the APA that was studied out the wazu for 8 years.

I hate Eco-Nuts!

Goddamn liberals protecting our winters so we can ski and..... wait a minute........

ML,

Joseph Smith told Mitt that climate change is a hoax so fossil fuel away!!!  

My bad for using the L word (Liberal) before.  It is a dirty word of course.

If you read that attached piece "Protect" is not concerned with the global warming issue but is concerned with what they think are the really big issues of being against things like building a few dirt roads in the ADK Park.  They do not want one single tree cut down in the name of development.  They don't live here and their funding is not coming from the area so what do they care about jobs.  If people can't live in the park and move out that will make it a better place in their minds.