August 10, 2009 ROCC Meeting Summary

Three main topics came up at the Monday 8/10/09 ROCC meeting. They centered on the fact that the bike path crosses resident's property and in some cases there is no easement in place to allow the GOGC access to the bike path.

Topic #1

Should the ROCC take advantage of this fact and use it as leverage to force the GOGC to negotiate?

Some say the ROCC should not get involved in this, it is up to those residents to take any action. My argument is the residents don't have a good reason to do that. Either separately or together, the expense of a lawyer would be a large cost just for the right to use the bike path. However, if the ROCC paid for the lawyer and ALL residents gained access to the bike path, the benefit relative to cost would be substantial. If you recall, when I collected signatures I asked residents if they consider this important enough to pay an additional $10 or $15 assessment to cover legal costs. Nearly 90% (17 out of 19) replied "yes". I doubt any additional assessment would actually be necessary; our position is strong enough that it would never go to court.

Topic #2

Are we getting adequate legal representation now?

I argued that we are not. Last November when the GOGC notified the ROCC lawyer that the Prudential mortgages were discharged, our lawyer did not look into any other reason why the GOGC could not block our access. Not the easement issue, not Adverse Possession, nor any other legal maneuver. In fact, in every case that I have heard of, "our" lawyer seems to argue the issue from the side of the GOGC not from our side. Anyone that has ever dealt with a lawyer knows they can take any "fact" and turn it to look good for the client and bad for the opposition. I have seen just the opposite from "our" lawyer.

Topic #3

Just what properties are crossed by the bike path and what easements are in place?

Ever since last November our lawyer has been asking the GOGC for "their survey" so we can find these properties. At the last meeting we were informed that the GOGC would not be providing that survey. Eight months late.

As I reported earlier, I made trips to the County Clerk, Amherst Town Hall and Amherst Highway Department. I reviewed various maps of resident's properties and the GOGC property. I concluded that indeed many residents do NOT have to allow the GOGC to use the bike path.

It seems there is a desire to find ALL of the properties like this rather then just go with the few I found so far. In discussing this the survey came up again and the need to use it to find those properties. I pulled out one of the maps I got from the Highway Department and lo and behold, it is the long sought after survey!

It shows the bike path wandering on and off various resident's property. According to a chart on the drawing this occurs at 14 separate points and totals over 4,000 feet in length!!! No wonder the GOGC didn't want us to see the survey!

I took the action item to identify the properties where this occurs and provide the list to the board.

Which begs the question, why didn't our lawyer know that the maps are readily
available? Why did he wait all these months without pressuring the GOGC to provide the survey?

To summarize, large sections of the bike path cross resident's property. If we can get the ROCC board to hire a good real estate lawyer we can get the GOGC to reverse the position that we cannot use the bike path. Simple as that.



Pete