What more can I say? It is now time to put this issue to bed. Two years is too long.
Our goal is an agreement in writing with the Glen Oak Golf Course that ensures that residents of Ransom Oaks can use the bike path for all time.
We intend to achieve that agreement with the GOGC by negotiations. To ensure the GOGC will negotiate we are preparing ways to pressure the GOGC to meet out demands.
Working with our lawyer we have written a letter to all the residents that live along the bike path. That includes everyone; those that just border the golf course, those that own parts of the bike path but have easements allowing the GOGC to use their property, and those that own sections of the bike path and have no easements.
It asks them, in exchange for indemnity from GOGC legal actions, to allow the ROCC to post signs on their property, take actions against golfers that trespass on their property and other actions including barricading the bike path where no easements are in place.
If most or even all sign the letter we will be in a powerful position. Also, if all residents step up pressure on the GOGC by boycotting the golf course, the banquet facilities and companies that sponsor events at the GOGC we should be able to put this matter to rest in short order and then we can all go on about our business. Especially me.
Thanks
Pete
Friday, March 18, 2011
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Success Success Success!
Yes! We succeeded last night. Our three candidates were the winners. Not
only that, but our third place candidate got nearly twice the number of
votes as the fourth place candidate. The actual vote count will be
officially released later.
I would hope this puts to bed forever any doubt that the residents want the
bike path. I'm betting it won't though. But I'm also betting that by next
year we will have won the battle and it won't be an issue. Let's hope.
Thanks to all of you that helped get the vote out. Yesterday morning I had
three ballots to deliver including our own. By 5:30 I had fifteen. What a
ramp up.
Thanks again and please thank all the others you got to vote.
Pete
only that, but our third place candidate got nearly twice the number of
votes as the fourth place candidate. The actual vote count will be
officially released later.
I would hope this puts to bed forever any doubt that the residents want the
bike path. I'm betting it won't though. But I'm also betting that by next
year we will have won the battle and it won't be an issue. Let's hope.
Thanks to all of you that helped get the vote out. Yesterday morning I had
three ballots to deliver including our own. By 5:30 I had fifteen. What a
ramp up.
Thanks again and please thank all the others you got to vote.
Pete
Friday, December 10, 2010
This Upcoming Election Could Be A Disaster For the Bike Path Effort.
In the next few days you will be receiving your ballot to vote for three board seats. There are five candidates running. Two of them could spell disaster for the bike path.
The problem candidates are Ed Drozen and Deby Fox-Hahn. Both of them are against doing anything to retain our access to the bike path. I have spoken with Drozen and he was very explicit. He did not value the bike path and he is against spending any funds to support it. If you have the December newsletter you can review his write-up. He does not even mention the bike path; the most important issue to ever impact the Ransom Oaks lifestyle.
The same is true for Fox-Hahn. She was the secretary last year before I won in the election. At every meeting, when I tried to get board support for the bike path, she challenged me asserting it was not something the ROCC should be doing.
If either or both of these candidates should win in the election we could "snatch defeat from the jaws of victory". We are so close, so very close. We can't let this happen.
What can you do?
(1) VOTE FOR THE THREE INCUMBENTS.
Gene Zambarda has been on the board for about a year. He has done an outstanding job. He is on the Bike Path Committee, he restarted the Audit Committee and he is chairman of the committee that is updating the By-laws and Covenants and Restrictions.
Dennis Thompson, with your help, was appointed to the board during this last year. He also is on the Bike Path Committee and the By-laws and Covenants and Restrictions Committee. In addition he took over the Facilities position from Fox-Hahn and created the online version of the calendar for scheduling use of the facilities. Dennis also found a very economical security system to prevent the kind of vandalism we experienced this last year. He is a truly valuable asset to Ransom Oaks.
Mark Walsh is the current president of the board. We have formed a good working relationship. Mark wants to ensure that we have full access to the bike path.
(2) Get the word out to every resident.
Tell them, VOTE FOR THE INCUMBENTS!! AND DON'T FORGET TO SEND IN THE BALLOT!!!
(3) Try to collect ballots.
Be careful to read the rules about ballots and proxies. This ballot/proxy collection activity is one where Drozen and Fox-Hahn have a great advantage. They live in Charlesgate Village. A very small compact area with a high density of residents. They can collect ballots and proxies very efficiently. Those of you in Charlesgate, Woodgate Village and Forrest Edge have the same advantage, please utilize it.
The rest of us that are in the "family homes" are at a disadvantage. We have to make up for it by spreading out and covering a larger area.
This email is getting a bit long. Maybe I'll wait for some questions from you guys before I pass on more information.
Thanks
Pete
The problem candidates are Ed Drozen and Deby Fox-Hahn. Both of them are against doing anything to retain our access to the bike path. I have spoken with Drozen and he was very explicit. He did not value the bike path and he is against spending any funds to support it. If you have the December newsletter you can review his write-up. He does not even mention the bike path; the most important issue to ever impact the Ransom Oaks lifestyle.
The same is true for Fox-Hahn. She was the secretary last year before I won in the election. At every meeting, when I tried to get board support for the bike path, she challenged me asserting it was not something the ROCC should be doing.
If either or both of these candidates should win in the election we could "snatch defeat from the jaws of victory". We are so close, so very close. We can't let this happen.
What can you do?
(1) VOTE FOR THE THREE INCUMBENTS.
Gene Zambarda has been on the board for about a year. He has done an outstanding job. He is on the Bike Path Committee, he restarted the Audit Committee and he is chairman of the committee that is updating the By-laws and Covenants and Restrictions.
Dennis Thompson, with your help, was appointed to the board during this last year. He also is on the Bike Path Committee and the By-laws and Covenants and Restrictions Committee. In addition he took over the Facilities position from Fox-Hahn and created the online version of the calendar for scheduling use of the facilities. Dennis also found a very economical security system to prevent the kind of vandalism we experienced this last year. He is a truly valuable asset to Ransom Oaks.
Mark Walsh is the current president of the board. We have formed a good working relationship. Mark wants to ensure that we have full access to the bike path.
(2) Get the word out to every resident.
Tell them, VOTE FOR THE INCUMBENTS!! AND DON'T FORGET TO SEND IN THE BALLOT!!!
(3) Try to collect ballots.
Be careful to read the rules about ballots and proxies. This ballot/proxy collection activity is one where Drozen and Fox-Hahn have a great advantage. They live in Charlesgate Village. A very small compact area with a high density of residents. They can collect ballots and proxies very efficiently. Those of you in Charlesgate, Woodgate Village and Forrest Edge have the same advantage, please utilize it.
The rest of us that are in the "family homes" are at a disadvantage. We have to make up for it by spreading out and covering a larger area.
This email is getting a bit long. Maybe I'll wait for some questions from you guys before I pass on more information.
Thanks
Pete
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Thank You, Thank You, Thank You!
Thanks to all of you that showed up and spoke at the meeting. For those that were not there, IT WORKED! The board passed the "Save the Bike Path Resolution" 7 to 1. We now have a committee with five or six members and a budget.
As for the gory details, 24 residents showed up to speak for the bike path. All spoke out and most said that they would stay for the full meeting to see which board members support the bike path. All of them actually stayed. In addition,
Jane Weston spoke for the owners of the bike path and basically laid it on the line, they have the power and they want the ROCC to carry the ball.
Dave Specker spoke for the residents in general and covered about 14 points ranging from, "the board must vote the residents wishes not their own interests" to "why are they ignoring the owners, the petition, the residents in general" to "why hasn't the vacant board position been filled by the candidate with the most votes".
Tom Bubar reiterated how he has been attending meetings for 18 months, he has spoken to the Amherst police and is fed up with lack of action by the board. It is incomprehensible to him why we are still being harassed by golf course personnel given 4000 ft of the bike path does not belong to the golf course. Why hasn't the ROCC acted and why is the board position still vacant.
The Woodgate board, part of Ransom Oaks, is unanimous in its support for solving this bike path problem.
Others described being hassled by the golf course AND a golfer.
Again the question came up about the ROCC covering liability for the golf course. Again we were told that the golf course has rejected that. They just want us off. It is a business decision, they say we hurt their business. (Can we hurt it more by being denied the use?....We may have to prove that.)
AND THEN, Pat Hanny spoke and at least twice during her talk, the rest of the residents broke out in applause. It was truly compelling. She covered everything with additional emphasis. Including, we need an attorney for an another opinion, just like if you were told you have a terminal disease, you don't lie down and die, you get an another opinion. She has hours and hours of surveillance video of the golf course and we can use it to document problems.
All in all, a great success. But it would not have happened if all of you did not show up and pressure the board. I hope I never have to ask you to do that again. The board should be able to remember what the residents want and not backpedal.
Thanks again,
Pete
As for the gory details, 24 residents showed up to speak for the bike path. All spoke out and most said that they would stay for the full meeting to see which board members support the bike path. All of them actually stayed. In addition,
Jane Weston spoke for the owners of the bike path and basically laid it on the line, they have the power and they want the ROCC to carry the ball.
Dave Specker spoke for the residents in general and covered about 14 points ranging from, "the board must vote the residents wishes not their own interests" to "why are they ignoring the owners, the petition, the residents in general" to "why hasn't the vacant board position been filled by the candidate with the most votes".
Tom Bubar reiterated how he has been attending meetings for 18 months, he has spoken to the Amherst police and is fed up with lack of action by the board. It is incomprehensible to him why we are still being harassed by golf course personnel given 4000 ft of the bike path does not belong to the golf course. Why hasn't the ROCC acted and why is the board position still vacant.
The Woodgate board, part of Ransom Oaks, is unanimous in its support for solving this bike path problem.
Others described being hassled by the golf course AND a golfer.
Again the question came up about the ROCC covering liability for the golf course. Again we were told that the golf course has rejected that. They just want us off. It is a business decision, they say we hurt their business. (Can we hurt it more by being denied the use?....We may have to prove that.)
AND THEN, Pat Hanny spoke and at least twice during her talk, the rest of the residents broke out in applause. It was truly compelling. She covered everything with additional emphasis. Including, we need an attorney for an another opinion, just like if you were told you have a terminal disease, you don't lie down and die, you get an another opinion. She has hours and hours of surveillance video of the golf course and we can use it to document problems.
All in all, a great success. But it would not have happened if all of you did not show up and pressure the board. I hope I never have to ask you to do that again. The board should be able to remember what the residents want and not backpedal.
Thanks again,
Pete
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Its Time to Solve This Bike Path Problem on June 14 or Drop It.
I'm getting to the end of my rope on this bike path issue. I have spent thelast 18 months banging my head against this wall. There will never be a better time to act and solve this problem!
(1) A vast majority of the residents want to use the bike path without any hassle from the golf course.
(2) The residents that own parts of the bike path have authorized the ROCC to use their ownership to our advantage.
I intend to introduce a resolution to the board at the June 14th meeting (7:00 PM Greenwoods). It will charter a committee of myself and one or two others and a budget of a few thousand dollars. We will create a plan to protect the owners of the bike path and secure access for all residents of Ransom Oaks.
The PROBLEM IS we don't have enough board members on our side to pass the resolution.
The only way to get the board to approve this resolution is for the residents to pressure the board members at the meeting to vote our way.
To do that, we need a large number of residents to show up, and NOT leave when the "resident's portion" of the meeting is over. They all need to stay and witness which board members are for the bike path and which are not.
In addition, to be most effective, during the resident's portion of the meeting, as each resident is asked to talk, they should each say:
"I am here because I want this board to secure our rights to use the bike path AND I AM GOING TO STAY FOR THE WHOLE MEETING TO SEE WHICH BOARD MEMBERS VOTE THE WAY I WANT".
How many of you can get to the meeting? Can you get friends and neighbors to attend also?
If we can't get this resolution passed, I don't know what else to do. The time is now!
Thanks
Pete
(1) A vast majority of the residents want to use the bike path without any hassle from the golf course.
(2) The residents that own parts of the bike path have authorized the ROCC to use their ownership to our advantage.
I intend to introduce a resolution to the board at the June 14th meeting (7:00 PM Greenwoods). It will charter a committee of myself and one or two others and a budget of a few thousand dollars. We will create a plan to protect the owners of the bike path and secure access for all residents of Ransom Oaks.
The PROBLEM IS we don't have enough board members on our side to pass the resolution.
The only way to get the board to approve this resolution is for the residents to pressure the board members at the meeting to vote our way.
To do that, we need a large number of residents to show up, and NOT leave when the "resident's portion" of the meeting is over. They all need to stay and witness which board members are for the bike path and which are not.
In addition, to be most effective, during the resident's portion of the meeting, as each resident is asked to talk, they should each say:
"I am here because I want this board to secure our rights to use the bike path AND I AM GOING TO STAY FOR THE WHOLE MEETING TO SEE WHICH BOARD MEMBERS VOTE THE WAY I WANT".
How many of you can get to the meeting? Can you get friends and neighbors to attend also?
If we can't get this resolution passed, I don't know what else to do. The time is now!
Thanks
Pete
Sunday, May 16, 2010
My Submission to the ROCC Newsletter
Letter to the Editor
In our continuing effort to demonstrate to the Glen Oaks Golf Course that they need to be good neighbors and share the bike path with us, we need to inform companies that sponsor golf outings at Glen Oaks of our situation. Last year, the following four companies sponsored such outings.
Human Resources Partners
Post Office Box 215
Bowmansville, New York 14026
716-532-8800
M.D. Carpet Upholstery Cleaning
33 Parkside Cir.
Buffalo, NY 14227-2360
(716) 668-4216
R.B.U'ren Equipment Inc
1120 Connecting Rd
Niagara Falls, NY 14304
(716) 283-4466
UniFirst Corporation
3999 Jeffrey Blvd
Buffalo, NY 14219-2334
(716) 825-4252
The situation is:
• We have shared the bike path with the golf course for over 35 years.
• Now the Glen Oaks golf course seeks to prohibit us from using the bike path.
• Oddly, the golf course does not even own the entire bike path
• Over 4000 feet of the bike path lies on resident’s property yet the golf course believes they can refuse us access to it.
There are 1100 families in Ransom Oaks that are affected by the actions of the golf course. Any residents that are associated with any of these firms should inform them of our situation. Any that are customers should also inform them.
In addition, why don’t we all write letters to these companies and describe the situation? Or, just make copies of this page, pen a short note on the copy and send it to these companies.
We can have this bike path issue resolved by the 4th of July if enough pressure can be applied to the Glen Oaks Gold Course.
This Letter to the Editor is from me personally, not as an ROCC board member.
Thank you,
Pete Calinski
In our continuing effort to demonstrate to the Glen Oaks Golf Course that they need to be good neighbors and share the bike path with us, we need to inform companies that sponsor golf outings at Glen Oaks of our situation. Last year, the following four companies sponsored such outings.
Human Resources Partners
Post Office Box 215
Bowmansville, New York 14026
716-532-8800
M.D. Carpet Upholstery Cleaning
33 Parkside Cir.
Buffalo, NY 14227-2360
(716) 668-4216
R.B.U'ren Equipment Inc
1120 Connecting Rd
Niagara Falls, NY 14304
(716) 283-4466
UniFirst Corporation
3999 Jeffrey Blvd
Buffalo, NY 14219-2334
(716) 825-4252
The situation is:
• We have shared the bike path with the golf course for over 35 years.
• Now the Glen Oaks golf course seeks to prohibit us from using the bike path.
• Oddly, the golf course does not even own the entire bike path
• Over 4000 feet of the bike path lies on resident’s property yet the golf course believes they can refuse us access to it.
There are 1100 families in Ransom Oaks that are affected by the actions of the golf course. Any residents that are associated with any of these firms should inform them of our situation. Any that are customers should also inform them.
In addition, why don’t we all write letters to these companies and describe the situation? Or, just make copies of this page, pen a short note on the copy and send it to these companies.
We can have this bike path issue resolved by the 4th of July if enough pressure can be applied to the Glen Oaks Gold Course.
This Letter to the Editor is from me personally, not as an ROCC board member.
Thank you,
Pete Calinski
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Election Results... 67% Solution
Well two out of three. Forrest and I were elected last night. Dennis
didn't get enough votes. The other candidate that won was Jim Golding.
I would like to give you the vote breakdown for each candidate but the
president of the board said that information should not be released. I
don't agree with that policy but being "the new guy on the block" I will be
a team player.
In general I disagree with the veil of secrecy that surrounds the board
actions. We are supposed to be doing the resident's bidding and the
residents should know everything we do. I will try to move the board to the
point of full transparency in the future but right now I have more important
issues.
Since we didn't achieve a majority on the board we will have a harder time
winning this battle. I may have to call on you folks to take some action(s)
in the future. I will not ask unless it is of strategic or tactical
importance. I know everyone has a busy schedule and can't keep responding to
this bike path problem.
On another note, I understand that many of the residents that own parts of
the bike path are getting together. They may offer the board the right to
exploit their ownership for the benefit of all of Ransom Oaks. I sure hope
we can get the board to take advantage of this resource.
I'll send more information about last night's meeting in the near future.
I want to say thanks to all of you that voted for our candidates. It really
means a lot to know we have so many supporters. For the last few weeks I
have been walking the neighborhood asking for votes. So many people I had
never met said they already voted for us and thanked me for all my efforts.
All that support proves to me that my time and effort are worth while.
Thanks Again,
Pete
didn't get enough votes. The other candidate that won was Jim Golding.
I would like to give you the vote breakdown for each candidate but the
president of the board said that information should not be released. I
don't agree with that policy but being "the new guy on the block" I will be
a team player.
In general I disagree with the veil of secrecy that surrounds the board
actions. We are supposed to be doing the resident's bidding and the
residents should know everything we do. I will try to move the board to the
point of full transparency in the future but right now I have more important
issues.
Since we didn't achieve a majority on the board we will have a harder time
winning this battle. I may have to call on you folks to take some action(s)
in the future. I will not ask unless it is of strategic or tactical
importance. I know everyone has a busy schedule and can't keep responding to
this bike path problem.
On another note, I understand that many of the residents that own parts of
the bike path are getting together. They may offer the board the right to
exploit their ownership for the benefit of all of Ransom Oaks. I sure hope
we can get the board to take advantage of this resource.
I'll send more information about last night's meeting in the near future.
I want to say thanks to all of you that voted for our candidates. It really
means a lot to know we have so many supporters. For the last few weeks I
have been walking the neighborhood asking for votes. So many people I had
never met said they already voted for us and thanked me for all my efforts.
All that support proves to me that my time and effort are worth while.
Thanks Again,
Pete
Sunday, April 4, 2010
Get a Proxy Here
If you need a proxy you can download it from here and print it.
click here
We need it for the April 12th meeting. To ensure it gets there:
(1) Bring it to the meeting at Greenwoods Rec. Center that night at 7:00 or,
(2) Give it to someone that is going to the meeting or,
(3) Call me and I'll come by and pick it up. 688-1871
Thanks
Pete
click here
We need it for the April 12th meeting. To ensure it gets there:
(1) Bring it to the meeting at Greenwoods Rec. Center that night at 7:00 or,
(2) Give it to someone that is going to the meeting or,
(3) Call me and I'll come by and pick it up. 688-1871
Thanks
Pete
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
I don't understand
The current board agrees that the golf club is correct in its interpretation of the original covenant. Do you and your running mates agree with this? If so what is the plan to get the golf course patch access back, is it to find private property owners that actually own part of the path and then use them to threaten the golf course into cutting a deal? Have you actually identified a single property owner who claims to own part of the path and who is willing to participate in this plan?
Saturday, March 6, 2010
Time to Alert Everyone That You Know----Proxies Are Coming Soon
Hi everyone,
According to the March Newsletter the proxies will be mailed the second week of March.
Please tell every resident you know:
#1 DON'T THROW IT AWAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!...Better let them know in advance
#2 Vote for the following three candidates:
Forrest Benson,
Dennis Thompson,
Pete Calinski
#3 Fill it out completely
#4 Either: Seal it in an envelope and return it by April 12 or
Give it to someone that is going to the April 12th meeting or
Bring it to the meeting and be there for the big counting.
Thanks,
Pete
According to the March Newsletter the proxies will be mailed the second week of March.
Please tell every resident you know:
#1 DON'T THROW IT AWAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!...Better let them know in advance
#2 Vote for the following three candidates:
Forrest Benson,
Dennis Thompson,
Pete Calinski
#3 Fill it out completely
#4 Either: Seal it in an envelope and return it by April 12 or
Give it to someone that is going to the April 12th meeting or
Bring it to the meeting and be there for the big counting.
Thanks,
Pete
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
My Concerns about the Charlesgate Board President.
I'm getting more concerned about the actions of the Charlesgate board president. Last spring he told me flat out that he wouldn't spend a penny to save the bike path.
I have also heard that he has taken actions or made statements like:
(1) Requested the "disbursement journal" (what ever that is).
(2) Wanted a copy of the offering plan and covenants.
(3) "No body wants the bike path".
(4) Questioned how the Charlesgate portion of the assessment is determined.
(5) Complaints about proxy method. (We all do but maybe he is on the otherside, wanting more control for the board).
(6) That money spent on the lawyer was wasted.
I don't know the extent to which statements 1>6 are not true and I will correct them if so informed. My concern is he could make it difficult for the ROCC board to take the actions necessary to protect our rights to the bike path. He could even make it difficult for the pro-bike path candidates to win in the ROCC board election if he has a lot of control over what happens in Charlesgate.
(1) Does anybody know if the bike path was discussed at the Charlesgate board meeting January 13?
(2) Does anybody have a list of the Charlesgate board of directors and where they stand on the issue? Ideally the Charlesgate residents should speak up and get the Charlesgate board and its president to see things the right way. If I had a phone list for the Charlesgate board I would ask all the Charlesgate residents I know to call their board and get them moving in the right direction. I would appreciate any help on these actions.
Thanks
Pete
I have also heard that he has taken actions or made statements like:
(1) Requested the "disbursement journal" (what ever that is).
(2) Wanted a copy of the offering plan and covenants.
(3) "No body wants the bike path".
(4) Questioned how the Charlesgate portion of the assessment is determined.
(5) Complaints about proxy method. (We all do but maybe he is on the otherside, wanting more control for the board).
(6) That money spent on the lawyer was wasted.
I don't know the extent to which statements 1>6 are not true and I will correct them if so informed. My concern is he could make it difficult for the ROCC board to take the actions necessary to protect our rights to the bike path. He could even make it difficult for the pro-bike path candidates to win in the ROCC board election if he has a lot of control over what happens in Charlesgate.
(1) Does anybody know if the bike path was discussed at the Charlesgate board meeting January 13?
(2) Does anybody have a list of the Charlesgate board of directors and where they stand on the issue? Ideally the Charlesgate residents should speak up and get the Charlesgate board and its president to see things the right way. If I had a phone list for the Charlesgate board I would ask all the Charlesgate residents I know to call their board and get them moving in the right direction. I would appreciate any help on these actions.
Thanks
Pete
Thursday, January 7, 2010
January Newsletter with Election News and Our Lawyer's Letter
The January newsletter is out. As I hinted, the election has been canceled,
primarily because it the way it was structured, a fair vote could not
happen.
I am sure the letter I sent to each board member and the board's lawyer
prompted this.
As a result, according to the bylaws, a committee made up of one board
member and two residents (that are not running) will be formed to select the
slate of candidates. I don't know if the one board member on the committee
can also be a candidate in the election.
I hope some of you can attend the January 11 meeting to get on this
committee and ensure I will be one of the candidates. If not I'll have to
mount a write-in campaign (which is allowed under the bylaws).
According to the newsletter the committee will then select the candidates
and a new proxy will be created at the February meeting.
Also, the letter from our lawyer to the Glen Oaks Golf Course lawyer is
printed on the inside of the back cover of the newsletter. There is no
explanation about it. It is the result of the November 16th meeting between
the board's lawyer, Ron Shubert, board members Tom Meldrum and Gene
Zambarda, and yours truly. I have not heard of any response from the golf
course.
Thanks,
Pete
primarily because it the way it was structured, a fair vote could not
happen.
I am sure the letter I sent to each board member and the board's lawyer
prompted this.
As a result, according to the bylaws, a committee made up of one board
member and two residents (that are not running) will be formed to select the
slate of candidates. I don't know if the one board member on the committee
can also be a candidate in the election.
I hope some of you can attend the January 11 meeting to get on this
committee and ensure I will be one of the candidates. If not I'll have to
mount a write-in campaign (which is allowed under the bylaws).
According to the newsletter the committee will then select the candidates
and a new proxy will be created at the February meeting.
Also, the letter from our lawyer to the Glen Oaks Golf Course lawyer is
printed on the inside of the back cover of the newsletter. There is no
explanation about it. It is the result of the November 16th meeting between
the board's lawyer, Ron Shubert, board members Tom Meldrum and Gene
Zambarda, and yours truly. I have not heard of any response from the golf
course.
Thanks,
Pete
Sunday, January 3, 2010
ROCC Board Elections
There will be news coming out about the ROCC election.
I believe I know some of the details but I have been asked to not reveal the
information.
To demonstrate that I can be a "team player", all I will say is, those of
you that are calling residents regarding voting for me, you should no longer
make any calls.
Happy New Year.
Thanks,
Pete
I believe I know some of the details but I have been asked to not reveal the
information.
To demonstrate that I can be a "team player", all I will say is, those of
you that are calling residents regarding voting for me, you should no longer
make any calls.
Happy New Year.
Thanks,
Pete
Sunday, December 20, 2009
How to Vote For Pete
To the Residents of Ransom Oaks:
My name is Pete Calinski. I am running for a position on the Ransom Oaks Board of Directors. For the last eleven months I have been doing everything I possibly can to ensure that we all can continue using the Ransom Oaks bike path. I can be far more effective in this battle if I am a member of the board.
From all my encounters with Ransom Oaks residents since this issue arose, I found that there are three discrete groups of residents with three sets of priorities regarding the bike path.
(1) All of the residents would like to retain use of the bike path.
(2) Those that live along the bike path have a larger concern. They have to put up with the actions of golfers that don’t practice good golf etiquette. Things like driving in their yards, damaging their property, swearing, and even urinating in public.
(3) Then there are the properties that are encroached on by the bike path. Those residents, in addition to the previous priorities, are also concerned about liability.
I intend to resolve this bike path issue in a way satisfies the concerns of all.
Some residents have expressed concern that the Golf Course has had to put up with the residents. Well, if we loose access to the bike path, the golf course won’t have to put up with us anymore but the residents in (2) and (3) above will still have to put up with the golfers.
I need your vote. To vote for me, either,
(1) On the proxy you received in the mail, fill in "Pete Calinski" next to the phrase “(insert name)" and then get the proxy to me (preferred) or mail it in. Each card mailed in costs the ROCC $1.00 and I can ensure none gets lost.
(2) Attend the meeting on January 11 at the Greenwoods Recreation Facility and cast your vote. Proof of residence will be required.
(3) If you sent in your proxy or lost it or it DID NOT have either Gene Zambarda or Pete Calinski in the (insert name) field, do as in (2) above and ask to retract the proxy at that time.
Thank you so much,
Pete
My name is Pete Calinski. I am running for a position on the Ransom Oaks Board of Directors. For the last eleven months I have been doing everything I possibly can to ensure that we all can continue using the Ransom Oaks bike path. I can be far more effective in this battle if I am a member of the board.
From all my encounters with Ransom Oaks residents since this issue arose, I found that there are three discrete groups of residents with three sets of priorities regarding the bike path.
(1) All of the residents would like to retain use of the bike path.
(2) Those that live along the bike path have a larger concern. They have to put up with the actions of golfers that don’t practice good golf etiquette. Things like driving in their yards, damaging their property, swearing, and even urinating in public.
(3) Then there are the properties that are encroached on by the bike path. Those residents, in addition to the previous priorities, are also concerned about liability.
I intend to resolve this bike path issue in a way satisfies the concerns of all.
Some residents have expressed concern that the Golf Course has had to put up with the residents. Well, if we loose access to the bike path, the golf course won’t have to put up with us anymore but the residents in (2) and (3) above will still have to put up with the golfers.
I need your vote. To vote for me, either,
(1) On the proxy you received in the mail, fill in "Pete Calinski" next to the phrase “(insert name)" and then get the proxy to me (preferred) or mail it in. Each card mailed in costs the ROCC $1.00 and I can ensure none gets lost.
(2) Attend the meeting on January 11 at the Greenwoods Recreation Facility and cast your vote. Proof of residence will be required.
(3) If you sent in your proxy or lost it or it DID NOT have either Gene Zambarda or Pete Calinski in the (insert name) field, do as in (2) above and ask to retract the proxy at that time.
Thank you so much,
Pete
Sunday, November 15, 2009
ROCC Meeting November 9, 2009
About six residents attended the meeting. Two or three were there concerning missing or nonfunctioning gas lights. (Just as an aside, these things have been a problem for a long time. Why doesn't the board just step in and repair them. I don't think anybody has looked at the cost. It could be minimal.)
Here are some other topics that came up at the Monday 11/9 meeting:
(1) I described my encounter with the Golf Course owner. One board member asked me why I was continuing to walk the path and enrage (or some such term) the golf course.
My answer was, because I want to demonstrate that we have not surrendered our access to the bike path. And as for the threat that I could be arrested for trespassing, I addressed that and, since some of you expressed concern for me, I will explain my reasoning in a separate email. But for now I will just say that a resident at the meeting understands what I am doing and said, "Let him get arrested, I'll pay the fine". Well, we will split the fine.
(2) We hope to meet soon with the ROCC lawyer to compose a letter that says, because the bike path is on many resident's property, residents will continue to use the bike path. I have also been thinking, rather than just that letter, maybe we should ask the lawyer how to best leverage this ownership to our advantage.
(3) I asked some questions to get a better understanding of how the January 11 election will be conducted. I am concerned about how difficult it could be to get votes cast for our candidates. The only way for a resident to cast a vote for any candidate is for that resident to attend the January 11 meeting and cast their ballot.
If they cannot attend the meeting they can mail in a proxy BUT the proxy can ONLY be assigned to the board president or another board member. A resident cannot vote another resident's proxy. Since in a typical election, very few people show up to vote, the board typically has enough proxies to carry the election their way.
(4) I asked how a person becomes a candidate. There was some discussion about the person providing the president a written description of capabilities, etc. I pointed out that it sounded like the board controlled the candidates. The letter requirement was withdrawn. I said I want to be a candidate and would have two more candidates to run for the three open positions.
(5) Gene Zambarda expressed interest in being appointed to an open board
position. This position would not be one of those to be filled in the next
election, it extends for another year. In my opinion, Gene is an ideal
candidate. He and I have discussed many Ransom Oaks issues, from enhancing
the appearance of our area to the bike path. He has the time, the initiative, and the ability to become a real asset to Ransom Oaks. We may need a demonstration of support by us to get him on the board. I may have to call on you all in the future to help make this happen.
Pete
Here are some other topics that came up at the Monday 11/9 meeting:
(1) I described my encounter with the Golf Course owner. One board member asked me why I was continuing to walk the path and enrage (or some such term) the golf course.
My answer was, because I want to demonstrate that we have not surrendered our access to the bike path. And as for the threat that I could be arrested for trespassing, I addressed that and, since some of you expressed concern for me, I will explain my reasoning in a separate email. But for now I will just say that a resident at the meeting understands what I am doing and said, "Let him get arrested, I'll pay the fine". Well, we will split the fine.
(2) We hope to meet soon with the ROCC lawyer to compose a letter that says, because the bike path is on many resident's property, residents will continue to use the bike path. I have also been thinking, rather than just that letter, maybe we should ask the lawyer how to best leverage this ownership to our advantage.
(3) I asked some questions to get a better understanding of how the January 11 election will be conducted. I am concerned about how difficult it could be to get votes cast for our candidates. The only way for a resident to cast a vote for any candidate is for that resident to attend the January 11 meeting and cast their ballot.
If they cannot attend the meeting they can mail in a proxy BUT the proxy can ONLY be assigned to the board president or another board member. A resident cannot vote another resident's proxy. Since in a typical election, very few people show up to vote, the board typically has enough proxies to carry the election their way.
(4) I asked how a person becomes a candidate. There was some discussion about the person providing the president a written description of capabilities, etc. I pointed out that it sounded like the board controlled the candidates. The letter requirement was withdrawn. I said I want to be a candidate and would have two more candidates to run for the three open positions.
(5) Gene Zambarda expressed interest in being appointed to an open board
position. This position would not be one of those to be filled in the next
election, it extends for another year. In my opinion, Gene is an ideal
candidate. He and I have discussed many Ransom Oaks issues, from enhancing
the appearance of our area to the bike path. He has the time, the initiative, and the ability to become a real asset to Ransom Oaks. We may need a demonstration of support by us to get him on the board. I may have to call on you all in the future to help make this happen.
Pete
Thursday, November 5, 2009
I Met the Golf Course Owner Yesterday and He Wasn't Very Nice
Well, I was walking the bike path yesterday. I take a route that follows sections that are owned by residents. There was a crew removing leaves and one of the men informed me that the bike path was closed. I told him that we had been informed by the golf course lawyer that we could use the bikepath (as long as there were no golfers and I didn't see a single one that day). He told me to take it up with the owner and pointed to a man further down the path.
I walked that way and he shut off his leave blower and told me the bike path was closed. I told him the same thing I had told the employee, your lawyer informed us we could use the bike path. He denied it saying he talks to his lawyer everyday and the lawyer never said that.
There was more conversation including his asking me if I was "Pete", to which I replied in the affirmative.
He also said he would have me arrested for trespassing.
I informed him that he didn't own the bike path.
He said he did.
I said we have the survey.
He said he has the survey.
He said he has easements.
I could have said the easements (where ever he may have them) may give him rights to use the bike path but they do not give him the right to exclude others but by then he restarted his leaf blower so I went my way.
And so it goes.
Pete
I walked that way and he shut off his leave blower and told me the bike path was closed. I told him the same thing I had told the employee, your lawyer informed us we could use the bike path. He denied it saying he talks to his lawyer everyday and the lawyer never said that.
There was more conversation including his asking me if I was "Pete", to which I replied in the affirmative.
He also said he would have me arrested for trespassing.
I informed him that he didn't own the bike path.
He said he did.
I said we have the survey.
He said he has the survey.
He said he has easements.
I could have said the easements (where ever he may have them) may give him rights to use the bike path but they do not give him the right to exclude others but by then he restarted his leaf blower so I went my way.
And so it goes.
Pete
Friday, October 16, 2009
ROCC Meeting October 13, 2009
News from the meeting:
(1) We had 6 residents attend the meeting including a new couple that are firmly convinced that the actions of the golfers has become atrocious since the residents have stopped using the bike path. They read a full page letter they will be sending to the board, the golf course, and the Amherst police department.
It describes how conditions have deteriorated over the summer months. They have reached their worst level since this couple moved in during the 1980s. The number of golfers urinating around their house and the incidents of obscene language has increased significantly. They are convinced that before, when we individuals and families were walking the bike path, the golfers were less likely to display such disrespect for residents.
They described one case where a car alarm went off somewhere in the neighborhood. A golfer kept yelling "shut the f... up" at the top of his lungs. He keep repeating this as he teed off, returned to his cart, and drove off.
There doesn't seem to be a good solution to this other than recording the actions, getting the cart number and hoping the Amherst police can get to the club house before the golfer finishes. I wonder how many other residents have to put up with this while the golf course no longer has to"put up with" us. And how much worse it can get.
(2) There is some confusion about letters the board may write. It wasn't clear if one letter would be in support of the deteriorating actions by the golfers and a second letter would retract the December 13 letter saying we didn't have access to the bike path. Perhaps the second letter was just being "considered".
Since some of us stayed for the second phase of the meeting wherein theboard conducted its business and nothing came up about any letter, we don'tknow where this stands. But you can bet it has, or is in the process of, petering out. We'll see what can be done to keep it alive.
The second letter is based on the new information that many sections of the bike path do not belong to the golf course. Even if the golf course may have easements to some subset of the bike path, the easement does not give the golf course the right to exclude us from using those sections.
(3) We heard that 13 of the 29 residents responded to the "encroachment"letter so far. It requested responses by October 15. There was a discussion about how many surveys were provided, which had easements, and what the surveys showed. Many showed no bike path encroachment however, it is a known fact that the bike path crosses many of those very properties. All this serves to exemplify the confusion around this issue. A good title and boundary dispute lawyer should be able to spin these facts into a very strong case for us.
(4) We heard again from one board member how "good" our present lawyer is. It is interesting that the new couple, who never heard any of this before, came to the conclusion that we need a new lawyer to "take a fresh look" at this. I don't understand why the board doesn't see this.
(5) That same board member, at one point jumped up and shouted, "Enough is enough with this foolishness", and "Shut up, I'm talking". When in fact he was interrupting one of the residents. I pointed out that there are provisions for removing a board member and they are not very onerous. I also pointed out that many many residents have asked me questions like, (a) Does the board realize they were elected to represent us? (b) Whose side is the board on, ours or the golf course's? (c) Which board members are on our side and which are on the side of the golf course?
I need to put in my $0.02 here. I believe we should consider forming a "probike path" slate of candidates to replace those board members that are against or even passive to this issue. As I understand it, there are three positions up for a vote this January. One of those is held by our strongest supporter. That leaves two open for us. Also, a board member with an additional year term has resigned. I am considering asking to be appointed to fill that position. I don't know if I can pull that off, but I do know that I would need a lot of support from you to do it.
(1) We had 6 residents attend the meeting including a new couple that are firmly convinced that the actions of the golfers has become atrocious since the residents have stopped using the bike path. They read a full page letter they will be sending to the board, the golf course, and the Amherst police department.
It describes how conditions have deteriorated over the summer months. They have reached their worst level since this couple moved in during the 1980s. The number of golfers urinating around their house and the incidents of obscene language has increased significantly. They are convinced that before, when we individuals and families were walking the bike path, the golfers were less likely to display such disrespect for residents.
They described one case where a car alarm went off somewhere in the neighborhood. A golfer kept yelling "shut the f... up" at the top of his lungs. He keep repeating this as he teed off, returned to his cart, and drove off.
There doesn't seem to be a good solution to this other than recording the actions, getting the cart number and hoping the Amherst police can get to the club house before the golfer finishes. I wonder how many other residents have to put up with this while the golf course no longer has to"put up with" us. And how much worse it can get.
(2) There is some confusion about letters the board may write. It wasn't clear if one letter would be in support of the deteriorating actions by the golfers and a second letter would retract the December 13 letter saying we didn't have access to the bike path. Perhaps the second letter was just being "considered".
Since some of us stayed for the second phase of the meeting wherein theboard conducted its business and nothing came up about any letter, we don'tknow where this stands. But you can bet it has, or is in the process of, petering out. We'll see what can be done to keep it alive.
The second letter is based on the new information that many sections of the bike path do not belong to the golf course. Even if the golf course may have easements to some subset of the bike path, the easement does not give the golf course the right to exclude us from using those sections.
(3) We heard that 13 of the 29 residents responded to the "encroachment"letter so far. It requested responses by October 15. There was a discussion about how many surveys were provided, which had easements, and what the surveys showed. Many showed no bike path encroachment however, it is a known fact that the bike path crosses many of those very properties. All this serves to exemplify the confusion around this issue. A good title and boundary dispute lawyer should be able to spin these facts into a very strong case for us.
(4) We heard again from one board member how "good" our present lawyer is. It is interesting that the new couple, who never heard any of this before, came to the conclusion that we need a new lawyer to "take a fresh look" at this. I don't understand why the board doesn't see this.
(5) That same board member, at one point jumped up and shouted, "Enough is enough with this foolishness", and "Shut up, I'm talking". When in fact he was interrupting one of the residents. I pointed out that there are provisions for removing a board member and they are not very onerous. I also pointed out that many many residents have asked me questions like, (a) Does the board realize they were elected to represent us? (b) Whose side is the board on, ours or the golf course's? (c) Which board members are on our side and which are on the side of the golf course?
I need to put in my $0.02 here. I believe we should consider forming a "probike path" slate of candidates to replace those board members that are against or even passive to this issue. As I understand it, there are three positions up for a vote this January. One of those is held by our strongest supporter. That leaves two open for us. Also, a board member with an additional year term has resigned. I am considering asking to be appointed to fill that position. I don't know if I can pull that off, but I do know that I would need a lot of support from you to do it.
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Good News, the Letter is Printed
We got an email from Mark Walsh, the ROCC board President yesterday. He
said the majority of the board agreed with Gene's version of the letter that
requests assistance from those encroached on by the golf course.
It includes a request to return the response by October 15 and a space to
indicate if they have submitted their surveys, will submit one, or don't
have one.
I printed all 29 of them and delivered them to Mark today around 5:30 PM.
He will sign and mail them.
We are on our way!!!
Now to make sure we get the right kind of lawyer on this.
Pete
said the majority of the board agreed with Gene's version of the letter that
requests assistance from those encroached on by the golf course.
It includes a request to return the response by October 15 and a space to
indicate if they have submitted their surveys, will submit one, or don't
have one.
I printed all 29 of them and delivered them to Mark today around 5:30 PM.
He will sign and mail them.
We are on our way!!!
Now to make sure we get the right kind of lawyer on this.
Pete
Friday, September 18, 2009
September 09 ROCC Board Meeting
I'll give you the bottom line first. We will draft a letter to the residents that are encroached on by the bike path. The letter will be from the ROCC board president and ask those residents to allow the board to use their property rights as leverage to restore our rights to the bike path. I am amazed how the board still does not perceive how important this is to the residents and how urgently we want it resolved.
Full report, about 16 residents attended the meeting. As suggested by members, I summarized the current state by describing how approximately 31 properties are encroached on by the bike path.
I also tried to document that we need a new lawyer because the current one failed to properly perform his last action item (Now reported to cost $2500) and took eight months to find out that the Golf Course would not furnish their survey. Of course, I then went to the town and a few days later picked up that survey.
As a result of a lot of conversation and statements from the residents, it was agree that the president will send the letter described above. Having experience with how slowly the board acts, I requested a timeline for the letter. They proposed a month to draft the letter and a month to run it past the board. Thus my comment above about lack of urgency. After some protest by the attendees, a resident agreed to draft a letter and email it to the president.
This is a link to the list of properties crossed by the bike path: ClickHere
Other tidbits (please email me anything I forgot so I and add to this list).
(a) One resident expressed his frustration of how the board performs saying something like, "In the 15 or 20 years he has interacted with the board he has never seen it act in the interests of the residents. There always seems to be a hidden agenda that controls the board's actions. They do not represent the residents."
(b) Another said since we have now established that there is some question regarding rights to the bike path, the board should send a letter to the Golf Course stating that it is retracting the letter saying we do not have access to the bike path. We should also inform the residents that they should resume using the bike path. I thought I saw some board members (only 5 of the 9 board members were present) nod in agreement. Any bets on when we will ever see such letters?
(c) A board member said that the Golf Course lawyer told our lawyer a few months ago that he didn't think the golf course would mind if we used the bike path when there were no golfers. To which a resident reported that her husband jogs the path every morning before golf starts and twice this week he was told not to use the path.
A few of us found one board member to be particularly disturbing. He made statements like:
We don't have a case.
We can't pursue this any more.
The board won't fund 31 people that have faulty surveys.
In case anybody is interested, here is an excerpt from the Offering plan
that relates to removal of a board member: Click_Here
It requires a quorum, defined as: Click_Here
I wish we had more people show up. The board still doesn't "feel the need".
That is all I can think of for now.
Pete
Full report, about 16 residents attended the meeting. As suggested by members, I summarized the current state by describing how approximately 31 properties are encroached on by the bike path.
I also tried to document that we need a new lawyer because the current one failed to properly perform his last action item (Now reported to cost $2500) and took eight months to find out that the Golf Course would not furnish their survey. Of course, I then went to the town and a few days later picked up that survey.
As a result of a lot of conversation and statements from the residents, it was agree that the president will send the letter described above. Having experience with how slowly the board acts, I requested a timeline for the letter. They proposed a month to draft the letter and a month to run it past the board. Thus my comment above about lack of urgency. After some protest by the attendees, a resident agreed to draft a letter and email it to the president.
This is a link to the list of properties crossed by the bike path: ClickHere
Other tidbits (please email me anything I forgot so I and add to this list).
(a) One resident expressed his frustration of how the board performs saying something like, "In the 15 or 20 years he has interacted with the board he has never seen it act in the interests of the residents. There always seems to be a hidden agenda that controls the board's actions. They do not represent the residents."
(b) Another said since we have now established that there is some question regarding rights to the bike path, the board should send a letter to the Golf Course stating that it is retracting the letter saying we do not have access to the bike path. We should also inform the residents that they should resume using the bike path. I thought I saw some board members (only 5 of the 9 board members were present) nod in agreement. Any bets on when we will ever see such letters?
(c) A board member said that the Golf Course lawyer told our lawyer a few months ago that he didn't think the golf course would mind if we used the bike path when there were no golfers. To which a resident reported that her husband jogs the path every morning before golf starts and twice this week he was told not to use the path.
A few of us found one board member to be particularly disturbing. He made statements like:
We don't have a case.
We can't pursue this any more.
The board won't fund 31 people that have faulty surveys.
In case anybody is interested, here is an excerpt from the Offering plan
that relates to removal of a board member: Click_Here
It requires a quorum, defined as: Click_Here
I wish we had more people show up. The board still doesn't "feel the need".
That is all I can think of for now.
Pete
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Why the ROCC Board is Ignoring Us
I think I know why the board is ignoring us. They don't realize how many of us there are and how strongly we feel on this bike path issue. Not enough of us are speaking up at the meetings. Even when we have 20 or 30 residents present, only 4 or 5 say anything. Well, we need to remedy that.
The board has instituted a 3 minute rule; everyone gets to speak for 3 minutes. So I urge everyone to take some of their 3 minutes to show the board we are serious.
If you want the board to fund a new lawyer to represent us, TELL THEM!
If you want the board to provide funding of $5,000 or $10,000 to cover legal fees and other expenses, TELL THEM!
If you want (and I may regret this but "in for a dime, in for a dollar") me to coordinate the lawyer and other activities, TELL THEM! I don't want any payment. I have nothing to gain beyond rights to the path, but I sure want to succeed.
If you believe the board is ignoring the petition signed by over 200 residents, TELL THEM!
If you believe that the board has forgotten that they were elected to represent us, TELL THEM!
If you believe some members of the board are on the side of the golf course, TELL THEM they have to change!
If you want to know which board members are on the side of the residents, and which are on the side of the golf course, DEMAND they make it public! (Note, the board has an "unofficial policy" of presenting a "united front" to the residents.)
If you would vote to remove any board member that won't back these actions, TELL THEM! (Note, according to the offering plan, sections "5.06 Removal" a board member can be removed by a majority vote of a quorum and according to section "4.04 Quorum", a quorum is the LESSER of 1/10 OR 100 members.)
If you believe in just a few of these points, please make yourself heard. Print out a copy of this and take it with you to the meeting. Make a few extra copies to hand out to other attendees.
This has gone on too long. The meeting is Monday, 9/14, 7:00 PM Greenwood Rec. center.
Thanks,
Pete
The board has instituted a 3 minute rule; everyone gets to speak for 3 minutes. So I urge everyone to take some of their 3 minutes to show the board we are serious.
If you want the board to fund a new lawyer to represent us, TELL THEM!
If you want the board to provide funding of $5,000 or $10,000 to cover legal fees and other expenses, TELL THEM!
If you want (and I may regret this but "in for a dime, in for a dollar") me to coordinate the lawyer and other activities, TELL THEM! I don't want any payment. I have nothing to gain beyond rights to the path, but I sure want to succeed.
If you believe the board is ignoring the petition signed by over 200 residents, TELL THEM!
If you believe that the board has forgotten that they were elected to represent us, TELL THEM!
If you believe some members of the board are on the side of the golf course, TELL THEM they have to change!
If you want to know which board members are on the side of the residents, and which are on the side of the golf course, DEMAND they make it public! (Note, the board has an "unofficial policy" of presenting a "united front" to the residents.)
If you would vote to remove any board member that won't back these actions, TELL THEM! (Note, according to the offering plan, sections "5.06 Removal" a board member can be removed by a majority vote of a quorum and according to section "4.04 Quorum", a quorum is the LESSER of 1/10 OR 100 members.)
If you believe in just a few of these points, please make yourself heard. Print out a copy of this and take it with you to the meeting. Make a few extra copies to hand out to other attendees.
This has gone on too long. The meeting is Monday, 9/14, 7:00 PM Greenwood Rec. center.
Thanks,
Pete
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
