Gibson's argument against the decision

After the closing weekend of Saranac Lake’s Winter Carnival (which was awesome, you guys!), I didn’t really have the mental capacity to dig into David Gibson’s post from Monday on Adirondack Almanack.

But I finally managed to get through it today. It’s basically his entire argument against the APA’s decision on the ACR.

His argument has some good points and some weaker points.

I admit that I spent most of the time reading this post looking for clues as to whether Adirondack Wild is going to file an Article 78 to challenge the APA’s decision. (Don’t lie, most of you did, too. Those of you who don’t know what they are thinking, anyway.)

As evidence that they are definitely considering it, Gibson sure lays out the entire legal argument against the decision — why he thinks it was improperly decided and what missteps he thinks commissioners made.

He obviously believes that it was against the law for the board to make the decision it made.

But then again, it sort of seems to me that he’s leaning away from a lawsuit. Paul the Commenter makes a good point. Why did Gibson lay his entire argument out there on the blog? Wouldn’t that jeopardize his case, if Adirondack Wild does choose to sue to challenge the decision? How is the court of public opinion going to help him in terms of a judicial review of the decision?

And the last graf of Gibson’s post is about looking ahead, instead of looking back to the ACR. He talks there, as he does at the beginning, about how the APA needs to revise its practices in order to meet more stringent environmental standards. That seems to be his focus, and he uses the ACR process as an example for the most part rather than the main point.

We will see.

Oh yeah, I might as well link to Brian Mann's post on the topic, too.

Previous Post | Next Post