Document text
http:// --> Ashland, Oregon HOME Valley & State Sports Nation & World Opinion/Editorial Classifieds Business Columnists Local Issues Obituaries Weather Archive Revels Etcetera Backpage Hot Topics Most Viewed Forum Photo Galleries Video Readers Polls O-Zone Online Games Movie Preview Special Sections Real Estate Guide Menu Guide Shakespeare Subscribe Contact Us Rate Card Place an Ad Featured Galleries: August 23, 2007 Curiouser and curiouser Recent moves by the Mt. Ashland Association, when lined up in a row side by side, look far more like precarious dominos about to teeter than a coordinated plan for the future of the ski area. We can't help but wonder about the result of the forthcoming ruling by the Ninth District Court of Appeals — whether it will cause those dominoes to topple into a big pile of chaos, with the entire fate of the ski area crumbling under the debris. Too dramatic? Not when you consider the ski area has struggled for survival throughout its history, including going belly up altogether had the local community not rallied to save it as a nonprofit organization. If expansion fails, how longer can it hope to remain viable? Imagining reaching that point again is not difficult. Imagining the community rallying again with enough support to save the MAA is very difficult. Today, the entire mountain is covered in more controversy than winter snow. Recent decisions by the MAA tend to fuel the discontent and raise questions. Why would the MAA decide to sue the city just one day after a rough and tumble hearing in court? We are told its just a coincidence of timing. If true, its an unfortunate one, as it looked very much to the casual observer that the MAA lashed out at the city for impeding the expansion project. The MAA's refusal to provide the city of Ashland a detailed business report that laid out its plans for expansion, financial viability, and contingency plans to provide for restoration funds should it fail, heightened the distrust in those running a nonprofit community organization. Prudence suggests the MAA had nothing to gain from making its plans known and thereby giving its opponents more fuel for their fires of opposition. But the problem with a community-supported nonprofit organization is that it can never ignore the court of public opinion. Proving a clear transparent plan for expansion would have left the city with far less ammo to fire back. Instead, the MAA appeared petty and secretive. The biggest blow of all came when the MAA, again just days after its district court appearance, announced that it would not be open on Mondays, Tuesdays and Saturday nights this coming season, thereby depriving pass-holders more days to enjoy the mountain for the same cost. While the move may be financially prudent, it came after the pre-season pass sale, where the most loyal users of the mountain paid for what they believed to be a seven-days-a-week operations. The MAA offered refunds, although most avid skiers and snowboarders have little choice but to keep their passes. But it did bring bad blood, not to mention incentive for area winter enthusiasts to look again at other options, perhaps Mount Shasta, Bachelor or others. In the grand scheme of things, none of this matters. The votes that matter are those of the three judges in the Ninth District Court of Appeals. Should they deny expansion, MAA must go back to the original drawing board and perhaps try to reconsider alternatives that area environmentalists say they would support, but the MAA dismisses as untenable. If they win the ruling, they will make every effort to fell the trees before winter, and before the Sierra Club and others issue more legal battles to delay and/or block the expansion. Whatever the court ruling, it seems the aftermath of this protracted, nasty battle will linger for years to come. Current Comments: "If the expansion fails, how longer can it hope to remain viable?" True words these. Unless we get the expansion through, we will have a marginal hill. Other ski resorts invest, making it better. We invest having to fight a small, vocal minority and a local newspaper. I'm alright with their decision not to try to submit a "detailed" business plan to the city. The City Council has proven time and time again the ability to micromanage to a point of insanity. Why give them the opportunity. Pragmatiac - Ashland, OR - August 23rd, 10:08 PM Yep. Blew it, MAA did. Big time. The only people happy right now are the Rondonner skiiers who will love having the mt. to themselves every Mon. and Tues. I have a feeling that includes a whole bunch of MAA staff who always take the first tracks anyways before the lifts start running. For a non-profit, community organization MAA feels more exclusionary and less friendly every year. I predict their greed will bring about not a better mountain but one that ceases to operate. Sad and unnecessary. Pass Holder - Ashland, OR - August 23rd, 10:37 PM well yeah, to the winner goes the spoils of nasty political fall-out. hopefully, when MAA loses the legal fight, most will see that it made its own bed trying to steamroll the community. Tidings falls into the more terrain = viability fallacy. Groom the runs, keep the parking lots plowed, find a way for skiers to bypass Upper Dream and ski just Caliban and Lower Dream... bomber area, much improved. skied there since 82 - ca$hland - August 24th, 12:05 AM If MAA board doesn't run the operation as a serious business with bottom line accountability they are scorned and ridiculed. If they don't run it like a community NFP they are chastised. Damed if they do; damned if they don't. Did the Tidings bother to send one of its crack reporters to MAA for input and balance? Has anybody looked at the books or is it just more sporting to beat up on the Board without the benefit of fact? Bill Bartlett - Ashland - August 24th, 8:33 AM From what I've read of MAA finances, they've socked away millions in the past 10 years for expansion planning, and now, lawyers. For the editors to question the viability of the area without expansion is unfounded. Who knows what drought and warming will bring in the future, but let's have a discussion based in reality. Without expansion, the MAA could upgrade facilities (i.e. Aerial chair, rental lodge) and make Mt A a quality experience, sans expansion. skisANDtrees - Ashland, OR - August 24th, 8:44 AM This is incredibly sad. The money MAA had to spend to fight all of you representing expansion denial, wasted legal battles, feuds & litigation. Resources for expansion or even operations are gone! Why close Monday/Tuesdays? Its business necessity: managing dollars & operating overhead! This town�s leadership & most outspoken clearly don�t understand business & its development! They only know how to dismantle & obstruct! Such a triumph! I�ve been skiing Mt A since 1971. Can MAA survive this mess? downtown - Ashland, OR - August 24th, 8:57 AM The future is now? Don�t worry you won, no expansion! MAA is broke! What you won is the real question. MAA is shutting down two days a week and with a few bad years they will be gone forever. The access road will not be kept open because of decreased use and increased costs. How does it feel to destroy rather than expand? Please don�t go into a diatribe of boondoggles to justify your stupidity over this insignificant minuscule expansion in millions of acres! You really don�t know what you got! mad as_____ - ashland - August 24th, 9:52 AM Yep, thanks to MAA ineptitude, Mt Ashland is going to be a great Rando (and Tele) mountain, and not just on Mon. and Tues. Looking forward to it. Earn Your Turns - Ashland, OR - August 24th, 11:50 AM I know exactly what we've got, and I've been saying for years that trying to expand would destroy what is a fine little mt. It's not meant to be a Bachelor or Hood, and a few more acres of terrain won't make it so. I've supported them through poor mgmt, inconsistent chairlifts, terrible road and parking and a me-first attitude from the staff and crew. I would much rather have the mt. as it is (just run it better), then lose it all. How difficult is this to comprehend. It's not rocket sicence. Pass Holder - Ashland, OR - August 24th, 11:57 AM Pass Holder-why have all the different owners of MtA gone under? Of course they all tried to make MtA financially viable. Do you believe that none of them knew how to run a ski area and you do? Their need for expansion is/was critical for success. If you let MAA have a shot at success you just might get to keep your bump! The options are subsidize the losses, expansion or extinction. Because of it�s limitations MtA has always had difficulties. Give MAA the benefit of the doubt and ski on and on on and on - ashland - August 24th, 4:04 PM Mad, to say that the access road will be closed if the the ski area fails shows a real disconnect on your part. The ski road is also used by the many residents that live on Mt Ashland Rd and in the Colestine Valley. Why on earth would it close? And to be as dramatic as to say people are trying to destroy rather than expand is ridiculous. The expansion as is currently being proposed is what would bring destruction and not minuscle if watershed is seriouly compromised by cutting and digging sanity versus madness - Ashland - August 24th, 4:27 PM Ahem - ski area repeatedly failed in the past for LACK OF SNOW. It never failed for lack of (lower elevation) terrain. Get it straight. MAA frittered tens of thousands on litigation it INITIATED and in which it voluntarily INTERVENED. MAA never was sued. Legal costs were elective. Get it straight. memory beyond last board meeting - ca$hland - August 24th, 5:40 PM When Steven Pass was going to abandon MtA ODOT stated they would not maintain the low priority portion of Mt. Ashland Road to MtA. Their reasoning was cost benefit. There are few homes and the TV Station has other means of access. There are many road closed every winter in Oregon for the same reasons. If you do your homework you will also realize not even Ashland�s engineers concludes the watershed will be compromised by the expansion. What is your expertise--propaganda? mad as_____ - ashland - August 24th, 7:43 PM MAA has no spokesman who can articulate a vision. They rely on folks like enough and mad to spread rumors: the ski area will go broke if no expansion-the road will close-71 acres of clearcut will have no effect on the creek-we have a plan to raise 17 Million Dollars-we have reserve $ to fix the Mtn if we go broke (for the 4th time).. The Mtn runs fine as a modest ski area, and has posted small profits the last few years. Why not make small affordable improvements that won't bankrupt you? Lazlo - ashland - August 25th, 9:05 AM The only propaganda being put forth here is trying to scare people into thinking the ski area and access road will be shut down if expansion does not happen. Ridiculous! get real - Ashland - August 25th, 9:54 AM History tells us if something does not change the mountain will again shut down. Expansion is an attempt at preventing closure. Have you ever taken the risk necessary for a successful business? Doing little or nothing but repeating the mistakes of the past is a sure recipe for failure. You sound like you care about the existence of MtA. Brainstorm a better solution/plan that doesn't repeating past failures. Minor improvement to satisfy �steep and cheep� skiers has never brought success to MtA. mad as ___ - ashland - August 25th, 1:33 PM As Ca$hland stated so well- the history of closures at Mt A. has to do with LACK OF SNOW.. If you put $17,000,000. into an improved area and you don't get the SNOW- who is going to continue to pay the rent and service the new debt? Your argument makes no sense. If Mt. A. needs cash reserves to make it thru a few bad years- then a multi-million $ deficit will not help it survive. Seems like your plan is the fastest way to kill a good little ski area. Lazlo - ashland - August 25th, 4:11 PM The ski park will shut down no matter what. Drought will claim its casuality, only it will claim the expansion area first, fully 600 vertical feet below the existing park. Expand beginner and novice terrain east of the lodge, use Poma for love's sake, install a chair that bypasses Upper Dream and allows intermediate skiers to ski Lower Dream and Caliban, and stay out of the creek. Voila! A viability-improving expansion that solves crowding, no serious environmental impact or controversy! skied there since 82 - ca$hland - August 25th, 4:56 PM Well I'm happy to say we all have the same goal. That would be a great little ski area that we can enjoy for many years to come. I hope that is the reality! Many just seem to want to see MtA go away. It is not my business just my recreation so I think I will leave it to those responsible for making these decisions and have the background to mold the future of MtA. At least the discussion has gotten beyond the political baiting and killing the messengers that seem to be the main stay of the DT�s. mad as ___ - ashland - August 25th, 7:32 PM Mad, I want the ski area to thrive in its current form. I enjoy skiing powder up there and chasing powder in the backcountry. Perhaps those willing to help fund the expansion to the tune of 17 million can be ready for the inevitable bailout. Expansion (supply of terrain) will increase skiers (demand) is a fallacy and contrary to basic economics. MAA should meet with the users who proposed the community alternative (new lift and exp. area access) and go back to the drawing board. Cooperation Derek - Ashland - August 26th, 9:51 AM Totally with you there, mad. This forum has such potential for productivity. Yeah, I think there will be an opportunity to approach Mt. A viability with fresh eyes after the federal court decides the Forest Service broke its own laws. Then, if MAA is willing, we can talk for real about what works. skied there since 82 - ca$hland - August 26th, 10:55 AM As has probably been stated, MAA violated our trust. The claim that adding lower terrain (which is even more climate dependant) somehow secures Mt. A's future is nonsensical. All this is going to do is straddle the mountain with more debt that will be exacerbated by what is often already marginal snow pack (even at higher terrain). As a business model, that is a stupid one frankly and MAA is operating in bad faith. Has anyone considered marketing Mt. A as an intimate ski area (as an asset)? E - Ashland, OR - August 27th, 12:19 PM Yes! Check out the MAA website: www.mtashland.com Note the "It's steeper here" banner. yearning for MAA to pull back - ashland - August 27th, 7:24 PM doesn't this city (us?) own the ske lodge? the mountain? ... can we PLEASE say bye bye to the Mt. Ashland Association?!?!?!? James - Ashland - August 27th, 11:39 PM Enough of this! Mount Ashland is a beautiful ski park. It ranks with Mount Shasta and can complement it. One can't see all the terrain the state of Jefferson has to offer by only visiting one. Stop all this talk of expansion. Tearing up the mountain will only ruin the city of Ashland and close the ski park for good, as will any further controversy. Ashland is difficult skiing for a reason: to make us world class skiiers. The MAA won't make it, but our awesome ski park still has a chance. will b - Ashland, OR - August 28th, 11:44 AM seems MAA's facade of "responsible management" is irretrievably cracked, and the public has expansion fatigue. joe skier - Ashland - August 30th, 12:08 AM Leave a Comment: Advertisement: Advertisement: Paid Advertising: Debt Help Inkjet Printers Payday Loans Free Ringtones Debt Consolidation Security Systems Debt Relief New Hampshire Primary Advertisement: Copyright © 2007 Ashland Daily Tidings and Ottaway Newspapers. All Rights Reserved. Del.icio.us