The FAWNSKIN FLYER Volume II Issue 12

Priceless when posted! Otherwise .25

Inside This Issue
Gossip Girl’s Notes
Fawnskin Events
Fawnskin Park Closure

Fawnskin Events
December 2, 2006
Christmas Tree Lighting (5:30pm)
Ornament Making, Snacks Earlier
Fire Station 49

December 2, 2006
Texas Hold’em (Noon)
Fundraising Pasta Bar
Mayoral Candidate Gene Cyr
Moose Lodge 2085

December 9, 2006
WOTM Mexican Potluck (5-9pm)
Moose Lodge 2085

December 12, 2006
NSIA Holiday Potluck (6:00pm)
Old Miller Park

December 15, 2006
Christmas Caroling (6:00pm)
Moose Lodge 2085

December 16, 2006
Fundraising Pancake Breakfast (8am-11am)
Candidate Diana L. Guerrero
Moose Lodge 2085

GG’s Notes
A couple of well meaning locals have decided to stir up the Fawn Park issue again.

The Fawnskin Flyer presented background on the Fawn Park in the September issue and a few other posts online. Visit the online version to review the matter. I’ve even put up a specific page link for your convenience.

Basically, Fawnskin organizational leaders have opted to not play into the tactics and drama of the park owner…and in the last contact with him left the ball in his court.

I have read the email retraction from the individual who seems to be responsible for this mess (and who is incidentally NOT a Fawnskin resident).

I also possess two letters, one from the president of a Fawnskin organization and the other from the park owner.

Bad behavior from the park owner has catalyzed a standstill on the matter. Bottom line, it is a privately owned park.

Read more at the online edition at
G.G. (Gossip Girl)

Fawn Park Closure
One of the biggest sore subjects around town is the closure of the privately held Fawn Park. The park has been closed since the end of July.

Although the park is privately owned by the Fawn Park Corporation, the group solicited funds from the community and made promises that the park area would be open to the residents and visitors of Fawnskin.

In addition, community leaders were led to believe that the park area was to be open for use for Fawnskin related events.

As a result of that pledge, many local organizations, not just individuals, donated funds in good faith to support the park. Some were even told that donation tiles would be erected.

Recently, part-time residents wrote to the Fawn Park Corporation officers. They donated funds for the park and were disturbed that it has not been open since the Doo Dah Parade.

The response to their letter looks a bit disturbing. One valley resident said, “It looks like a ransom note.”

The two page response is a confusing rant that incorrectly alleges that a “public press release” was sent out by “the little lethal ladies.” (Referring to two community leaders named in the letter and a third non-Fawnskin resident.)

The “public press release” was in fact only a personal email sent by a non-Fawnskin resident with whom the park owner has been allegedly feuding with for several years.

The park owner requested a “press retraction” and community leaders did, in fact, get the person to send out another email to her list retracting and clarifying her previous error.

Despite the retraction and subsequent distribution to those who received the first email, the park owner made an additional demand.

He requested a meeting with community leaders to resolve the situation. Local organization leaders were happy to agree–as establishing guidelines for park usage was needed and useful.

However, the park owner seemed more interested in revenge instead of resolution.

Consequently, Fawnskin community leaders declined to be part of what seemed to be a public humiliation/retaliation effort of the park owner. He seems to be hell bent on targeting the person he calls a “particular blood-thirster.”

During subsequent phone calls and faxes to community leaders, the park owner became belligerent with the current mayor of Fawnskin and the president of one of the local organizations.

The Marines (who cancelled their participation in the Fawnskin Festival) were also targets of his verbal assault.

In an undated letter sent to the park owner by the president of a local organization (Who he calls one of the “local ladies.”) it states, “I believe we have done what is necessary on this end and the ball is in your court. I was hoping to be able to find a resolution so that we can utilize the park in a way that honors you and your desires.” It ends with “Please let me know if you want me to proceed to set up a constructive meeting to discuss guidelines for the park usage.”

The park owner states, in his letter to the inquisitive locals, that he has “written..and called…and asked…and chased some response to that meeting…”

Ultimately, community leaders decided to cease attempts at further mitigation as it seemed futile.

The question sent in by local donors simply asks for clarification of rumors and states, “I am writing you to find out why you closed the park.”

The park owner responds with comments such as, “I said I would dissolve the park to private seekers. And that is exactly my plan.”

The park owner also challenges the locals to call the mayor and president of the Fawnskin organization to ask them why the park is closed.

For some reason he also states, “As for other matters? You want your money back??? I’ll see if there’s if there’s such a ‘reverse payment’ procedure.”

So, the fact is that Fawn Park remains closed. From my conversations with Fawnskin leaders it does not look like anything constructive will happen. I hope the locals who are attempting to converse with the park owner have better luck.

Finally, don’t you find it strange that none of the local media outlets or national publications that were so hot to cover the generous donation of Fawn Park to the community have failed to cover the park closure or to investigate the matter related to good faith donations? Please add your thoughts and comments online.

Fawn Park Documents: Online Only
The recipients of this letter disseminated it throughout town and to the Fawnskin Flyer for other residents to see:
Response Letter from Park Owner

This filing is public information and available from the Secretary of State website:
Fawn Park Tax Filing

Thank you for reading this post. You can now Read Comments (2) or Leave A Trackback.

Post Info

This entry was posted on Wednesday, November 29th, 2006 and is filed under Mountain Lake Resort.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the Comments Feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Previous Post: »
Next Post: »

Read More

Related Reading:

2 Responses to “The FAWNSKIN FLYER Volume II Issue 12

  • 1
    November 29th, 2006 09:52

    I feel so sad that the residents of Fawnskin have to put up with that type of individual (FawnPark owner). Shun the creep and refuse him the negative attention he seems to so badly want.

  • 2
    November 29th, 2006 13:05

    Incredibly Sad for everyone. No one wins…All of Fawnskin loses. Perhaps a third party with no connection to the park could help find a resolution..and settle things down…. The park is so beautiful. I’d hate to see Fawnskin lose it…..