Rhinebeck Museum trouble

[N3221]

In addition to remembering the attacks on Pearl Harbor and its ramifications, please remember that December 7, 2003, marks ten years since Cole Palen's passing. One would doubt that he would approve of the current leadership of Old Rhinebeck, or of the situation that exists.

Thanks to Cole, and everyone that assisted him, for the many good years of the Old Rhinebeck Aerodrome.

[baldeagle]

Thanks for reminding us N3221, I remember pushing the answering machine button that day in the townhouse I was sharing at the time, and hearing the bad news from my brother. By the way I looked up N3221 and it's the registration number for Cole's old Fokker Triplane, the rotary powered one that became such a symbol of Old Rhinebeck.

Andrew Smith, thanks for your well thought out post and comments. I have one difference of opinion, and I stress opinion-- I think that withholding or withdrawing financial support is a concrete way to show the current "management" what we think of them, and to show that we won't support an organisation we don't trust. With the mis-management that has been shown I couldn't in good faith give money to ORA. Do you know that they voted to pay a person in Georgia $60,000 a year to work on Aerodrome aircraft, and he wouldn't even provide his own shop. I'm in the business of restoring antique aircraft, a one man shop, and I couldn't come close to grossing that much, and I don't know a mechanic anywhere in the US who makes that kind of money working on old airplanes. Very poor stewardship of money on their part, although the deal seems to have faded into oblivion like so many of their plans.
The person who I talked about in a previous post, who withdrew a large financial gift to the Aerodrome, doesn't have a computer, and knew nothing about this forum, he was simply so upset at the actions of the current "board" members that he couldn't in good faith continue to support them in any way. I know at least one other person who gave a substantial donation to the ORA every year, who will probably give his money elsewhere next year.
And the bottom line is this: I don't think that finances will kill the Aerodrome. Waning support of all kinds calls for a new start, with a new board and a new director. With a more qualified and benevolent board, and a more qualified director, I believe that as much or more support would arise than opposition that now exists. We can rally that support just as we have here rallied that opposition. I have connections at several large aviation related businesses who I would be glad to approach about sponsorships and other support, for a cause that I believe in, and am sure that there are others here who feel the same way and have similar contacts. I also have a friend who is the chief fund raiser for the current Wright Brothers Centennial celebrations, he has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for those efforts, which will soon be over. I'm quite sure he could be persuaded to use his talents and connections for the cause of ORA if he thought it was a worthwhile effort.
So, my opinion-- do withhold and withdraw financial support, until a change is made which warrants returning that support, and then we'll increase that support beyond what it has ever been.

[falconer]

In response to "vintageav8r", I think you miss the point of some of these discussions about certain employees. Granted, there has been quite a bit of character bashing on this post, and those who are doing it may be out of line, but it seems some of it may be well directed. For instance, if the board has "serious reasons" to fire Ken Cassens, which I personally find hard to believe, then why does it insist on keeping someone who has admitted to KNOWINGLY been in posession of a stolen airplane?(fact!) Would the Shuttleworth Collection do the same, or Owl's Head, or the Smithsonian? In fact, would Cole Palen have allowed someone like that to stick around and be associated with Rhinebeck? I also have to disagree with saying it has nothing to do with the Aerodrome, when it was found on Aerodrome property and in posession of an Aerodrome employee. Seems that type of thing would reflect poorly on any business, and the person in charge would have serious reasons to release that employee. I personally hold no ill will towards the man in question, but ask these things based on evidence. As was pointed out in an earlier post, poor judgement on the Boards' part is not illegal, but it certainly should be looked into, especially if the issue causes such an outcry from so many people involved with Rhinebeck.
As for the direction in which the Aerodrome is heading, I would welcome any info on this from the Board, or anyone else intimately involved with this process. Please prove the non-believers wrong! I don't wish to see it die as much as anyone else, but I certainly don't want it to become an amusement park either. I have to believe that was NOT part of Cole Palens' long range plans. The aerodrome is and always has been a unique window into aviations' past, a way to educate the public about wing warping and rotary engines, and what it's like to fly in an open cockpit biplane. Let's keep it that way.

Good post Falconer.
Vintageav8r,
I don't know why you would post such a message, when many of us have heard you give more than your fair share of Gene bashing and board bashing. And why would you support a board that would get rid of a person like Ken Cassens, who gave you a lot of help with your own airplane, and let you stay at his place so you didn't have to get a hotel room, and Jim Hare who at the 2001 Banquet you personally gave an award for hard work and dedication. Don't pretend to be an angel now.
Sorry all, but I wanted to keep the record straight. I just can't stand hypocrites.

Thanks to SteveS, I checked out the website. They changed the opening paragraph and deleted all of the Aerodrome News that had been posted from August of 2000 through December of 2002. The Aerodrome news was an on-going archived history of the good things that happened there during that period. It shows some of the projects that were farmed out to people in other areas of the country who wanted to help the ORA. It also chronicles how much work had to be done to the triplane when it was brought back from Georgia. It is disturbing that the current Aerodrome management intentionally chose to eliminate this information from public view this past weekend. Was it because it showed the progress of the old administration? Or that it shows the dedication of the people they recently fired, and volunteers that recently quit?
Well all is not lost. The Internet is a big place, and look what I found. The old website. Anyone who wants to see what the Aerodrome website looked like, and the projects that were going on prior to the recent changes, can see it by clicking on the link below:
http://web.archive.org/web/*/www.oldrhinebeck.org
Click on Feb 20, 2003 to see the Aerodrome News from Summer 2000 through Winter 2002.

DavisD1W, don't quite know who you think I am, but I assure you I don't own an airplane, have never stayed at Ken Cassen's, have never bashed Gene (although I do admit to having bashed certain board members at certain times over the years), nor received any award from Jim Hare. Am no angel, but certainly not the hypocrite you think I am because I obviously am not who you think I am. And given the tenor of these postings, I prefer to remain anonymous since I'm not really into being attacked by people who seem to freely accuse others of things they have nothing to do with. I appreciate the strength of your feelings, but you might want to watch what you say about people without actually knowing who you are talking about. And those of you who are listening to him might also want to take note of this particular mistaken accusation as you sort through the various stories.

[Paul Revere]

Well, vintageav8r, it's a pretty short list of people who support gene (including of course current so-called board members dean ryder, jim kick, paul richards, and stan segalla. And of course his buddy, tom "Homeland Security" daly). lori r.?

Poughkeepsie Journal September 9, 1997-headline "Stolen Plane Recovered in Rhinebeck" by Joseph A. Kilcoyne.

Rhinebeck-A rare, vintage small plane, stolen four years ago, has been impounded by police and the person currently in possession of it has been charged by police.

Eugene J. DeMarco, 35, of Stone Church Road, Rhinebeck was CHARGED by state police at Rhinebeck with third-degree criminal possession of stolen property, a 1946 Piper Cub aircraft reported stolen in 1993 to state police in Highland.

De Marco, identified as an aircraft mechanic and pilot with a permanent address in New Port Richey, Fla. was arraigned in Red Hook Town Court and released pending a future court appearance, troopers said

...Someone broke into a hangar, pushed another plane out of the way and took off with the Piper Cub. ...it made no difference in the charge against DeMarco.

..."There's a connection with him and the plane," the investigator said. "It's hard to say he had no knowledge of what he was getting."

STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY COURT COUNTY OF DUTCHESS
IND. #18/98
Index# 747/98

Plea Criminal Possession of Stolen Property Fourth Degree

Before Hon. Thomas J. Dolan, Judge

10 Market Street
Poughkeepsie, NY
July 30, 1998

The Court: Are you ready Mr. Sall?
Mr. Sall: Yes, your honor

Mr. Witherwax: Judge,currently before the court is Indictment #18 for the year 1988, which charges a class D felony, that of criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree. At this time I would move to reduce and amend the Indictment, to reflect the charge of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree, a class E felony, in violation of 165.45, Subdivision1, of the penal law. This reduction, Your Honor, is with the understanding that Mr. DeMarco would plead to the reduced Indictment as reduced and amended.

....The Court: All right Mr. DeMarco, you've heard what the proposal is. Is that what you wish to do?

The defendant: (Mr. DeMarco) Yes, sir.

The court: Raise your right hand. (whereupon the defendant Eugene John DeMarco was duly sworn.)

The clerk: State your name and address, please

The defendant: Eugene John DeMarco, 10506 Marlin Drive, New Port Richey, Florida 34654

The Court: All right, Mr. DeMarco. This Indictment No. 18, dated the 10th day of February, 1998, now charges you with criminal possession of stolen property fourth degree, an E felony, in violation of Section 165.45, Subdivision1, of the penal law.

The specific accusation is that the defendant, meaning you, in the town of Red Hook, in Dutchess County, New York, on or about the 2nd day of September, 1997, with intent to benefit yourself, a person other than the owner thereof, and to impede recovery by the owner, knowingly possessed stolen property, consisting of a 1946 Piper J-3 Cub airplane belonging to Robin Reilly, and the value of the property exceeded one thousand dollars. Do you understand that charge.

Defendant: Yes, I do.

The court: How do you plead to the charge of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree?


defendant: (DeMarco) Guilty.

The judge goes on to explain that by pleading guilty to a lesser crime he gives up his right to a jury trial and also a trial whereby the judge would be the only one to hear the case and then would decide his guilt. Mr. DeMarco said that "yes he understands that."

After asking several personal questions , the judge then said

The Court: ...Are you pleading guilty to criminal possession of stolen property, fourth degree, because you are, in fact, guilty of the crime, and for no other purpose?

Defendant: Yes

The judge then explains what he expects of the defendant, Mr. DeMarco answers that he does.

The judge then explains "if you fail to do even one of those things...I will put you in prison for up to four years, and I will not give you the plea back. "It is certified as a true and accurate transcript of the minutes as taken by Harold E. Warren, Senior Court Reporter

There you have it folks, It's a matter of public record. Transcripts are available from the Dutchess County Court, Poughkeepsie, NY 12601

To clarify my previous comments, I'm simply asking what the (systematic)
plan is to begin dismantling the current board and start working toward instituting
reforms at the aerodrome.....what needs to be done, how can people help, what resources
are needed, etc..... These current board members are slippery characters who
have had the better part of 10 yrs to entrench themselves.

I know it sounds somewhat self-destructive to some people, but Andrew King is exactly right,
financial pressures (and other operational pressures), will be the single key element in driving
reforms above and beyond any state level involvement.

[timjnf]

Let me start off by saying I have no inside information about ORA, especially with regards to the seeming fiasco that is happening now. Over the past 25 years, I have been a frequent visitor, have been a member (though my membership lapsed recently and I agree with BaldEagle that financial support should not be given until things get straightened out over there), and have donated to the wish list. Most everyone I have ever met at ORA over the years, including Tom Polapink, Richard King, Stan Segalla, and Cole himself all seemed to be genuinely good hearted, friendly, and certainly enthusiastic about the Aerodrome, and were all inspiring in one way or another.
On to my question...
Does anyone know what happens to the aircraft if the Aerodrome should dissolve for any reason?

I remember hearing, or reading, that as soon as Cole died there were multiple people attempting to acquire one or more of the aircraft for private collections.

Do any of you conspiracy theorists out there suspect there is something fishy going on?