Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Place Names topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Resident warns renaming Big Indian could impose real costs and risks

Shandaken Planning Board · May 14, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A resident letter read to the Shandaken Planning Board urged the town not to pursue a proposal in the draft comprehensive plan to rename the Hamlet of Big Indian to 'Winnisook' without resident consent, USPS confirmation, a cost-impact study and a dedicated hearing in Big Indian.

A letter from Big Indian property owner Alan Shiner warned the Shandaken Planning Board that renaming the Hamlet of Big Indian to "Winnisook" would impose practical, legal and financial burdens on residents and businesses if the town moved forward without broad local consent.

The clerk read Shiner’s 05/05/2025 letter, which argued that a hamlet name appears in mailing addresses, property and tax records, bank and insurance files, medical and government benefit records, and emergency-services systems. "Changing it creates real burdens and risks for the people who actually live there," the letter said, insisting the town obtain written confirmation from the U.S. Postal Service that a name change would not disrupt mail delivery and prepare a written cost-impact report before any action.

Shiner asked the town to hold a dedicated public hearing in Big Indian, mail written notice to affected property owners, collect written comments from residents, emergency-service providers and county mapping authorities, and to identify who would pay the costs of any change. The letter also recommended nondestructive alternatives — such as historical signage or educational programming — to recognize native or local history without replacing the established hamlet name.

Board members placed the letter into the record and confirmed it would be reviewed as part of the comprehensive plan materials. The item came up alongside public comment urging cautious, nonprescriptive language in the draft plan so future zoning work remains flexible and less vulnerable to legal challenge.