Quote:
Originally Posted by MAXUM
I should be in charge 
In the interest of debate - your assertion here is completely lubricous. Furthermore I am sick and tired of the notion that just because you don't agree with what I said that is considered "polarizing". No where did I suggest that property could not or should not have been considered for conservation. What I did say is that the town of Alton alone was not an appropriate candidate to take on that kind of project due to the initial and ongoing costs associated with trying to conserve that property never mind do something with it. Instead I suggested that the STATE would have been a better suited custodian of that property with the infrastructure and logistics and broader tax base to develop it in a way for all to enjoy. However even at the state level it's not an excuse to borrow millions for something that is not essential.
That said every single piece of open space cannot be set aside for conservation. Life goes on, things change, development does and will happen. Would it have been nice for that property to be conserved, absolutely, but what the current owners did with it is tastefully done.
Finally if you were so interested in conserving that property why didn't you just go out and buy it? My bet is probably like the town of Alton, you couldn't afford it.
I do hear FFL and Walmart are in discussions  |
The state would have been better candidate? How about the federal government? I think about the purchase of a local piece of land totally differently. I have no problem paying higher taxes when I can see where the money is going.