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  |
Lubricous? Really?!
In any case, yes--I suppose this discussion is a reflection of one greater: where is the line between government spending taxpayer money on "unnecessary" purchases vs. those that are expensive but we know are worthy.
As the son of a machinist and grocery store clerk who has depended on the US Parks system and public lands for recreation my whole life--along with millions and millions of others, including the affluent--I see a great value in purchasing and protecting valuable lands for use by everyone. Of course, this assumes the purchase is viable and won't destroy a town's financial stability.
In short, in my mind, there's a very real balance that needs to be found between people's willingness to pay to keep beautiful places public and available to all rather than the few.
I'd love to know where this land fell in that spectrum.
Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk