An argument I've heard against the proposition is that if development rights for a specific property are purchased, it won't stop the development from happening but rather move the development to the farm down the road.This argument suffers from a lack of foresight. Planning before we lose all our open space is exactly what we need to do. Just because there are currently plenty of places to develop doesn't mean we shouldn't start protecting the open space now. If there was only one parcel of land left in the county to develop, this argument might apply, but it would likely cost much more than $10 million at that point. Or perhaps it might be worth much less, since no one else would be wanting to move here. Either way, it becomes a moot point.
Preserving our open space now when we still have the option to do so allows us to make strategic choices, not just end up with two acres of land no one wanted develop as the only open space left 50 years from now.
2 comments:
The opposition has sound logic. It is following this logic that I have lost 87 pounds. Because I have discovered that by the time lunch time came around I was already hungry. What good would it do to eat if I was already hungry? Without taking lunch breaks, I was able to leave work one whole hour earlier and therefore spent one more hour with my family. This time I spend with them is important because Dr. says I don't have much time to live with them anyway, if I keep this habit up. I was going to take an IV tube, but I already needed it...
lol, you sound like you're ready for the political scene. The circular logic is astounding.
Post a Comment