"Route 840 was built with the idea that it would help invigorate economic growth."Where did that idea come from?
"Development in these areas must be encouraged."WHY?
" . . . we also have the obligation to protect the prospective developer."Since when? . . . and from what?
The editors seem to be working from a set of preconceived notions about the "benefits" of "development."
If New Hartford can be used as an example, residents and taxpayers will pay the price in forms such as (1) bond issues to remediate storm water problems, (2) extending services, (3) traffic congestion, (4) more town government, (5) loss of crop land, and (6) the loss of the semi-rural character that brought them to the town to begin with.
"More" is not always good.
1 comment:
"Protecting the Developer?" Is the Observer Dispatch Editorial Board in need of psychiatric help?
Residents whose pocketbooks are being "robbed" are the ones who need to be protected.
Strikeslip, your example of New Hartford is well taken. You have cited a Town whose ONLY concern has and will always be for the Developer. One only needs to look at the Stormwater fiasco, the monies spent and nothing done to date.
Also, why has the Observer Dispatch not looked at the Virkler dealings within the Town of New Hartford. It seems there is some hanky-panky going on here and has been going on since the One Oxford Road 99 year lease and reduced property taxes to the owner.
The O.D. would better serve their readers with on-going investigative reporting of the illegal actions reported by Cathy Lawrence ( www.newhartfordnyonline.blogspot.com )
Post a Comment