Climb Down From My Soapbox?
Rob took issue to my rant on Smart (Dumb) Growth, one post below. Here's his comment:
This is one of the few issues where the 'little liberal' in me comes out. We have problems like this in Colorado Springs. Much of the desirable foothill property is gobbled up by development when there are hundreds of miles of sand covered eastern plains beckoning for development. Not even so much as a tree to get in the way of road building, pipe laying or fence building.
Problem: The folks who own the property shouldn’t have it taken by the government to satisfy my liberal inclination on the issue.
Solution: If the taxpayers think that having the more comely foothills for open space is worthy, then they should pony up the dough. Fair market value. Tax the masses to pay the tab. Of course, the likelyhood of this in the conservative Mecca of Colo Spgs is,... well, slim to none.
I would be willing to pay higher taxes for this. Not willing for most any other issue. I am certainly more amicable to taxation for this than I am for a sports stadium or some such.
I'm with you on that last point, Rob; tax dollars for sports stadiums is a bad idea. But you'll find yourself pretty much alone on the windy prairie when it comes to taxing yourself for open space. I ran a poll recently in a town where open space preservation was a very hot issue, and it turned out that, yes, the folks would tax themselves to aquire it -- as long as it wasn't more than $10 a year. Trouble is, the acquisition would have cost a couple hundred bucks annually to the taxpayers.
If Colorado is at all like California, I think you will find some peace if you look at land ownership of the foothills. It's likely that quite a bit of it is already publicly owned. And much of what's in private ownership is either restricted from development due to wetlands, endangered species or other regulatory brick walls, or has been pledged as open space in return for development rights elsewhere.
But until we get together and decide to ban sex, we'll keep having kids and keep having to build more homes. Who wants to lead that charge?
This is one of the few issues where the 'little liberal' in me comes out. We have problems like this in Colorado Springs. Much of the desirable foothill property is gobbled up by development when there are hundreds of miles of sand covered eastern plains beckoning for development. Not even so much as a tree to get in the way of road building, pipe laying or fence building.
Problem: The folks who own the property shouldn’t have it taken by the government to satisfy my liberal inclination on the issue.
Solution: If the taxpayers think that having the more comely foothills for open space is worthy, then they should pony up the dough. Fair market value. Tax the masses to pay the tab. Of course, the likelyhood of this in the conservative Mecca of Colo Spgs is,... well, slim to none.
I would be willing to pay higher taxes for this. Not willing for most any other issue. I am certainly more amicable to taxation for this than I am for a sports stadium or some such.
I'm with you on that last point, Rob; tax dollars for sports stadiums is a bad idea. But you'll find yourself pretty much alone on the windy prairie when it comes to taxing yourself for open space. I ran a poll recently in a town where open space preservation was a very hot issue, and it turned out that, yes, the folks would tax themselves to aquire it -- as long as it wasn't more than $10 a year. Trouble is, the acquisition would have cost a couple hundred bucks annually to the taxpayers.
If Colorado is at all like California, I think you will find some peace if you look at land ownership of the foothills. It's likely that quite a bit of it is already publicly owned. And much of what's in private ownership is either restricted from development due to wetlands, endangered species or other regulatory brick walls, or has been pledged as open space in return for development rights elsewhere.
But until we get together and decide to ban sex, we'll keep having kids and keep having to build more homes. Who wants to lead that charge?
posted by Laer at 8:19 PM
<< Home