2005-03-28
OPEN SPACE
"last hunt of the day" It took a gawd awful number of meetings, gabfests and dog-and-pony shows to get permission from local citizenry to purchase conservation easements on a 46.7 ascre parcel of land | Some citizens [7 of them, in fact] anonymously opined to the town leadership that a referendum [costing an extra $7,000 or so dollars to taxpayers] had to be held since it was supposedly impossible to discern what the community's common interest on the subject might be | a two-to-one vote by townspeople [either 735 or 804 : 429] was the outcome | We have a mandate and certainly a stronger one that others in power have elsewhere | That was the vote last week |
The Open Space Committee agreed unanimously to go forth with this endeavor; it had support of the townspeople and we have the money in the bank already | It is by now a matter of record that members on the Board of Finance, and a small, vocal group of real estate speculator and land developers spoke strenously against this, asserting "development rights," an interesting turn of phrase and one that is curious in the omission of "property rights"
Some developers could care less about property rights, and who seem [except in order to be compliant with building codes and such] to take umbrage about being required to make development a planful effort on property to which they temporarily have authority with | I'm not saying that this is necessarily the case with the particular developers now a bit more prominently in the public eye, just "some" developers |
Society, and all of its members, are far to intermeshed; human understanding of the interrelationships of all things in the environment ~ watersheds and other natural resources, wildlife management, soil uses, industrial or commercial district planning, residential population placement ~ is far beyond the era when it was accpetable for one to do "whatever they damned well pleased on land temporarily entrusted in their care |
But, leaving defining the finer points between opportunities for indivdiuals [such as developers, for instance] and the obligation of the polity to prudently plan for what the public has established what it considers to be the greater good for a future discussion |
The "discussion" at hand right now, is rather than of recognizing that we are all, essentially, obliged to plan for the future of the community | What opportunities arise from planing for the common good come out of recognition of the responsibilities of making such planning happen |
Having thus said that, it is time, now, to move forward with future planning, rather than exercising in rancor long after one has lost the debate |
"headed out at dawn"
¶ 00:29 
"last hunt of the day"
The Open Space Committee agreed unanimously to go forth with this endeavor; it had support of the townspeople and we have the money in the bank already | It is by now a matter of record that members on the Board of Finance, and a small, vocal group of real estate speculator and land developers spoke strenously against this, asserting "development rights," an interesting turn of phrase and one that is curious in the omission of "property rights"
Some developers could care less about property rights, and who seem [except in order to be compliant with building codes and such] to take umbrage about being required to make development a planful effort on property to which they temporarily have authority with | I'm not saying that this is necessarily the case with the particular developers now a bit more prominently in the public eye, just "some" developers |
Society, and all of its members, are far to intermeshed; human understanding of the interrelationships of all things in the environment ~ watersheds and other natural resources, wildlife management, soil uses, industrial or commercial district planning, residential population placement ~ is far beyond the era when it was accpetable for one to do "whatever they damned well pleased on land temporarily entrusted in their care |
But, leaving defining the finer points between opportunities for indivdiuals [such as developers, for instance] and the obligation of the polity to prudently plan for what the public has established what it considers to be the greater good for a future discussion |
The "discussion" at hand right now, is rather than of recognizing that we are all, essentially, obliged to plan for the future of the community | What opportunities arise from planing for the common good come out of recognition of the responsibilities of making such planning happen |
Having thus said that, it is time, now, to move forward with future planning, rather than exercising in rancor long after one has lost the debate |
"headed out at dawn"
