It seems that the current economic downturn, coupled with the recent voter approval of Amendment 1, is causing some in our community to attempt to revise the county's growth and planning strategy. We wonder if the discussion tends more towards an opportunity, or a bailout for overambitious development plans.
A couple of weeks ago, the Osceola News-Gazette suggested that Osceola County find a way to purchase the land currently planned as the "Toho Preserve" DRI (Development of Regional Impact) by DR Horton. Then in an "As I See It" column, Kevin Schoolfield, the past chairman of the S.A.V.E. Political Action Committee, suggested that we should call our commissioners and ask them to use the funds generated by the S.A.V.E. Tax to purchase this land for conservation purposes.
First we have to ask ourselves, are we using S.A.V.E. dollars to preserve land or bail out DR Horton, who claimed a first quarter loss of $128.8 million and whose revenue has been cut in half? The News-Gazette suggests that the property the county considered buying five years ago for $25 million should now be considered for $38 million during an economic and housing downturn. DR Horton and the Osceola County commission were all too eager to dump 3,615 residential units, 100,000 square feet of office space, and 350,000 of commercial strip mall space into our community before the downturn and many elected officials trumpeted this as a victory under the promise of "Smart Growth." Remember the political promises of making growth pay for itself?
We hope that Mr. Schoolfield, those who have fought to protect our lands, and even our old buddies at the News-Gazette do not take this post in an anti-preservation light. We agree with you that preserving green space in Osceola County is critical to our community's future. We just find it difficult to justify using taxpayers money to bail-out developers and to correct the horrible growth policies that have been practiced by our elected officials.
We also suggest that before making any of these purchases we do what the county commission has failed to do for far too long, create a realistic pro-community plan of what our community is going to look like in the future, and determine how we are going to control growth instead of letting growth control us.
Since our county and cities have become so growth dependent that they can barely fund basic operations unless homes continue to be built (because of the nature of our impact fee revenues), what do we do to fund a better quality of life for those who live here now? We are not sure that buying one piece of land will fix the problems that were allowed to get out of hand.
Just because a developer or property owner now feels pressure to sell a piece of property at a premium does not mean that local government should be a willing buyer.
A couple of weeks ago, the Osceola News-Gazette suggested that Osceola County find a way to purchase the land currently planned as the "Toho Preserve" DRI (Development of Regional Impact) by DR Horton. Then in an "As I See It" column, Kevin Schoolfield, the past chairman of the S.A.V.E. Political Action Committee, suggested that we should call our commissioners and ask them to use the funds generated by the S.A.V.E. Tax to purchase this land for conservation purposes.
First we have to ask ourselves, are we using S.A.V.E. dollars to preserve land or bail out DR Horton, who claimed a first quarter loss of $128.8 million and whose revenue has been cut in half? The News-Gazette suggests that the property the county considered buying five years ago for $25 million should now be considered for $38 million during an economic and housing downturn. DR Horton and the Osceola County commission were all too eager to dump 3,615 residential units, 100,000 square feet of office space, and 350,000 of commercial strip mall space into our community before the downturn and many elected officials trumpeted this as a victory under the promise of "Smart Growth." Remember the political promises of making growth pay for itself?
We hope that Mr. Schoolfield, those who have fought to protect our lands, and even our old buddies at the News-Gazette do not take this post in an anti-preservation light. We agree with you that preserving green space in Osceola County is critical to our community's future. We just find it difficult to justify using taxpayers money to bail-out developers and to correct the horrible growth policies that have been practiced by our elected officials.
We also suggest that before making any of these purchases we do what the county commission has failed to do for far too long, create a realistic pro-community plan of what our community is going to look like in the future, and determine how we are going to control growth instead of letting growth control us.
Since our county and cities have become so growth dependent that they can barely fund basic operations unless homes continue to be built (because of the nature of our impact fee revenues), what do we do to fund a better quality of life for those who live here now? We are not sure that buying one piece of land will fix the problems that were allowed to get out of hand.
Just because a developer or property owner now feels pressure to sell a piece of property at a premium does not mean that local government should be a willing buyer.
4 comments:
I am tired of the rich connected people in this community directing where the money gets mis-spent. How about we repeal the SAVE Osceola TAX. Why do we have to pay to protect land when simple zoning will do the trick? Is it because the land families, or those investors who bought the land need to get paid. I think you are right WayneWho, stop the bailouts on the backs of the taxpayers.
I don't have any problem with the county purchasing the land, but if it was valued at 25 million a few years ago, it would not have appreciated that much. With everything going down, the County would be negligent in purchasing it now, anyway, because land is still falling in price. This is just another cheap trick to steal the taxpayers money.
I agree with anonymous 1. Why do we have to pay to protect land when zoning will do the trick? Does anyone know how many signatures it would take to place a question on the ballot to repeal the SAVE Osceola tax?
I think repealling the tree tax is a great idea. I voted against it originally because I think it is sad that the local government is so week that it forces us to by the land instead of them standing up to the special interests. I do not mind them making some land purchases, but this self taxation or we will pave over everything mentality is not government at its finest.
Post a Comment