06-28-2014, 02:32 AM
How can anyone defend violating state land
Riiiight. It's all "State Land" because the State says so -- there was nobody living here before the US of A came along to make sure everything was Safe For The Children.
Clearly, VGS should have bought "sustainable" lumber, clear-cut from an old-growth northamerica forest, delivered here with renewable fossil fuels.
Here's hoping that the county can now ... deny any permits of any kind.
Which would be different how exactly? At one point VGS asked for a CV upzoning, with all the permit-license-fee-inspection that involves, and County said "no".
Personally, I don't consider County to have legitimate authority, simply because the manner in which County treats the vast "private" subdivisions (eg, as a massive tax-mining operation rather than a livable community) makes it painfully clear that they do not represent "the people", only certain people. County should have either worked with VGS to help them realize their dream in an appropriate manner, or County should have shut VGS down as soon as it was clear that there would be a problem. Instead, County took the third option: let it fester until it's a big enough mess that the State can get involved, at which point County can throw up its hands and claim "hey, we not doing anything".
Now our tax dollars will be used to clean up this mess ... and we'll have to pay for it with a slightly smaller tax base now that the only "local commerce" has been driven out of Seaview, unless all those people are going to drive to town for everything (so they can pay Fuel Tax that doesn't fund their subdivision roads).
Progress?
Riiiight. It's all "State Land" because the State says so -- there was nobody living here before the US of A came along to make sure everything was Safe For The Children.
Clearly, VGS should have bought "sustainable" lumber, clear-cut from an old-growth northamerica forest, delivered here with renewable fossil fuels.
Here's hoping that the county can now ... deny any permits of any kind.
Which would be different how exactly? At one point VGS asked for a CV upzoning, with all the permit-license-fee-inspection that involves, and County said "no".
Personally, I don't consider County to have legitimate authority, simply because the manner in which County treats the vast "private" subdivisions (eg, as a massive tax-mining operation rather than a livable community) makes it painfully clear that they do not represent "the people", only certain people. County should have either worked with VGS to help them realize their dream in an appropriate manner, or County should have shut VGS down as soon as it was clear that there would be a problem. Instead, County took the third option: let it fester until it's a big enough mess that the State can get involved, at which point County can throw up its hands and claim "hey, we not doing anything".
Now our tax dollars will be used to clean up this mess ... and we'll have to pay for it with a slightly smaller tax base now that the only "local commerce" has been driven out of Seaview, unless all those people are going to drive to town for everything (so they can pay Fuel Tax that doesn't fund their subdivision roads).
Progress?