Archive: Opinions

Two mothers claim a baby.  Solomon judges their case, saying he will split the baby in half and give one piece to each mother.  The fake mother agrees, the real mother begs Solomon to give the whole baby to her opponent.  Solomon rules that must mean she really is the real mother, and gives the baby to her.  A Solomon-like solution was proposed Wednesday for a large parcel of land that some people want to turn into a state park.  But don't worry -- no babies are at risk.

By the time the Town Board started talking about the possibility of supporting a 500 acre state park Wednesday night, my eyes were glazing over after observing a long meeting.  They had spent nearly an hour going over a contract, and while I was able to write a business article and make a few phone calls while they did that, it was a bit mind numbing.

But I perked up considerably when they started talking about the land at the end of the meeting, because it was a great example of good governance in a nutshell.  Of the four board members present, one argued to support it, one argued against, one argued that she could support it if guarantees are in place to protect the Town from having to pay for a state facility.  These are all real concerns, especially in light of the dwindling value of the Town's largest tax payer, the coal fed power station at Milliken Station.

The fourth came up with what I thought was a brilliant compromise that would benefit the Town in many ways.

That was Katrina Binkewicz's idea to support a plan to turn the wooded lakeside half into a state park, while opening what is now leased agricultural land up the hill to developers.  Her idea was that the kind of MacMansions that are built with lakeside views would greatly increase the taxable value of that land, while the state recreation area would attract tourists and provide an unsulliable view for the homes, raising the taxable value of the land even more.  It would preserve a unique resource in the town and help solve the revenue problem that the schools in particular are suffering from.

I think this discussion was the right one to have.  Taking that amount of land off the tax roles would harm the community as Ed LaVigne argued.  Preserving that northern land and focusing cluster development in the center of town would follow the letter of the Town's comprehensive plan, which is supposed to represent what we Lansingites want for our town as Ruth Hopkins argued.  And getting stuck with the bill for something the State wants to do would harm the town as Kathy Miller maintained.

Splitting the difference is a wise path to take, and you don't need irony to figure out who the baby's true mother is.  It is not the same as splitting a baby in half.  It could be a serious win-win for the Town.

v8i46