Let­ter to the edi­tor

The Covington News - - OPINION -

Dear edi­tor,

It is good that the Cen­ter for Com­mu­nity Preser­va­tion and Plan­ning will hold ed­u­ca­tional meet­ings about the 2050 plan around the county. De­spite its years in de­vel­op­ment, it re­mains an enigma to most people.

“The cen­ter will lead the meet­ings, de­liv­er­ing in­for­ma­tion to the pub­lic and hear­ing their feed­back,” ac­cord­ing to the an­nounce­ment.

The ques­tion is whether feed­back will trans­late into mean­ing­ful changes and com­pro­mises if there is pub­lic ob­jec­tion to cer­tain is­sues. Mem­bers of the Board of Com­mis­sion­ers should be at each meet­ing to hear what the ques­tions are so they can re­spond ap­pro­pri­ately when the ques­tion is called.

There is sig­nif­i­cant op­po­si­tion evolv­ing in east­ern New­ton County to one ma­jor tenet of the base­line or­di­nances as cur­rently writ­ten, that be­ing the limit on new hous­ing to one res­i­dence per 20 acres, not five, not 10, but 20. That may be a lovely vis­ual for plan­ners, but it is ex­tremely un­fair and un­re­al­is­tic to say to land own­ers that their fi­nan­cial fu­ture and in­ter­gen­er­a­tional legacy will be im­pinged upon to this ex­tent.

To have a plan to guide New­ton County’s growth and pro­tect nat­u­ral re­sources is wise. All par­ties should ac­knowl­edge this, but property own­ers in the east­ern side of the county have a le­git­i­mate beef with the cur­rent plan. Hold­ing land for gen­er­a­tions is costly, but many fam­i­lies have done so in hopes and ex­pec­ta­tions that the fi­nan­cial fu­ture of their fam­i­lies could be se­cured through fu­ture de­vel­op­ment.

Sincerely, Bar­bara M. Mor­gan

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.