LETTERS: Stanton-NR boundary debate begins
To the Editor:
I attended the first meeting of the New Richmond, Stanton boundary discussion along with about 20 other concerned residents Tuesday night. Local officials numbered at about nine which included a representative of Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.
I must first point out that I am not in favor of, or opposed to the process going forward, but what concerned me and others is the task of getting the boundary questioned correctly established.
The devil is in the details which will need to be hammered out to everyone's approval, which in itself is daunting in nature. Another interest by the locals was expressed in terms of what secret agenda the city might have in mind. The city categorically denied there was any secret agenda, which they would.
They also claimed that we, the residents of Stanton, have the opportunity to put forward a design for our community which will reflect the destiny the town wants to go in.
With only 20 residents providing input it seems likely that in the future many new residents may be stonewalled by rules we think are applicable for today and the future.
For example, years ago when I tried to sell my land, which is what all the local residents will eventually do, I could only sell it to another farmer. This ruling was established back in the 1960s and never repealed. Additionally, there are automatic rules that kick in by the city if there is a change in ownership. This may be a deal breaker for a prospective buyer who wants to live in a town, rather than a city.
As government continues its march to progress things become increasingly expensive. The city already has a sizeable debt load that may be restricting other goals financially.
Subsequently they must seek out new revenue streams to support such projects. Encompassing surrounding towns will only provide limited tax revenues but there is the possibility of land use fees and other cash income from permits and charges yet to be determined. It would be in the best interest of the city to get everyone on board before starting the increase in side incomes.
The plight of the small town is in danger of being overrun by larger communities simply because it's easier to do, than to be creative and more restrictive to existing programs. It's no secret that the world is suffering from a bad case of legacy expenses created by unions and easily persuaded officials with no regard to the general public. But like all citizens who have to make do with what they have, government sees no reason to stop its expansion.
It is the hope of the two governing bodies that local residents who are involved with the decision making will turn out to provide information necessary to making their municipality an example of cooperation. Yet to be determined are the incidentals that make for a practical and fair exchange necessary for longevity.
Wake up, get involved.