Incorporate part of Eldersburg and allow it to grow A...

LETTERS

April 09, 2000

Incorporate part of Eldersburg and allow it to grow

A news story ("Support found to make a town," March 22) of Lineboro's struggle with water contamination due to failing septic systems pinpoints exactly why the projected incorporation of Eldersburg will fail.

When a concentrated growth area has a common problem, it is relatively simple to get people united to fight and work cooperatively.

In Eldersburg, there is no one problem that all people can agree should be fixed.

An example is the projected promenade. While the op/ed pages were filled with those against the project, it is now obvious some who opposed it are now regretting their efforts to kill the project.

They're reaping what they sowed. In truth, the Eldersburg majority wanted the project.

The main motivation for incorporation in Eldersburg is to gain political power.

This is, I'm afraid, what will kill the project. To gain political power, the few who are pushing the project are trying to take in as much land area and population as they can.

While I agree that incorporation is a worthwhile goal I do have two caveats:

It must offer very obvious and visible benefits, other than political power.

It must start in a very limited area and grow outward by the sheer display of those very obvious benefits.

At the last incorporation meeting I pointed out that the only recent success stories were towns that had large areas of apartments and condominiums to overcome homeowners who would be negative due to projected tax increases.

There is a projected area of about 200 acres near the intersection of Route 26 and Oklahoma Road that will soon be subject to applications for condos and apartments. It is in keeping with the 1977 plan, the recent CAC recommendations as well as the Smart Growth initiative.

This is the area I would like to see incorporated. It is a small area. It can afford the tax increases. It can build the municipal structure needed, but best of all, it can create all the benefits the surrounding homeowners want.

The idiotic reply was advanced that apartment renters and condo owners would not take the tax increase. The fact is house sale prices, condo fees and rents are not set by the owners of property, they are set by the competition. Think about it.

I hope that the pages of the newspapers will be given to those who disagree with this proposal. I would like to see the reason against starting incorporation in a very limited area and growing, not by political force, but by giving superior benefits to the homeowners. My adage is grow by creating a superior product not by trying to force your will on a majority that very, very obviously doesn't want it at all.

Hoby Wolf

Eldersburg

Understanding the plot of `Cider House Rules'

Maybe it is too much to ask that William F. Buckley in his OpinionCommentary column ("Oscar and abortion," March 30) understand the plot for the "The Cider House Rules" before he criticizes the movie. The cider house was not the orphange.

The cider house was where Homer -- who left the orphanage at least in part because he did not believe his mentor should be doing abortions -- went to live with other itinerant workers while they all picked apples for a meager living.

The cider house was where Homer learned that abortion is a complicated issue.

While he knew that life was sacred, he came to realize that the life of one already there -- a young woman pregnant by her father and with no immediate future save climbing trees to pick apples -- was more sacred than the life of one not yet here who would depend on her for its chance at life.

The workers who had to live in the cider house decided to make their own rules instead of abiding by the rules of a management that did not have to live there.

In the cider house, Homer discovered why Dr. Larch would not obey rules set by those who did not have to live in a woman's body or her life.

The cider house would be a good place for us to start working together to make abortion unnecessary instead of illegal.

Kathryn J. Henderson

Westminster

Changes in oversight not good for the county

On Wednesday, March 29, the Carroll County Planning and Zoning Commission considered proposals by the Board of Commissioners and the Department of Economic Development to remove site plan review and oversight by our citizen planning panel. The proposals also eliminate plan review by the members of the Subdivision Advisory Committee (SAC), which consists of county and state professionals.

The Finksburg Planning Area Council Inc. believes that the proposals are deleterious to the health and welfare of the general public and will appear in opposition to both proposals.

It would appear that the Carroll commissioners and Department of Economic Development have become desperate in their search for just any business proposals.

Baltimore Sun Articles
|
|
|
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.