Saving history, one wood window at a time...
Since you didn't post my comment I can tell this is going to be a one sided argument. But I'll try to be polite should you change your mind and allow both sides of the argument to be heard.I'll keep this short: The value of a historic building is what someone is willing to pay to possess it.The current owner placed a value on the property and *PAID* for it. He is now free to do with that property what he pleases to do (as long as it's otherwise legal). If that means tearing it down, so be it. You could have bid against him, you can still make him an offer to purchase it...What I oppose it you using the power of the state to take the property he bought, or restrict his rights to enjoy the property he purchased. **EVEN IF THAT MEANS BURNING IT TO THE GROUND**I'd hope you would have the courage and faith in your convictions to post both comments and let the public decide who is correct.
Please feel free to repost your original comment, CTYANKEE. I would be happy to include it, and to permit debate. I actually tried to publish it and it didn't go through. Public? What do you think?
Post a Comment