Monday, April 24, 2006
I notice the two blog entries from eight hours ago have finally been published. The host has a message posted advising that serious problems are being experienced and that publishing will be slower than normal. No duh.
Duncan Adams has a revealing and marvelously well-written report in this morning's paper (read it here) relating to a survey released by the president of Roanoke College and an economics lecturer at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in which it was made clear that the Roanoke Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) is lagging behind the nation in growth, household income, "quality of life," and ... taverns. And little is being done about it.
The editorial page of the paper, taking the latest news into account, comes out with a hard-hitting piece demanding that area leaders create conditions such that Roanoke no longer wallows at the bottom of every national economic survey.
No, the editorial staff has no interest in the fact that Roanoke is falling behind the entire western world in population growth, in economic vitality, in ... They advocate the opposite. They instead are enthralled with the governor's plan to remove 400,000 acres of property from ever being productive. And they demand that the state of Virginia set aside taxes so that the land can be purchased and made permanently unproductive:
Virginia's pace of development is at a gallop. Roanoke's can charitably be described as a slow crawl.
Kaine's blueprint for a green Virginia
The governor's commitment to land preservation can be realized, if he can gain the cooperation of the General Assembly.
Gov. Tim Kaine has the right vision: Preserve Virginia land from almost limitless development.
He has a measurable goal: Protect 400,000 acres by the end of his four-year term, in 2010.
The governor and General Assembly need to guarantee a steady source of funding by dedicating a particular tax or portion of a tax for land preservation -- and soon.
At Virginia's pace of development, delay will mean failure. (link)
And the Times editorial page, in its relentless effort to retard the former, will, if its scheme is adopted, most assuredly help destroy the latter.