Laserfiche WebLink
2. Or.that the Town's Plan was not valid in the first place because it was shoved down our <br /> throats." By definition, the Plan is valid because the Town Board adopted it and to argue <br /> otherwise is an insult to the intelligence and independence of the Board that adopted it. <br /> 3. Or,that the plan is no longer valid because "things have changed too much" since the Plan was <br /> adopted. Those changes have not been specified. Even if there have been changes, they will be <br /> addressed during the annual plan review process in January, 1995. <br /> 4. Rezone supporters also argue that more commercial development is needed to offset <br /> anticipated losses due to annexation. This assumes that new commercial development is needed to <br /> keep the Town's tax base up where it needs to be for the Town to survive. Well, it might. But <br /> generally commercial development is assessed at a lower rate than residential. (Chuck Deadman <br /> has figures that support this contention for Blooming Grove.) So one could counter that rezoning <br /> actually shifts the tax burden to residential property. What would do more to help the Town <br /> survive is for it to demonstrate that is a responsible and credible steward of its land. <br /> 5. Rezone supporters also argue that the Rogers/Hoover rezone petition approval is justified,in <br /> that,during the upcoming annual Plan review process in January, 1995, the Plan Commission <br /> will update the Plan to allow commercial development on HWY AB. It is possible that the annual <br /> review process will recommend that change, but it is by no means assured. <br /> Thank you for your consideration in this matter. <br /> Sincere. , <br /> Steve Glass <br /> Chair, Blooming Grove Plan Commission <br /> cc Deadman, Johnson,Still man <br /> enclosure: rezone petition documents <br /> 4 <br /> 4 <br />