Is $2.7 million for 130 acres of linear parkland along the South Beltway worth it? That's $20,769 per acre, or about $.48 per square foot.
I'm torn on this one. On the one hand I like parks -- who doesn't like parks? -- and I enjoy it when major roads are softened by green space rather than miles of strip development. On the other hand, $2.7 million for little more than a strip of weeds (the money doesn't include development costs) seems a bit pricey, especially in the context of Lincoln's overall economic picture. Lincolnites are being asked to fork over a hefty chunk of change these days: $250M for schools, $250M+ for the Antelope Valley Project, and on and on.
Jerry Hoffman, president of the Nebraska Trails Foundation, notes that the bond would only cost the owner of a $100,000 home approximately $1.60 per year. That argument works in a vacuum, but it degrades quickly when you begin to add up all of the "insignificant" costs we're already saddled with.
Not only am I not sure how I will vote on this issue, I really don't have a good feel for how Lincolnites as a whole will tend to vote. Are they willing to put up with another "insignificant" cost now in order to benefit from gains they won't see for at least a decade? Or did the LPS bond issue zap much of their generosity? I'm looking forward to listening in on conversations over the next few weeks.
Comments
See what your friends and neighbors have to say about this.
I am with you in that the “it will only cost the owner of a $100,000 home $x.xx per year” statement is starting to get old. If you add up all of these things over the last five years, you will have a significant (at least for owners of a $100,000 home) amount of money. I am confident that Lincoln’s voters will overwhelming turn this one down, as their record on these bond issues has been stellar. Yes, the schools bond issue was a hiccup, but the pro-bond campaign was run brilliantly against no opposition.
Share your thoughts with the community.
Commenting is no longer permitted on this post.