Trackbacks

• No trackbacks exist for this post.

Comments

• 5/5/2010 5:10 PM Ian Walters wrote:
  Since writing this blog article I have received emails from 3 of the 4 commissioners assuring me that the commission has no intention of reviving the project. Good news, but we must still not rest on our laurels; keep visiting the site for news as and when I get it.
  Reply to this
  1. 5/6/2010 12:53 AM Denise Monroe wrote:
     Heard a conversation today about the very feasible possibility of getting all or some of the neighborhood annexed into Spanish Fort. It seems that any string of homes that can contiguously connect to a border of Spanish Fort, can, with 100% agreement from those homeowners involved, request annexation by Spanish Fort. Supposedly, it does not matter than our utilities are with Daphne. Wonder if we could pursue this if necessary, knowing that Spanish Fort politicians do not support big development in their community. Even if we could organize just some of the residents in a contiguous path to pursue this annexation, maybe, it could create some nervousness among Daphne politicians. I'd be curious if the thought of losing all the tax revenue from TC properties would be incentive for "the powers to be" to choose TC property tax revenue stream over the future possibility of business revenue tax from the Magnolia nine property? Of course, being annexed into SF would not resolve the issue of Magnolia Nine (which would still be part of Daphne) becoming "planted" with an "asphalt city". Perhaps, just the prospect of losing the TC tax revenue would cause Daphne to make a permanent solution--create recreation zoning for this golf course, in order to keep TC in Daphne. I have no expertise here; just heard this discussion, and found it surprising that annexation is something we can initiate. Has anyone else heard such discussions? Would making that kind of implied threat to Daphne alienate them, or convince them that TC property taxes are important to/needed by the City of Daphne? (more so than prospective commercial revenue taxes would be). Comments????
     
     It seems so quiet these days---Has anything new transpired from the supposed meetings of the property owners regarding creating a conservation easement? Would that be permanent, or could they reverse it at will? I just want to see the uncertainty about the future of this issue to go away, so people are able to sell their homes if they have to re-locate, or rest peacefully knowing their back yard will always be lush and beautiful.
     
     Does anyone have any insight into this annexation idea?
     Reply to this
• 5/5/2010 9:32 PM Joe Worley wrote:
  Thanks Ian. Good news, but you are right. We must not let our guard down.
  Reply to this

Leave a comment