Letter: Why I’m voting against Basalt land purchase

I have several concerns about the town of Basalt’s proposal for the purchase and development of the Community Development Corp./Pan and Fork property.

The first is the price tag necessary to buy and maintain the property when there is more than adequate park property on both sides of the Fork currently under the town’s domain.

Secondly, the ballot language again promotes skepticism regarding the long-term plan for the property. The discussions and drawings have always delineated and described that an acre-plus is to be used as appropriate commercial development while the remainder was to be used as park land. The portion of the ballot language consistent with that intent states that the noncommercial portion will be “used” as a park while the commercially developable portion will merely be “available” for that purpose.

Who determines how long it will remain available and how it will be used during the indeterminate time that it remains available? Why is the predicate to complying with the ballot language on the one hand satisfied by merely maintaining the non-park property as “available” while on the other hand the remaining park property must actually be “used” for a mandated purpose? How long might it be before the commercially “available” land seamlessly morphs into the remaining park land? It appears the park usage is absolute while the developable property may never happen.

If both commercial and park uses are mandated, then the ballot language referring to the two segments should have been the same. For these reasons, I plan to vote against ballot Issue 2F.

Kent Whinnery