Election 2011: Should the Park District Continue Purchasing Riverfront Land?

Should the Park District continue to purchase riverfront property for future use by Park District residents?

As president of the current board, I spearheaded a resolution that we would never take property away from anyone.

However, if a homeowner on the riverfront comes to us, the Park District, to say that s/he is interested in selling his/her property, I would certainly look into the possibility if the property is contiguous to what we already own, if it meets our goals, and if the price is right. I believe riverfront property is a valuable commodity for a community, and if we can get it at today’s prices, we should. It’s property that we all can enjoy forever.

In addition, having the Park District own such property is healthier for the river since there will be fewer pollutants and other improper products flowing into the river that many homeowners use on their lawns.

I certainly am not in favor of what our opponents want to do which is to turn what we already own back over to whoever else wants to purchase the property.

In my brief time on the board, I have not had to vote on the purchase of any houses along the Fox River.

I believe the purchase of property along the Fox River can have positive effects, but must be done in the right way.  By purchasing property the Park District is not only creating a place that residents can enjoy, but also will create an additional barrier against run off into the Fox River.

I think as the Park District considers properties they need to be evaluated on a case by case basis and as I’d evaluate the purchase of property there are three parameters that need to be met.

1) The property has to be offered by the owner. The Park District cannot force an owner to sell. 2) The right price would have to be paid for the house. 3) A sense of community needs to be maintained in the area where the purchased property is located. By this, I mean you would not want to necessarily purchase a home right in the middle of a row of homes creating empty spaces between neighbors.

Creating a destination park at the Fox River in Downtown Oswego is a good investment. 

Currently there are three more properties that would need to be purchased in order to tie all of the current park properties together.  I believe the Park District should buy these if and when the owners would make them available.  I voted to buy other properties along the river to help expand Hudson Crossing Park into a place that will attract people to Oswego.

This effort will help support local business as well as improve local home values (people like to live close to great parks).  Every time I voted to buy a property I did so because I felt that the property was worth much more to the community as park property than did as a stand alone property.  A

gain creating an expanded Hudson Crossing Park is good business for Oswego and meets the will of the residents. Resident surveys have shown that creating more trails and open space should be the highest priority of the Park District.

Not in the near future. Our community has too many taxes and fees.

Oswegoland’s growth has stopped, foreclosures are skyrocketing, unemployment is stubbornly high, and many seniors on fixed income cannot pay taxes.
Disregarding citizens’ plight, the OPD, paid $1 million/acre for perfectly good homes along the Adams St. riverfront. This is extremely wasteful spending.

Further, they paid up to 70 percent above market value for these homes, and, when challenged, stated to the presst hey know what’s best for us taxpayers. This arrogance must stop. These homes go off the tax rolls, and then incur demolition costs and perpetual maintenance costs.

As home values plummet, the Park District’s answer was to raise our 2011 tax levy by 7.8 percent. We are missing out on at least a hundred thousand dollars in property taxes from homes the Park District has taken off the tax rolls.
State Senator Chris Lauzen has introduced legislation to make it clear that no state OSLAD grant money can be used to buy habitable homes on the tax rolls. 

 I believe we should not be buying any more riverfront property based on the previous purchases in excess of $550,000.  These purchases did not include the demolition, hauling of debris, or cost of labor to level the property and plant seed.  These properties together equal approximately 1 acre or so of land and we already have an abundance of river property.

Editor's note: did not respond to requsts for answers to followup candidate questions.