Posted by Oxymo Ron, a resident of another community, on Mar 21, 2008 at 9:02 am
Congratulations to Tom Fredericks for a recognized truth!
We can celebrate Tom's commentary as he focused our review on local government's exacting focus on our neighborhoods. We can laugh at such clever realism of another layer of government with a too-intense interest in very local activities not requested by neighbors and their neighborhoods.
It is a warning deserving careful consideration in the neighborhoods of what a handful wish to call the Town of Alamo. Too many layers of government are by definition an oxymoron, a self-cancelling redundancy.
Posted by Dennis Downtown, a resident of the Alamo neighborhood, on Mar 25, 2008 at 7:54 am
My thanks to Tom for saying what many have been saying in Alamo, Danville, and other towns in our area.
We all have seen incorporation bring city governments that become a burden to our communities and an imposition on our neighborhoods. City councils and governments become insulated from residents and only consider their own views in their decisions.
In the end, cities develop the same lack of community we have with our county.
Dennis, Downtown in Alamo
Posted with permission of the author via firstname.lastname@example.org
Posted by Karen Sexton, a resident of another community, on Mar 28, 2008 at 8:15 am
In today's weekly:
In closing, regarding the remark that Alamo should be careful what they wish for with incorporation, we went through the same criticism during Danville's incorporation. Local control and decision making has turned Danville into the "gem" it is today. Alamo is a very nice little community, but it can become even nicer with more local control.
Tim MacHugh, Danville
My response and questions:
Danville is not a GEM when its government violates it neighbors and neighborhoods. That leaves a real question about your comments about Alamo, “Where is this community of Alamo, who lives in it, and what structure of local control is being offered?”