The Northampton County Bulldog, Ron Angle, is a farmland preservation advocate. But his hackles go up when we buy "environmentally sensitive" land because he considers much of it worthless and already bound up by so many regulations that any development is unlikely. Last night, Angle was particularly irked by the contemplated purchase of a 5.8 acre tract, owned by local gazillionaire James Garofalo, located near Lake Minsi. Angle calls it worthless swampland, but Charles Dertinger calls it a priceless vernal pool.Swampland or vernal pool, one thing is clear - nobody really knows how much taxpayers are paying for this land.
Angle: "You say we are only paying $3,500 an acre."
Dertinger: "That's what I'm saying."
Angle: "We, the slobbones (?) out here who pay federal, state and local taxes and all the other stuff, are paying $8,000 an acre for swampland. I just bought a 100 acre farm of the most choice land you ever seen - and there's not an ounce of water on it unless you're carrying your water jug when you're plowing the fields - for $8,000 an acre. You people in this great - we're going to save the world by buying up the swampland - paid $8,000 an acre for swampland. Then we sometimes wonder what's wrong with this country and this state and why we're broke and what's wrong. ... I live near there."
This land is being purchased with $44,711 from the County and another $46,000 from the Pa. DCNR. That's actually $15,639 per acre, as Council member Joe Capozzolo quietly pointed out after everyone but Angle voted to make the purchase.
Don't tell Ron.
Angle is right. Of course don't blame only Dertinger. Stoffa set up this buy. Another stupid decision.
ReplyDeleteI ashamed of the Rs and especially Peg Ferraro who lies about being fiscally responsible and then asks for my vote. For the first time, she'll not get it. If the land is as described, Peg couldn't place a single, code-breaking, dilapidated family trailer on it; yet she's willing to pay a premium with my money. This is exactly the kind of abuse many of us knew we'd see with this program. Get ready for more. Has Garafalo donated to her, or any others' campaigns?
ReplyDeleteBTW, I also ashamed of Ds, but this is expected of them.
ReplyDeleteThe people of this county overwhelming support these types of acquistions. One imagines that Rong Angle wanted to buy this land drain it and sell it for development - which is exactly what he is going to do with all that other land he is supposedly saving from development.
ReplyDeleteWhen Angle buys land, it is not for preservation, it is for his monetary preservation or to make another gazillion bucks.
ReplyDeleteThose verdant pools as you describe them also contribute to mother nature, act as filters and are home to amphibious creatures, ecocologically worth the purchase. When land is gone, it is not going to be replaced.
ReplyDeleteAngle is a skank
ReplyDeletewetlands, not swamp, Bernie.
ReplyDelete"Open Space" is such a buzz word, that it is hard to argue against...."what, you don't want to save open space?" (kind of like NCLB, "what, you want to leave children behind?"). Yet, whenever you get a buzzword-driven policy, it is easy to have wasteful, incompetent, or abusive decisions being made under the cloak of the buzzword (eg, preserving open space).
ReplyDeleteI believe in protecting our earth, and oppose unfettered development, but common sense needs to be a key element....or we just dump tax money into what the developers don't want anyway.
If the purpose of to "preserve open space" then what in the hell is the difference if the land is "choice" or not? The entire idea is a waste of money to begin with but these two nitwits shouldn't be arguing over the viability of the land purchased under the program. What is Angle talking about anyway? Development? The purpose is to SAVE it from development.
ReplyDeleteMy god, these people cannot rub two synapses together without smoking out of the ears.
I am as liberal as you get but I DO favor unfettered development (within current laws of course). There is plenty of open space throughout the country. There is plenty of open space just minutes from the Lehigh Valley's cities.
ReplyDeleteOpen space and preservation are not the issues. It's what was paid for it. The reference to the land's developmental potential is a proper reference to the land's monetary worth. Angle didn't say it shouldn't be preserved. He said they shouldn't sinfully overspend on it. Council and Stoffa are either dirty or stupid on this deal.
ReplyDeleteAngle Derangement Syndrome makes many blind with hatred to the point of being completely ripped off on deals like this by a fiscally irresponsible council and county executive.
VOTE NO INCUMBENTS.
"What is Angle talking about anyway? Development? The purpose is to SAVE it from development." -
ReplyDeleteAngle's point is that this land could never be developed anyway. I'm sorry for not writing more clearly. It is much more difficult and costly to develop on wetlands. So Angle prefers not to waste $ on these projects and prefers to devote our limited resources to farmland preservation.
Dertinger's point is that you actually can develop on these wetlands. Once you do that, you ruin them. He did not mention this, but interfering w/ wetlands eventually means interfering w/ our very important water supply.
So what do you do? If you have a tract of wetlands near Lake Minsi that is available, do you buy it or do you take your chances? There were appraisals showing what these lands are worth, and according to the paperwork submitted, we were getting a deal. But I don't believe those appraisals. That land is worthlesss for developmet.
I'd still agree with Dertinger on this one, even if it means that a rich person gets richer. Ron does make some excellent points and that is why he is so valuable as a Council member. He presented the argument about as well as it can be made. I think we need to look a little more closely in future purposes on who is doing the appraisals.
To answer someone's question, Garofalo never contributes to anyone.
Jim Garofalo is very wealthy and very cheap. If he wanted to help out the community, he would have donated that land. But he doesnt care.
ReplyDeleteOpen space and preservation are not the issues.-
ReplyDeleteOf course it's the issue.
Once again you and Angle failed to do your homework the money went the nature conservancy. Garofalo already got his check. And just like the farmland preservation board open space uses appraiser to arrive at land values and since the DCNR also was involved they had to follow State rules as well. Hereis an example of Dertinger working with the administration and you and Angle can't stand it!
ReplyDeleteYou can't have it both ways attacking Dertinger for working with Stoffa or working against him. Wait what am I saying this is Beenie world where only Angle and Stoffa are right.
Learn how to read. I said I agree w/ Dertinger on this one. My suggestion would be to look into who is doing those appraisals for future purchases bc the land value is probably too high.
ReplyDeleteOnce again you and Angle failed to do your homework the money went the nature conservancy. Garofalo already got his check. And just like the farmland preservation board open space uses appraiser to arrive at land values and since the DCNR also was involved they had to follow State rules as well. Hereis an example of Dertinger working with the administration and you and Angle can't stand it!
ReplyDeleteYou can't have it both ways attacking Dertinger for working with Stoffa or working against him. Wait what am I saying this is Beenie world where only Angle and Stoffa are right.
It wasn't going to be developed anytime soon given local opposition and likely environmental restrictions. For this reason, too much was paid. It's not whether it should be preserved. It's how much was wasted doing it. The appraisals are suspect, so why the rush?
ReplyDeleteAngle is dead on here. Bernie would be more upset if Stoffa wasn't one of the mistake makers. Remember this next time Stoffa and the others tells you what deliberative fiscal watchdogs they think they are. It's only your money.
A point of clarification, vernal pools do not qualify as wetlands as they only hold water during spring melts and spring rains after which they dry up. Because they are only wet for this short season vernal pools can be mitigated relatively easily. Now the question is who would want to live in the middle of hundreds of preserved acres in seclusion without any neighbors to bother you, my guess is there are plenty of people who would jump at the chance. My thanks to Dertinger and the members of the Council who supported buying this property.
ReplyDeleteIs this really a picture of the land?
ReplyDeleteNo, that is a picture of a Savannah bog. I wanted to post a pictre of wetlands. The Garofalo tract is not as wet.
ReplyDeleteRong Angle wants to make money for Rong Angle. He doesn't care a lick about preserving open space or farmland and has never voted once to spend one dime to do so. Thank God for Charlie Dertinger a politician we can believe in for the long haul!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ReplyDeleteHey annon 8:25, the only person who loves Charlie more than you is Charlie!
ReplyDelete