The Bastrop Advertiser
May 7, 2005
County at a crossroads

Dear Editor:

Since no one else has the nerve to tell it like it is, I'll give it a shot.  I moved to Bastrop County to escape living in the city.  I live in a small, self-built, single-family dwelling on 25 acres in Cedar Creek.

By all standards, I had moved into the country.  Taxes were less than a $100 a year.  Today they are more than $3,000.  that was the picture more than 20 years ago.  Today, moving to the country has a new meaning for some.

Today moving to the country means living in tract homes built a few feet apart in housing developments.  Wait a minute, isn't that the way it is in the city?  Doesn't the city have high taxes, congested roadways, higher crime rate, more government and densely packed housing developments?  No, wait a minute; this is what the country is looking like.  I am confused.  What happened?

Large corporate home builders and big box retail outlets, with the help of naive politicians seeking a fast buck, cleared farm and ranch land in the country and threw up track homes without concern for road congestion, government services (which includes schools) and the fact they were creating the city in Bastrop County while promoting the illusion: Move to the country.

If you live in a track home development, you do not live in the country.  you have contributed to the demise of the country.  you have moved the city to the country.

On the minds of many letter to the editor writers and local politicksters is how to sell the notion that Bastrop needs more schools for the children.  Bastrop wouldn't need more schools/government if the city weren't being cloned here.  Something these late coming tract home development residents could do for the children is to move back to the city from whence they came and not give the children a lesson in how to destroy the country.

The unregulated and ill planned growth of Bastrop County is a cancer on the land.  Soon it will be hard to distinguish Bastrop County from the City of Austin.

Don't believe it.  Check out Cedar Park, Round Rock, Pflugerville.  Does it have to happen?  Is it inevitable?  no, it doesn't have to happen and voting no to school bonds, or any bonds for that matter, may be the only way we can retain what is left of its country flavor.

Who will force Bastrop to build more schools if the voters don't approve bonds?

The glow of Bastrop County as a bedroom for Austin industry may be fading with $3 a gallon gasoline on the horizon.  Be sure and add the high cost of the commute to your budget.  This alone might be enough to keep the bulldozers at bay.

Bastrop County is at a crossroads.  City or country, the choice is yours.

Vic Vreeland
Cedar Creek

The Bastrop Advertiser
May 14, 2005
Opposing taxes just to oppose them is nonsense

Dear Editor:

Mr. Vic Vreeland began his letter, "County at a crossroads," by telling us that he was going to "tell it like it is."  After reading and re-reading his letter I'm still trying to determine just what it is that he is telling us. Perhaps the headline should read, "Back to the 19th century."

It is unfortunate to read such attacks on the community.  Mr. Vreeland seems to be adopting a philosophy of the City of Austin that he so obviously detests.  When faced with the prospect of having to build roads because of an increasing population, the city fathers of Austin adopted a philosophy that said, "If we don't build it, they won't come."  That is obviously a false philosophy.

Mr. Vreeland seems to be saying, "if we don't approve any school bond proposals, they won't come."  This narrow and selfish view refuses to see that they are already here and don't have room to move in the corridors.

Statements such as those espoused by Mr. Vreeland are not community-minded.  He refuses to see what is happening around him and refuses to consider what is good for the greater community, especially the children.

It is possible to be mindful of increasing taxes and to oppose those that are earmarked for inefficient purposes.  but there must be consideration of other people in the community and their common needs.  Opposing taxes just to oppose taxes is nonsense.

You'll have to give me a better reason that just a rant against obvious community needs.

Chet Dombrowski
Bastrop

A thought on the two Letters to the Editor of May 7th and 14th

It appears that these two gentlemen have opposing views of what should be done in the community.  Mr. Vreeland would like some "brakes" put on the inflow of new people.  Mr. Dombrowski wants what the community appears to need and is willing to pay the price.

What bothers me is that neither have spoken about the true problem, the apparent lack of any county planning based on the size of schools, availability of roads, water, electricity and other services, both by governmental agencies and for-profit corporations.

The track home developers come in, purchase the property, get the permits, put up homes, sell them, take the money and leave.  The taxpayers are left with finding a way to pay more for roads in the county, schools to educate the young and decreasing availability of water and other services.

If it is legal, shouldn't the city and/or county require that the developer pay an amount toward new schools based on the number of homes being built?  They require that the developer put in roads that meet the county requirements - why not help build the schools that will be needed?

If a developer finds property he likes and the seller wants to sell it, give him the permits, as long as he puts in the proper roads, sewer systems, etc.  The taxpayers can pick up the tab for building new schools.

Mr. Dombrowski equates the lack of building of roads to that of not building schools.  The fault there is that people will put up with traffic, like it or not, but will fight to buy homes in areas with schools that have stellar reputations.  They will go out of there way and avoid homes they like and can afford to purchase to avoid the school with a lesser reputation.  If there were no schools in Cedar Creek at all, the developers would be hard pressed to get people with children to buy their large homes.

We have little control over our local politicians - the city councils, county commissioners and school board members.  There aren't many that are willing to run so choice at the polls is limited.  Once elected, there is no control - just to not re-elect them at the next election.  The majority of our county is made up from hard-working individuals with little time to give to running the local governments and even less to trying to keep up with what they are doing.

The only control we have is at the ballot box.  Mr. Dombrowski says that opposing taxes just to oppose them is nonsense.  He says he needs a better reason than a rant against "obvious community needs."  Mr. Dombrowski fails to see that what is an "obvious community need" differs from individual to individual.  When the only control you have is at the ballot box because you haven't the money or power to be heard any other way, opposing a new tax at least lets your voice be heard. 

Mr. Dombrowski also fails to look at another "community need."  That is the ability of the local homeowner to keep his home in the face of rising taxes.  Many individuals that have lost their homes and left the county were hard-working families that made this county a great place to live.  They purchased their land at a time when the payments could be made out of their salary.  As taxes went up faster than the cost of living raises, they simply couldn't keep up with the payments, sold their property and left. Weren't their "community needs" entitled to just as much consideration as those that want more people to move in?

Perhaps the city/county/school boards could get together and work out a plan for community development and have the community vote on it.  Maybe that way, homeowners can keep their homes, schools will be adequate for the children, businesses will be able to stay and we can control the growth to what the county can support.

Just a thought...... webmaster