Shining light

Published: Thursday, January 24, 2013 at 09:41 AM.

At the most fundamental this is a debate about the economy, about creating a revenue stream and potentially jobs as well as a ripple effect throughout the county.

This is in significant measure about economic development and in this rare instance, when the city has, shall we say, a bit of the upper hand, there is a path for the city to make this work far beyond a lighthouse and museum and park.

The city could decide to back away and alert the U.S. Department of the Interior that it will defer to the county on the lighthouse.

This may very well not be the city’s call; the federal government tends to do what it cares to and that is why no one should be holding their breath on any RESTORE Act money.

But the city could back away with the same stipulation the county put in its letter of appeal to the feds’ decision to award the lighthouse to the city – make it contingent on the county relocating the lighthouse within a certain period of time or the city moves ahead in line.

In return the city could demand, through interlocal agreements, two things that are in BOCC hands but could prove far more fruitful for economic development.

One, force an agreement in writing on the Economic Development Council, living to the original parameters agreed when the current director was hired more than a year ago.

1 2 3 4 5

Reader comments posted to this article may be published in our print edition. All rights reserved. This copyrighted material may not be re-published without permission. Links are encouraged.

▲ Return to Top