Stop pitting old subdivisions against new subdivisions
It is bad enough that neighbors are pitted against neighbors when 50% of a neighborhood plus one can impose restrictions on the 49% who do not want something. But now, we have old subdivisions against new subdivisions. Old subdivisions are said to be subsidizing new subdivisions (Eagle, July 25).
If this is going to be the new narrative, then we should look at the facts:
In a new subdivision, the roads and all infrastructure, including sewer, are the responsibility of the developer. The developer builds them to the city's specifications but at his or her expense. The developer even pays a fee to have new sewer lines connected to the city sewer line.
In a new subdivision, the developer is responsible for allocating park lands. If the developer chooses to put in a swimming pool, he or she pays for it and all the amenities of the new subdivision are maintained by the subdivision homeowners association.
It goes without saying that these new subdivisions add considerably to the city tax base to help maintain the established, older subdivisions which, often, do not have HOAs.
So, enough already with the divisiveness. Us versus them might make for a nice voting block but it is deceitful to have it based on erroneous facts. And unless you were born on campus, pre-city of College Station, then you -- we -- are all part of the growth of the city.
Democrats have no one else to blame but themselves
Walter Buenger's letter (Eagle, Aug. 2) is representative of most letters and columns written by the left and reveals why Donald Trump won in 2016 and why he may well win again in 2020. Calling Republican voters "racist" rather than extolling the left's policy solutions is, of necessity it seems, the Dems only perceived path to victory.
The right does not believe Trump is racist, yet largely dislikes his carping and pettiness. But in a binary election versus any Democrat, he's the saner choice.
The Dems have themselves to blame for their frustration.