Quote:
Originally Posted by H2O
I don't think you should get into debates about revisionist history. You are the master of alternative 'what-if' scenarios that are impossible to prove or disprove. There is a reason why the Stratus land swap was not pursued. If you knew anything about land development fiscal impact, you would know that Circle C style sprawl development rarely covers its own cost of providing services. In contrast, higher density, mixed-use development can not only cover its costs, it often generates a surplus.
|
This is really all you need to know to assess credibility.
Stratus did not propose low-density Circle-C style suburban development on that tract. I suspect H20 knows this, and yet led you to believe that's what they would have done, because it makes his argument look better.
Also apply to actors like SecretAgentMan.
There's a reason guys like this stay anonymous - they're consultants and political operatives and not enamored with the precise truth but really really good at shading it.