By Jeb Bladine • Publisher • 

Feds again rebuff Wallace Bridge

Only online subscribers may access this article. Subscribe online by clicking here. Already a subscriber, please .

Comments

KLYC Radio

Your tax dollars not at work again. Everyone we talk to about this story sees it as a win win for the environment and for jobs. The NRCS answer of not meeting the "initial criteria" is just another indication they simply don't want to do this easement modification. One has to ask what is so important in this current thistle overgrown piece of land they are willing to doggedly hang on to it no matter what. KLYC has only talked to three people in the last three months that agree with the NRCS. Everyone else doesn't agree with them, but feel powerless to effect change.

Robert Lee

I believe this process, unlike a lot of government processes is working perfectly. A government agency isn't being influenced by someone just because they have money or influence.

The easement was put on three owners ago and they're intentionally designed to not be removed or altered unless, as the article clearly states, “compelling public need, which is defined as public health and safety and protection of T&E species.” A millionaire wanting a horse facility does not meet these requirements in any way.

Web Design & Web Development by LVSYS