We started thinking about that figure. Let's pretend, just for a second, that Dorchester leaders had paved our streets 40 years ago today. The town could have saved nearly three-quarters of $1 million on gravel (adjusted for inflation).
In addition, we are told village leaders are considering purchasing a new street sweeper for around $20,000. That's great -- but think about how much cleaner our streets would be if our side streets weren't gravel in the first place.
We just wanted to get that off our chests.
Hey, we love our town. We think our town leaders are top-notch, caring neighbors who do work few others aren't willing to do.
We just wish the paving discussion would get more serious consideration. Long-term thinking and planning make sense. And it's long overdue.
OH PLEASE, MOVE TO THE COUNTRY! WE have men that maintain the county roads, look at the figures there on how many work for the county, Please find somthing else to complain about. Just like the country, no one is ever satisfied, the way the roads are. But they live with it. IF you dont like living in Dorchester, then move.
ReplyDeleteI agree ... with the editorial. As for the comment above, how about you move, Anonymous, if you're going to resort to juvenile tactics. I already reside on a paved street, but I'd sure like to see the rest of Dorchester catch improve itself. Those folks who want the streets paved, like the bloggers, they're paying property taxes, too. Probably more than you, just a guess. Go get yourself some kleenex and start your own anti-paving website.
ReplyDeleteYou want an opinion? How about we ban all these political calls I'm getting on my land line? Ugh!!!!! I can't take it. Shouldn't politicians have to pay a tax for monopolizing the phone line I pay for??
ReplyDeleteI would like to thank the Village board for getting us gravel on our streets since there are not enough votes for paving. They are much nicer to drive and hopefully we can avoid pot holes.
ReplyDeleteHere's an idea ... How about fining the property owners who've let their real estate deteriorate into blighted property. Use that money and begin a paving fund, might be another 20 years but at least we will have started the wheels in motion. Just a thought...
ReplyDeleteThis time last year the Village Board had a meeting and talked briefly about a 6 year plan to pave the streets of Dorchester. Any progress on that 6 year plan? One year has already gone by. Gravel streets make homes dusty.
ReplyDeleteThey have to do a 1 and 6 year plan every year. That doesn't mean that they are ever getting paved.
ReplyDeleteWHY WON'T THE BOARD JUST PUT THE PAVING ISSUE TO A VOTE OF THE TOWN'S PEOPLE?
ReplyDeleteSCARED IT WILL PASS???
It will never pass
ReplyDeleteI wonder why anyone would vote no for paving streets. What is the reasoning behind that?
ReplyDeleteum, a paving sweeper? really? we want to spend $20,000 on a paving sweeper for the little pavement we have.....lets get real.
ReplyDeleteIf you go to D. Times archives 2007 there's an article about paving the streets of Dorchester. Some things in life seem to move at a glacial pace as changing pro baseball rules, Catholic church changes, and paving the streets of Dorchester, NE.
ReplyDeleteWhy do you think some residential streets are paved and some aren't? It's because citizens who wanted paving on their streets got paving and those who didn't want paving didn't get paving. It was based on the majority of the citizens on that street 40 years ago. You can see how many wanted paving.
ReplyDeleteHi. I had to weigh in on this paving issue.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I don't believe we should be pushing paving on every street in Dorchester. Some homes are beyond repair and some people are so adamantly opposed to paving that if Warren Buffett offered to pave their street for free, they'd still say no because they're so darned backwards. So why waste effort putting spit and shine on a turd. Instead, I think certain neighborhoods, those with residents who take pride in their property and themselves, should try to push paving.
To me, it makes sense to start with a new paved street, paid for by the village and maybe the community foundation, for a development of 10 new houses and see what happens. My guess is you'd see 10 new homes built within a year to 2 years. The paving opponents would have to eat their words.
Finally, why don't we put paving to a vote, to allow (or restate authorization for) block-by-block paving? What's the harm? The comment above talks about 40 years ago. Ummm, do you realize the majority of those who were adults in 1974 aren't even alive or living here any longer?
It's time to allow the folks who want paving to have a stake in this town, too. You'll still have your graveled, wash-boarded roads to drive on and live on. Trust me. Give an equal voice to all taxpayers.
-Taxpayer Who Lives On A Paved Street