• With certain restrictions

    If we want to protect our historic places, allowing private citizens to buy them frees up government money for other programs. Purchasers would have to agree to terms of use to ensure that places are preserved as historic. We already have regulations in place for how much change can be made to historic buildings, those can be expanded for private purchases.

  • Yes, private citizens should have the right to buy historic landmarks.

    I support the right of private individuals to buy historic landmarks. However, the purchase should come with conditions about the preservation of the property. The conditions should specify that the property is designated as a historic landmark and cannot be sold or altered without approval of a committee, much in the same way that neighborhood associations operate.

  • With Certain Rules

    There is no real proveable issue with private citizens purchasing histody landmarks as long as there are safeguards in place. May cities a "historic" section of town or an area under a "beautification project" in which the houses and buildings are maintained under a more strict set of standards and codes. As long as the person owning a landmark is required to keep it in reasonable repair and form, it should not matter who owns it.

  • No, private ownership should not be allowed.

    Normally, I would ask to have clearly defined what is a historic landmark. I normally do such as this so that all in attendance have an equal knowledge of who posed the question and, therefore, gives a sound foundation for debate. However, with this particular debate I will forego that definition in hopes that all understand any such landmark preceded by the word, "historic" shall not be in the private sector and under the rule of that private sectors reasoning.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.