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.
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.
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.