Quote:
Originally Posted by rubicon
I have in my younger days cut large diameter trees with a hand saw and believe you mean your hands will cramp up for a few days.
I do not believe the culprits will be caught.
I do believe that the simplest answer is the correct answer and one should look to whom gains advantage of a better view.
I wish the District had not paid for this crime because once paid all interest by district and police will disappear because our money solved their problem
I do wish the district reviewed the legal possibility of charging the costs to the residents of this village because I assure you suddenly one neighbor would have a miraculous recollection of suspicious events
In short the district did not serve us best in the use of our amenities .
|
It’s been 6 full weeks since this egregious act was first posted and it is just as disgraceful today as it was then. The most obvious motive has always been that one homeowner or a few homeowners desired a better water view at the expense of those beautiful old trees.
While the felled trees are truly awful, it is equally wrong to punish so many homeowners who will now foot the bill. I agree that if the $50,000 fee was charged only to the homeowners in this particular neighborhood someone’s memory would be jogged. After all, money is a powerful motive – it makes idiots cut down trees (so they can sell their house for more $$$) but it also makes a lost memory become an “Ah ha…now I remember” moment.
The reward has unfortunately not yet encouraged anyone to step forward but a hefty bill shared by a small neighborhood will produce reliable leads. It’s time for those who know something to step forward and do the right thing.