By Dr. Frank Labagnara and David Garling

I was present at the Sept. 3 city council meeting where our neighbors, the Schaffers, were on the agenda for the final approval of landmark status, for their Spanish Mission style home in the West Square Historic District. It was approved, as it should be, but not before Councilman David Post verbalized his disdain for the ordinance and plan to vote “NO” for any future applicants. He stated he did not understand the ordinance when he first voted for it, which begs the question of his attention to his duty as a councilman, to understand and know what he is voting for. He made several inappropriate comments, including comparing the financial burden of maintaining and improving historic homes with his burden of maintaining his commercial properties. He also said he could imagine every home in the West Square applying for landmark status, which is far from the truth.

There are rigid guidelines and qualifications a residence would have to meet, and then it has to be voted and approved by HPS, the state and city council. As Mrs. Karen Lilly-Bowyer so accurately reported in her column in the Post on Sept. 12, “the requirements for landmark designation are very stringent” so hundreds of homes would not be eligible. However there is no reason that Salisbury should not have 30 or 40 homes in this category, and only has seven currently. Salisbury prides itself on historic districts and residences, that is the main reason we decided to move to Salisbury. Not a week goes by that tourists or visitors are walking in our neighborhood, marveling at the homes.

Mr. Post states concern regarding the loss of tax revenue to the city, but as Mrs. Lilly-Bower reported, the amount is 0.019 of one percent of the budget.

If Mr. Post is worried about tax monies, he should develop processes to get delinquent tax payers to pay their back taxes, and reduce the voluminous number of names in the newspaper each year.

The residential owners in Salisbury, especially historic districts, have much affection for their homes and city, and put much more money into their home then they will realize if they should sell. They do it out of respect for history and architecture, and love of Salisbury. It is a very small investment by the city to encourage residents to apply and receive landmark status; think of the financial return to the city from the work the homes generate for the trades, the economic return from the OctoberTour, and other tourist attractions. What would happen if we all said no when asked if we would allow our home for the tour? City Council should be proud to be able to honor the residents that maintain the historic homes, and continue this program without passing another moratorium on applications.

Mr. Post has now lost two votes from my household and I suspect will lose many more from those who support our history and historic homes. Perhaps he will revisit his original decision to approve this ordinance and realize why he voted for it in the first place.

Dr. Frank Labagnara and David Garling own a landmark designated home in downtown Salisbury.