To be perfectly clear, this is not an idea original to me.  The map below and the verbiage justifying the lake

were prepared and offered several years ago by a former city planner, as I understand it.  He has asked me to

add the following disclaimer:  THE IMAGE BELOW AND/OR ITS CONTENTS CAN BE COPIED OR PRINTED

IN ANY FORM, BUT MUST BE REPRODUCED IN ITS ENTIRETY; WITH NO OMISSIONS, ADDITIONS OR

EXCLUSIONS.  There is a line where he states "We need to give youth, monied (sic) retirees and all of us that

seek a diverse outdoor life a reason to stay."  A fairly well-known member of the other party has decided to be

a demagogue on this, and is arguing that I'm admitting the lake would serve a few "monied" retirees with boats,

and not many others. That isn't true, it isn't even what the author of the proposal wrote, and it isn't what I believe.   

It is unfortunate that we cannot have an honest discussion of a proposal of this scale and importance without

political games and dishonest rhetoric.  Unfortunate-- but not surprising.  Similarly, despite what some have alleged,

I do not own land with Hal Daub near Asland (or anywhere else), and I do not own a boat.  We did rent a boat for

two afternoons in the Ozarks in July, so an issue has arisen over whether or not I am a "boater" in reality.   

Oh well-- as long as we're focusing on what's really important . . .

Anyway, here's the proposal: