Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 11 · column 3 of 9 · from the scan, no model involved
Well, I’ve all along endorsed federal legislation which would require disclosure—this is tangential only—of the foreign investor all the way—particularly of (the investment in) agriculture land.
Now with respect to land use the federal government at the present time particularly with some of its HUD regulations imposes on developers with what I regard as rather severe limitations particularly when they’re doing an intrastate development. As you know now they’re hoping—the realtors and others—can shoot for an intrastate ceiling of say 100 parcels and (where) they’re gonna go interstate they’d like to have say 100 miles in which to avoid those somewhat burdensome advertising disclosure requirements. And I lean at the present time toward giving some relief in that area.
Beyond that I can’t think of anything at the time unless we get into some ot your federal grants—federal and state grants and things like that.
Q: The only related thing to that has been periodic talk—one of the waves of the future—that this country should at the federal level begin to get a hand on more of the development and utilization of the land. England as you know has gone in that direction.
A: Yes.
Q: We’re concerned in this part of the country about our open land. Can the federal government at any level have an impact in planning land use?
89.0%