A teacher of mine once said that sometimes something may be legal but it doesn't necessarily mean it's right. I suppose it was legal for the owner of Pimlico to take its historic tax credits, provided by the City of Baltimore, and use it on another facility in another county. It certainly doesn't seem right to then complain that Pimlico is too expensive to renovate.
I would also be interested to know how the law stands on a national historic landmark whose owner doesn't care about it ("Preakness 2015 comes against backdrop of optimism and uncertainty," May 9). I can only hope that there is an answer that is both legal and right.
April I. Smith, Baltimore