The reasoning behind our selection to include the rental property is
that the landlords in our city are wealthy in both terms of money and
political power. Most of the members of the city council are landlords
and would not be willing to live with some of the extreme measures that
the historical society has mandated.

To include additional neighborhoods will increase the number of
homeowners affected by the societies dictates and increase the
political power to mitigate some of their influence. Again most of the
city council, the mayoral candidates and the society members themselves
would have property in one of the affected neighborhoods, in addition
to the mayoral residence itself. And if the society began to selective
enforce their dictates, then we would have a stronger legal avenue,
possibly even enough for class action. There's even a judge in one of
the neighborhoods that we would like to include.

As to the possibility of remove the historical designation, there is no
precedent, and is deemed as the least likely scenario.