Multiple choice questions always seemed easy in grade school. Even when the correct answer wasn&8217;t apparent, generally, the process of elimination could help steer you away from the obviously wrong answers.

Applying that same logic to the decision over the Roth Hill development facing the City of Natchez makes things become a bit clearer.

Three options are currently on the table: A). Allow development by the Lane Company; B). Allow development by a newly formed group, the Natchez Riverfront Development group; C). Do nothing.

Given the amount of money the city stands to gain from options A or B &8212; both centered on a casino development &8212; the do nothing option probably isn&8217;t going to happen. The lure of &8220;easy&8221; money flowing into the city coffers will be too much for aldermen to simply do nothing.

So that leaves options A and B.

Examining those two options draws out differences between the two groups and their track records.

Option B consists of some seemingly great groups of people. They have massive talent, but come at the project with the need to work together, communicate with one another and bring together different pieces of the funding, the development and the planning together cohesively. Anyone who has ever tried to lead a committee of volunteers knows that&8217;s easier said than done.

Option A also contains talented people. The difference between A and B has to do with the difference between dealing with one group that can do everything and dealing with several groups at once.

To us, assuming the casino train is inevitably steaming toward Roth Hill, the choice is clear: Option A: the Lane Company&8217;s plan is the best choice.