As reported here, the Washington Farm Bureau is launching a new initiative, with the hope of getting it on the 2006 ballot, that would require governments to compensate landowners impacted by regulation on the use of their property, saying this would balance out the effects of land use regulations such as the KC Critical Areas Ordinance.
Of course, the environmentalists are lining up to try to prevent this, saying this would allow anyone to do anything with their property. But, that's just not so. Zoning regulations are already in place to prevent, say, a chemical refinery being built in a residential neighborhood, so that argument, to me at least, is moot. What this new initiative would do is give control over your own property back to you, rather than government telling you what you can, or cannot, do with what you own.
Most people who own property are fully aware of what impacts their use of their property may have on their neighbors, and are smart enough to know what's a good idea, and what isn't a good idea.
Let me put it another way, using as an example something else a large majority of us own - cars. There are laws in place regulating what is acceptable - and what is not acceptable - use of a car. Most people who own a car have the intelligence to abide by those regulations. That's not to say that there are some who don't abide by those regulations, but those who don't - and get caught - face penalties for their unacceptable use of their car. The same idea applies to those who own land. There are acceptable uses for their land, just as there are unacceptable uses, and I tend to give the benefit of the doubt to land owners as to their intelligence to know the difference. I think that government should acknowledge this as well, and stop treating people as if they don't have a brain.
No comments:
Post a Comment