Who do you believe is the most entitled to property rights? The homeowner? The property developer? Neither more than the other?
Within the next week our Village will hold two (2) public hearings, asking our community to consider issues of zoning and land use. Tomorrow, we'll hear from residents about a garden shed in the back yard of a local family's home; next Tuesday we'll hear from residents about rezoning to allow prospective development of an old hospital property.
Beth & Paul's garden shed and Paul Guillaro's Butterfield property have been made infamous - each for different reasons. Most interesting (to me) about their political magnetism is the fact that some of the most vocal detractors of the garden shed are the most vocal proponents of the rezoning for hospital redevelopment.
I thought I'd see the same dyslexia in support for the garden shed (i.e. an equal antipathy toward the rezoning) but I don't see such an extreme opposite. I have seen garden shed supporters generally interested in more information about the rezoning.
Arguments about land use and property rights have informed many months of public discourse prior to the recent Village election. Examining that language used to discuss these two projects and derivative issues in both newspaper coverage and online social networks reveals interesting and inconsistent positions on property rights.
So who do you believe is the most entitled to property rights? And do you think your answer is the same today as it was 3 years ago?
No comments:
Post a Comment