Scared for Homeowner Rights
The news has been a little disturbing lately. First there was the story in Boulder entitled “Lawyers Awarded Property Next Door” and then today the Denver Post’s article “Land grab should be condemned” appeared.
Go ahead and take a minute to read both articles. Don’t worry, I’ll wait.
Done, okay lets chat about how scary this is. Today it seems more and more the news is about the taking of property from others. One of the strongest rights in our country has always involved property rights and now it seems; with property getting more valuable, that the rights of property owners are up for grabs.
Let’s take the first article. Squatters rights and easements were created years ago for many reasons. I don’t believe those reasons included protecting your view through a taking of your neighbors property. Granted, the article doesn’t give us all the details but this just sounds wrong. A family buys a lot years ago to build their retirement house someday. They visit the property and don’t notice anything indicating usage. Then whammo. Guess you all should have gone to law school (note the profession of the neighbors).
Or the second case, even worse. Talk about a case of “I ate all my cookies so give me yours” big bully on the playground. So the town looks at this individuals land as their next best expansion area. As the article mentions… TOUGH.
Property rights need much, much stronger protection. Otherwise they aren’t really rights at all. They are just things that make you feel warm and cozy until someone else decides that what you have looks good to them. Or they think that their usage is better.
Speak up, what do you think?
On a much happier note. Happy Thanksgiving and hope you all have a wonderful day!!
Loading ...
3 comments
Don’t go too far overboard on pushing property rights. Protecting open space, farmland, wetlands, wildlife habitat, purchasing parkland, buying property (yes, buying based on far market value through eminent domain) for roads, transit lines, bicycle lanes, trail access, etc., are all dependent on laws that allow the “greater public good” to be maintained and advanced, even if it means an individual has to give up their “property rights”. It sounds really good to go around touting “property rights” until you understand the full implication of having absolute property rights and little or no recourse around them for certain purposes and needs. The right wingers love using that phrase “property rights”.
Robb,
I could not agree with you more about protecting open space and wildlife habitats. Nor am I saying that there is never a good case for eminent domain.
But there is a slippery slope where we need to watch the use of eminent domain to make sure it is not abused and that the individual homeowner’s rights are also protected (ie there needs to be a great reason not a selfish one). These two cases just seem to be ones worth taking a closer look at.
This might have a longer discussion so here is a forum topic for everyone to use.
Leave a Comment