Town hall & the 51% majority

For discussion of liberty, freedom, government and politics.
breakingFree
Hi, I'm new.
Posts: 1

Town hall & the 51% majority

Post by breakingFree »

Hello All. I've been lurking around here for over a year and a half, and have come to value many of your insights.

Just under a year ago I moved to Springville, Utah.
It just so happens that I moved into a "historic" residential area.

The city (due to the voices of several citizens in this area) is attempting to pass a law that would severely restrict what types of buildings may be built, what kinds of remodels could be made.

The proposed law goes so far as to specify what materials could be used on the outside of the building (no stone or siding for heavens sake), what types of roofing materials can be used, what styles of homes can be built (you have a choice of five general "styles"), maximum dimensions for various rooms, which way a home may be oriented on a lot, where the "front" door has to be, ratio of original home to additions, what the dimensions of any pillars, minimum porch widths, where garages can be located, etc, etc...

I have a friend living in another of these "historic" homes. It is run-down and should be leveled, so he has been attempting to get permission to level it and build new. The city has denied his building permit, because of this pending law. According to city officials he should remodel it (which would cost more than starting new), or revise his construction plans so that the proposed building would "fit" more nicely in the neighborhood. The style of construction that they are seeking to impose on him would probably cost him 50% more than his original plans.

I was very dismayed to see many members of my local ward, get up at a public open-house on this matter and support this proposed measure whole-heartedly.

I recognize the concerns that many in this community have (someone painted their home purple, causing neighboring property values to go down), however, I also believe in the concept of limited government - at all levels - that people should be free to make their own choices, especially regarding land that they "own".

There is another public meeting scheduled in a few weeks, and I was wondering if anyone here has some ideas I can share with the city. I will be attempting to remind folks of concepts of limited government, but I would also appreciate any ideas regarding non-compulsory, and non-socialistic means of motivating people to preserve the "historic" feel of their neighborhoods.

User avatar
SwissMrs&Pitchfire
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6047
Location: Driven

Re: Town hall & the 51% majority

Post by SwissMrs&Pitchfire »

Welcome!

I wish I could be of help, but I am afraid that from what you say it is clear that they want far more control over peoples lives and property than can be checked by more rational suggestions. All reasonable alternatives would stand out by contrast as severe and detrimental restraint to those so inclined.

I would push for incentives for historic preservation perhaps facilitated by committee without penalties for non-compliance. I feel as you that people have a right to the property they buy. As long as none can claim real harm and a genuine violation of rights, there is no recourse to those offended by whatever the person chooses to do with it. I do not subscribe to the argument of "property values," as real harm. Property values are subjective and based upon biases, preference etc... Should a black person not be able to move into an all white neighborhood? How about an organist? We almost bought a house next to a guy that liked to blast hard rock every Sunday next door, should he be banned from playing his music in "good" neighborhoods? How about skater punks? All of those tings can affect what lots of people will pay for houses in the neighborhood, none are valid claims to violated rights.

If the move represents the majority opinion, then I would resign myself to move (what then of my rights to pursue happiness and enjoy my property?) If not I would attempt to rally the majority to push the minority back into the shadows.

Proud 2b Peculiar
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5560
Location: American Fork, Utah

Re: Town hall & the 51% majority

Post by Proud 2b Peculiar »

I used to live in Springville. And suddenly I am reminded of how restrictive everything in Utah seemed to be. It was hard to just be a family and live as you needed to but still fit in this box.

There are no covenants, codes or restrictions in most places in Missouri. There are some here in Springfield, but not many.

I really cannot understand the mentality of forcing restrictions on others like that anymore. People should be able to choose if they want to be in a 'historical' area. Which is how it is here. There are buildings that are, because people chose to do that, right next to others that are not, because the owners did not want to.

Property values has little to do with paint color.

I wish I had recommendations for you, but I am sure that there will be someone that will come a long that does.

User avatar
Moses
captain of 100
Posts: 316
Location: New Zealand

Re: Town hall & the 51% majority

Post by Moses »

I know I am out of step with you guys, apologies in advance. But I think that Majority has the right to govern, and govern according to the manifesto, and mandate given to the winner.
I think that the people have a chance every few years to vote out the people they dont like but democratic majority is the only way to govern.

You counter abuse of this system, like in Britain by having an upper house who can veto any unsafe legislation that Parliament passes. You can have rules that circumvent any legislation that puts human rights in jeopardy. That is how I see it.

Our neighbourhood needs protecting form those who would do things that spoil it. and kudos to the council for being custodians of standards.

User avatar
tmac
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4526
Location: Reality

Re: Town hall & the 51% majority

Post by tmac »

I have a real problem with "majority rule" when it comes to running rough-shod over private property rights, and the political PTB, planning commission, etc., want to restrict and dictate everything you can do.

I have mentioned in other posts that the small, rural, agricultural community that I live by has been engaged in a fierce debate about a new land use (zoning) ordinance. It attempts to implement many of the same knds of restrictions Springville must have, and many more. It has split the town between what I call the "urbanites" who are promoting the ordinance and the "ruralites" who are opposing it.

The proposed ordinance has been studied and debated very vigorously for two years now. There have been many public hearings, and many written comments have been submitted. Aside from the planning commission chairman, however, not a single person has ever spoken in favor of, or attempted to defend the ordinance.

The night of the final public hearing, the place was packed, with people even spilling out into the street. Many spoke against the ordinance in very strong terms. Not a single person spoke in favor of it. But when it came time for the counsel to vote, the majority (3/2) voted to adopt it, subject to legal review (the opponents recently got two new councilmen elected, or it probably would have been 5/0).

That night, a scout leader brought his troop to the meeting to observe the public process in action. Before the meeting, he had explained that "in this country, and in our town, we have a government of the people, by the people, and for the people." After the meeting, the scouts had lots of questions for their leader. They wanted to know -- if we have a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, and the people came and expressed a clear consensus of what they wanted -- why did their elected leaders go against the voice of the people? It was really tough for the scout leader to explain how and why that happens.

In the event the council adopted the ordinance, the opponents had long been planning to initiate a referendum to repeal it, but the state legislature just passed a new law prohibiting referendums that have anything to do with budgets or land use ordinances.

Sometimes you've really got to scratch your head.

User avatar
Moses
captain of 100
Posts: 316
Location: New Zealand

Re: Town hall & the 51% majority

Post by Moses »

How absurd would it be to have 90% of people not getting their wishes and 10% getting theirs, whilst minorities have to have their say, surely not at the expense of the majority.

If every home in the street has a soft neutral colour and your home has a bright purple colour , then it spoils the street, and I think its reasonable to keep it tasteful. Also if you wish to alter your home, it is sensible to have to have permission, to avoid problems later on. You must always consider the amount of light you may deprive from your neighbours property,how would you know until your plan is presented to the council? its not just about number one.

I agree that buildings of historic note should be protected. There are too few of them left.

User avatar
shadow
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10542
Location: St. George

Re: Town hall & the 51% majority

Post by shadow »

Moses, how is it that 90% of the people have control of the 10%? I can't figure this one out. When deciding on public issues, sure, 90% rule. But when it comes to PRIVATE property, how is it that 90% who have ZERO ownership (rights) should have a say? Now that' s what I call absurd! Rights always come before WISHES.

I live in a small town. There has been much building lately. Many new subdivisions. I went to a heated city council meeting where many neighbors of a proposed new subdivision were there to protest. They didn't want their "views" of the mountains blocked. They didn't want the extra traffic on the roads. One of the council members (my old scout leader) got up and told these "socialists" that they should put their money together and buy the land. Then they could do with it as they wanted. He even offered $20,000. and he didn't even live in that neighborhood. The protesters of course thought that to be a bad idea because it would be at their expense. Fortunately the city leaders granted the new subdivision. The city didn't own the land, it was PRIVATE.

The majority rule when it comes to public property. Not private. If someone doesn't want an old historic privatley owned building torn down, then they should buy it. If the owner won't sell it, oh well. Remember Force vs agency. Agency wins.

You talk of the 90% and their wishes not happening because of the 10%. The dilemma the 90% have is that it isn't their property. They have no RIGHT to it, only wishes for it. Thus they are breaking one of the commandments. Guess which one? I'll give you a clue, it has to do with COVETING.

User avatar
jbalm
The Third Comforter
Posts: 5348

Re: Town hall & the 51% majority

Post by jbalm »

If the legality of Mormonism were placed on the ballot, a majority of the people would surely vote to make it illegal.

User avatar
SwissMrs&Pitchfire
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6047
Location: Driven

Re: Town hall & the 51% majority

Post by SwissMrs&Pitchfire »

When did rights become privileges granted by the nanny state?

User avatar
ChelC
The Law
Posts: 5982
Location: Utah

Re: Town hall & the 51% majority

Post by ChelC »

Bubble bubble toil and trouble... (that's my blood boiling)

This topic always gets me feisty! If you want an all beige neighborhood then by all means, move to a covenanted neighborhood with a homeowners association. Personally I'm so sick of beige. I was just this morning walking through my mom's neighborhood. The homes are light or medium shades of pinkish beige, peachy beige, beige, brown beige, greenish beige and ruddy beige. My house is beige and white, but I rebelled and painted the front doors a dark chestnut color. I'm waiting for the notice to appear over that... :)

I find it funny Moses that you are so into loving your neighbor through socialism but all for forbiding the purple house. That doesn't sound very neighborly and loving to me. And to be so accusatory of our ideal being too caught up in money and not people...

It would be fun to have a coventanted neighborhood where beige was against the rules, and every potluck neighborhood party had to play salsa music. Gosh that would be refreshing!

Proud 2b Peculiar
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5560
Location: American Fork, Utah

Re: Town hall & the 51% majority

Post by Proud 2b Peculiar »

LOL

ha ha ha ha

Proud 2b Peculiar
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5560
Location: American Fork, Utah

Re: Town hall & the 51% majority

Post by Proud 2b Peculiar »

Moses,

The Majority of us think your house should be purple with bright orange polka dots, is that ok?

We will give you 2 weeks to paint it that way yourself, or we will come and do it for you.

User avatar
shadow
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10542
Location: St. George

Re: Town hall & the 51% majority

Post by shadow »

LoveChrist wrote:Moses,

The Majority of us think your house should be purple with bright orange polka dots, is that ok?

We will give you 2 weeks to paint it that way yourself, or we will come and do it for you.
And send him the bill! If he doesn't pay, we confiscate his house.

User avatar
ChelC
The Law
Posts: 5982
Location: Utah

Re: Town hall & the 51% majority

Post by ChelC »

Oh come on, let's give him a choice.

The planning commision has reached an agreement. Acceptable colors are anything that makes your skin glow when standing nearby. It must have either polka dots or stripes in a contrasting color. Every home must be self sufficient with a garden measuring at least 1000 sq. ft. and at least three farm animals. Failure to display at least two plastic flamigo's and four pinwheels will result in a fine of $500 for each citation. The metal butterflies on the side of your home must measure at leat 60 inches in height.

You lose Moses, comply within 30 days.

User avatar
Moses
captain of 100
Posts: 316
Location: New Zealand

Re: Town hall & the 51% majority

Post by Moses »

I dont find it funny, I havent laughed at your views, though I am close to it at times.

Think of what you are saying, " I want my own way its my right so to H*** with you I have my rights....... etc. Its so spoilt child.

Moses,

The Majority of us think your house should be purple with bright orange polka dots, is that ok?

We will give you 2 weeks to paint it that way yourself, or we will come and do it for you.
That was an absurd remark, the point is that we arent allowed to alter our home to the detrament of others. Not be forced to change our house to fit in with a new idea.

When these absurd examples to try unsuccessfully to paint democracy as a demon, it shows how bankrupt of real objections the anti demcracy argument is.


If you are so selfish that you would put an eyesore in your neighbours view its no wonder that local government is forced to have guidelines. Even though im a horrible socialis with two horns on my head, I always think before I act, and this is what I think. ((((Will my actions hurt or inconvenience another)))))))))))
Now talking about Coveting. We are also commanded not to covet our own property, not just our neigbours, but yes shock horror , Our own........

I think I sum up this obssession with rights business as so so so spoilt child.

BUT... Having said all that, I do agree that any rule can go too far.
Providing any alteration does not cause a danger to you or anyone else, or in no way disadvantages someone else. IE their view or quiet enjoyment of their own home. Or devalue the resale of their home ( ie a polka dot painted house next door to me) or a car wreck in the front garden causing an eye sore to the neighbours. then we ought to be able without hinderance carry out that alteration.
Last edited by Moses on March 17th, 2008, 4:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Proud 2b Peculiar
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5560
Location: American Fork, Utah

Re: Town hall & the 51% majority

Post by Proud 2b Peculiar »

Moses wrote:I dont find it funny, I havent laughed at your views, though I am close to it at times.

Think of what you are saying, " I want my own way its my right so to H*** with you I have my rights....... etc. Its so spoilt child.


If you are so selfish that you would put an eyesore in your neighbours view its no wonder that local government is forced to have guidelines. Even though im a horrible socialis with two horns on my head, I always think before I act, and this is what I think. ((((Will my actions hurt or inconvenience another)))))))))))
Now talking about Coveting. We are also commanded not to covet our own property, not just our neigbours, but yes shock horror , Our own........

I think I sum up this obssession with rights business as so so so spoilt child.

BUT... Having said all that, I do agree that any rule can go too far.
Providing any alteration does not cause a danger to you or anyone else, or in no way disadvantages someone else. IE their view or quiet enjoyment of their own home. Or devalue the resale of their home ( ie a polka dot painted house next door to me) or a car wreck in the front garden causing an eye sore to the neighbours. then we ought to be able without hinderance carry out that alteration.
Can you give the reference to the statement about our property?

Proud 2b Peculiar
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5560
Location: American Fork, Utah

Re: Town hall & the 51% majority

Post by Proud 2b Peculiar »

The closest I can find is this in D&C 88

123 See that ye love one another; cease to be covetous; learn to impart one to another as the gospel requires.

Which leaves the question, what is as the GOSPEL requires?

D&C 105

4 And are not united according to the union required by the law of the celestial kingdom;
5 And Zion cannot be built up unless it is by the principles of the law of the celestial kingdom; otherwise I cannot receive her unto myself.
6 And my people must needs be chastened until they learn obedience, if it must needs be, by the things which they suffer.

And the law is?

D&C 51: 2.
2 For it must needs be that they be organized according to my laws; if otherwise, they will be cut off.

D&C 88: 22.
22 For he who is not able to abide the law of a celestial kingdom cannot abide a celestial glory.

The principles of the law?


D&C 11: 9.
9 Say nothing but repentance unto this generation. Keep my commandments, and assist to bring forth my work, according to my commandments, and you shall be blessed.


D&C 42: 30 (30-39).
30 And behold, thou wilt remember the poor, and consecrate of thy properties for their support that which thou hast to impart unto them, with a covenant and a deed which cannot be broken.

We must WILLINGLY give...... Not by force, but by choice, and in a very deliberate way.

We covenant with the Lord, and none else. We are only returning to Him what is already His, we do not own it, and the government cannot take His place. the government would be a false God in this concept of Consecration.

User avatar
ChelC
The Law
Posts: 5982
Location: Utah

Re: Town hall & the 51% majority

Post by ChelC »

I actually agree with Moses to a point. Everything we own belongs to God and is entrusted to us. I do believe we can covet our own things and not impart of our substance, which is really the Lord's. Shouldn't then it's management be left to the partnership of ourselves and the Lord?

Moses, bring your family over for dinner next time you're in Utah so that I can figure you out. You'll recognize my house, it's the one with the neon polka dot paint, butterflies, flamingos, smelly farm animals, flashing lights, blazing sirens and blaring salsa music... and a loaded gun on ever table and in every toy box... threw that last one in special for you. :wink:

User avatar
Moses
captain of 100
Posts: 316
Location: New Zealand

Re: Town hall & the 51% majority

Post by Moses »

D&C 19: 26 To martin Harris

What about sharing our food, clothing, and furniture? The Lord commands that we not covet our own property (see D&C 19:26). In many places we are blessed to have Deseret Industries. We can teach our children to go through their closets regularly and share their clothing while it is still in style, allowing others to dress fashionably too. see link below

http://lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnex ... &hideNav=1

Joseph Smith inquired of the Lord, and the Lord told Martin not to “covet” his own property but to “impart it freely” to cover the costs of printing the Book of Mormon (see Why is it essential that every person gain his or her own personal testimony of the Book of Mormon?


The Law of Abundance
Elder Franklin D. Richards
Assistant to the Council of the Twelve



In this dispensation the Lord has said, “Thou shalt not covet thine own property, but impart it freely.” (D&C 19:26.)

As we consider ourselves trustees of wealth for the benefit of God’s children, we should not worship property, whether it be of great or small value. If we are guilty of worshiping property, then we have need to repent and straighten out our values.

A person who places the wealth of this world in the scales against the things of God evidences little understanding of eternal values

User avatar
ChelC
The Law
Posts: 5982
Location: Utah

Re: Town hall & the 51% majority

Post by ChelC »

It's always fear based reasoning that gives us silly rules and regulates every aspect of our lives. It reminds me of the Aunt in Lemony Snicket...

Aunt Josephine: Come in quickly children...
[the children rush in; she freaks out]
Aunt Josephine: Aah! Not that quickly! You could trip over the welcome mat and decapitate yourselves.

Aunt Josephine: Where's your brother?
Violet Baudelaire: Kitchen.
Aunt Josephine: Klaus! What are you doing?
Klaus Baudelaire: Napkins.
Aunt Josephine: Napkins. Oh, napkins are here. Come away from the fridge. If it falls it'll crush you flat.

Aunt Josephine: I hate it here.
Violet Baudelaire: Well, maybe, Aunt Josephine, you should think about moving.
Aunt Josephine: Oh, I could never, ever sell this house.
[pause]
Aunt Josephine: I'm terrified of realtors.

User avatar
Moses
captain of 100
Posts: 316
Location: New Zealand

Re: Town hall & the 51% majority

Post by Moses »

Moses, bring your family over for dinner next time you're in Utah so that I can figure you out. You'll recognize my house, it's the one with the neon polka dot paint, butterflies, flamingos, smelly farm animals, flashing lights, blazing sirens and blaring salsa music... and a loaded gun on ever table and in every toy box... threw that last one in special for you.
You might ruin your perception of me if you do that. Im a businessman and I am very much profit minded, just like the things I am against, except I willingly give tax to help others. haha , might take a few meetingt to work me out, My wife hasnt worked me out after 11 years of marriage.

Maybe you would come to our home in return. and enjoy my wifes cuisine, She is a trained Chef in a former career. and can make the most exquisite meals you ever tasted haha.

Then you could leave your gun at the door, where it would be recyled into pruning forks and other useful implements. :)

My boys who are so strong would show you self defence Tongan Style. ( my wife is Tongan)

Peace and thanks for the nice natured way of discussing this very emotive subject.

User avatar
ChelC
The Law
Posts: 5982
Location: Utah

Re: Town hall & the 51% majority

Post by ChelC »

Poor quality but here you go...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFUq6ZNfdnY

Proud 2b Peculiar
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5560
Location: American Fork, Utah

Re: Town hall & the 51% majority

Post by Proud 2b Peculiar »

My point is this...

Everything belongs to God, nothing is ours.

We should only go through the channels that God has established to create Zion, or equality as far as the needs and wants for families go. The Government cannot do this, unless it is the government of God.

It also is a choice, and it requires a covenant. That means that we willingly promise to give. It is not taken from us, however I am sure that we lose blessings if we do not enter this covenant or we break it.

Proud 2b Peculiar
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5560
Location: American Fork, Utah

Re: Town hall & the 51% majority

Post by Proud 2b Peculiar »

ChelC wrote:Poor quality but here you go...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFUq6ZNfdnY
:lol: :lol:

User avatar
Moses
captain of 100
Posts: 316
Location: New Zealand

Re: Town hall & the 51% majority

Post by Moses »

Im going to Implode, ( not explode as I am so consderate)

THis word force keeps coming up, force is a two way street, be carful lest in your clamour for your rights, you do not step on the rights on another. so easy it is to do..


I object to force like if you say I have to attend a meeting, I would not go. if you said I had to buy brown shoes I would buy black. I agree. 100%

I dont agree however that being a citizen we should see something as force that our government require of us. I suppoose loosely we can see it that way, but lets look maturely and see the difference between neccessity and arbitarily being forced.

Post Reply