Wednesday, March 03, 2010

Column for March 4, 2010

Just like a bad penny, some things just keep showing up. The federal government take over of the health care system is one of those things. The problem is that we have to be incessantly vigilant against such intrusions and control. Every single time it comes up, we have to say "NO!" It only takes one single time to say "Yes" and we are permanently hosed. Government intrusion is not limited to the feds, however.
Just like the health care take over, the Town of Selma is again seeking to extend its tentacles of control into more unincorporated territory in the county. Johnstonians as far as two whole miles away from the town limits may wind up beholden to this little town. This is repulsive to the principles of American freedom and is patently unethical. There is absolutely no way that a town this small geographically and in population should be allowed to control territory greater than its corporate limits just because it wants to.

The bottom line is that there is but one reason a town would extend its planning jurisdiction, regardless of the fallacious arguments about wanting development consistent with it's own. The reason is to be a precursor to forced annexation. I have read the statutes on extraterritorial jurisdiction. The entire context of having an ETJ is for the future expansion of a town.

Once again, this unfair, unaccountable, and unethical issue has come up like the proverbial bad penny. The concept of an ETJ amounts to regulation without representation. People are subjected to the regulatory whims of the town even though they live outside the corporate limits and have zero voting capability for those who make such regulations. The only representation that they do get is on the Planning Board, which is an advisory board only.

This is one of the very frustrations that led me to take the decision to not seek another term on that board. During my travels, I sometimes run across current and former members of Selma's Planning Board. To a person I hear the complaint that they feel/felt like they are/were wasting their time. Regardless of the recommendations of the board, there is no binding authority behind decisions taken. Sure, a few ideas may be taken into consideration to help shape the town's zoning ordinances, but I personally have a hard time reconciling the idea of taking personal freedom away from people. I have read too much behind the Founding Fathers to be a partaker in abridgment of freedom.

Make no mistake. I have no issue with the work of the Planning Board and the Planning Director to simplify the town's zoning ordinances. They needed to be simpler and clearer. However, I take great umbrage at the idea of exercising control over people outside the town limits who have absolutely no say or sway in a Republican government. People, we fought a war over ideas like that.

My plea to the town council and mayor would be to please stop exerting control where you have no business controlling. Honor the freedom of those outside the town. Do not even think about setting up forced annexation in years to come. Let freedom reign. The county already has planning laws and the they are fairly consistent with the town's.
A reason such as bringing the zoning of outlying territories into close approximation to Selma's is a moot one. I have seen the maps and compared. I served on the Planning Board when this came up the first time. Heck, I even commented that if we are going to look towards the proposed ETJ map then we should assign zoning similar to its present use and as congruent as possible to our own zoning. Right after that, I refused to vote in favor of the adoption of said map so that I would not be a party to extending the tentacles of control where they do not belong. I thought that if we were going to move in a direction I abhor, then the town should at least do it right.

In order to preserve freedom, each and every time some immoral plan like this comes forward, we have to say "No!" It is much like saying no to personal temptation. It only takes one time of saying yes to fall into sin, or in this case, institute a soft tyranny.

No comments: