 |
Editor's ViewpointMeditations Of A Minnesota Mossback |
The Emperor's Club . Doodling For The Public Good . Bread And Circus.
Humans have always had a thing for boundaries. The term is endemic in our language: We talk about "crossing the line," "drawing lines in the sand," and actions which are "beyond the pale."
In the book "Buffalo Bird Woman's Garden," a highly-skilled Native American gardener who died in 1932 recalls that the furtive shifting of boundary lines around the small fields the village women cleared and planted was considered unacceptable behavior.
Homebuyers still need confirmation of surveyed property lines before they purchase a home.
Speaking of drawing lines, it was a rough week for Eliot Spitzer, former governor of New York. Renowned for being tough on crime, he resigned as governor after a series of money transfers caught the eye of the FBI.
Eliot, a member of the "Emperor's Club," seems to have had a penchant for entertainment that fell outside the bounds of civilized - and lawful - behavior.
Minnesota Sen. Satveer S. Chaudhary (DFL-District 50) is an expert on drawing lines. He authored the Shooting Range Protection Act of 2005 that drew a line 750 feet beyond the boundaries of shooting ranges within Minnesota, placing restrictions on the use of that private property to guarantee permanent buffer areas for those shooting clubs.
That legislation has had a direct impact on numerous property owners in Hugo, especially those close to the Bald Eagle Sportsmen's Association property on 125th Street.
I find two things most interesting: an earlier draft of the Shooting Range legislation intended to strip local cities and counties of their zoning authority insofar as shooting ranges were concerned. The law also didn't include a provision to pay landowners for taking away the use of their property.
Clifford and Grace Axelson farm some very beautiful property east of Goodview Avenue adjacent to the 60-year-old BESA range, and have done so for their entire marriage. Cliff was born in that house. The Axelsons will have to justify any new use proposed for 45 acres of their land, on which they still pay property taxes, and demonstrate that it will not bring the shooting range out of compliance for noise and operating standards. In other words, the Axelsons are pretty much guilty until they prove their innocence, at least along the BESA boundary.
The residents of Dellwood Ridge in Hugo, who indisputably arrived on the scene much later than BESA, are also affected. None of these landowners were paid a dime for this privilege.
And unfortunately, Sen. Chaudhary hasn't finished drawing his lines.
His latest artistic work is a proposed bill that will draw a line around DNR Wildlife Management Areas all over the state, and Paul Hugo Farms WMA in Hugo in particular.
His doodling will again encroach on private property, to the tune of 150 feet. Again, this bill is mum on the topic of paying for these takings.
According to SF 3690, no property owner can build a new building on, alter pre-existing vegetation on, or re-grade his or her land, within 150 feet of the WMA boundary. [For the full text, go to www.senate.leg.state.mn.us, and enter SF3690 in the "Get Bill" box. Click on "Text."] The way I interpret this, farmers who want to plant corn on their pastureland next to the WMA boundary are out of luck.
Furthermore, the bill exempts the WMA from "local ordinances that limit [its] use and management," specifically, ordinances that restrict trapping, limit the discharge of certain shotguns, restrict noise, and require dogs to be on a leash.
Just last week at Hugo City Hall, DNR Central Region Wildlife Manager Tim Bremicker said, "I think we can make hunting out there [at Rice Lake] compatible with adjacent landowners."
Indeed. Sen. Chaudhary would remove any local control of the WMA and "borrow" - forever - a 150-foot swath of private property around the WMA boundary line. I'd say that would pretty much silence the neighbors, wouldn't you?
Even when cities and counties take right-of-way for permanent or temporary use during street and highway construction, they pay for the privilege. When the property owner is unwilling to sell, there is a process mandated by statute by which the owner is compensated for the loss of his or her land.
I'm not a fan of condemnation, by any means. But at least through condemnation proceedings authorities take your land after coming in the front door, as opposed to slipping in through the back door in the name of the "public good."
The philosophy that continues to find its way into Sen. Chaudhary's legislation is one that's been around since the Roman poet Juvenal coined the phrase panem et circenses - bread and circuses.
The phrase was used to refer to government's tendency to spend its time providing entertainment, and failing to address issues that some might consider to be more important: like property rights, for instance. Or bridges.
So, what entertainment is Sen. Chaudhary's bill enhancing? Hunting.
Nothing is wrong with hunting, except when the DNR's failure to plan ahead and acquire WMA buffer areas the old-fashioned way - that is, by paying private landowners for them - leads to not only a taking of private property but a further intrusion of the state into zoning matters historically left to local communities and the citizens who live there.
You may ask, "How can legislators propose to take private property and skirt the issue of condemnation - and compensation - completely?" It is because they can.
They can, and they will, aided by the complacency of those who somehow glean some small benefit from the passage of laws that overreach in the name of the "public good."
I don't object to conservation efforts. I don't object to hunting. I don't even object to the use of my tax dollars to enlarge public recreation areas.
I object to legislation that sacrifices property and principle for a proverbial play puddle.