- Joined
- Apr 25, 2014
- Messages
- 6,665
- Reaction score
- 6,278
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
True. Maybe the mini-library was in the shape of a huge erect penis.
Well mini might be in the eye of the beholder.
True. Maybe the mini-library was in the shape of a huge erect penis.
I've seen some of these small free libraries. It would never occur to me that a local government would object... but some do. Is this a legit way for our local governments to spend their time and energy?
I don't have links, but I believe they have (at least state SCs), and generally, if you sign away your property rights, you're out of luck.I don't think village codes should trump your fundamental right to property... I wonder if homeowners associations have ever been taken to the supreme court.
I've seen some of these small free libraries. It would never occur to me that a local government would object... but some do. Is this a legit way for our local governments to spend their time and energy?
My take, at least the way the story was written, is that the code enforcement is specious, very subjective, and quite possibly something of a "little Napoleon" syndrome.Alright, I think some do-gooders have mischaracterized the problem.
From the article:
"The Leawood City Council said it had received a couple of complaints about Spencer Collins' Little Free Library. They dubbed it an "illegal detached structure" and told the Collins' they would face a fine if they did not remove the Little Free Library from their yard by June 19."
So it seems the structure is the violation, not the concept.
We don't know why the complainers called, but if the structure is indeed against code then the village has no choice but to enforce the code now that it's been brought to their attention.
This sounds similar to the homeowner's association that found the "cop flag" against their code. It is what it is, and regardless of the motivation of either party - codes need be enforced.
Is that the bookworm version of Hotel California? :lol:The little free library run by John Wayne Gacy could pose a problem. No?
You can check out a book.
...but you can never leave.
I've seen some of these small free libraries. It would never occur to me that a local government would object... but some do. Is this a legit way for our local governments to spend their time and energy?
I'm with ya, until your last paragraph. I see it as equal opportunity regarding which "side to blame". The reasons, and exactly what they micromanage is different, but they both micromanage all the same.No it's not, but the government has to get into everything. And some people have no other events in their lives, so they have to lodge complaints against others doing no harm. It's retarded, there is so much for the government to be concerned about, but most of the time it seems to be coming down against its own citizens for things that are not its business.
Thus is the world the Republocrats have built.
I'm with ya, until your last paragraph. I see it as equal opportunity regarding which "side to blame". The reasons, and exactly what they micromanage is different, but they both micromanage all the same.
Damn, you did. I missed that. My apologies.Yeah, I said Republocrats.
I don't have links, but I believe they have (at least state SCs), and generally, if you sign away your property rights, you're out of luck.
Alright, I think some do-gooders have mischaracterized the problem.
From the article:
"The Leawood City Council said it had received a couple of complaints about Spencer Collins' Little Free Library. They dubbed it an "illegal detached structure" and told the Collins' they would face a fine if they did not remove the Little Free Library from their yard by June 19."
So it seems the structure is the violation, not the concept.
We don't know why the complainers called, but if the structure is indeed against code then the village has no choice but to enforce the code now that it's been brought to their attention.
This sounds similar to the homeowner's association that found the "cop flag" against their code. It is what it is, and regardless of the motivation of either party - codes need be enforced.
Problem is... you cannot buy the property without it...so it's handcuffed... it's a forced involuntary sign.
Not all properties are in HOAs. Some geographic areas are harder to buy into without one, though.
ETA: I equate busybody HOAs with busybody city code enforcement. Just saying the legal aspect is considered that being in an HOA is more of a choice.
It doesn't matter. If it falls under the provisions of the law, then it falls under the provisions of the law. You don't get to ignore the law because you don't feel like following it. If you do that, the courts are going to declare the law null and void because it isn't being enforced. The people can, if they choose, try to amend the law so that it doesn't apply to things like that "mail box". There are systems in place to do that. Pretending the law doesn't exist is not how these things work.
It doesn't matter. If it falls under the provisions of the law, then it falls under the provisions of the law. You don't get to ignore the law because you don't feel like following it. If you do that, the courts are going to declare the law null and void because it isn't being enforced. The people can, if they choose, try to amend the law so that it doesn't apply to things like that "mail box". There are systems in place to do that. Pretending the law doesn't exist is not how these things work.
I wish our immigration laws were as enforced as you insist here!!!!
The article links to a map of Little Libraries across the country. If you search on Leawood KS the library that's the subject of the enforcement action is listed with a picture - it's under Sarah Collins. To call that a structure and claim it is subject to zoning regulations is absurd. It's the size of a large mailbox or birdhouse.
Whether it is subject to zoning or building regulations is entirely up to the town in which it resides. I thought you libertarians were all about state's rights?
I agree. That said no sane zoning regulations would apply to such a small "structure." I'd suggest it likely that the regulations here probably don't apply but the town is banking on the homeowner acquiescing because it's the path of least resistance.
Which changes nothing. Your opinion is noted, it just has nothing to do with reality.
If I was really bored today I'd read the local code for Leawood KS and see if it really does apply - though of course there's the question of whether the town has a legitimate purpose in applying zoning regulations to mailboxes. But I'm really not that bored today so I'm not going to. I'll just once again note that the situation is in reality absurd.
I don't know. It doesn't really matter because neither of us has any legal control over what they do in Leawood, KS. You're welcome to disagree with what they do and that means exactly jack squat.