• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Danger of Being Neighborly Without a Permit

Is this a legit way for our local governments to spend their time and energy?

  • Total voters
    19
radcen

radcen

Phonetic Mnemonic ©
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
34,817
Reaction score
18,576
Location
Look to your right... I'm that guy.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
It doesn't matter how small it is -- someone in the government will want to horn in. You have to pay tribute to the King if you want to do anything.

Statists be statists.
 
Harshaw said:
It doesn't matter how small it is -- someone in the government will want to horn in. You have to pay tribute to the King if you want to do anything.

Statists be statists.
Click to expand...
Granted, in the grand scheme of things it's a small thing, but damn this pissed me off.
 
This is a problem with all levels of government but I find more true at lower levels like housing associations and small municipal government, it attracts power-hungry people with too much much time on their hands and as a result they tend to start exerting power over things no one really cares about. They just want the power-trip.
 
radcen said:
Granted, in the grand scheme of things it's a small thing, but damn this pissed me off.
Click to expand...

It isn't a small thing, though. If the government can send its apes and bust up your hood for this, there's nothing they can't (or won't) do it for.

I can't even imagine how anyone could think anyone could possibly need permission to do this kind of thing, but statists be statists. "Land of the Free." Teh.
 
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.
 
radcen said:
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?
Click to expand...

The idea that government even a local one might forbid informatiin exchange? Positive initiative? What a sick way to do things.
 
Chomsky said:
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.
Click to expand...

Some neighbors objected to the library. The village is using the code to deal with it. That's what I got.
 
One of the municipalities mentioned in the article is Leawood, Kansas. Its a very affluent suburb of KC. Just a few miles from me. Its full of country club Republicans, they are constantly doing crap like that.
 
Chomsky said:
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.
Click to expand...

I've been involved in construction for a goodly part of my life. Building codes are a way to set standards, but you have to remember that these standards are for safety and for limiting liability for localities. The emphasis is on the second part of that. I'm not suggesting this locality abandon building codes, but OTOH we should consider the use and the benefit for something this mundane. Nobody is living in that structure. It's impossible to imagine exactly what threat it poses. I'd love to do something like this because I have an extensive book collection, but since nobody around here can read, it's all kinda pointless. Now if I put out a little refrigerator and stocked it with beer, I'd cause a traffic jamb. Then the complaints would pour in..."What? No "Old Leg Humper"? ****. Can't get a good beer with pictures around here."
 
humbolt said:
I've been involved in construction for a goodly part of my life. Building codes are a way to set standards, but you have to remember that these standards are for safety and for limiting liability for localities. The emphasis is on the second part of that. I'm not suggesting this locality abandon building codes, but OTOH we should consider the use and the benefit for something this mundane. Nobody is living in that structure. It's impossible to imagine exactly what threat it poses. I'd love to do something like this because I have an extensive book collection, but since nobody around here can read, it's all kinda pointless. Now if I put out a little refrigerator and stocked it with beer, I'd cause a traffic jamb. Then the complaints would pour in..."What? No "Old Leg Humper"? ****. Can't get a good beer with pictures around here."
Click to expand...

Regardless, those standards exist for a reason. Just because this particular case is a bit silly doesn't mean that all cases will be. If you start making exceptions for some people, you have to make exceptions for all people. Because they were getting complaints, they had to shut it down. If nobody complained, I'm sure it would still be there because the city could claim reasonable deniability.
 
Cephus said:
Regardless, those standards exist for a reason. Just because this particular case is a bit silly doesn't mean that all cases will be. If you start making exceptions for some people, you have to make exceptions for all people. Because they were getting complaints, they had to shut it down. If nobody complained, I'm sure it would still be there because the city could claim reasonable deniability.
Click to expand...

Did you look at the photo? That thing has no power, water, sewer, or communications cables. It's a big mail box, and poses no structural hazard. I suggest that the local government tell the complainers to get a life. I'm all for the building codes and enforcement of them, but a little sense is required. This is exactly like the zero tolerance gun policies enforced in schools in a lot of places. One can only hope that those entrusted with the education of our children have enough sense to determine what's a threat, and what's not.
 
humbolt said:
Did you look at the photo? That thing has no power, water, sewer, or communications cables. It's a big mail box, and poses no structural hazard. I suggest that the local government tell the complainers to get a life. I'm all for the building codes and enforcement of them, but a little sense is required. This is exactly like the zero tolerance gun policies enforced in schools in a lot of places. One can only hope that those entrusted with the education of our children have enough sense to determine what's a threat, and what's not.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Harshaw said:
Some neighbors objected to the library. The village is using the code to deal with it. That's what I got.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

The structure doesn't meet code.

The activities themselves are not being regulated.
 
Chomsky said:
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.
Click to expand...

What we need to do is start fighting back against the concept the state has any business over non commercial structures on land you own
 
radcen said:
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?
Click to expand...

I reserve judgement until I see a picture of the actual "small" free library that was against the zoning (I'm assuming) regulations that the neighbors complained about. A cute little dollhouse that holds a couple of dozen books (like the one pictured in the article) or did the guy put a storage shed on his front lawn?
 
EMNofSeattle said:
What we need to do is start fighting back against the concept the state has any business over non commercial structures on land you own
Click to expand...
That's all fine, unless the property in question interferes with others or their property.
 
If the majority of residents in this jurisdiction wants such a silly law, I suppose they can have it. But if most of them like these little libraries, they should show up by the hundreds at the next meeting of the local government and make their view known. Local officials who don't do what most of their constituents want--for example, amend a silly municipal ordinance--are asking to get replaced by ones who will. And they know it.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
What we need to do is start fighting back against the concept the state has any business over non commercial structures on land you own
Click to expand...

Yeah, good luck on that. I mean, why would they care if your next-door neighbor is building a bomb or shooting a gun in your general direction?
 
Cephus said:
Yeah, good luck on that. I mean, why would they care if your next-door neighbor is building a bomb or shooting a gun in your general direction?
Click to expand...

That's a counter argument so pathetic it doesn't even warrant response.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
That's a counter argument so pathetic it doesn't even warrant response.
Click to expand...

Yes, it proves how ridiculous your argument is, which really isn't a surprise.
 
This pisses me off beyond a reasonable level. To hell with governments that would prohibit this and to hell with neighbors who would complain about it.

I had never heard of such a thing and think it is a great idea.
 
Skeptic Bob said:
This pisses me off beyond a reasonable level. To hell with governments that would prohibit this and to hell with neighbors who would complain about it.

I had never heard of such a thing and think it is a great idea.
Click to expand...

As a general rule I'd agree, but we don't know the particulars of this case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom