No amount of word-smithing, no extra layers of review boards and appeals procedures, can cure the fundamental flaw with the proposed blight ordinance the selectmen have been working on for months.
It’s just not a good idea.
Reduced to its basics, this is a law that lets the town bring charges against people and possibly fine them for not keeping their own homes and yards to standards that others judge satisfactory.
Right. Land of the free and home of the brave.
The draft law is set up to be initiated by neighbors’ complaints. Those ‘my neighbor’s property’ complaints are something the town already receives with some regularity — which is why the selectmen are considering a law again after discussing one and dropping the idea a few years ago.
And the reason? Property values.
Any alarm bells going off?
There was more support than opposition to the proposal at the recent public hearing, and much of the discussion focused on a couple of properties in town that are, in a practical sense, abandoned.
But the law is also designed to handle — and the town already gets complaints on — properties that are owned and occupied.
The selectmen keep saying they mean to address only extreme cases, and don’t want to go after people who just aren’t neat and tidy, or who can’t afford the upkeep. That’s why they keep tinkering with the law, trying to perfect the wording. That’s why they shelved the idea the last time they were working on it.
It’s clear that the selectmen really are concerned that a blight law might be overzealously enforced. They don’t want that.
But selectmen change. Laws remain on the books.
There are already laws against creating real health and safety problems. So it comes down to aesthetics, and property values.
There will always be people — contractors with equipment, artists with sculpture, eccentrics with collections — who for reasons of their own don’t keep their yards and homes to their neighbors’ standards.
Do we really want to live in a town that makes that a crime?