[Lorianne]

NIMBY's normally don't own the property in question.

[USFRIENDINVICTORIA]

The property I'm referring to is the one they own.

If I chose to buy a lot next door to a boiler factory (or airport, or half-way house for convicts) -- then I have no basis for complaint. Similarly, if I buy a property next to land zoned for such uses -- I should not complain when the developments finally occur. Clearly then, the other property rights are being infringed, and this amounts to a "taking". I think that this is what you're referring to -- and I agree with you about this important point.

However, if the zoning or community plans are changed to allow a boiler factory, airport or half-way house to move in next door; then I have a right to complain. These sorts of changes will lower my property values, and they amount to a taking.

[AZ_Cowboy]

Would you defend the property rights of the farmers and ranchers who might live near such a development when the newcomers start using the government to harass these older residents?

I've seen airports shut down, farmers subjected to asinine regulations, people being told they can't drive their truck down the road at different times, even railroad lines closed down. What about their property rights?

You can't just say "if they want to control what happens there, they should buy it" only to turn a blind eye when the people who buy those houses essentially become retroactive NIMBYs and punt the poor farmer out.

Maybe you're the exception to the rule, but I've seen far too many on here who get all fired up about the "poor" developer and his property rights only to either be silent or tell the farmer to "just suck it up".

I think that was where USFRIEND was coming from.