Liberty, Property, and Automobiles

Future of Freedom Foundation ^ | June 2002 | Bart Frazier

[RJCogburn]

The Board of Supervisors in Fairfax County, Va., recently passed a measure that limits the portion of a home's front yard that can be paved for a driveway to 25 percent (30 percent for very small lots) and also prohibits parking on the homeowner's grass.

Why are too many cars on a lawn a problem? According to one county supervisor, "It tends to suddenly make the neighborhood look commercial rather than residential . . . and it has a profound affect on the quality of a neighborhood." The president of the City Park Civic Associated said, "Neighborhoods like ours, older and more affordable and lacking in restrictive covenants, are affected disproportionately by this scourge." A representative of the Woodrow Wilson Action Group added, "Get the cars off the front lawns and you also have made a small step to reducing illegal, unhealthy and unsightly overoccupancy."

How can such a restriction be reconciled with the principles of liberty and private ownership of property? The answer is: It can't be. Ownership means control. The owner of a home has the right to do whatever he wants with his front lawn, including parking as many cars on it as he wishes. It is the right of everyone else to offer to buy him out if they're unhappy with what he is doing.

The motives behind such a law might be honorable but the consequence of such a law here in Fairfax County is racist to the core. Like all of Northern Virginia, during the last decade Fairfax County has experienced a massive influx of immigrants, most of whom are Hispanic and most of whom are very poor. They save money by sharing housing, and that means a larger number of cars in the driveway or front lawn.

An interesting twist to the ordinance is that it excludes any property over 36,000 square feet, or about 4/5 of an acre. Why the exemption? Perhaps so that wealthy, white residents with nice homes on large lots (and lots of nice cars) won't be too upset at county supervisors during the next election cycle.

In a free society, landowners have the right to do whatever they wish with their property as long their conduct does not trespass in a direct way on the rights of others. If people want to avoid what they consider unsightly front lawns on neighboring property, then they should move into housing subdivisions that prohibit such things.

But when people move into a neighborhood knowing that no such restrictions exist, they should not be permitted to run to government officials and cry for relief. The free market provides them a remedy: put their money where their beliefs are by making their neighbor an offer he can't refuse.

[Britton J Wingfield]

I love having a paved backyard to park my car in. I also love living in AZ where statists usually get their butts kicked for proposing crap like this.

[borntodiefree]

Gee, I wonder if because every state controlled...oops in... the union is operating unconstitutionally in using "Torrens System" (sp).

Wake up folks, by a virtue of law YOU DON"T OWN YOUR HOME OR CAR... I'd be willing that NOONE who reads this has their Deed and probably hasn't even ever seen their DEED. You do have a "Certificate of Title" or "Certificate of Ownership".

The DEED to the title was given to your "Register of Deeds" that was the "allodial title". The Certificate only gives you use of the asset, not ownership (this is called equitable title). It is just like a "Gold Certificate" you just have the piece of paper, someone else has and controls the Gold (for your best interest). Another word for this is a Trust relationship. The fiduciary (allodial title holder) may at anytime change the rules as to how the assets are to be managed to keep the value of the trust to whatever is determined to be appropriate...Sounds a lot like zoning laws and town ordinances doesn't it?

Now, try and go and get the allodial title....Not gonna happen, it is usually (illegally) destroyed.

By the way, go look at your car "title". Notice it says "Certificate of Title". The allodial title to a vehicle is normally called an MCO, (Manufacturer's Certificate of Origin). This document at the time the vehicle is purchased the first time is sent to the State DOT, microphished (sp), and then illegally destroyed!

For those of you who read this and verify the information, good for you.

For those of you who write it off without researching it, then I am apologize for wasting your time with the truth.

[mamelukesabre]

THis is nothing new. Residential areas used to have rules called COVENANTS. They were not enforced by the state or even the city. You could break them so long as no one in the neighborhood complained. If the residents of a neighborhood wanted to enforce a certain covenant, they would have to form a group of some kind and hire a lawyer and go to court. Maybe someone else here knows more about how they work. It is my understanding that every neighborhood has them, it's just that in the older neighborhoods, there isn't anyone left that remembers what they were. As time goes on, people forget what the covenants are.

Some examples that I've heard of:

No cars are allowed to be parked in the street
no cars are allowed to be parked in the driveway
no cars are allowed to be parked in the yards
no boats, campers, trailers, or RVs allowed.
no fences above a certain height
no privacy fences allowed
no fences in the front yard
no fences allowed at all
no garden sheds or utility sheds allowed or any "out buildings"
no TV antennas or radio atennas allowed on the roof, they must be in attic
no swimming pools allowed
no lilly ponds, fish ponds, or reflecting pools allowed

[borntodiefree]

COVENANTS and RESTRICTIONS are rules that you accept upon purchasing the property, initiated by the builder of a community so that he can keep property values up if some slob moves in. These are legally binding..while the company exists within the state, and they are transferrable to an HOA all nice and legal like...though I don't care for them.

This article is about ordinaces, statutes, etc.. that are passed by the Lords..I mean city/county/etc... they are illegal and unconstitutional on their face...

[mamelukesabre]

I see your point. THere is a difference.