So what’s not to like about zoning? Plenty, apparently. Back when I served on the 2020 Commission (1990-1993), we called it the “Z-word” because whenever anyone dared utter “zoning”, an angry uprising seemed certain to follow.
Arguments against zoning came at us in a surprising barrage. However, none of them made any sense. In fact, many of them were downright stupid, especially the themes and variations on “It’s my land and I will damn well do anything I want with it!” Or the ever popular, “Who are you guys to tell me what to do with my land?”
These are the attitudes that lead to one resident burning his garbage while other folks downwind have to breathe the putrid fumes. Then there are the grass fires which do not stop at the property lines but blaze away endangering adjacent properties. “Spaghetti lots” that are too narrow allow septic systems to run off into neighboring yards. Slobs that exercise their rights to accumulate trash seem to enjoy letting it blow away all over the countryside.
The lack of zoning leads to a long list of antisocial assaults perpetrated against neighboring residents. What makes the entrenched resistance to zoning so baffling is that the victims outnumber the perpetrators. Why do people want to live like this? Why put up with it?
However, that was then. Now we have plenty of new residents moving into the county. They sold their homes downstate, or in New Jersey, for big bucks and come up here to build bigger and better houses for less. Why do they want to build a fancy home only to have someone set up a junkyard or a mega-chicken/pig farm next to them? Do not these new property owners want zoning to protect their investments? They came up here for fresh air, not to breathe the acrid fumes of burning garbage. Perhaps there are enough of them now to shift the balance of power away from diehard land abusers, many of whom may have died out or become even more senile.
It all boils down to one basic argument. If you can do whatever you want with your property, then everyone else can do whatever they want with their property. They can drill for gas and disturb your well water. They can put up a power line, or build a manure processing plant, or erect windmills, or open a quarry, or fire up an incinerator, or establish a motor speedway, or open a tenement, or construct big-box stores or warehouses. They can do anything. It is like the old song, anything you can do I can do better, or in this case, worse.
However, the zoning issue is not entirely one-sided. A reasonable fear of zoning is prompted by numerous examples of tyrannical abuse of power. Zoning that dictates nit-picking trivialities is something that even I might oppose.
Zoning should be restricted only to substantial issues which impinge upon the well-being of neighboring residents. This is why a thorough discussion has to play out. Obviously, the owner of a junkyard sees his operation as serving a vital social purpose, as it certainly does. Junkyards centralize junk, as opposed to having it spread out all over the countryside. The issue is not whether to have junkyards but where to put them, and how to camouflage them. The same goes for all the other obnoxious, but vital, enterprises.
Zoning should be enacted only if the vast majority of residents want it. Otherwise, it will be resented and abused. Zoning should not be enacted solely by elected officials or their appointees, but rather by a general election. Our form of representative government is okay for most issues but it simply does not work for the important ones. The reason is that elected officials represent many diverse constituencies and often one issue is connected with another so tightly that the official is committed to both. If zoning is anathema to the official’s power base then the official may have no choice but to oppose it. Moreover, a larger voter turnout would probably occur if citizens could vote on critical issues rather than just for persons, especially in elections with only one candidate.
Ask yourself, do my elected officials represent my views on zoning? We need to vote directly on important matters, so that issues are not hijacked by irrelevant emotional propaganda or good old boy networks or power plays or hidden agendas. It would be far better to vote directly on having a powerline than having government officials impose it. Voters would never award eminent domain powers to a private foreign corporation. Furthermore, propositions that are presented to the voters have to be in simple plain English, not the usual ridiculous gobbledygook.
Chenango County is currently undergoing massive changes and the next two decades will determine its path well into the 21st Century. Zoning presents a splendid opportunity to shape the future by preparing for it. We should act now, before it is too late.