by Timothy Sandefur
Our friends at the Coalition for Property Rights have a very good point here:
Today, CPR will narrowly tailor the focus of our e-newsletter to address one comment by one public servant as quoted in a recent issue of the Orlando Business Journal.
In its July 20th edition, the OBJ quoted a local senior planner (it doesn't matter which city) regarding an ordinance (it doesn't matter what the ordinance is about, but it is an unnecessary one.) and indicated the planner, "…says the code is purposely "vague" to allow commissioners room for interpretation. These issues will be determined on a case-by-case basis as they come up."
This remark is noteworthy because it is rare to have a government official make this statement publicly. Unfortunately, it is not in the least rare for property ordinances to be written intentionally vague, which strips property owners of important due process protections.
What to read next
Can the government designate your private property critical habitat for a species that can’t survive there?
Pacific Legal Foundation filed its Reply Brief today in Weyerhaeuser v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. The Supreme Court of the United States will hear oral argument in this important … ›