Land Rights

In what is a hopeful sign for the Inland Empire economy, land brokers and developers are starting to move forward with plans to develop in multiple cities around the region. I know this because my public relations firm, Desmond & Louis, which has overseen many local project-advocacy campaigns over the years is currently working on several new projects of various sizes throughout the Inland Empire. And the rules and stakes remain the same. The same old battle lines are being drawn, the Nimby’s and no-growthers on one side, and the business community and residents who want more amenities mostly on the other.

One of the key arguments people in my line of work often hear from residents opposed to development is that they want to see the open space around them remain open. In essence they want to deny the right of the landowner to develop their land, which is a fantasy.

Under the U.S. Constitution you cannot violate someone’s rights to their assets by simply declaring that you do not want them to use said assets. There is no particular distinction between stealing someone’s money and denying them the right to develop a piece of land they own. In both cases it is theft.

Theft by denial of use has the same practical effect of having stolen all of the money the property owner used to buy the land and prepare it for development.

The question the opposition often fails to address is not if a piece of property will be developed, but how it will be developed. In most cases vacant sites and lots are part of a city’s overall vision and development plan usually put in place many years before. However, time and circumstances change often, necessitating a change in how the plan is zoned and/or developed.

The choices that are made must be weighed by the local community and their input respected, but we do not live in a mob-rule society. Elected leaders must act within the margins of the law, or face setting their city up for being sued and losing out.

Members of the community who are anti-development need to keep this in mind as they pressure their elected officials to see their point of view. If their point of view is that a piece of land owned by someone else should never be developed because the neighboring resident enjoy having the open space around them, than I, as an elected official, would say to them “go ahead and contact the owner and buy the land from them. Otherwise that owner has a right to develop it as they see fit within the boundaries of the law.