The City Council will soon vote on a "Junk Car" ordinance. There's no link to The Record story or we'd post the link.
Based on what we've read, this ordinance is troublesome (caveat: we haven't seen a copy of the ordinance so this is based on the story). The City Council wants to give the Mirch Department authority to remove vehicles that are not parked on the property's "official" driveway or in a garage. Essentially, cars located in backyards can be removed. We imagine that two neighbors in Lansingburgh are in a pissing contest and one went to their Councilperson looking for legislation (or, in the alternative, Mirch wants to break someone's balls).
Although the story refers to "Junk Cars" it would seem to apply to any car. There is a difference between a "junk car" and a car, is there not?
What happened to property rights in this city? Doesn't a person have the right to do with his property what he or she wants? We're not suggesting no limits on private property use. If there's a health or public safety issue, then limitations should be set. For instance, overgrown backyards can attract rodents that will affect surrounding properties. But, according to Mirch:
"There's no reason to have a car in the backyard." - His Mirchness, The Record, March 23, 2006
Hey, Bob, it's not your business who has what in their backyard. We hardly need to legislate your asthetic sensabilities.
If someone is going to fix-up a '68 Mustang and is doing it in their backyard, who is Mirch to say otherwise?
Is this about looks? Sure, it looks crappy. Collier was going to propose legislation that would keep satellite dishes off the front of homes because it looked crappy. She was right. It does look crappy. So what? Two-thirds of Troy would be removed if an anti-crappy ordinance was passed. Many Trojans would not be allowed on their front porches.
We don't even have a problem if it was limited to "junk cars." By that, we mean old cars, up on blocks, rusted out, unusable. At least some standard should be set.
Now, you'll have Mirch entering private property to remove a resident's personal property simply because they don't like it.
Remember when Republicans at least payed lip service to individual liberty and property rights. We guess that only applies when the Democrats are in power.
Besides, until the infrastructure problem is fixed, until new sources of revenue are found or developed, these cosmetic measures are just putting a new dress on a broken down whore