Soapbox IV - Regulatory Extrapolation

Reminder - This is your alert that the content may prove to be either controversial blather, or a cure for insomnia.  If you choose to continue to read, for reasons of boredom, curiosity, or incredulity, please feel free to comment in the space at the bottom of the post. 






"Buildings need to be fifty feet back from the river bluff," the building inspector said.

"Great, so we should be good to put up that pole building here on the construction driveway, at the top of this hill, right?" I figured since we were at least two miles back from the river, the river bluff  ordinance didn't apply.

"No, you'll need to be fifty feet back from that ridge,  since the slope is more than twelve degrees."

"Huh? You're saying that ridge is a river bluff," I said in disbelief.

"Well, it's within the Saint Croix River Shoreland district, and falls within the definition of a bluff line," he said.

That my land hadn't bordered river water in modern history didn't matter. I'm guessing the original state designation was intended to protect the scenic waterway from the blemish of visible construction along the rivers edge. Or to prevent erosion on river bluffs and banks. I can't imagine, however, that this extrapolation of a land use ordinance was intended to prevent me from building a pole-barn on my five acre property. But it did.

I was reminded of that unpleasant experience when I received a letter from the company that installed my new air conditioner. It said I needed to set up an appointment with the city building inspector to close my building permit. What building permit? Building? It was a simple air conditioner condenser replacing the old, leaky unit outside of my garage.

Apparently, residents are required to allow a local government official, the building inspector, to tour a home, inside and out, for which any plumbing or electrical installation or modification has been made.  I thought building permits and codes pertained to building structures or new installations, not replacements and repairs of equipment. The city states on its website that this is for my health and safety (not to mention the building permit fee).

I was further reminded of unfettered regulatory extrapolation when my father informed me that the local assessor requested that he (my father) make an appointment during a specified upcoming weekend. The assessor required access for an inspection of the inside of our 16' x 16' cabin to determine the value of the northern Wisconsin property. The nearly 50 year old structure, with no running water or electricity, clearly and transparently contains nothing of "value". The entire interior can be seen by simply peering in one of the four picture windows. Yet, my father is presumably required to allow a government representative access to the inside of his humble vacation home to assess his personal property. Not likely to happen.

But the most recent example of what I think is personal intrusion by over-reach through regulatory extrapolation is a postal letter I received from our city administrator informing me of a neighbors intention to modify his home.

"The City of Afton Planning Commission...(will) conduct the following public hearing: To consider (the neighbors) application ... to enble (sic) an addition to the existing nonconforming house for a handicap accessible bathroom."

"Materials will be available for viewing at...City Hall... (and) on the City website..."

Really? A public hearing, no less? My poor, elderly neighbor needs to show to all the world his intention to accommodate his developing infirmity through a modification to his bathroom? Why should I care? Why should anyone care? Why should I know?

Much is discussed in the media these days about privacy. Well, he sure doesn't have any privacy in this case.

What at their inception are probably well intentioned regulations designed to protect and preserve often seem to grow into extrapolations that increasingly intrude and constrain, particularly regarding personal liberties. That should become a component of our overall privacy conversation.

'nuff said....