A matter of taste?
To the editor,
The upcoming election will have a strong impact on future property rights on Sanibel. I am a strong advocate of proper control of residential development through established methods; i.e., establish height, density, setbacks, etc. in relation to lot size. But please, don’t dictate to me the type of architecture that I must use. Keep a “Board of Taste” with its supposed expertise away from me.
Assume I am wrong, and Sanibel repeats its actions that stopped the Mimms’ project. Could the following nightmare actually occur? Let us project ourselves to the year 2024.
Imagine waking up one morning and reading the following in your morning paper. “Jefferson’s Monticello destroyed by fire, cannot be rebuilt.” Continuing in the article, and wondering why such a marvelous structure cannot be rebuilt, you find that due to existing Federal legislation passed in the preceding year, and controlling all land development in the country, all new construction, rebuilding and remodeling must be compatible with the existing neighborhood. Federal officials declared the size of Monticello was no problem, it was a matter of its architectural style not fitting in with the present neighborhood, as determined by the Federal Housing Department’s Division of Proper Taste.
The enacting Congressional bill that was passed by the majority Socialist parties in both Houses, and signed by the Socialist President, was entitled “Sanibel Code – Section 86-43.” This was in honor of Sanibel having the only existing City Ordinance in the U.S. that had imposed similar retroactive aesthetic zoning for residential development and redevelopment.
At the same session of Congress that passed the aforementioned legislation, the “Star Spangled Banner” was replaced by “Kumbaya” as our national anthem. The Socialist majorities declared that we needed a more international theme, rather than the nationalistic “Star Spangled Banner.”