Editor, Times-Union: There has been much talk as to the constitutionality of the Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance. Some Warsaw City Council people have even laughed at the idea that it may not be constitutional. Here's a couple of thoughts: According to the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, the government can only seize control of private property under very specific conditions. The verbiage that the Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance is for the good of the community is a defacto declaration that all property belongs to the collective, and not to private individuals, and is only granted to owners by the government's grace. The Fifth Amendment also guarantees citizens the right to private property, not subject to government regulation without due process of the law. So we're essentially making up laws in order to take away the “private” in property. Not something you would expect from freedom loving Republicans. Warsaw is essentially making all private property public. Not public in the sense that a park or library is public, but in the sense that it should be subject to the scrutiny and censure of the public with city officials playing the part of aesthetic authority on behalf of the great whole. Then, they're going to give us permission to live in our own houses under the conditions that they set. Freedom-loving people everywhere ought to have a problem with that. The Fifth Amendment also entitles private citizens compensation for the loss of their property to public/ governmental entities. I would be very interested in how the city of Warsaw intends to compensate home owners for the loss of property (money) that they will be losing as a result of trying to comply with these new laws. An excuse that's being tossed around is that our city government is obligated to enforce state laws which mandate safe living conditions. Fine, enforce laws which will mandate safe living conditions. I personally think those laws are also government over-reach, and Warsaw actually has the power to decide how to enforce those laws, but let's go with it. How is a fence in your front yard that is more than 4 feet tall unsafe? How about chipping paint? How about windows that slip a bit? Or a bedroom that’s a little smaller than they’d like? Maybe ugly, maybe inconvenient, maybe lessen the property value of your neighbor, but not unsafe. Unless it really is just about money. The point is this. There is ample doubt as to the constitutionality of this "living" document, and too much ambiguity to ease the minds of those of us who are perhaps a little more afraid of losing our freedoms than our city council seems to be. Wouldn't Warsaw be better off to err on the side of too much freedom than too little? Tressa Nichols Warsaw, via email
