Property matters now up to courts (Editorial)

In every discussion of the use of agricultural land for something other than agriculture, there arises in the conversation, whether in the courts or in the councils of the local government, an issue dear of the hearts of every American — the right of a property owner to use that property for whatever he wishes, provided that use is lawful.
That extends to downgrading, in any way, the potential use of the land by its owner.
For example, farmers often express their outspoken opposition to what is called “downzoning,” the practice of restricting the amount of development of a property, usually by reducing its allowable density.
Farmers generally argue, usually with great intensity, that their farmland is their retirement, it’s their savings account and any attempt to reduce its value by limiting its potential sale value is essentially robbery.
That discussion also arises in efforts to alter the zoning of land zoned for agricultural use, as is the case recently in Queen Anne’s County where the county commission voted 3-2 to lift the ag zoning protection on 600 acres of farmland to allow those acres to be used for residential and/or commercial development.
Steve Arentz is president of the commission. We asked for his views on that action, which is now being challenged in the courts. He responded in this way.
“It does amaze me as a citizen that when a set of commissioners are elected, by a pretty large margin, that the will of the people spoke loud and clear.  
“You will note that most of all the proposed growth in the county is met with challenge. It should be no secret that there are a few organizations that are paid to push the agenda of no growth.  
“We sometimes hide under different excuses; however, when you ask what they would do, you get little or no response. Develop the areas we currently have, fill the empty spaces.  
“We can’t tell business where they will succeed, we can’t tell people where they have to live. Most every empty space has someone that will be paid to find a tenant. Route 301 is not the economic driver we would hope to have to promote our wares. Route 50, a college, Broadband will be a far better draw.
“As a commission we are all concerned with preserving our county heritage. Not one request to preserve a farm has been denied.  
“Regardless, people do have rights, and property rights are among the most valued. Virtually every farmer I speak to feels his rights are being taken away, either by legislation or by those who have the dollars to challenge them in court.”  
Of course, there is a flip side to the coin.
Does a property owner have a right, an inherent right, to use his property in a way that devalues or detracts from the property of his neighbor? Is he not then violating the very right which he seeks to preserve and protect?
That, dear reader, is what the courts must and will decide.