The Town of Forest Hills rejected a proposal to set up a rehab home for women in a district zoned exclusively for single-family residences. Representatives of the facility, Kingdom Care Ministries, argued they were not going to run a treatment facility, but rather run a “family unit” for up to fifteen women and six children. The fact that the argument has any traction is evidence that the language has disintegrated.
It is pretty much well-known by now that zoning only cripples the poor people who can’t afford lawyers to conduct research and guide them through processes, or, better yet, hard-hitting pros with enough clout to write changes to the zoning code.
We could tolerate zoning as protection for property rights if we consider stories of people who have had to put iron bars over their windows after halfway houses introduced a sticky-finger element to their once quiet and wholesome abode. I will always hold in reverence the statement made by a young man by the name of Jonathan at a meeting of Asheville City Council. Combining the best of both political polarities, he said he would be willing to bear the brunt of damage to his home if it were only collateral damage for helping people integrate socially-responsible codes of conduct in their lives. Unfortunately, not many of us feel we can afford that level of risk in this decade of economic recovery.
