Tuesday, December 19, 2006

Property Values & the CAFO spin

Last Monday, at the BZA meeting, I recall a pro-CAFO comment indicating property values don't decline... that many values actually increased around Fair Oaks.

I don't know about that. But what I do know is this...

While the hog CAFO was under construction, we had an appraiser at our house -- this was before the construction was complete, before the BZA made it's final decision, before they sealed the fate of our property value.

The appraiser gave us a "ballpark" estimate while in our home. It was significantly higher than the previous estimate back in the late 90's -- due to the tremendous amount of work my husband had completed on our home. His is a labor of love... as I mentioned previously, this home and land has been in his family for 5 generations now.

But, the appraiser said he had to check surrounding values before committing any estimate to writing.

A month rolled by... then two... the hog farm got its Special Exception permit and was open for business ...and still we hadn't heard from the appraiser. Several months later after numerous requests for the written appraisal, the appraiser sent our money back. He could not hold to his previous estimate in writing.

So please, don't tell me a CAFO has no negative effects on nearby residential property values.

But, for those of you living near a CAFO, did you know about the "Right of Exclusion" laws in the USA? This is information that even surprised me when I started reading through it today. Quote:
"Right of Exclusion

The right of exclusion -- often called the right of exclusive use or right of exclusive enjoyment -- provides that those who have no claim on property should not gain economic benefit from enjoyment of the property.

In other words, the right of use is exclusive to the property owner, and any violation of the right of exclusive use typically carries either payment of compensation to the rightful owner or assessment of a penalty. For example, if "A" trespasses on land owned by "B," then "A" will be guilty of a crime and a possible criminal penalty may be in order, as well as civil damages. Physical impairment, such as the odor or flies, in effect is a trespass on property rights and violates the right of exclusion.

Society places a high value on the right of exclusion, for justifiable reasons. Exclusion provides that both the current benefits of ownership as well as future benefits accrue only to the rightful owner, and his/her successors and assigns.

In the absence of exclusion, the right of use is under constant threat of nullification without just compensation. In an economy without the right of exclusion, property owners would adopt short-term strategies for use, rather than long-term strategies. In an economic sense, this would lead to widespread inefficiency in the allocation of resources.

Hence, the right of exclusion carries with it a significant societal good, and thus a significant, societally recognized Value."
Interesting... Here's the link for those wishing to learn more.

No comments: