From: Employee@MilVeh.com
Date: Sat Sep 13 2003 - 13:15:31 PDT
I am surprised the great State of Texas would be
trying to enforce a law that would be more at home in
the People's Republik of Kalifornia! lol
That being said, the first legal issues that come to
mind are Constitutional and they are (without going
into too much research):
1. Property rights - infringement. Where regulatory
action limits activity on the property or otherwise
deprives it of value, whether there has been a taking
in the Fifth Amendment sense becomes critical.
a. Land use controls constitute taking, the Court
stated in Agins v. City of Tiburon, if they do not
''substantially advance legitimate governmental
interests.'' In other words if the law appears
"arbitrary" and without just merit as to the city's
allegation that it is "protecting" property value at
the cost of "your right" to enjoy and use property as
would "normally" be expected. What is normal is found
under the "prudent man rule."
b. A [P.U.D.] or planned unit developement can
inact a higher standard of property control based on a
contract that each buyer acknowleges and signs as a
condition of purchase and prior to ownership. So, if
you know the rules going in and you violate them, you
can be subject to punitive action for a breach of
contract in covenents and conditions restricting what
you can do with your property. Even if the rule seem
arbitrary and wrong, i.e. being in violation for an
American flag flying on the front lawn for example, if
you agreed not to do that as a condition to ownership,
you are stuck with it.
2. Equal protection under law - 14th AMMENDMENT
SECTION 1. EQUAL RIGHTS GUARANTEED. TRADITIONAL EQUAL
PROTECTION: While this deals mainly with taxation, a
valid arguement in your case could be made that a
municipality may not discriminate against the owner/s
of a vehicle because of it's age by imposing a
property use restriction without being in violation of
the equal protection clause.
I THINK YOU HAVE A DISCRIMINATION CASE HERE, I'm just
fishing around to see where it falls. Let me amplify
on this and you read this carefully and see if you
don't agree, that to some degree this is what is
happening to you:
a. 14th Ammendment - Section. 1. No State shall
make or enforce any law which shall abridge the
privileges or immunities of citizens of the United
States; nor shall any State deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of
law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction
the equal protection of the laws.
(Equal protection is the key here. Are you being
equally protected or are you being discriminated
against because of a vehicle's age?)
My suggestion would be first to contact the ACLU, tell
them you are being discriminated against because of
the age of your vehicle by an arbitrary city code.
(take the code in with you)
IMHO, the city is wide open for punitive damages,
because this is an unenforcible and illegal law.
You could probably win a fair amount of money in
addition to legal costs and actual damages as they may
be. The ACLU provides free legal services where
constitutional rights are at issue.
Next, contact your local legal services that do
pro-bono work when civil liberties are at issue.
Failing that, contact your local Bar association and
get a name of an attorney who does this kind of work.
Jack
P.S. My area is criminal law, not civil, wish I could
offer up more, but this is sort off the top of my head
kind of thinking and at least it's a start.
--- Jumpmaster <the_real_jumpmaster@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Howdy, folks...
>
> I'd posted a problem similar to this to the list a
> couple of years ago. I've moved since then (same
> town, different area) and am now being harassed by
> the
> city again.
>
> The problem appears to be with problematic
> (politically correct) neighbors. The set that live
> across from my house are flaming liberals and would
> appear to have some degree of contempt for my M1009.
>
> They also do not like my '68 Mustang.
>
> The code enforcement half-wits sent me letters about
> my vehicles. I called them and they explained that
> these "neighbors" said that I'd towed them here.
> The
> only one towed here was the Mustang because it was
> not
> registered/insured and therefore would have been
> illegal to drive here. The CUCV was driven here and
> probably has enough power to pull their tiny little
> house off its foundation. The code enforcement
> idiot
> didn't seem concerned with the CUCV but stated that
> the Mustang falls into the "Antique Vehicle"
> category
> this year. Woohoo...
>
> The city considers vehicles over 35 years old as
> "antique vehicles" where the state considers them
> antique at 25 years. He's telling me that since
> it's
> an "Antique Vehicle" now, that it must be
> continually
> screened from view regardless of operating
> condition,
> inspection or registration. I read the law and that
> just doesn't make sense. The way I read it, you
> could
> have a '74 Pacer with crappy paint job parked on
> your
> driveway (unscreened) as long as it's registered and
> operable BUT a '68 Mustang IN ANY CONDITION must be
> screened from view (in the garage, behind a fence,
> etc.) What would the advantage be of having your
> car
> considered an "Antique Vehicle" when you could just
> have it operational and let it remain parked on your
> driveway? I don't get it.
>
> I asked about a car cover and he said that wasn't
> good
> enough. The car runs and drives and is otherwise
> fully operational. Same with the CUCV. I thought
> about getting Antique Vehicle plates for the
> Mustang,
> but that statute reads like it would still have to
> "screened from ordinary public view."
>
> Any ideas? Anyone else live in Texas and have these
> problems? I read in Deja where this new law had
> been
> considered a victory for antique vehicle enthusiasts
> because you only had to have inoperable vehicles
> screened from view. The way I read the statutes, it
> doesn't say that.
>
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/tr/tr0068300.html#tr021.683.071
>
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/tr/tr0068300.html#tr028.683.077
>
> Sorry this is so long...people like this just make
> me
> want to move out to West Texas where your nearest
> neighbor would be about 30 miles away or more.
>
> And please don't tell me to just park it in the
> garage. If I'd planned on doing that, I wouldn't
> have
> asked for guidance here. :-) I would really like
> to
> get an M35 or M109 and sit that squarely in the
> driveway, but I'm sure they'd find something to
> harass
> me about that too.
>
> If anyone can make sense of any of this, please
> e-mail
> me directly. It may be able to help others on the
> list later, but I don't want to risk tying up the
> list
> with this.
>
> T. Bloxom
> 1985 M1009 CUCV and 1968 Mustang "Special Interest
> Vehicles"
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site
> design software
> http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
>
> ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
> To unsubscribe, send e-mail to:
> <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
> To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to
> <mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
> To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 07 2005 - 20:24:25 PDT