This text was obtained via automated optical character recognition.
It has not been edited and may therefore contain several errors.

---

THE SEA COAST ECHO
THURSDAY, JANUARY 15, 2004 ? 5A
Letter
Continued from Page 4A
appeal to the City Council.
Doug Seal, City Council Member for Ward 1, opposes the ordinance, reports the Echo, on the grounds that it "amounts to a vast set of new regulations over property owners? rights. 'We're creating a monster,' he said." Council President Bill Taylor noted that "he'd like to see an opinion poll on the proposal's popularity among those property owners directly affected."
I wholeheartedly agree with Councilman Seal.
I am a lifelong resident of Bay St. Louis. Though my duties as a history professor at a university in South Carolina require me to be away from my home for eight months each year until I retire, I have always been a registered voter here in Bay St. Louis.
My great-grandparents, my grandparents, and my parents have always been property owners in the historic district. This is my home, about which I care
deeply.
I am extremely concerned about the dangers inherent in the preservation ordinance that may be enacted by the City Council on January 27. From what I have seen in South Carolina, an historic preservation ordinance can indeed, in Councilman Seal's words, be "a monster." The historic district of Charleston, for example, is a beautiful place for tourists to visit, but that status comes at the expense of a preservation ordinance in the historic district that is so restrictive and controlling that no one can make home improvements or build so much as a tool shed without the official permission of a preservation board.
What would our Founding Fathers think! Like the great English political philosopher John Locke, our Founding Fathers believed in the inalienable right of the citizenry to life, liberty, and property. To me,
as I'm sure to many Americans, the idea of a government agency, preservation board, or homeowners' association telling property owners what they can or cannot do with their property is appalling and frightening.
An historic preservation ordinance is different from routine (and necessary) zoning regulations designed to maintain the distinction between commercial and residential districts.
An historic preservation ordinance has the potential for denying home owners the right to improve or repair their property as they see fit. To make it worse, the prospective historic preservation ordinance for Bay St. Louis hasn't even been written yet. Therefore no one knows exactly what it might or might not specify.
I know there are some who would say that my fears are groundless. "Don't worry!" they would say. "The
preservation ordinance surely would not require anything unreasonable!" But who would decide what is or is not unreasonable? Where would the line of demarcation be drawn? Would the ordinance dictate that only certain colors would be acceptable for painting one's house?
That only certain exterior surfaces would be permissible? (No aluminum siding!) That carports must be of specified design? That no ordinary mailboxes could be used and that homeowners must (as in a neighborhood I know) construct brick mail receptacles within specified parameters of height and width?
We have all read of the case of the ex-serviceman who is in the midst of a lawsuit with his homeowners' association because the association refuses him permission to fly his country's flag from a free-standing flagpole in his front yard.
Can we simply trust that
Minor
Continued from Page 4A
trucks in order to eat.?
And another observation that ?anybody can find work
_ r ?__________________?
the schools.
Noticeably absent from last week?s lineup of new
African-American woman, Barbour was believed seeking a black female to fill the
some 57 county supervisors of public corruption.
Certainly the laid-back
an historic preservation ordinance, not yet written, would be "reasonable"?
The point is simple: A property owner who loves his home and pays taxes on it and wants to make improvements to his property should not be answerable to the ideas of any special -interest commission, no matter how well-inten-tioned or sincerely motivated.
John Locke was correct: The right to property is an inalienable right that no "preservation" ordinance should be allowed to dictate. Yours very truly,
Lorraine de Montluzin Bay St. Louis
BOOKS
109 E. Scenic Drive Pass Christian, MS 39571 (228) 452-7399
Wed. - Sat. 10:00 - 5:00 Sun. 12:00 - 5:00 pcbooksl @ bellsouth.net
Consider it...........SOLD!
I Lighthouse
F UiEBsnansi
EEHssana
10008 Highway 603 ty St. Louis. MS 39520
467-9333,
CHARLOTTE & STEPHANIE
WHITNEY TEAM
SOUTHERN DEUStlTS
Restaurant 9k Catertaw
Lunch: Mon - Sat 11am - 2pm
Dinner: Thurs 5pm - 8pm, Fri & Sat 5pm - 9pm
Dailv Lunch & Dinner Specials