Regulation without Representation
A few days ago, a federal judge ruled that the City of Houston's sign ordinance violated the first amendment and that he was enjoining the city from enforcing it. Cory Crow notes that on Matt Stile's blog I pointed up what I feel is an even bigger issue. Look, I have made it clear that I detest Mayor White. And I have done my part in trying to thwart some of his more egregious schemes. And I will continue to do so, even though I do not live within the city's boundaries, well sort of. I do and I don't.I live in an area that was annexed for specific purpose which means we don't pay city property tax but we do pay city sales tax. In return we get an assurance that the city won't annex us for 30 years. The residents of course had no say in this, the local MUD district board signed on the dotted line, but at least the MUD board IS answerable to the people. In the sign issue however we have an entirely different situation. The City is attempting to enforce it's sign regulations on signs OUTSIDE of it's city limits. Those residents in the area have no right to vote in city elections, but yet they are apparently required to follow city law. How can that possibly be legal? When the city decided it was going to regulate pollution outside it's borders there was a huge hue and cry from a number of quarters about regulation without representation, but in this instance, only the hapless sign owner is fighting the good fight.