This past week, the Texas Supreme Court struck a rare, but welcome, victory for property rights. The ruling put a dagger into the heart of the Texas Open Beaches Act (TOBA).
One website defending TOBA claimed common law as the justification for the act (the website is no longer available):
The late Bob Eckerdt saw what development, and the power of development money, could do to undermine the ability of the average citizen to enjoy this most basic and traditional right to some of the best of God’s creation. He wrote the Texas Open Beaches Act. This was not a new law, but only served to codify what was already common law. In other words, the beaches were highways that the public used since “time immemorial.” Nobody could block off the beaches or hinder access to them the same way landowners could not block access to a cattle trail, or other highway that the public had always used for trade, commerce, and transportation.
The law holds that the portion of the beach between the vegetation line and the water is open to the public. After Hurricane Ike moved the vegetation line on Galveston Island in 2008, one home owner found that his home was now on “public property.” When the state moved to seize his property, he sued.
At the time, defenders of the TOBA responded that the home owners had been warned about this possibility, and therefore, they really had no complaint. In other words, since the home owners have been warned that an injustice might occur, they have no reason to complain when that injustice does in fact transpire.
Supporters of TOBA, have argued that tax dollars are used to provide infrastructure–such as roads, water, and sanitation–for the beachfront properties. Therefore, the argument continues, if “the public” must pay for such things, “the public” has a right to beach access.
This amounts to nothing more than using one violation of property rights to justify another violation of property rights. That is, since tax payers are compelled to finance infrastructure, it is justified to force beachfront property owners to cede their property to the state. There is no rational justification for this gross injustice.
The owners of beachfront property are as much a part of “the public” as anyone else. Yet, they are forced to play the role of sacrificial victims simply because of the consequences of a storm. They have not violated the rights of anyone, and yet, under TOBA they are treated as criminals.
The long term solution is to privatize the roads, water, and other infrastructure. If individuals wish to build along the ocean, they have a right to do so. They do not have a right to force others to pay for roads, sanitation, or repairing their homes. The state government should limit itself to its proper function–protecting individual rights, including property rights. This applies to taxpayers as well as beachfront property owners.
One comment
Comments are closed.