This change, of course, is being advocated by those folks who generally own less than 15 acres to begin with, and who tend to be adjacent to larger farms. These folks tend to be “newcomers”, in the sense they are part of the hippie invasion of the 60’s and 70’s or they are more recent city dwellers who’ve migrated to the countryside …and as my neighbor puts it … “want to raise the drawbridge behind them” because now hat they are here, the want to control who else might show up.

This attempt to “buy the view” at someone else’s expense drives me and most of my fellow rural landowners up the wall.

This is a town whose population is significantly less than it was 150 years ago, and doesn’t have enough growth to warrant having a development plan. There are virtually no local jobs, so you’re either a farmer, a commuter, or retired.

This is, of course, a disaster to any farmer who retirement was based on the possibility of subdividing some of his land and selling building lots to the public. And, I might remind everyone, has paid taxes on this land for decades as if it were much more developable than it is now turning out to be.

It’s of questionable Contitutionality, since a change of this magnitude seems to be a “takings” of significant enough proportion to trigger the Takings Clause.

And finally, it’s just plan rude and inconsiderate by these zoning czars to come out here to the countryside and bring their top-down command and control socialist government model along with them.