CAMPAIGN - Private Property Rights

     I am a firm supporter of private property rights. Ownership of land is one of the fundamental principles of a free society. This issue is somewhat of a "no-brainer" for those who support the U.S. Constitution. Unless one is a socialist or a communist, any political candidate who takes the oath of office to uphold the U.S. Constitution, is presumably in favor of private property rights.
     Where people sometimes fall into disagreement is what type of private property rights one agrees with:
ABSOLUTE PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS - A person should be allowed to do with their land whatever they want, regardless of the impact it might have on neighbors.
UNIVERSAL PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS - A person should be allowed to do with their land whatever they want, provided it does not interfere with their neighbor's private property rights.
     At candidate forums in past elections, I've used the analogy of a property owner who wants to build a housing development next to a pig farm. Or, one could use the argument in reverse, and say a person who wants to raise hogs next to an existing housing development.
     A person who believes in absolute property rights would say that the person should be allowed to build their homes, or raise their pigs, regardless of what impact it would have on their neighbors.
     A person who believes in universal private property rights would say that whomever was there first (the housing development or the pig farm) takes precedent....and the neighbor needs to re-adjust their plans to accommodate their neighbors' needs.
      At past candidate forums, I've always said that I support a person doing whatever they want with their land, without government intervention, as long as it is what the land is zoned for. In other words, I believe in universal private property rights. If the hog farmer was there first on agriculturally-zoned land, then the land developer does not have the right to build houses on farm  land. If the housing development was there first on residential-zoned land, then the person who wants to raise hogs should not be allowed to do so next door.
     Obviously, land use decisions are never that simple, or have black-and-white answers. Communities are constantly expanding their urban growth boundaries to allow for an increasing population, and therefore changing the zoning status of some property.
      The bottom line is that whenever someone wants to use their property for a new use....an activity that the land is not historically zoned for....it needs to go through a public review process. Multiple factors need to be considered. So where do I stand on private property rights?
     I support a person doing whatever they want with their land, without government intervention, as long as it is what the land is zoned for. If the use requires a zoning change, then it needs to go through a public review process to insure the neighbors' private property rights are not infringed upon.