Home

This includes the right to possess, to use, to enjoy to exclude from, and to dispose of one’s property.

When Thomas Jefferson penned in the Declaration of Independence “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” he borrowed wording from English philosopher, John Locke who believed all people have natural rights to life, liberty and property.

Founding Father, Arthur Lee said “The right of property is the guardian of every other right; and to deprive a people of this is to, in fact, deprive them of their liberty.”

In large part, the “American Dream” is the opportunity to own property and prosper from it. This occurs best in a free market environment where government and economic conditions allow as many to participate as possible.

Florida is a growth state and its comprehensive plans should support growth rather than hinder it.

Privately owned lands given to agricultural and ranching help form the backbone of Florida’s powerful economy.

A responsible, affordable, and stable housing and development market.

Preservation of Florida’s historic agricultural and ranching land use.

Growth management plans that coincide with Florida’s growth rather than conflict with it.

CPR believes property rights must be embraced and pursued if our nation’s corporate success and our individual liberty are to be sustained.

”Less”

Yet, today we find government more often than not seeks to hinder the use and enjoyment of property with overly-burdensome regulations, rules, exactions, unfair taxation, and mind-numbing bureaucracies. All too often, property owners seeking to improve or develop their property find this to be the case.

After detailed planning, expensive studies, and time-consuming negotiations, owners find themselves with no recourse but to seek relief through litigation. Regrettably, government, with their tax-payer funded team of lawyers, drag out the process while the property owner must pay legal fees in addition to paying a mortgage, taxes, and employees.

CPR believes property rights must be defended and the “playing field” leveled, especially when government becomes antagonistic or obstructionist and its priorities protect itself rather than the rights of “We the People.”

”Less”

While CPR acknowledges the occasional need for government to acquire land, it should be the exception, not the rule. Approximately one-third of Florida is owned and controlled by government. More than 30 per cent of Florida is in conservation. Despite this enormous amount of ownership, special interests call for more tax-payer money to buy more land., primarily through the Florida Forever program.

Each additional acquisition of land by government is an incremental step towards socialism. It removes land from private sector control to government control. As private land is acquired by government, local property tax revenues for roads and schools and various services are decreased. The only option available to maintain current government spending is to raise property taxes or ask the voters for a new, designated tax.

CPR believes government acquisition and control of property should be limited.

”Less”

Proper stewardship should guarantee that property does not become a threat to public health and safety. Included in proper property maintenance are things like removing undergrowth to minimize the danger of wildfires, guarding against invasive plant and animal intrusion, clean-up following severe weather, and keeping public land open to the public who paid for it.

Proper maintenance is expensive. It requires employees (and their pensions) , equipment, equipment maintenance, vehicles, fuel, etc. These all cost “We the People” money. Leaving property unmaintained should not be an option. Allocating money for further acquisition without funding responsible maintenance should be prohibited.

Any additional acquisitions should be based on real need, free-market and private sector innovations, public-private partnerships, consideration of future maintenance cost, a cost-benefit analysis, and the employment of best management practices.

”Less”