The Pink House...Enough Already!

Is anyone really considering the legal ramifications of interfering in the absolutely legal sale of private property? If one feels that such properties are worth then I would suggest that potential future prospects be addressed.

However, regardless of the courtesies or degree of community influence of petitioners, any presumption that they are endowed with a more cultivated perception of culture and comprehension of historic significance that affirms their right to redefine the of private property ownership and transfer is as condescending as it is frankly abusive. They are as if its sole purpose is to pose background to the broad-stroked painting of their own presence and property when the purpose and priority should be to serve the rightful owners as investment, residence, inheritance or whatever clearly legal purpose and usage they desire.

Perhaps we should turn our community into a co-op and forget the formalities of individual ownership and while we're at it, let’s all sit around one big table and making sure that they consider the desires of the co-op ahead of those of their family’s who may have been very proud to leave property of value to be sold and divided as they wished.   

It is hard to imagine the need to illustrate ones influence in this manner of pretentious interference and intimidation. I can only imagine what an outstanding concept it would be to have the absolute legal right to transfer private property under the protective and seemingly abstract concept of the rights of ownership.  or maybe even a round table affair outlining the rights of the lowly homeowner when confronted by the courteous and good intentioned dominating community protection mobs. Sorry, but as much as I love the "…I am far more fond of the fact that we are in fact not yet a co-op.

Let’s stop confusing private preference with public charity.

Richard Zucckero