I believe protecting Individual Rights is the government's primary responsibility. Local governments, in particular, must be vigilant in their defense of Property Rights as they are most often in charge of building roads and infrastructure. Poor planning and a lack of respect for people's rights often leads to disastrous policies and decisions.

A recent incident has caused quite a controversy in the Glen Cove neighborhood. The Seminole Bridge connecting to two sections of Glen Cove was getting old and TxDOT wanted it replaced. They agreed to pay 90% of the replacement cost with League City paying the rest. The bridge was torn down.

Coincidentally, the land upstream from the bridge is owned by a developer who has a lot of influence with some members of city council. Before the bridge was torn down, the part of the inlet running through his property was a small stream. After the bridge was torn down, the city decided not to rebuild the bridge, the developer expanded the stream enough for large boats to travel on and now he has water-front property to sell.

The people of Glen Cove are currently in a lawsuit against the city. They have documents that support their claim to ownership of the bridge and have complained about the city not following the Texas Open Meetings Act. Had the city been open and honest about its plans and respected private property rights, this mess could have been avoided.

An incident similar to the Glen Cove incident is starting. The Clear Creek Shores neighborhood and a high school owned by the Clear Creek Independent School District sit on on opposite sides of Clear Creek. The school district wants the city to build a bridge across the creek to connect the dead-end street its new high school sits on, with an existing road on the other side that connects to NASA Road 1, in order to alleviate traffic congestion. This existing road sits between Challenger 7 Memorial Park (which I understand to be Harris county property) and the neighborhood. Because this street is very narrow and will need to be expanded, and because private property is easier for local governments to acquire than other government property, the city is planning on expanding the road where into people's driveways exist today. Having driven down this street before, it is easy to assume that there won't be any driveway left if this road is expanded to 4 lanes.

The people of CCS are understandably not pleased with this idea. They claim that the traffic problems are not as bad as the school says and that an existing bridge less than one mile away has hardly any traffic on it. They are pleading with the city to consider alternative options. They also point out that the city can't afford to build another bridge, as the entire project would cost almost $30 million. As far as I know, the city hasn't changed any of its plans.

I agree with the people in CCS and am afraid this will turn into yet another abuse of property rights at the hands of the city.