Reader response to proposed Johnson County property code

Man, are some folks steamed about Johnson County Supervisors' proposed property maintenance code for rural areas.

And several contacted me about Saturday's column on the issue with the kind of “feedback” that makes up in color what it lacks in detail.

I'd written to support the property maintenance code for rural residences, and to encourage supervisors to make sure the code doesn't reach beyond their stated intent of creating a baseline for livable conditions. I'm not sure what column some of these readers read.

“When will you be satisfied,” one caller asked. “When there's a regulation for every little thing?” Or another: “Why don't you rich kids down there in Iowa City just leave us alone?”

I like talking with readers, but it's a short conversation when the questions are why I always support the most expensive solution to a problem (I don't), or what it is I have against private property, freedom and liberty (not a thing).

To be honest, I'm not even sure what a reader is after when he asks if he can collect 99 percent of my income to fix “the 100 percent of 1 percent of problems” I want to solve with more government. (Did I miss some secret part of the supes' proposal?)

The criticism is no skin off my nose - believe me, thin-skinned “rich kids” don't last long in newspapers - but I was surprised by the heat.

And I quickly got the impression that readers weren't responding to the column, or even the proposed code - in fact, not one person who contacted me brought up any specifics. This was strict property rights stuff, the details casualties to that grander fight.

I can admire the sentiment, even as I wonder about its expression, which has lead to some odd exchanges - like the man who lectured Supervisor Sally Stuts-man about how life in the country is different from living in town. Or the man who insisted problem properties aren't an issue in the county immediately after supes said they've received complaints for years about unsafe homes.

It's as if detractors didn't even hear County Planning and Zoning Administrator Rick Dvorak's repeated assurances that the county - working with a stripped-down code and input from the Farm Bureau - isn't interested in making anyone's life more difficult, only in making sure people are safe: “The basic idea, in our view anyway, is to protect the health and safety of residents of Johnson County - all residents of Johnson County.”

Of all the godless, statist, controlling, just plain city sentiments ...

Comments: (319) 339-3154; jennifer.hemmingsen@sourcemedia.net