Last week CPR traveled to the Pasco County Commission to speak on a challenging and emotional property rights issue.

In an unincorporated part of the county is an agricultural/residential zoned community.  And, within the community is a small church.  The church decided to offer itself as a “cold night shelter” for the homeless.  Through that experience they decided to start a full-time homeless shelter ministry. 

As more and more people came to the shelter, residents of the neighborhood began to report increasing amounts of vagrancy, intimidation, vandalism and theft.  Additionally, an alarming number of calls to law enforcement for assistance from the church’s shelter began to accumulate. The church, aware it was operating a shelter without a license and violating the zoning code, was ordered to cease and desist by the county authorities.  In order to continue the shelter project, the church applied to the county for a non-conforming use permit to operate a homeless shelter in the neighborhood.  Last Tuesday, the Pasco County Commission heard the request from the church.

The church’s hired attorney gave a very attractive presentation for more than 30 minutes emphasizing the need of the county for such a shelter.  Then, the residents were given their opportunity to voice their opposition emphasizing the safety concerns of their neighborhood.  The opposition was led by a young couple, Mike and Carrie Barnard.  Having grown up in the community and residing with their three children on a property bordering the church, they described how their neighborhood had quickly changed.  They and other residents offered testimony of drug and alcohol use. Others described how they had found people from the shelter wandering the neighborhood and sleeping on private property.  Still others spoke of their fear due to growing crime reports.  They even documented the criminal records of some of those using the church as a shelter.  

CPR offered testimony on the residents’ behalf citing the incompatibility of the church’s request and the safety concerns for the neighborhood, especially since an elementary school entrance was a mere 900 feet from the church.  CPR applauded the church for its mission but opposed its location and encouraged the Commissioners to work with the church to solve the difficult problem.

Following public testimony, the Commissioners debated the decision.  After much discussion, one Commissioner, Jack Mariano, accurately described that, despite the obvious need to help the homeless, he had heard the neighbors express they were now afraid to live in their own homes.  He strongly stated how it was the county’s first duty to protect homeowners while working with the church to find an appropriate solution.  The Commissioners voted to deny the request of the church siding with the owners/residents.  In doing so, the Commissioners were walking in step with Alexander Hamilton’s words from 1787, “One great object of government is personal protection and the security of property.”

This case highlights the challenge of consistency in advocating for property rights.  Here was a rare situation where one group’s attempt to exercise property rights infringed on another’s property rights.  The church had a good mission but, a poor location.  CPR sincerely hopes the Pasco County Commissioners will find a suitable location for a shelter. 

This case also highlights the impact citizen-residents can make when they speak-up to protect their property rights and neighborhood.  CPR will continue to work with residents in the community and will conduct a training seminar, “The Effective Advocate,” for them in June.

Dan Peterson

Executive Director

Read More Of Story   |   Read Past Newsletters