Eyesores
I was attracted to Nancy Kemler’s letter of 9 February on the appearance of Roundup, to K. Williams’ addressing the same topic in 23 Feb’s and, in fact, to the use of the word “eyesore” in the latter.
For some time I have compared Roundup to Portugal as follows:
Portugal has the Azores; Roundup has the Eyesores.
It’s true, isn’t it? For example, examine some of the buildings standing tentatively along Main Street (Remember the utter collapse of No-Name City in “Paint Your Wagon?”), or examine some of the buildings NOT standing there. The mysterious restaurant fire, which left my wife and me with 21 unused dollars on a gift card, created a hole to gape at everyone like the unsightly space where a tooth should be. It’s appropriate that it’s adjacent to the dental office.
The town has, in addition, various repair businesses that act as centers for the propagation of junk, spreading out from them like fungus on a petri dish, and with the evident lack of municipal resolve, there’s no incentive for a homeowner to be any more conscientious.
It’s natural to ask if, even given no or catch-as-catch-can zoning, there are not some laws here pertaining to eyesores, their impact on personal health and safety and the like. Ms. Kemler says there are, but that they are not enforced.
South of town towards Billings large, new eyesores have sprouted within the last few years. Probably Portugal wishes it could match that feat with its Azores.
Several years ago, when the vicinity of the drugstore corner was an active dovecote with pigeon dung all over the sidewalk below (We’re still ahead of New York City, San Francisco, Seattle, and other places, where people act with impunity the parts of our pigeons.), I wrote a short note to the RRT and asked the County Attorney to do the same and mention what were the relevant laws about building maintenance by owners, but there was no reply.
What’s the County Attorney have to do with it, anyway? We don’t need that person to enforce Roundup traffic laws; according to the RRT notices, the Sheriff’s Dept. does quite well on its own. Can’t police officers just write tickets with fines and court dates for building owners in violation of laws?
Ms. Kemler is hopeful of changes after the next election, but it isn’t necessary to await that event. Recall elections are certainly possibly, and if office-holders are responsible for untenable conditions, they can be terminated at any time.
On the other hand, perhaps most people approve or are apathetic about how Roundup looks or about any derivative conditions pertaining to health or
the public welfare. Some of us have lived the greater parts of our lives in conditions where what is done is whatever pleases minorities, but we still have the tradition of majority rule, so perhaps that summarizes the situation. It’s said that a population gets the government it deserves, and possibly this is an instance of that.
From where we live my wife and I needn’t confront the eyesores every day. Still, it’s embarrassing when relatives and friends come here from other parts of the country, but we don’t feel we should have to devote our time and energy to improving negligent owners’ properties.
My wife had a constructive idea. Throughout each month Roundup would hold an election in which everyone that drove through it could vote for the number # 1 eyesore. (Someone else can worry about details such as how to assure that no one votes more than once.) The owner of the losing property pays a fine, and, of course, he or she is eligible for next month’s election, too. This, you see, would require passage of a law or two, and if we have selective enforcement of them ..?
Perhaps a list of our more spectacular eyesores can be provided in the new Welcome Plaza.
Larry Stanfel
Roundup
Reader Comments(0)