This post is the fourth in a series.
About twelve years after zoning was defeated in Houston, I was contacted by two businessmen in Hobbs, New Mexico. The city council was considering a zoning ordinance, and they wanted me to help defeat the proposal. They had found the pamphlet that my friend and I had written at the start of the debate over zoning in Houston. I agreed to help them, though I realized that it would be challenging to do so from six-hundred miles away. As in Houston, a referendum would be held on zoning.
I began by writing a series of articles about zoning, which the two businessmen had published as paid advertisements in the local paper. One of the men often chastised me for “big city” talk. He argued that my writing was too intellectual for the “simple folks” in Hobbs. I refused to dumb it down. I told him that I would continue writing in the same style, and if he didn’t want to print the articles, that would be his choice. He continued to have them printed.
A short time before the referendum, I traveled to Hobbs for a series of meetings. My first event was a meeting with local business owners. I talked about the nature of zoning and why it is a violation of property rights. To my surprise, they had never thought zoning violated the right to property. This led to a very fruitful conversation, and I left with the sense that I had provided them with some powerful intellectual ammunition. Interestingly, I learned that Democrats were opposed to zoning, while Republicans were in favor of land-use regulations.
I then spoke at the Hobbs Rotary Club’s luncheon. I focused on the fact that zoning strips a property owner of control over his land. He cannot use his land by right, but only with the permission of zoning officials. It was difficult to judge what impact I had on the audience.
In the afternoon, I met with the editor and publisher of the local paper. They included many of my comments in an article the next day. Though the paper had yet to take an editorial position, the editor and publisher seemed to be in agreement with me.
In the evening, I attended a town hall meeting hosted by the local NAACP. I had prepared to speak for about twenty minutes, but when the meeting began, the emcee announced that I would have only five minutes. I had to quickly decide what to say in such an abbreviated time frame, and what resulted was not my best performance. I had intended to focus on how zoning is particularly harmful to those who don’t have political influence, but I decided that I didn’t have enough time to properly develop that point. So, I simply repeated a few of the points I had made earlier in the day.
During the Q&A, I was asked only one question. A minister wanted to know if it was true that most Houstonians lived in gated communities so they weren’t subjected to strip clubs and similar businesses. I admitted that I didn’t know what motivated people to live in gated communities, but most of the city’s sexually oriented businesses were located along freeways or major thoroughfares.
The following morning, I was interviewed by the local radio station. The host of the show, who was also the emcee of the Rotary Club luncheon, asked good questions and allowed me to elaborate on points I made during my talk.
When I returned to Houston, I wrote and recorded several radio ads that were played in the weeks leading up to the referendum. My efforts paid off. Voters rejected zoning by almost 2-1.