Issue Summary

When a permit is granted by the government, the rights inherent in that permit are considered to have vested at that time.  What that means is that when the government grants a permit, that permit becomes the property right of the property owner.  It is a part of the property.  The actions by Judge Sumter, and Commissioners Ingalsbe and Ford are an attempt to set a precedent that suggests that property rights do not vest.  They feel they have the right, at any time after a permit has been granted, to revoke the permit.  This means that they feel all permit rights are the property of the government, not the individual.

Details

Nick began discussing his plans to build a commercial kitchen with EHD in 1996.  On June 15, 2005, Nick received permission to construct the THK septic system, which means that the county had reviewed his design plans and felt they met all laws required by Hays County. That means that once the system was built as designed and properly inspected, Hays County was required to issue a permit to operate the septic system.  The law does, however, provide for an appeal. Neighbor, who opposes the septic system on grounds that it is unsafe (See Not About Public Safety for details.) and will somehow cause damage to her property, appealed our permit. On July 11, 2006, the Commissioners Court heard her appeal and voted unanimously to deny it. On September 11th, 2006, the county issued the permit.   Under a normal construction of  property rights, at that time Nick’s permit was vested.  It was his personal property and was no longer subject to be taken away by the County.  Judge Sumter and Commissioners Ingalsbe and Ford are trying to set a dangerous precedent by taking a very different position on this issue of vesting property rights.  On April 17, 2007, they voted to revoke Nick’s permit.  The position of the majority of the court was that they had the right to undo the prior court’s decision since they disagreed with it.  This is an astonishing position.  They are saying that property rights do not vest when a permit is issued, but remain the continued property of the government.  They believe they have the right review a permit at any time and revoke it.  Not only do they believe they have the right to do so, they believe they have the right to do so in closed, executive session with no due process rights given to the property owner.  This is exactly what happened on April 17, 2007.   If we allow this power grab to go unchallenged, we allow a dangerous precedent to stand, a precedent that puts all of our valuable property rights and our property investments in jeopardy. See What You Can Do if you are interested in stopping the power grab.