Lars Larson: Nanny state goes too far

Nanny state goes too far
Monday, May 07, 2007 by Lars Larson

This is taking the Nanny State a whole bunch too far!

You know I heard about the proposal last week from Beaverton. The proposal is to bring the Nanny State, literally, into your own house. It begins in Beaverton where they’ve came up with a seventeen page ordinance that establishes minimum requirements for homes.

Now, that sounds like something that’s warm and fuzzy. The problem is Beaverton has decided to set those minimum standards for foundations, exterior walls, hand rails, doors, and bathrooms. They set the amount of water that has to be able to come out of your water heater within 10 minutes. They set the minimum number of square feet of your kitchen, your dining room and your living room. This is the Nanny State come to your house.

It makes no sense. If people choose to live in a very small house, Tina and I bought a first house that was only 700 square feet. That should be their choice. It should not be the job of the Nanny State to dictate how big your house is or any of those other standards. It should be the market place and the buyer.

For more of Lars Larson commentary go to Lars


    I agree! As long as the house is structurally sound and adheres to local safety codes, there is no reason for the government to make an ordinance for kitchen sizes…etc, stupidity!

    You’d think they’d have better things, like running the city to do or something . What’s next, flower bed size and contents, bath tub size, track light bulb size limits…………..come on already!

  • Mark

    Is this all about the tax rolls? A big house means more tax receipts in property taxes, development fees and city services. Tax advoidence is a crime and even if a city asks you to live green, you had better not do this in a way that affects your taxes, otherwise they will make you live in a big house. I think this is discriminatory to individuals of low income who wish to start the American dream of owning a home.

  • Pepe’

    Our state and local governments are really getting out of hand, which ultimatey means they are far too deep into our pockets. Whatever happened to the “folks” running government rather than the reverse. My message to all of them – get back to the REAL work of the people and stop meddling in our personal business.

  • Jerry

    Just like annexing Nike, these people are absolutely NUTS! If they had real jobs they would not have time for this nonsense.
    The fools!
    What a bunch of pathetic, luckless, hapless, losers.

  • Max

    Let’s see: in Portland, they’re cramming 2 or 3 skinny houses on lots that used to hold one single-family dwelling. They call it “infill”. So what’s Beaverton’s approach – outfill?

    • Sakaki Onsei


      • Max

        I do like your term better!

    • Richard of Portland Son of John


  • Ric in Beaverton

    What they need is an ordinance for minimum numbers of parking spaces for apartments & condo’s in particular.

    • rgsawlxi8a

      rvxt1phw t8ooqcw97rk3 [URL=] saf762c8r [/URL] 1i9665bo

    • rgsawlxi8a

      rvxt1phw [URL=] saf762c8r [/URL] 1i9665bo

    • rgsawlxi8a
    • rgsawlxi8a

      rvxt1phw z5481y67g 1i9665bo


    What they need is to not be elected to positions of power over citizens of this state!

  • Richard

    What Next!, Assigning residents to housing? You need to get permission form Beaverton hosing committee comrade to move. This is exactly why Beaverton attempt Soviet era centralizes planning will not work. I wish somebody build a small affordable one bedroom bungalow with a nice yard for us singles instead of condos and row house that look like something out East Germany but nicer fonts.
    It is sad because the same people are in power since I moved to Beaverton in the 1992. Abuse of power is a fine sign that people have been in power too long. However, the real issue is the incredible stupidity of the Beaverton voter who year after year elects the same leaders.

  • devietro

    I recently took a political science class that required the reading of 1984 and at first I though it was a dumb idea to read in a class because of how unrealistic it was. BUT now I am realizing that its not unrealistic at all. If I choose to (either by my choice or the choice of checkbook) live in a small house then thats my choice.

  • Captain_Anon

    Has anyone read the ordinance?

    • Marvin McConoughey

      I’ve not found the 17 page proposed ordinance on the Beaverton City website. Does anyone here know the online access to the document?

  • Baynative

    Building and planning departments have long been operating out of control They are unaccountable, can’t be sued or regulated. They are insulated from any legal recourse and have a destructive capability that is clearly unconstitutional.

    They are incompetent, non-productive, adversarial, over paid and over staffed, yet can’t perform their basic task of customer service in reasonable time.