Solving the Mount Bonnell Litter Problem
News8Austin: More problems erupt at Mount Bonnell
Up the long trail of stairs is a special place for the city of Austin -- the top of Mount Bonnell.[...]
This weekend, visitors saw something no one wants to see -- graffiti. The city hired an outside contractor to clean up the mess on Monday.
"I'm glad it was actually cleaned up by the time we got here because I don't think I would have enjoyed it otherwise," Plano resident Liesa Richardson said.
The graffiti may be gone but there are still some problems. The park has no lights and people often come to the park after it closes at 10 p.m.
Visitors are also complaining about an increase in trash.
Copyright ©2005TWEAN News Channel of Austin, L.P. d.b.a. News 8 Austin
What to do? Whose responsibility is it to keep the park clean? Why do people leave trash behind? How can people get away with vandalizing scenic areas?
I think the bulk of the issue resolves down to one word: ownership.
Since "the people of Austin" are allegedly the owners of Mt. Bonnell, we are taxed in order for the city government to have the resources to operate and maintain the grounds. Since "the people of Austin" are allegedly the owners of the mountain, the city government that is supposed to represent has been tasked with policing the grounds to keep them safe and clean. A relationship among the individuals who use the park, the individuals who "own" the park, and the individuals who take operating responsibility for the park has been established.
This relationship has many problems, however. Can anyone point them out?
If the land was under private ownership, the relationship would appear to be the same, just the entities are different. But when the nature of the entities is changed, the relationship also changes. Switching out the collectivization of government and aggressive force with private individuals and free exchange makes all the difference.
I don't think there are rational arguments that can coherently establish and ground the assertion that some kinds of land (usually scenic, undeveloped, and unique) automatically belong to "the people of insert political subdivision." Once that red herring is dispensed with, we move forward and actually make progress.