

Florida Makes Off-Grid Living (homes) Illegal - atakan_gurkan
http://www.collective-evolution.com/2014/03/09/florida-makes-off-grid-living-illegal-mandates-all-homes-must-be-connected-to-an-electricity-grid/

======
dalke
While that's what the headline says, it appears that what the courts have said
is that the city has the authority to require that someone in the city be
connected to the city water system. The headline is really saying "....
Illegal If Cities Decide To Make Them Illegal."

It does not say that off-grid homes are illegal in Florida. (If it did, there
are any number of off-grid homes on islands which would also be made illegal.)

This ruling is little different than when I was in Miami and the city required
that once a sewer line was put in the street then all of the houses were
required to hook up to it instead of using septic systems.

Or when I was in Tallahassee and a nearby town moved to city garbage pickup
instead of individual trash disposal. I vividly remember the newspaper image
of the woman protesting that her monthly trash fit into a tin can, and she
didn't see why she had to pay for it.

~~~
kjs3
Yeah, but why is that okay? I can somewhat see a rationalization in the case
of sewage, and much less so in the case of garbage, as a public health issue.
I don't per se agree with it, but I can see it as rational. But what
compelling civil need is met by forcing residents to use the power grid and
not use self generated power, other than "you're costing us profits"?

~~~
dalke
(BTW, she was using the sewer system, but not paying for water. That's why her
sewer system was capped. Since water and sewer fees are coupled, I assume
that's one reason why the city had a problem.)

The proximate "okay" part is that the local authorities decided it. The
secondary "okay" part is that the local electorate voted for those
authorities. After all, at some point that requirement wasn't there.

It's hard to point to every single thing and say "I won't pay it unless I use
it." If someone doesn't own a vehicle, then why should they pay for highway
taxes for roads they can't bike or walk on? If someone is afraid of flying and
will never fly, why do they pay taxes that go to the FAA?

Another solution could be to raise everyone's taxes to be exactly the
connection fee for the power company, and have the city pay the power company.
Her bill would be $0, but the profits would be the same.

We've decided to have direct payments instead of indirect ones.

One might argue that the utility access to the house constitutes trespass, and
without the need for connection there's no need for trespass. This is a sort
of feudal view of the land. The flip side is to say that one bought the land
with certain rights of access in place, and the landowner can't make one-sided
changes. I believe in the latter.

BTW, it can't really really be that the residents decide. If I rent, and don't
want to pay power, can I tell the power company to disconnect? Or the water
company? Will the city then cap the sewer lines and withdraw the water and
power? That sure makes it harder for the owner to find a new renter.

Nor can it be the owner alone who decides. Some of these laws are in place to
prevent slumlords, who provide substandard housing. It might be simpler to
have a basic law that covers everyone, rather than deal with it through
contract law.

