Dear Editor,

I recently listened to the interview conducted by Ms. McKnight of the podcast, On The Edge, with Brian Combs, candidate for re-election as the magistrate for District 1. During the interview, Mr. Combs stated that his top priority is to “protect landowners and their rights as landowners,” emphasizing his commitment to, “Life, liberty, and property.” While these principles are important, I believe they must be balanced with the rights and well‑being of the broader community.

As Ms. McKnight noted, “the land does not separate itself; we separate the land.” What happens on one piece of property inevitably affects the people who live on and around it. When land is purchased solely for development and financial gain, the surrounding community should have meaningful input, and compromise should be part of the process. Development can have both positive and negative impacts, and local officials should understand the area, listen to residents, and consider more than just the rights of the property owner.

The concept of "life" includes relationships and community. Strong, unified communities are built through connection and shared values. Often, land developers are not a part of the community they build in; they complete their project, profit from it, and move on—leaving long‑term impacts such as increased traffic, safety concerns, septic issues, and changes to community character for residents to manage. Many people choose rural areas for peace, natural beauty, agricultural opportunities, and a slower pace of life. Rapid development can disrupt those expectations and deeply affect people’s sense of home.

Ms. McKnight was correct in saying that people have a personal relationship with the land, even when they do not own it. Losing that connection can feel like losing part of one’s identity. These emotional and cultural impacts are real, even if they are difficult to legislate or quantify. Unfortunately, many residents feel that current officials do not consider this side of the discussion when evaluating zoning changes. Even when we the citizens present documentation and heartfelt testimony, our concerns are always overlooked and with this our "liberties" are compromised. 

In my view, “life” and “liberty” are not being fully protected in Madison County when only the rights of landowners are prioritized. For voters in District 1, it is important to consider Mr. Combs’ stated position: “I’m always going to be in support of the property owner… That’s where I’m going to remain.” He also acknowledged that many people do not share his views and that he cannot change who he is. For those who feel unrepresented by this approach, the upcoming election is an opportunity to choose a different direction for District 1. 

Vickie Fritz,
Richmond, Ky