Most Americans consider it a basic right — doing what they want with their property. They’ve paid good money for a house or a farm. They want to do specific things to that house or on that farm. And, for the most part, they can do just that — for the most part.

Recently, the issue of fences, particularly privacy fences, in Washington’s historic district has surfaced. It’s not the first time a fence issue has developed in Washington, and it won’t be the last. Controversy over fences? Yes, indeed.

It’s safe to say that meetings about fences can draw and have drawn more people to offer up their views concerning fences than meetings about the city’s budget and tax rate. Earlier this year, a public hearing on the proposed city budget attracted a few people. A recent Historic Preservation Commission meeting about regulating fences drew significantly more people.

Property owners in the historic district know (or should know) they operate under a different set of rules than other property owners in the city when it comes to what they can and cannot do with their properties. Some people view those rules as a means to protect and preserve (as much as possible) those attributes that make the historic district special. Others see those rules as infringing upon their rights as property owners do with their properties as they want to do. Some critics of those rules contend they can place financial burdens on property owners seeking to repair or renovate their properties. They say some flexibility is needed when it comes to enforcing those rules.

Supporters of the rules contend that without such rules one property owner’s actions could adversely affect a neighbor’s property or the entire historic district.

Emily Rebert, the city’s new preservation planner, understands the views of both sides.

“There is a balance. We see it with the commission meetings, with tackling everything case by case. In these situations, it’s not black and white. Historic preservation isn’t black and white. Each building isn’t black and white. Each has their own story. So, to generalize everything and try to make everything fit a box, it doesn’t work,” Rebert said in a recent interview.

Her understanding goes farther.

“Nothing is more touchy than telling homeowners what they can and cannot do with their property. This is a beautiful town. This is original and unique, and while I’m here, as long as I’m here, I’m going to be an advocate to try to keep it as historically accurate as possible and just present the facts,” she said. “I’m going to do my research and give the commission as much information as possible so they can make the best judgment as possible.”

With that philosophy, finding the needed balance in the historic district can become a reality instead of a desire.