Looser pays sounds great, but only if the courts work the way they are supposed to, and they don't anymore.
City and County govts are pretty much free to do anything they want, and you can't stop them.
Look at the Kelo (SP?) decision where it's OK to take your property and give it to someone else.
I had a court decision against me where the court said in part, it was my responsibility to stop the County from committing fraud and taking my property. Once they have committed fraud and taken your property you can't do anything about it.
No explanation as to how you are supposed to know the County is committing fraud before your property is seized by the court, but once it's seized by the court it's too late to do anything about it.
The Kelo case, albeit an abomination against the Kelo family, was correctly decided pursuant to the Tenth Amendment (and for the record, I'm such a pro-property rights guy that I think zoning law is illegitimate). To hold that the Federal government should be the sole guarantor of property rights is effectively to accede all power over property to the Federal courts.
Pursuant to Kelo, many States then passed property rights protections superior to the Constitution. The States can then duke it out in the court of Natural Law to determine the best balance between collective v. individual control of property.