|
|
|
|
|||||
|
||||||
From: (no name) (no email)
Date: Sun Oct 08 2006 - 11:49:28 EDT
In a message dated 10/6/2006 12:37:25 PM Central Daylight Time,
writes:
>
> Here is how they manipulated you, all the while seeming to be
> sympathetic. (This was first class manipulation, by the way, very well
> done for small town politicians, but I digress.)
>
> See below:
>
>
> At 11:24 PM 10/5/2006, Sam Densler wrote:
> >Looks like we finally have the City's attention over the anchoring
> >ordinance. I have been told that the ordinance is not even enforced
> >unless there is a complaint.
>
> Which places the boater in the clutches of any moron with a
> telephone. Let's see... "I hate Sam, and I happen to know he is anchored
> out at (fill in the name of city here), so I'll just call the cops there
> and complain."
>
With no offense to Tom, who is usually right on the money, and with probably
just enough experience to get me in trouble, I get a different take on this.
I the last 2 years, I've filed two suits against a state. One was in federal
courts, which I recently won in the Federal Appeals court, and overturned the
law. The other was in the state court, and is just about finished in the
state supreme court. We've won, and the law as overturned. Trust me, if you have
an option, this is not the way to go.
I now spend a lot of time trying to educate a enough legislators so that we
so we don't have a repeat. Education involves time AND money.
At no cost and very little time spent, you're already past both these steps.
My take is that they had a problem with derilect boats, and as most small
towns do, they cobled together a law, with little research and not much thought
as to the finer points of constitutionality, and passed it to solve their
existing problem. Derilect boats were ticketed, and they either moved on or cleaned
them up so nobody complained. Nobody filed a lawsuit, which probably could
have been won if someone cared enough AND cared to invest around $50,000.
(Probable legal fees for the case). Remember, these were derilect boats, and nobody
in this case was going to come up with $50,000 to risk on a lawsuit.
After the problem was solved, it says on the books. The town council had no
desire to drive off the people who bring money in and they had no desire to
hassle the visitors, but Barney Fife also can read the lawbooks and see what it
says. Barney writes the tickes, or hassles people, the Judge checks the
backing in the law. It's on the books. He can enforce it until someone comes up
with the 50K and a desire to spend 2 years or so going after this. Like Norm.
Town council finds out things aren't going as they (or, most likely their
previous counterparts) had planned. Now they are asking for help in doing it
right.
You've been handed a gift that is so rare most of you don't recognise it as a
gift. Damn, folks, go for it.
Gene Gruender
___________________________________________________________________________
|| The Live-Aboard List : send a "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" request ||
|| in body of message to: ||
|