 Check out the bookstore at IRBS.com |
|
|
|
|||||
|
||||||
From: Lee Huddleston (no email)
Date: Mon Oct 09 2006 - 19:36:29 EDT
I can't tell you how proud I am of the effort all of you have been putting
into finding the correct language for a good ordinance. As I think you
have discovered, drafting a balanced ordinance is a lot harder than it
looks initially. If the language is broad enough to include all the
examples you want, it often sweeps up unintended victims. If the language
is very specific, it often leaves out examples you want to cover.
One thing to keep in mind as you search for the correct language is that it
has to be sold to a mixed group with many different agendas. I completely
agree that, especially from out point of view, rich people who own property
on shore should not have a strangle hold on boats in the water. The do not
have any legal right to keep other people away. By the same token, if you
do not take account of the feelings of those rich people, you can
significantly reduce the chances of getting the ordinance adopted. Even
though they do not have any rights, they do have power. Getting a balanced
ordinance passed is an exercise in practicality, not purity.
Perhaps some kind of sliding time scale could in incorporated. For
example, all boats would be permitted to anchor in the area for say a week
or two. For boats wanting to stay more than a week or two, the standard
might be they have to be seaworthy and occupied and have to be moved x
meters every thirty days (partially to prove that they can be moved and
that someone is tending to them). The requirement of occupation at least x
number of days a week could start a whole new industry of boatsitters. Or
there could be a requirement that if the boat is not occupied for a certain
period there would have to be a local person (whose phone number would be
posted on the sides of the boat) designated to tend the boat. Another
advantage of requiring a certain level of occupation would be that those
occupants would be spending money in the town.
As much as I have tried to encourage you to work for the most objective
language you can, I have to confess that complete objectivity is not
possible. As long as the objectives are clear, judges can interpret the
language to accomplish the goal. Also, if we take this opportunity to show
the leaders of Melbourne that we want to work with them, their change of
attitude can go a long way to inducing a favorable interpretation of any
ordinance that results.
Lee Huddleston
s/v Truelove
___________________________________________________________________________
|| The Live-Aboard List : send a "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" request ||
|| in body of message to: ||
|