By-law Enforcement

The recent kafuffle over the City of North Bay’s Noise By-law and its exceptions and enforcement brings to the fore how the City tries to regulate our behaviour. Webster says a by-law is “a secondary law or rule adopted by an organization or assembly for governing its own meetings or affairs”. We have by-laws for everything from paying salaries to staff to when we can water our lawns, feed the ducks or park on our streets.

Council passes many by-laws during their term, and for the most part these by-laws need little or no enforcement. Seldom does the By-law Enforcement Officer have to motor around town in his or her petite automobile to enforce the salary by-law or the closing-up of a laneway. Hardly ever is a ball-cap sporting Peace Officer called in to enforce the Noxious Weeds by-law although they occasionally do search out the exotic cannabis plant.

One of the prime considerations in writing and passing a by-law is whether it will need enforcement, and in the case of flagrant disobedience, what fine shall be imposed on upon the citizen(s) convicted of breaking the by-law. The one safety valve that council has is its ability to make exceptions to a by-law when enforcement would be onerous upon the citizen(s) or not temporarily astute for financial or political reasons. Another reason is that it would simply cost too much in staff time and resources to enforce the by-law.

Hence we have no one enforcing the lawn-watering by-law, relying instead upon the citizens to voluntarily follow the suggestion by council. In fact, a number of our by-laws could realistically be called “suggestions for good behaviour”. And when a by-law is reasonable, it does enjoy the support of the citizenry. Seldom do we see a dog bathing on the beaches with the children, although some four-footed friends seem to be tag-less. Most bicyclists know that they belong on the Pace-Way, not the walking side of the waterfront.

Signs posted on utility poles have all but disappeared since the passing of that by-law which may or may not impinge on freedom of speech. Pesticide warning signs have all but disappeared from lawns although herbicides are still being applied to outlying areas under power lines. The sale of mechanical dandelion removers has peaked at local hardware stores. Hardly any litter can be found on our streets, especially in the downtown area, after the anti-littering by-law was reviewed by council. The occasional shooting of an annoying pigeon (pardon me, rock dove) still makes the headlines, but generally, folk do not discharge guns within the city limits.

Illegal parking has all but disappeared due to the diligence of the enforcement crew around the hospitals and in the downtown core. Hardly ever does anyone without the blue sticker park in a Handicap Zone, and you never see anyone stopped in the Fire Zone. Only once have I been passed on Lakeshore Drive by a driver exceeding the speed limit – another by-law that tries to regulate how fast we drive in the city.

There is a hierarchy of law and by-law enforcement, and the more serious infractions of how we behave get more attention and enforcement. The lawn-watering suggestion falls far short of the Highway Traffic Act, which takes its place behind the Criminal Code. When it comes to the law about not coveting your neighbour’s ox, we all know the consequences of breaking that one!

In the grand scheme of things, the Noise By-law and its exceptions may need a little fine-tuning. Perhaps the By-law Enforcement Officers will have to take to the streets with their little decibel meters and slap some fines on rowdy parties, noisy motorcycles, deaf teenagers in their mobile boom boxes and barking dogs. They might also stop a few of the truckers who use the Jake brake within city limits (2001-035) and suggest to them that there are tiny signs at the city limits prohibiting said devices. I am sure I saw one of those signs attached to a utility pole . . .