autosurgeon
Regular Member
imported post
I became curious about South Havens ordinances because of a conversation with a city employee who shall remain nameless for personal reasons.
As a result I got a copy of the SH ordinances and went through every single one and found two that have unenforceable parts in them due to preemption. Now I would like to have this corrected but I am afraid that if my name was attached to this it could get a certain employee into hot water for bringing this to my attention. So I am asking either another member or MOC itself to send a letter informing them of the needed corrections.
OK here are the ordinences.
The portions to be removed are highlighted in yellow.
[align=left][font="Arial-BoldMT, sans-serif"]Sec. 58-83. Prohibited activities.[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"]No person or organization shall do any of the following activities in a park without the[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"]written consent of the city manager. The person or organization may appeal the city manager’s[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"]decision to the city council should they feel the need to do so.[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"](1) Hold or participate in any parade, drill, exhibition or political or religious meeting.[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"](2) Speak publicly or deliver oration, address, speech, sermon or lecture.[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"](3) Carry or use any firearm of any description, air rifles or slingshots or discharge[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"]any fireworks or explosive devices of any nature.[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"](4) Erect any structure.[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"](5) Canvass, advertise, solicit, vend or rent any service, merchandise or object of[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"]any kind.[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"](6) Hold or participate in any public function other than those conducted by the city.[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"](7) For any gatherings in excess of 500 people, chapter 42 of this Code shall apply.[/font][/align] [font="ArialMT, sans-serif"](Code 1965, Sec. 8.07; Ord. No. 747, Sec. 1, 11-28-91)[/font]
[font="Arial-BoldMT, sans-serif"]Sec. 18-34. Enumeration of forbidden acts.[/font]
[align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"]Within the cemetery, no person shall loiter, litter, use profane language, bring in or[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"]consume any alcoholic beverage or controlled substance, peddle or solicit the sale of any[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"]commodity unconnected to cemetery usage, place signs or notices, possess firearms unless the[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"]person is a duly authorized law enforcement officer or a duly authorized military escort for a[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"]veteran's funeral or memorial service, allow animals to run at large or otherwise beyond his[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"]control, or engage in any play or recreational activity.[/font][/align] [font="ArialMT, sans-serif"](Ord. No. 772, Sec. 12.08(c), 12-21-92)[/font]
[font="ArialMT, sans-serif"]In the discharge of firearms rules they have an exception for lawful self defense of yourself or others.
UPDATE
[/font]Ok here is and update on the South Haven ordinance issue!
See link for details http://shrgc.org/index_files/news_article.html
In short the city attorney told them that OC can be regulated in the city and as such it is OK for the police to enforce the ordinances. He said CC was ok... where he seemed to have gone wrong was when he failed to include the AG opinions in his research. He also apparently feels that the Ferndale case does not apply.
Now I know this Attorney and I have been less than impressed with him in the past so this does not surprise me.
At this time the City Manager is seeking another opinion so the saga goes on.
A big thanks to Dan Hosier SH Rod and Gun Club and John Matthews for speaking on behalf of OC.
I will update this thread as needed until this is resolved!
[font="ArialMT, sans-serif"] [/font]
I became curious about South Havens ordinances because of a conversation with a city employee who shall remain nameless for personal reasons.
As a result I got a copy of the SH ordinances and went through every single one and found two that have unenforceable parts in them due to preemption. Now I would like to have this corrected but I am afraid that if my name was attached to this it could get a certain employee into hot water for bringing this to my attention. So I am asking either another member or MOC itself to send a letter informing them of the needed corrections.
OK here are the ordinences.
The portions to be removed are highlighted in yellow.
[align=left][font="Arial-BoldMT, sans-serif"]Sec. 58-83. Prohibited activities.[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"]No person or organization shall do any of the following activities in a park without the[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"]written consent of the city manager. The person or organization may appeal the city manager’s[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"]decision to the city council should they feel the need to do so.[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"](1) Hold or participate in any parade, drill, exhibition or political or religious meeting.[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"](2) Speak publicly or deliver oration, address, speech, sermon or lecture.[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"](3) Carry or use any firearm of any description, air rifles or slingshots or discharge[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"]any fireworks or explosive devices of any nature.[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"](4) Erect any structure.[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"](5) Canvass, advertise, solicit, vend or rent any service, merchandise or object of[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"]any kind.[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"](6) Hold or participate in any public function other than those conducted by the city.[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"](7) For any gatherings in excess of 500 people, chapter 42 of this Code shall apply.[/font][/align] [font="ArialMT, sans-serif"](Code 1965, Sec. 8.07; Ord. No. 747, Sec. 1, 11-28-91)[/font]
[font="Arial-BoldMT, sans-serif"]Sec. 18-34. Enumeration of forbidden acts.[/font]
[align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"]Within the cemetery, no person shall loiter, litter, use profane language, bring in or[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"]consume any alcoholic beverage or controlled substance, peddle or solicit the sale of any[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"]commodity unconnected to cemetery usage, place signs or notices, possess firearms unless the[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"]person is a duly authorized law enforcement officer or a duly authorized military escort for a[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"]veteran's funeral or memorial service, allow animals to run at large or otherwise beyond his[/font][/align] [align=left][font="ArialMT, sans-serif"]control, or engage in any play or recreational activity.[/font][/align] [font="ArialMT, sans-serif"](Ord. No. 772, Sec. 12.08(c), 12-21-92)[/font]
[font="ArialMT, sans-serif"]In the discharge of firearms rules they have an exception for lawful self defense of yourself or others.
UPDATE
[/font]Ok here is and update on the South Haven ordinance issue!
See link for details http://shrgc.org/index_files/news_article.html
In short the city attorney told them that OC can be regulated in the city and as such it is OK for the police to enforce the ordinances. He said CC was ok... where he seemed to have gone wrong was when he failed to include the AG opinions in his research. He also apparently feels that the Ferndale case does not apply.
Now I know this Attorney and I have been less than impressed with him in the past so this does not surprise me.
At this time the City Manager is seeking another opinion so the saga goes on.
A big thanks to Dan Hosier SH Rod and Gun Club and John Matthews for speaking on behalf of OC.
I will update this thread as needed until this is resolved!
[font="ArialMT, sans-serif"] [/font]