Need advice about ordinances being changed...

A community Yooperlady and I are working with to change their illegal park's ordinance says they will change it next fiscal year due to budgetary concerns this year. But they have stated they will take no action on that ordinance......

Ok... at first blush that appears to be a stalling technique.. and perhaps is but.... and here is where I need the advice:

MCL 123.1102 states that a municipality shall not enact or enforce any ordinance more restrictive than State Law. Ok... since this community's ordinance most likely was enacted long before 1991 when MCL 123.1102 came into effect... this community has not enacted an ordinance contrary to State Law.. and since they have stated they will take no action in regards to that ordinance then they are not violating the enforce portion of MCL 123.1102.

So.......... my question is this:

If an illegal ordinance was enacted before 1990 but is not enforced .... would it still be an illegal ordinance that must be changed?

In short, do we have cause to require/demand this ordinance be changed as soon as possible regardless of budgetary concerns?

I fervently hope some of our sharper legal minds will weigh in on this!!!

MCL 123.1102 states that a municipality shall not enact or enforce any ordinance more restrictive than State Law.

Some of your answer is right in front of you. I for one would not waste time and resources to change an ordinance...unless they try to enforce it.
Also, in my opinion; I don't believe any law or ordinance would be "grandfathered" unless provisions for same were written into the new law. Much like the old liquor laws were "incorporated" into the new re-written version.

JMO...as usual

BTW: HAPPY BIRTHDAY YOOPERLADY....again. :banana:

WARCHILD said:

MCL 123.1102 states that a municipality shall not enact or enforce any ordinance more restrictive than State Law.

Some of your answer is right in front of you. I for one would not waste time and resources to change an ordinance...unless they try to enforce it.
Also, in my opinion; I don't believe any law or ordinance would be "grandfathered" unless provisions for same were written into the new law. Much like the old liquor laws were "incorporated" into the new re-written version.

JMO...as usual

BTW: HAPPY BIRTHDAY YOOPERLADY....again. :banana:

Click to expand...

An ordinance that is on the books has the ability to mislead the public - It should be changed. How will everyone be informed that it is unenforceable otherwise?

F y i

I will be working on some changes to 123.1102 to give it some "teeth", hopefully I will have the time and energy later this week. It is my hope to engage someone in the State Legislature to submit these changes.

PDinDetroit said:

An ordinance that is on the books has the ability to mislead the public - It should be changed. How will everyone be informed that it is unenforceable otherwise?

Click to expand...

Would misleading the public, even if unintentional, qualify as enforcing? Suppose a person wishes to know the ordinances for the park and is shown the one that is on the books without being told it could not be enforced... was that an attempt to "enforce"?

The reason I'm asking what may seem like stupid questions is that words have power............. and words in black and white on official paper have great power.

PDinDetroit said:

I will be working on some changes to 123.1102 to give it some "teeth", hopefully I will have the time and energy later this week. It is my hope to engage someone in the State Legislature to submit these changes.

Click to expand...

Good!

Bikenut said:

Would misleading the public, even if unintentional, qualify as enforcing? Suppose a person wishes to know the ordinances for the park and is shown the one that is on the books without being told it could not be enforced... was that an attempt to "enforce"?

The reason I'm asking what may seem like stupid questions is that words have power............. and words in black and white on official paper have great power.

Click to expand...

That is why I italicized "everyone". There is no way to inform ALL PERSONS without removing it from the books. If people are asked to review the laws/ordinances of the state/locality AND abide by them, then by default the ordinance is being enforced.

PDinDetroit said:

That is why I italicized "everyone". There is no way to inform ALL PERSONS without removing it from the books. If people are asked to review the laws/ordinances of the state/locality AND abide by them, then by default the ordinance is being enforced.

Click to expand...

Thank you... I have composed a reply to that communities leadership that addresses exactly that issue.

I also made mention of the fact that if a citizen were in violation of a law his/her budgetary concerns do not matter... the citizen must comply with the law.

Never to old to learn, I stand informed. I had not thought of it in that way, excellent point. This is why this forum is so important.
Thanks guys.

WARCHILD said:

Never to old to learn, I stand informed. I had not thought of it in that way, excellent point. This is why this forum is so important.
Thanks guys.

Click to expand...

Hey Dude... I have received quite an education just from the folks who have their... ummm... knowledge together on this forum. The amount of gratitude I hold for them cannot be expressed.

Oh... and yer kinda OK too Buddy..........

Speaking briefly from my experience with a similar issue in Wisconsin Statutes, our preemption statute is given no teeth and no jurisdiction is charged with its enforcement. Note that the community, the PD, does not enforce the ordinance/statute. They detect, investigate, detain and recommend charges to the 'state' though the states district attorney. The state enforces its statutes and with wide discretion. YMMV

WARCHILD said:

Never to old to learn, I stand informed. I had not thought of it in that way, excellent point. This is why this forum is so important.
Thanks guys.

Click to expand...

You are welcome.

Guess who I learned from when I first got here? And who do I still learn from? Your post was the one that sparked the information I put into my post!

I was hoping that you would not take my post as a challenge or take it personally, I really like when you post.

PDinDetroit said:

You are welcome.

Guess who I learned from when I first got here? And who do I still learn from? Your post was the one that sparked the information I put into my post!

I was hoping that you would not take my post as a challenge or take it personally, I really like when you post.

Click to expand...

Not at all. That's why I enjoy this site so much and welcome more than my opinion; which at times may have merit, but it's not the "only" way a subject can be discussed.
I still consider myself a novice and have learned much here. There are many people here who are more knowledgeable than me and contribute a lot to this site and you are one of them. I value your posts and contributions, as I do with others.
Unity, knowledge, and purpose will overcome any obstacle.