Get a rope!
Noticed earlier today that the Christmas tree vendor set up on the parking lot outside of Sears is staying in a self contained RV.
This new ordinance would also make this illegal and force another business ower to either hire full time security to watch their product (cost would have to be passed on to consumer) or force them to do business somewhere other then Victoria.
leave it to the Advocate to agree with whatever it is the City decides to do.
Getsmart - Nooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
So if my uncle comes to town for a few days and parks it winnebago on the street but sleeps inside with my grandparents, is it considered lived-in and therefore in violation? And how are they going to know how long it's been parked there? I see trailers and other stuff parked on streets for days even weeks without being moved and they get away with it when it's against the law to stow a vehicle on a street. I think that is more of a problem than visitors who live in rv's during the winter times and bring revenue to the city. If they can't tow a car/trailer off the street until after 48 hours, they shouldn't be able to do this law either. Come by, mark the tires and then come back two days later. Still there, tow it. If not, than not a problem. If there is a stench or leakage than tow them. If not, leave it alone.
Kaminski and Gwosdz do indeed give convoluted and evasive answers, about how much of a problem this is.You can't blame them. In light of the Garrett/Ure fiasco it is not hard to see that a city employee who speaks his mind and gives factual answers will not prosper under the current administration. Someone had to put this item on the city council agenda. When you know who that was, and why they did it, you will know what the real problem is. (As Paul Harvey use to say, "and now you know the rest of the story")
There are already enough laws on the books reguarding litter, sanitation, approved dumping and storm sewers. Enforce the existing laws if there is an isolated problem.
The city council, and city government should be using their resources to: 1) fix the streets, drainage and other infrastructure and, 2) apprehend the drug dealer, graffitti writers, and other law breakers. These two items are why we pay taxes and should be enough to keep city government busy. When you have these two problems solved, then you can worry about these other 'issues'.
It would also be nice if the local newspaper was more concerned with these major problems that affect all of the citizens, instead of this nonsence about a few people who stay in their RV.
It would be interesting to know how many times this proposed ordinance would have been enforced in the last 2 or 3 years. I am not an RV owner but am greatly concerned that government continues to inject themselves into our every day lives. This needs to be STOPPED at every level.
I live in Bell Tower which has homes ranging from mid $100's to low $200's. Every year that I can recall around the Thanksgiving and Christmas holidays a very nice looking 5th wheel RV is parked in a driveway down the street. It is there for maybe 2 weeks each holiday with electricity and water lines visible. On average I walk by the RV 6-10 times a week and have NEVER experienced any odor, trash or other unsightly problems. If this ordinance passes these people (who I don't know, don't even know the owners of the house) will be in violation of, in my opinion, an unjust law.
What right does government have to impose laws/ordinances that interfere with the peaceful enjoyment of an individual's personal property?
This is an overreaching approach to dealing with what I would guess to be a non-issue for 99% of privately owned RVs in the city. I applaud Joe Truman, Gabriel Soliz and Paul Polaske for voting against this. It is my hope one additional council person will see the wisdom in NOT supporting this ordinance at the second/third reading.
Even John Kaminski can't decide if this is really a problem! He's says the situation is rare, but one they deal with continually, or something convoluted like that.
Why not just require a permit to tie-in or a fine if you fail to dump responsibly? Do folks really like to live in these things without addressing the issue of what to do with the poo and the pee? Really? I'd think the smell might be a really good reminder that it is time to go visit a dump station.
To haul off someone's property is overreaching a bit.
COV--you do not have to be up in everyone's business. Really, you don't.
I do enjoy the Christmas Vacation reference. However, something about this editorial stinks!
Referencing a movie made by the liberals in LaLa Land, Hollywood is a poor example of living in an RV. The City of Victoria could just as easily upheld its occupancy and residential water-sewer regulations than initiate another whole set of laws. Building inspectors and health officials ought to review each RV on a case by case basis to see users meet sanitation and safety regulations rather than passing broad interpretation that is unfair to RV users who obey the law, have connected black-greywater lines to property sewer lines and which utilizes via connections to city water services. ........ Those in compliance get a pass; those in non-compliance are prosecuted..!!
Anybody else think this might have been championed by the owners of"approved RV parks"? Just a thought.Pat Barnes
I guess next I will have to ask for permission from the "city" to move my RV to the front of the house so I can pack it for a trip. Will it then be "Lived in" and causing a problem? People who live in their RV's are not a scourage upon the earth, regardless of what the "city" says. Just one more step towards control of our every activity by the government.