Proposed Snow Ordinance Clarifications
Nov. 20th, 2009 01:12 pm![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
somerville311.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
davis_squareA recent story in the Somerville Journal summarized the proposed snow ordinance in ways that may have confused DSLJ readers about the actual provisions of the new law.
Some posters in that earlier thread have expressed a preference for a fine schedule that starts low and only escalates to high levels for repeat offenders. Except for the offense of shoveling snow and ice back into a cleared street, the proposed ordinance does, in fact, have an escalating fine structure. Here is a summary of the proposed fine structure:
Some posters have expressed a concern that the new time limits might force business owners to turn out in the middle of the night to clear snow and ice from walkways. This is not the case. The actual language reads as follows:
(b) Requirements for ice. No owner or manager of a (i) commercial building, estate, or land abutting on a sidewalk, (ii) residential building containing four (4) or more units, or (iii) mixed use building, estate, or land abutting on a sidewalk shall place or suffer to remain in place any ice upon such sidewalk for more than four (4) hours, except that no violation shall be deemed to have occurred before 9 a.m. or after 5 p.m., unless the business is open to the public during those hours. Removal of any ice shall be in a manner consistent with the requirements of the preceding sub-section, except that any such owner or manager shall be deemed to be in compliance with this paragraph if such ice is made level and completely covered with sand, or other appropriate material to prevent slipping. Each consecutive day that a violation exists shall be considered a separate offense. Unless otherwise provided herein, no owner or manager of a residential building, estate, or land abutting on a sidewalk shall place or suffer to remain in place any ice upon such sidewalk for more than twelve hours if the ice forms during the daytime, or after the next succeeding 1:00 p.m., if the ice forms during the night.
In other words, the clock starts running at 9 a.m. and owners of businesses and/or multi-unit residential buildings have at least four daylight hours to deal with ice or snow before any tickets can be issued.
Some posters have expressed the hope that special arrangements are made to provide support for senior or handicapped residents. Through the Council on Aging, the City already provides shoveling assistance to shut-ins and the elderly. For more information, please call 311.
Finally, some posters have suggested that this measure is part of a larger campaign to increase local revenues in the face of massive cutbacks in state aid. While the need for additional revenue has been an element in policy-making in other areas of municipal fee and fine enforcement, the proposed changes in the snow ordinance arise entirely from complaints made in the past (in some cases by the aldermen themselves) that current fines and enforcement policies have not ensured adequate levels of compliance. Some posters here seem to echo these concerns.
We hope this additional information is helpful.
Some posters in that earlier thread have expressed a preference for a fine schedule that starts low and only escalates to high levels for repeat offenders. Except for the offense of shoveling snow and ice back into a cleared street, the proposed ordinance does, in fact, have an escalating fine structure. Here is a summary of the proposed fine structure:
Offense | Fine | |
Snow, Slush, and Ice on Sidewalks (Section 12-8 (a) or (b)) (Residential) | 15t offense: $50.00 | |
Snow, Slush and Ice on Sidewalks (Section 12-8 (a) or (b)) (Commercial or Mixed Use) | 1st offense: $100.00 | |
Snow, Slush and Ice on Sidewalks (Section 12-8 (c)) (Removal from privately-owned property onto street) | $300 per offense |
Some posters have expressed a concern that the new time limits might force business owners to turn out in the middle of the night to clear snow and ice from walkways. This is not the case. The actual language reads as follows:
(b) Requirements for ice. No owner or manager of a (i) commercial building, estate, or land abutting on a sidewalk, (ii) residential building containing four (4) or more units, or (iii) mixed use building, estate, or land abutting on a sidewalk shall place or suffer to remain in place any ice upon such sidewalk for more than four (4) hours, except that no violation shall be deemed to have occurred before 9 a.m. or after 5 p.m., unless the business is open to the public during those hours. Removal of any ice shall be in a manner consistent with the requirements of the preceding sub-section, except that any such owner or manager shall be deemed to be in compliance with this paragraph if such ice is made level and completely covered with sand, or other appropriate material to prevent slipping. Each consecutive day that a violation exists shall be considered a separate offense. Unless otherwise provided herein, no owner or manager of a residential building, estate, or land abutting on a sidewalk shall place or suffer to remain in place any ice upon such sidewalk for more than twelve hours if the ice forms during the daytime, or after the next succeeding 1:00 p.m., if the ice forms during the night.
In other words, the clock starts running at 9 a.m. and owners of businesses and/or multi-unit residential buildings have at least four daylight hours to deal with ice or snow before any tickets can be issued.
Some posters have expressed the hope that special arrangements are made to provide support for senior or handicapped residents. Through the Council on Aging, the City already provides shoveling assistance to shut-ins and the elderly. For more information, please call 311.
Finally, some posters have suggested that this measure is part of a larger campaign to increase local revenues in the face of massive cutbacks in state aid. While the need for additional revenue has been an element in policy-making in other areas of municipal fee and fine enforcement, the proposed changes in the snow ordinance arise entirely from complaints made in the past (in some cases by the aldermen themselves) that current fines and enforcement policies have not ensured adequate levels of compliance. Some posters here seem to echo these concerns.
We hope this additional information is helpful.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-11-20 07:53 pm (UTC)How can they expect to enforce someone to pay a fine if there's no evidence that you did or didn't shovel the snow, and to what acceptable levels?
This is ridiculous. I know I won't be paying any fines, and I hope anyone that gets fined fights it.