My Newsletter this week, in the post just below this one, addressed the city law controlling the use of alcohol on public property. One of our alter readers sent me this excerpt from the Spokane gossip blog, which picked up on my Newsletter, then asked City Attorney Mike Gridley to respond. He agreed with me. Here’s what he said in the email he sent them:
“I agree that this code section could be read to prohibit a closed container of alcohol from any public property, including streets and sidewalks, although I have never heard of it being interpreted or enforced that way by the Police Department or city prosecutors. The ordinance probably needs to be changed to clarify what “public property” means for purposes of this statute.”
Nice to hear that this problem, which obviously went unnoticed by the highly paid legal staff at the City, and by the Mayor and City Council, will now be clarified. Does it bother you that our officials don’t seem to READ the laws before they pass them?
Reading is not the problem. The problem is comprehension. Don’t you recall the tests being called “reading AND comprehension?”
Comment by Happy Trails — July 2, 2010 @ 8:11 am
Our city attorney, with or without specific direction from the City Council, prefers ordinances to be vague in order to give them maximum flexibility. Translation: They want ordinances that can be selectively, differentially, and preferentially enforced to benefit some people and harm others.
Then again, there is the very distinct possibility that none of our local elected officials are capable of reading and understanding/comprehending at the high school level. Forget any level of critical thinking.
Comment by Bill — July 2, 2010 @ 8:16 am
So Gridley agrees with you, Mary. Why are the buffoons on the gossip blog saying that Mary got it wrong? I don’t get it.
This reminds me of when the Mayor came on HBO to refute a campaign flyer during the 2007 election, and yet the Mayor simply confirmed everything that was written on the flier.
Spin. Spin. Spin.
Comment by Dan — July 2, 2010 @ 10:53 am
Yes, Happy Trails, the comprehension is a key element! We need thinkers who are willing to hold those like City Attorney Gridley, who are paid (very well) by taxpayer money, accountable for their errors. I don’t care if it was someone else who originally wrote the confusing language in the law, Mr. Gridley et al, just forwarded changes that were reviewed and approved by Council and signed by the Mayor. But NO ONE throughout that whole process bothered to READ the ordinance and notice the problems?
And yes, Dan, they are always spinning.
Comment by mary — July 2, 2010 @ 3:12 pm